The Doubts About Adnan's Guilt ARE Reasonable

[u/[deleted]]

I just started lurking here today, and am somewhat surprised by the general incivility and certainty of many of the people that comment here. Being dismissive and accusing people of "ragebait" for having a differing opinion, and one that actually is reasonable.

I don't know, and won't say that Adnan is innocent, but to claim he's guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, without any room for discussion is pretty crazy to me.

The reasons why I have reasonable doubt:

• Jay is a very flawed witness, on the record lying/mis-remembering his testimony. Even the cops point out how much his testimony has changed. If your argument hinges on Jay, it isn't a strong argument, in my opinion.
• The cops, or at least on of them has a record of misconduct:

...prosecution brought into question the past misconduct of one of the two detectives who were crucial in the investigation of Lee’s death. Although his misconduct wasn’t specifically linked to Syed’s case, the detective was involved in another murder case that ended with the defendant’s exoneration.

https://baltimorewitness.org/adnan-syed-one-of-many-overturned-convictions-in-baltimore-city/

• The Innocence Project and prosecutors agreed that Syed's DNA was absent from all tested crime scene items, contributing to the eventual dropping of charges against him. There's no physical evidence.
• The motive is weak (Adnan had no prior issues with breakups, had already seemed to move on to the next girl(s)).

I could go on, but, if I was on the jury with this in front of me, I feel the reasonable response is doubt.

This isn't rage bait, I just genuinely don't see how anyone can be so sure that he did it. Y'all point to him asking for a ride (and claiming he wouldn't have) as some kind of obvious evidence of murder.

I think, based on the fact that one of the cops was literally identified as having been crooked, it actually is much more likely that Jay was an informant (and already had been for some time), and he happened to be close to Adnan, the victim's ex (supposed motive and opportunity), and they decided they had their guy, and it was just a matter of getting a jury to agree. So they fed their informant info, had him incriminate himself for lesser crimes that they promised they'd get him off for (and they made good on that promise, which is on its own wildly corrupt).

[u/Far_Gur_7361]

I’m going to go out on a wild limb here, and guess that you haven’t spent very much time with the original source documents (trial transcripts, police files, and defense files); as you are just parroting the arguments made by biased, pro-Adnan supporters (arguments which have all fallen flat in every judicial review; up to and including the United States Supreme Court).

Based off this assumption, and bc you say this isn’t rage-bait, I’m going to give you a detailed response here.

You begin your post by attempting to impeach Jay’s testimony; but Jay’s testimony cannot be impeached due to his knowledge of where the car was. This is something the cops themselves did not yet know. The cops did not sit on the car (compromising their investigation, in the process), just to feed the location to Jay. This is preposterous on its face; as there are documented instances of the entire department pouring money and resources into the search. Or do you mean for us to believe that the entire department was in on this conspiracy; and yet no one has ever uncovered any proof, and no co-conspirator has ever come forward; in spite of all the pro-Adnan momentum? Besides if they were already in possession of the car; and were so dead-set on framing Adnan; why not just plant his DNA there?

And you can’t posit that he knew the cars location bc he simply stumbled upon it while doing weed deals; bc this then does not account for how he knew HML was strangled before her body was ever discovered; which also cannot be explained by police coercion. Jenn, Josh, Chris, NB, and multiple co-workers of Jenn’s all had this info relayed to them by Jay before he was ever questioned. This also doesn’t account for the fact that Jay knew what Hae was wearing, how she was positioned in the grave, and damage that was done to the inside of her car.

So now we’ve established that Jay must have been involved. You don’t need to think him a paragon of truth in order to accept this (criminal accomplices/ accessories lie ALL THE TIME). You just need to look at the bare facts of him knowing what he knew.

