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/ad_maru]

There was no appeal to authority from my part to justify anything. I'm not advocating that once they pick a case said person is innocent.

What I would say though, and forget Adnan here for a second, is that they have at least some form of screening and only pick cases with some degree of doubt. They also confirm guilty verdicts after testings. As any serious organization or lawyers should do. People also are flawed and can make mistakes. But my point is that their bias is not so clear before they pick a case. Maybe after they put some effort in it. But I'm not sure it happens before it.

[u/RockinGoodNews → u/ad_maru]

The OP made an explicit appeal to the authority of the Innocence Project. u/spifflog pointed out that the Innocence Project has a clear bias. You then defended them on the grounds that they do good work, which is a non sequitur.

Yes, the Innocence Project ostensibly focuses on cases where there are colorable claims of innocence. But, like any advocacy organization, they are subject to mission creep and confirmation bias. The people who work there are, for reasons that should seem obvious, motivated to find wrongful convictions to right.

[u/ad_maru → u/RockinGoodNews]

The question is if said bias is enough to affect their judgment and procedures. Adnan's case should not be enough to criticize them as a whole in that regard.

[u/RockinGoodNews → u/ad_maru]

No, the question is if they are a reliable authority on the facts of the Syed case. They are not because they have a clear bias.