MattFancy Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Did you guys see Urik's interview with The Intercept yesterday? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Did you guys see Urik's interview with The Intercept yesterday? Who is Urik? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Who is Urik? State Prosecutor for the case. Here's the link: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/01/07/prosecutor-serial-case-goes-record/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 State Prosecutor for the case. Here's the link: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/01/07/prosecutor-serial-case-goes-record/ Urick contradicts himself by saying Serial was biased for Adnan by admitting the cellphone records don't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Adnan murdered Hae. In the end, that is what Koenig said in the final episode. He's just upset about how he and the investigators were portrayed during the trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Urick contradicts himself by saying Serial was biased for Adnan by admitting the cellphone records don't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Adnan murdered Hae. In the end, that is what Koenig said in the final episode. He's just upset about how he and the investigators were portrayed during the trial. Exactly. SK basically wrapped it all up in the final episode as she couldn't prove one way or another if Adnan did it or not. Which is why the jury shouldn't have sentenced him since there is so many questions surrounding all the evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Exactly. SK basically wrapped it all up in the final episode as she couldn't prove one way or another if Adnan did it or not. Which is why the jury shouldn't have sentenced him since there is so many questions surrounding all the evidence. Anytime you can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that someone committed a crime, you have to say not guilty. It may not be what people want to hear, or what they believe, but it's the law. It's the reason why Casey Anthony and George Zimmerman are free, and the reason why that guy who killed that kid over loud music isn't. There was proof beyond any reasonable doubt in that case, and they had very little for Adnan. This case is littered with reasonable doubt. I am not certain of Adnan's guilt, but I almost wish he was guilty so that an innocent man didn't lose 15 years of his life for a crime he didn't commit, and a murderer hasn't been free to terrorize society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Anytime you can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that someone committed a crime, you have to say not guilty. It may not be what people want to hear, or what they believe, but it's the law. It's the reason why Casey Anthony and George Zimmerman are free, and the reason why that guy who killed that kid over loud music isn't. There was proof beyond any reasonable doubt in that case, and they had very little for Adnan. This case is littered with reasonable doubt. I am not certain of Adnan's guilt, but I almost wish he was guilty so that an innocent man didn't lose 15 years of his life for a crime he didn't commit, and a murderer hasn't been free to terrorize society. Agreed. The problem with Adnan's case was the defense didn't do a good enough job of putting the reasonable doubt into the jury's minds. They all heard Jay's story and believed him. I still can't say for sure if he did it or not. It seems hard to believe he wasn't involved in one way or another, but the evidence that was presented in the case just didn't seem like enough for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bliz Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 State Prosecutor for the case. Here's the link: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/01/07/prosecutor-serial-case-goes-record/ Wow. The tone of that article is MUCH more judgmental of the podcast than any of the jay interviews. Unfairly so, imo. Example: "Had “Serial” accepted the jury’s conclusion—that Adnan strangled a teenage girl—there would be no storyline, no general interest in the case, and hence no audience. So, Koenig dismissed the decision of the 12 jurors who heard the case, and even though she found nothing that would exonerate Syed, she shifted the burden of proof back onto the state." Let's turn that around. Had The Intercept accepted the podcasts conclusion—that there is reasonable doubt whether Adnan strangled a teenage girl—there would be no storyline, no general interest in the article, and hence no clicks on their website. So, the Intercept dismissed the questions raised by SK, even though the Intercept found nothing that would convict Syed beyond a reasonable doubt, they shifted the burden of proof onto the accused." Dismissing her conclusions out of hand based on what you think the special interests are is highly questionable, for a journalist. Wonder why they didn't try to interview sk about those very serious allegations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I agree, Bliz. The writer tried to prove SK was biased, but showed their own bias instead. I will definitely admit she seemed entirely convinced within episodes 1-4 in Adnan's innocence. But once the time of death was proven to not be what the prosecution stated it was, and the testimony of that one girl speaking with Adnan in the library became inconsequential, she had serious doubts. I found it curious the interviewer asked about that statement, and when the prosecutor didn't mention the witnesses' explanation on the podcast for calling him, the interviewer didn't follow up with that. What happened to the days when people didn't handpick the interviewer who will only ask the questions their willing to