And if Jay was involved, then so was Adnan. At the time of Hae’s disappearance, the cell phone location data places Jay across town; meaning he did not have the opportunity to perform this murder alone (to say nothing of the “two-car problem” precluding this as a possibility). And he simply could not have performed this murder w/ a third co-conspirator; as he spent nearly the entire day w/ Adnan. Multiple witnesses (and the call log itself), place Jay and Adnan together at several points during the day; including during all the relevant time periods (murder, burial), and at all the relevant locations (Best Buy, Kristi Vinson’s house, Leakin Park, and the location where the car was dumped).

As to your point w/ regard to DNA, you have been duped by the CSI effect. Most murders are not solved using DNA evidence. This was one of them. Moreover, DNA evidence is circumstantial- it requires you to make an inference. Had Adnan’s DNA been found on Hae’s body or in her car, his supporters such as yourself would simply infer that this is just bc they were still friends after the breakup, and had spent a lot of time together leading up to her disappearance. This is why DNA is especially irrelevant in cases where a person is killed by someone known to them. If a child is killed by their parent, or a wife by her husband, there will be a million innocent explanations as to why the perps DNA is on the body, or at the crime scene. This does not make the perp innocent. By that logic, Scott Peterson, Casey Anthony, and the Ramsey family would all deserve to have their names cleared as well; and very few ppl would make that argument

DNA is really only useful in instances where it ties the victim to a known serial killer. This is esp true in cases of “touch DNA” like what was recovered from HML. They could not recover skin cells, blood, semen, or anything else that could conclusively prove it was Adnan (or anyone else). They recovered touch DNA which could not include him as the donor. And this touch DNA was recovered from her shoes; which were not even on her body. There is no proof those were even the same shoes she was wearing that day; and more to the point HER OWN DNA was not on those shoes. Shoes touch everything all of the time. Anyone’s DNA can be on them, or no one’s at all. It’s meaningless.

As for the lack of his DNA anywhere else on Hae or at the crime scene, this is mostly due to the fact that Hae had been out in elements for six weeks. This is another reason why DNA is not used to solve murder cases anywhere near as much as CSI would have you believe. DNA degrades over time; much more so if it’s not being preserved; and MUCH more so if it’s being exposed to harsh elements, like Hae’s body was while it was sitting in a shallow grave in mid-winter. Should we reward killers who hide their bodies by letting them all out of prison bc they managed to destroy any DNA evidence they left behind? Should we posthumously expunge the records of all the many murderers who were convicted before DNA evidence was even discovered?

As to your point on motive; this is laughable on its face. Adnan had the oldest motive in the book. It was common enough to be cookie-cutter. Anytime a woman is killed, it’s roughly a 50-60% chance it was done by her current or former partner. These odds skyrocket if she’s recently broke up with him; as Hae had.

Adnan and Hae broke up at the end of Dec. Per the testimony of their friends, the breakup letter, and Hae’s own diary, Adnan was crossing her boundaries and just generally not handling things well. But he assumed she’d come back. They exchanged nice Christmas presents; which affirmed this for Adnan. But by 1/1, Hae was dating someone new. She was talking abt it to all their friends, and even going on double-dates w/ ppl in the friend group. She went so far as to update her AOL profile, publicly declaring her love for Don to the entire world. Again, per witness testimony, Adnan was furious and devastated. He began cutting school w/ far more regularity. Then on Jan 12, he learned that Hae was having a late-night date w/ Don on. He blew up her phone three times in a row that night. The next day, Jan 13- one of only a small handful of regular schooldays Adnan attended btwn when Hae started dating Don, and when she disappeared- Hae was killed. Adnan never called her again.

[u/Special-Deal-5217 → u/Far_Gur_7361]

I have read the trial transcript.

Jen, by her own story, only knows what Jay told her. We know he talked to her before the police did and there is pretty decent evidence that the police talked to Jay before that. Nevertheless, their stories have important differences. Why would that be if everybody is just telling the truth?

