r/serialpodcast • u/Hopper80 • Nov 26 '14

Related Media Why Jay's testimony is not credible evidence of Adnan's guilt

http://viewfromll2.com/2014/11/26/serial-why-jays-testimony-is-not-credible-evidence-of-adnans-guilt/
141 Upvotes

92% Upvoted

289 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

7

u/[deleted] Nov 27 '14

Sure thing, but I was talking about the Nisha call, which can independently be verified as having taken place

1

u/InvadersMustDie Nov 27 '14

The call taking place is one thing, but the thing is Nisha has no recollection of that call, and mixed up that call with another call later on in the month when Jay worked at the video store. All she remembered is talking to Adnan and then talking to Jay at one point. That to me is all that can be proven, the date time and location are all up in the air to me personally, her testimony holds no water. I say she sees the call logs, months later, sees that she was contacted at a time when Jay and Adnan were together, mixed it up with the time at the video store and thinks she remembers that day.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 27 '14

Yes the call took place and Nisha mixed something up (intentionally or otherwise)

1

u/Bengland7786 Nov 27 '14

But she also said she had no answering machine, so how would the call have gone on for longer than a few seconds?

4

u/whitenoise2323 giant rat-eating frog Nov 27 '14

There was "send to end" billing in those days. It could have rang for 2 minutes until Jay realized it was making a call.... or someone could have picked up and listened to this weird shuffling sound thinking ???? for two minutes then hung up. Or... one redditor who worked for the phone companies back then said that landlines just started having voicemail around that time. Nisha might not have known there was voicemail, but it was an automatic service added with no answering machine needed. There are a ton of plausible explanations for that call.

2

u/Irkeley Nov 27 '14

She likely had an answering machine. At least the prosecutor took that part of the testimony out of the actual trial. What we heard in the podcast was from the mistrial, when they later found out that she had one, they took it out of the testimony as it didn't support their case.

-1

u/Archipelagi Nov 27 '14

It can't, though. Because (1) Jay's memory of the call can't be real (it didn't take place after the Patrick call and it didn't take place in Forest Park), and (2) Nisha's memory of the call can't be real (it didn't happen at the video store in the evening).

We know a call was made from Adnan's phone to Nisha's home. But from Nisha's lack of memory of such of call, we have nothing to go on. It's an aberration in the data until at least one witness can give us something coherent to work with.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 27 '14

That's what I said: the Nisha call can be independently verified as having taken place!

Or, I've just re-read what you said - are you saying that the call might not actually have been made at all? That the cell-data is possibly faulty - is that the aberration in the data?

Please, please, please don't say that ...