answer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 It seems clear to me that The Intercept has an agenda against Serial. Not sure why, but I don't think Serial came off as anything other than saying, hey this guy is in jail for life, but we're not so sure the evidence brought against him is enough to put him away. But it seems The Intercept is taking shots at Serial every chance they get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 I'm listening to it now. About 5 episodes in or so. Not going to read the thread until I'm done. Don't want any spoilers (if they exist). I'll be back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chachie Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 http://time.com/3667080/serial-maryland-appeal-ruling-adnan-syed-innocence-project/ Serial may have ended in December, but the appeals process for Adnan Syed, the man at the center of the popular podcast, continues. A Maryland appeals court is considering whether Syed should be given permission to move forward his bid to overturn his murder conviction, and has asked the state to respond to the application by Wednesday. (More at link.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 http://time.com/3667080/serial-maryland-appeal-ruling-adnan-syed-innocence-project/ Serial may have ended in December, but the appeals process for Adnan Syed, the man at the center of the popular podcast, continues. A Maryland appeals court is considering whether Syed should be given permission to move forward his bid to overturn his murder conviction, and has asked the state to respond to the application by Wednesday. (More at link.) At this point, is "reasonable doubt" even on the table, or does he have to somehow prove he is innocent. I'm not sure the DNA evidence, if none of his DNA is present, would do that for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 I finished it tonight. I thought the whole thing was a work of fiction until I read this thread. I think it's possible Adnan is innocent. It's also possible that he killed Hae. I think it's most likely that Adnan and Jay killed her together, or something to that effect. Jay's changing stories, his disposal of any evidence, his apparent fear, his knowledge of the location of Hae's car. All of those things make me cast doubt on his innocence in even just being an accessory. Regarding the phone call to Adnan's new girlfriend, it's completely possible he butt dialed her. In the old Nokia phones, you'd assign a telephone number to a button. Hit that button and press call. I think it's safe to say, there was enough doubt that he shouldn't have been convicted of first degree murder, probably not even manslaughter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chachie Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 I think it's possible Adnan is innocent. It's also possible that he killed Hae. Nailed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Nailed it. This ****ing case man... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jobaga Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 I finally listened finished the podcast. I have so many questions. I agree with the general tone of this thread. I'm not sure of Adnan's innocence, but I don't think they had enough to convict him. I agree with Dana's skepicism about Adnan's perceived misfortune. How unlucky do you have to be to lend your cell and car to a guy that was involved in your exgirlfried's murder? Why didn't Adnan follow up on any of his supposed threats towards Jay? What's up with the prosecution providing Jay a lawyer. I think Jay was cohersed and coached by the prosecution. So many questions... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bliz Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/20/exclusive-potential-alibi-witness-for-convicted-murderer-in-serial-breaks-silence-with-new-affidavit/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/20/exclusive-potential-alibi-witness-for-convicted-murderer-in-serial-breaks-silence-with-new-affidavit/ So Asia McClain is calling Urich a liar? This story continues to remain interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chachie Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/20/exclusive-potential-alibi-witness-for-convicted-murderer-in-serial-breaks-silence-with-new-affidavit/ Oh for the love of.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StillUnknown Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 "Why you bringing up old ****?" - Urick, probably Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 The case just gets stranger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jobaga Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Interesting approach for another appeal. They are using the 14th Admendment. They are claiming that we are constitutionally protected from racially bias prosecution. I think they have a strong argument as Adnan's religion was a crucial aspect of the case the state built against him.Link http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-syed-trial-20150128-story.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Interesting approach for another appeal. They are using the 14th Admendment. They are claiming that we are constitutionally protected from racially bias prosecution. I think they have a strong argument as Adnan's religion was a crucial aspect of the case the state built against him. Link http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-syed-trial-20150128-story.html Just like my post from last week, the more that comes out from this case, the stranger it gets. Still seems so crazy to be that he was actually convicted for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 It was Adnon and Jay. Conspiracy type stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.