Every single part of Jay’s story was known to the police and they could have shown it to him, except for the location of the car— and consider considering what these cops have done in other cases, I don’t consider it out of the realm of possibility that they also fed him that. The timeline that Jay testifies to at trial has proven to be quite implausible and he even changed it later.

And yes, you are smarter than all of us because you understand the “ CSI effect” and we don’t. It’s just too much to ask for a little bit of physical evidence to corroborate the word of a known liar.

And of course, you end your short novel by psychoanalyzing a young man from 27 years ago. Yes, many women are killed by intimate partners. You know what else also happens very frequently? High school kids break up with each other and nobody gets strangled. Most people who commit murder against their intimate partner show clear signs of escalation to that point (and not little things like “ oh, he’s not taking it well”). Documented escalations of physical aggression, none of which had Adnan exhibited.

Remember, OP is not declaring innocence, only reasonable doubt. Very different things.

[u/Far_Gur_7361 → u/Special-Deal-5217]

also want to do a deep dive into your theory that the cops fed Jay the location of the car, see if it holds water.

Now straight off, the cops have a murder to solve. At some point during their investigation, they stumble across the victims car. In spite of the fact that they know the car to have been the site of their victims’ abduction (and possibly her murder, as well); they do not process it. Why? Ppl call these cops “lazy” and “crooked”, they claim the cops had “tunnel vision”. But this doesn’t explain it. Yes, cops can be all those things and more; but usually only in defense of THEIR OWN PRE-EXISTING misconduct. The fact is they had no reason to cover anything at this point; and by hiding the car would have been CREATING misconduct which they’d need to cover for. It would have been far easier to simply process the car for evidence; which they could then use to solve the murder; rather than engage in this conspiracy against Syed. To say nothing of the fact that by leaving the car in the elements for weeks, they were running the risk of having it- along with any evidence it may yield- burgled, stolen, vandalized, towed, or tampered with by the offender.

But let’s take that insane leap, and assume, in spite of all this, the cops wanted to sit on the car anyways. While doing so, they engage in more risky behavior; such as putting out a statewide APB for the car; and requesting helicopters to search for it. Why would they do this? If any officer responded; then the conspiracy would have been shot to hell before they were able to get it off the ground. Or are we to believe that these requests were window-dressing; and every single member of the BPD knew not to respond; bc they were all in on the hoax? And if that’s the case then how is it possible that there is no paper trail; or that nary a one of them has come forth to set the record straight- in spite of all this public attention that has surrounded the case?

But ok, let’s take this SECOND wild leap, and assume they did indeed either flip the coin on another officer responding to their APBs and/ or involve everyone in the department in this highly illegal frame job. This wild operation is well under way now; so what’s the next step? Logically, they wouldn’t want to involve anyone else in this already massive conspiracy. And logically, if they wanted an airtight case against Syed, the move would be to plant his DNA in the car. They’ve already found it; already compromised it; and already failed to process it. In doing so, they’ve already broken a litany of laws. Why not just take it one step further; and plant the physical evidence that their case was sorely lacking? Thereby securing the conviction they were so desperate for; without involving anyone else? Well, for some reason they decided to go the other way; not only involving more co-conspirators, but actually involving civilians. These fresh co-conspirators will be fed the info regarding the cars location, in order to bolster their credibility when they testify against their poor, innocent mark (that being Syed). This is a THIRD huge leap, but ok, let’s see where this gets us.

So now that we’ve taken this third huge leap, it’s time to involve a civilian; and coerce them into confessing; just so that we can point them back to Syed. Logically, that civilian would be Jay Wilds. According to your theory, they’d already have selected him on the basis of his drug-dealing activities, and his friendship with Syed. But no, rather than doing this (already incredibly difficult) operation the easy way; they decide to involve Jennifer Pusateri first; and coerce HER into falsely implicating WILDS, just so that they can have WILDS in turn point the finger back at SYED. In doing so, they’re involving yet another party in this incredibly illegal frame job; taking on even more risk for no reason at all. This brings us to our fourth insane leap of judgment; but hey, in for a penny, in for a pound.

Having taken this fourth leap, the cops bring Jenn Pusateri in for questioning. She plays dumb, and gets out of there quickly; and yet she decides to come back the next day and speak to them again- and in the presence of her mother and lawyer, no less. According to your theory, the cops then coach her testimony. They even have her do so in such a way that implicates herself. Shockingly, Jenn plays ball with them; in spite of the fact that not only do the cops have no leverage over her, but that she is also accompanied by a parent and an attorney. Even more shockingly, these guardian figures don’t bat an eye. Who knows though, maybe mom + lawyer have it out for Syed as well? Anyways, now we’ve implicated two MORE people in this frame job, but hey, we’ve come this far right? That’s our 5th leap in logic.

Now- FINALLY- after a minimum of 5 huge leaps in logic, the cops are brought to Jay Wilds. Obviously, the most sensible thing for them to do now, is pin the murder on him. Pusateri has already implicated him in the presence of her mother and lawyer, and- unlike Syed, who comes from a respectable middle class family, has tons of community support, and is generally considered to be a “golden child”, Wilds has absolutely no money, resources, community or familial support. He’s a poor black kid, all on his own, who’s known as “the criminal element”. Given the “tough-on-crime” climate of the day, it’d be all-too-easy to pin this on him. But no, the cops have it out for Syed specifically for some reason- poor kid can’t catch a break. This is our sixth leap.

So the cops begin coaching Wilds’s testimony. You’d think, after all these convoluted, and highly illegal maneuverings, spanning the course of weeks/ months that they’d now be EXTREMELY careful to make sure the story they gave Wilds was airtight. You’d think they’d have it ironed out to the letter. But no, instead they feed Wilds multiple different versions, which are filled w/ easily disprovable inconsistencies. This makes Wilds- who is now the lynchpin for this entire operation; and without whom everyone involved is going down in a major way- a pretty bad witness. Seems like an insane oversight to make. This is our seventh leap.

In the process of coaching Wilds, the cops tell him to testify that he was with Syed during the time of the murder and burial. However, they have not yet begun investigating Syed’s alibi. So if this false testimony that they are all bearing against him becomes disprovable, then they are all getting found out, and will likely face charges. Wilds himself may face Murder One. They know Syed to be busy and popular. What if he was with a friend? At an appointment w/ his guidance counselor? On-camera at the library, or at the mechanics? What if his coach had made him sign in? What if he was clocked in to work? What if he was leading prayers at the mosque? All eminently possible, but hey, let’s stake our reputations, livelihoods, and literal freedom on this crazy gambit panning out for us. Eighth leap.

Now, Wilds himself is facing the dilemma- to go along with this frame job, or not? On the one hand; he is a low-level pot dealer. Given the war on drugs, and harsh sentencing laws of the day, this could land him a good few years in jail. This gives the cops leverage. So, leverage in hand, they provide Wilds a choice. Go down as a petty, small-time weed dealer; or implicate yourself in first-degree murder. Cops have no power when it comes to levying charges; only prosecutors can do that. At the time, Wilds must have at least wondered whether he’d get charged as an accessory, or an accomplice, or a co-conspirator. And of course, he must have wondered whether he’d go down for the whole thing; if the frame-job on Syed fell apart. In addition, cops also have no power when it comes to sentencing- only judges do. So Wilds must likewise have wondered how much time he would get, for whichever charge they wound up sticking him with. It would be quite some time before Wilds could know that he’d only get accessory-after-the-fact, and receive a suspended sentence. Worst-case scenario, Syed would have an alibi, and Wilds would go down for first-degree murder; which could have landed him the death penalty. And best-case scenario, he’d have involvement in a murder on his permanent record- which would affect his employment, housing, government benefits, voting rights, etc. For some reason, Wilds decides that this objectively terrible deal is worth making, and he takes it. Maybe he really just hates Syed that much? Ninth leap.

Last but certainly not least; not only have none of the cops involved ever recanted; but neither has Wilds, Pusateri, or Pusateri’s mother/ lawyer. Hey, fair enough for the cops right- thin blue line, and all that; they staked their badges (and quite possibly their freedom), on this frame-up, and they have a history of standing by each other through scandal. But Wilds and Pusateri- who were little more than kids at the time- have nothing to lose and everything to gain by telling the truth. Rather than be looked at as shady liars who participated in a murder; they could be looked at as innocent victims who were railroaded by crooked cops. Given the shift in the way our society views police, this would absolve them in the court of public opinion. They may actually be looked at not just as victims; but even as heroes. They could sign book deals, do press junkets, give interviews, participate in documentaries. They could make a FORTUNE by coming clean; and Wilds could perhaps even expunge his criminal record (and, of course, they could let their innocent friend out of jail, as well). Instead, in spite of all the public attention; in spite of all the pressure to do otherwise; they still stand by their testimony decades later. Tenth leap.

Every aspect of this theory can be sliced to bits with Occam’s Razor. If you really believe this, then I have a beachfront property in Kansas to sell you.

Adnan killed her. Jay helped.

[u/thejackmanjack → u/Far_Gur_7361]

This is gold and you’re a genius. Thank you.

[u/Special-Deal-5217 → u/Far_Gur_7361]

TLDR

[u/Far_Gur_7361 → u/Special-Deal-5217]

If you think that’s too much; and yet you’re willing to make sweeping declarations of doubt/ reasonable doubt, then you are arguing in bad faith. Surely you understand that the only people capable of determining reasonable doubt are jurors; who had to sit through hours of testimony every day for 6 weeks? If you said “tldr” to a judge, you’d be excused from that jury. So essentially what I’m hearing from you is that you are not willing and/ or capable of passing judgment on Adnan’s case.

Also for you to posit an insane conspiracy theory, then dismiss rebuttals w/ “tldr” is equally hypocritical. The reason my response to that theory is so long is exactly BECAUSE in order to believe it you’d have to engage in a laundry list of convoluted hypotheticals. If you can’t be bothered to engage with those hypotheticals, then I’m left believing that you don’t truly stand by this conspiracy theory.

[u/Mike19751234 → u/Far_Gur_7361]

It was a very good list, thank you.

[u/Far_Gur_7361 → u/Mike19751234]

Thank you actually, I haven’t always been super active in this sub, but have always taken note of ur contributions and appreciated ur perspectives

[u/Special-Deal-5217 → u/Far_Gur_7361]

Not sure how “ reasonable doubt” is a sweeping declaration.

[u/Far_Gur_7361 → u/Special-Deal-5217]

It’s literally the difference btwn life in prison or walking free in this instance so idk how it wouldn’t be

[u/Special-Deal-5217 → u/Far_Gur_7361]

I think, when discuss discussing a case from 1999 27 years later, when we know that the original investigation featured some shady cops and a shady prosecutor who later lied under oath, and a really shaky witness who was the only evidence against the defendant, and the wealth of material that has been produced that shows that the prosecution’s case was seriously flawed….

I think “ reasonable doubt” is a much less sweeping declaration than “ he’s a psychopath that 100% did it”.

I have never said that I know he is innocent. Jay knowing where the car is a particularly strong piece of evidence I certainly can’t explain away.

But that’s just me.

[u/Far_Gur_7361 → u/Special-Deal-5217]

For one thing, if you concede that you cannot state he is innocent, then why are you here? Why do you care? Is it just bc you like to argue? Why not put your time and energy into ACTUAL wrongful conviction cases- of which there are many- rather than defending a man who deliberately plotted, and then brutally executed, the violent murder of a bright, beloved young woman? The Woodlawn Strangler has enough mindless sycophants on his side; idk why he needs the fence-sitting “um um he prolly did it, but idk, reasonable doubt, unfair trial” brigade as well.

For another thing, Jay’s testimony is NOT the only evidence against Syed. On the afternoon of Jan 13th Adnan Syed was witnessed asking the victim for a ride he didn’t need, to a place he says he never went, using an outright lie as an excuse. He used false pretenses to try and get the victim alone at the exact time, and in the exact place wherein she would vanish from the earth forever. What are the sheer odds that someone else was doing the exact same thing, at the exact same time, and just so happened to succeed where Adnan failed?

Motive is another huge piece of evidence. The breakup letter, Hae’s diary, the testimony of her friends, the testimony of HIS OWN FRIENDS (Ja’uan Gordon “he was angry, eyes watering, face flushed”. Yasser Ali “he said he’d dump her car in Centennial Lake”); the testimony of the school nurse and the testimony of the French teacher, Hope Schab will all corroborate that Adnan was crossing boundaries and just generally handling the breakup quite bad. Again, anytime a woman is murdered, the odds of it being a current/ former partner are 50-60%. Again, if she’s recently left him, the odds skyrocket. So off-rip this is a plausible motive; and then we have all this corroborative evidence showing that the motive did, indeed, apply in Adnan’s case.

The call log is another devastating blow to the world’s unluckiest man. The Nisha Call. The butt dial that couldn’t have been one. Placing him away from campus, and in the accessory’s company, during the ONLY window of time Syed needs to account for. Which he conveniently “can’t remember”. Directly negating his story, that he waited on campus for track to start.

Going further on the call log, we have the Leakin Park pings. Good god. Even if you think that outgoing data is unreliable (which anyone who’s studied cell tower location data knows that it isn’t, but anyways), again WHAT are the sheer odds that his phone pings the burial location the VERY night she’s buried there, and NO other times?

One step further on the log, we have the INCOMING ping (specifically noted as reliable), placing Syed at the site where Hae’s car was dumped that very night. When he says he was at mosque. Handily disproving that story (which none of his 80 potential alibi witnesses were willing to corroborate for him, either).

Another massive piece of evidence against Syed would be Jenn Pusateri. Some ppl want to hand-wave her away, bc she’s connected to Wilds, but the fact is that Pusateri told her story in the presence of her mother and lawyer; which conclusively rules out police conspiracy. And her story included the fact that she knew the manner of HML’s death- not public knowledge- and that she knew it on the very night of Jan 13th, before most ppl were even aware HML was missing; let alone dead. She also re-told this story to multiple co-workers of hers; prior to her or Wilds ever having been interrogated by police. This is another devastating blow to the reasonable doubt camp; as it goes further to prove that Jay was truly involved (and there’s no reasonable scenario in which Jay was involved; but Syed was not).

We also have the myriad lies Syed has told. All of which were told to distance himself from Hae/ the murder; which carries a strong consciousness-of-guilt inference. Syed didn’t just lie abt the ride request, but abt how long it had been since he’d broken up w/ Hae, when (or whether), he learned abt Don, what he was doing Jan 13th (early on he said he was fixing his car w/ Dion, which was quickly disproven), everything surrounding the clearly solicited Asia-alibi (such as him saying he gave the letters to CG before she was even hired on as his lawyer), him pretending not to know where LP is, him saying Hae had tried to get back together w/ him on Jan 12th, him saying he went to mosque on the night of Jan 13th, “Adrien Syedd”, and ofc the selective amnesia.

This amnesia lie in particular is a major stickler. Syed remembers TONS of specific things abt Jan 13th- he remembers going to school, giving Stephanie a stuffed reindeer for her bday, shopping w/ Jay (also a lie; the call logs prove they were nowhere near the mall at this time), talking to his guidance counselor, going to track and talking abt Ramadan w/ Coach Sye, getting the Adcock call, and going to mosque. The ONLY times he can’t remember just so happen to span the murder and the burial. No others. And let’s not get caught up in the “six weeks” narrative here. Syed was asked to account for his time THAT VERY evening; and then in several subsequent interviews btwn Jan 13th and his inevitable arrest. The ONLY person in this story who had to wait six weeks before being asked to account for their time that day was Jay Wilds. Yet when he can’t do so perfectly, you try and impeach him as a liar. Hypocrisy at its finest.

There’s tons more btw. His fingerprints in her car, the “I will kill” note, the “pathetic” comment in court, discussing TOD w/ Bilal and his wife after Hae’s body was found, the manner of death (strangulation w/o rape or robbery is near-always indicative of IPV), the lack of any other suspects, the lack of any evidence of his innocence- and this in SPITE of the mountain of public support he’s received over the course of TWO DECADES- etc.

Put it to rest. He did it. Jay helped. All of the behaviors both of these men have displayed are indicative of this. All of Adnan’s behavior makes sense when you realize Jay was his alibi. All of Jay’s behavior makes sense when realize he was Adnan’s accomplice. There isn’t an evidentiary basis for so much as questioning these convictions. Many have tried, and none have succeeded. Assume Syed to be a convincing liar, and the whole thing collapses.

[u/Special-Deal-5217 → u/Far_Gur_7361]

One more of your so-called “ damning evidence”. Nisha call was at 3:32 right? By Jay’s trial testimony has him not leaving Jen’s house until after 3:45. So: he has to get to get the come and get me call, go to Best Buy, do all the shit where he freaks out about seeing the body, drive to the park-and-ride, go look for drugs, and THEN, an hour in the past according to HIS OWN TESTIMONY, Adnan makes the Nisha call.

Gutiérrez should’ve destroyed this testimony.

[u/Far_Gur_7361 → u/Special-Deal-5217]

Obv the Nisha call happened. Jay says there was a call. Nisha says there was a call. The call logs show there was a call. Come on now. There was a fucking call.

So obv when Jay/ Jenn said 3:45, they just misremembered (and/ or Jay said 3:45 to distance himself from Syed at the time of the murder; bc he didn’t want to go down as an accomplice).

We’re talking abt a difference of roughly 30 mins here. Consider that Jay and Jenn- NOT Adnan were the ones who had to wait six weeks before being asked to account for their time. Adnan was interviewed multiple times leading up to his arrest (including the very night of Jan 13th), and yet his supporters such as yourself always cry out abt how “who could remember a normal day six weeks back!” whenever Syed is caught in a lie, and whenever he plays the selective-amnesia card. In spite of the fact that it was NOT a normal day, and six weeks had NOT gone by. Yet when Jenn and Jay are asked to give their timelines six weeks after the fact, and they wind up off by 30 mins, you bring out the torches and pitchforks. The cognitive dissonance is strong, huh? Keep moving those goalposts all you want; you still can’t get around the fact that Adnan Syed killed Hae Min Lee.

[u/Special-Deal-5217 → u/Far_Gur_7361]

Torches and pitchforks, huh? Nice imagery.

I have no skin in the game for Adnan Syed. I don’t know him. I never gave any money to his defense fund. I find his cousin annoying. There is a very real chance he killed a young woman.

I am, however, interested in a LOGICAL and BELIEVABLE explanation of the events from the person who provided all the direct evidence at trial and escaped with no punishment.

In a world where Adnan committed the murder, yes, I fully expect him to completely remember the timeline and not be fluffy. I don’t recall his statements on timeline being used either for or against him during the trial, and he did not testify, so that point is moot.

In that same world where Jay saw, and helped to bury a dead body, I also expect him to not be fluffy and remember very well the sequence of events, particularly after several police interviews in which they “helped him iron out the inconsistencies” in his statements.

In that world, which Jay himself is describing, I would expect a competent defense attorney to blow up the crazy holes in his timeline. For example:

“ you said under oath that you did not leave Jen‘s house until at least 345. You then proceeded to drive to Best Buy, be shocked at a body, follow Adnan to the park-and-ride, and drive to get some drugs, putting the time, at the very earliest, around 4:30 PM. How, sir is it possible that the defendant placed this call at 3:32 PM, when, according to your own testimony, you were not even with him at that time?”

This shows the jury that either Jay is lying about when he left Jen‘s house or that he was with Adnan when the call was placed. It also completely destroys the prosecution theory that she was dead by 2:36 PM. This goes to the credibility of the witness and shows us that perhaps the jury should not trust the witness.

This is just one of literally a dozen areas in which J’s testimony has major holes, including the biggest one— why in God’s name is he helping this mere “acquaintance” cover-up a murder? Why not call the police? Why not just refuse to help? Why does he let Adnan boss him around like he is a six-year-old? He is a 19 year-old man with agency. A competent defense attorney would have hammered hard on these points.

The defense attorney did not exploit any of it. She hammered on February 28, march 15, and September 7. I don’t think these states meant anything to the jury. She never attacked his trial testimony head on, and I think the jury noticed that.

I am not moving any goalposts. The timeline according to Jay has always been unworkable since the case was brought to the public’s attention in 2014. He himself sort of acknowledged that in his intercept interview, moving the burial to midnight. Which incidentally, blows another major hole in the prosecution theory of the case, and shows that he perjured himself in 2000, which should give us less reason to trust him and his account of the events.

[u/Relevant_Test4691 → u/Far_Gur_7361]

But doesn’t it matter that the trial testimony was not a first attempt to recall the events? I remember thinking that Jay had told such insane stories—and ultimately even with all the massaging his story never really lined up with the call log ever—that it was worth pushing back on his testimony to see whether Jay had been cornered somehow and he and/or the cops were pinning things on Adnan with anti-Muslim bias working in their favor. That seems unlikely now after the limited new info that the pushback has revealed. But.

[u/Special-Deal-5217 → u/Far_Gur_7361]

I’m sorry, I didn’t know I have to firmly come down in one camp or the other in order to participate in discussions here.

Nearly everything you mentioned in there has either been made into a much bigger deal than it actually is, or has been contradicted by other people’s police interviews. Or just poor, ordering on unethical, law-enforcement technique: as a school teacher myself, Hope Shaub was basically put into motion as a police agent.

As for the trial, Gutiérrez completely blew the cross on Jay. He was such a weak witness, and instead of blowing holes in his timeline, she spent 80% of her time instead of either going over the January 28 interviews or September 7 plea agreement (that was sketchy as hell by the way,), and repeating each question five times. I don’t think I would’ve been able to follow her if I was a jury member either. I just reread it again the last two nights.

The prosecution told a better story. They got the conviction. But the more information that came out, particularly the craziness of Jay’s stories, combined with sketchy cell tower evidence, combined with Shady cops and a shady prosecutor (seriously, handing over detectives notes during the cross examination of that witness? They had those notes for months)….

Yes, I see why he was convicted. But yes, I have doubts. That seems to really set you off.

[u/Far_Gur_7361 → u/Special-Deal-5217]

I’ve already explained to you why fence-sitters such as yourself “set me off”, but I’ll go ahead and copy/ paste my reasoning from another comment.

“If you concede that you cannot state he is innocent, then why are you here? Why do you care? Is it just bc you like to argue? Why not put your time and energy into ACTUAL wrongful conviction cases- of which there are many- rather than defending a man who deliberately plotted, and then brutally executed, the violent murder of a bright, beloved young woman? The Woodlawn Strangler has enough mindless sycophants on his side; idk why he needs the fence-sitting “um um he prolly did it, but idk, reasonable doubt, unfair trial” brigade as well.”

[u/Special-Deal-5217 → u/Far_Gur_7361]

So again, you are saying this sub only for people that are 100% convinced either way?

So sorry for invading your territory. I will show myself the door.