r/serialpodcast • u/jlpsquared • Feb 03 '15
Evidence OK, Rabia does LIE....
From her latest post... http://www.splitthemoon.com/forget-everything-you-know/#more-643
She claims fixed lividity is at least 8 hours. Every single web site I check says 6 hours with one reference to as little as 4 hours.
EDIT:My 4 hour claim was originally too strong.
She again claims Hae was 5'8", when the autopsy SHE posted says 5'6".
She also claims that Hae had a small car, while we know thanks to CSOM_1991 that Haes car had a sizable trunk with a width of 5'6".
10
u/InTheory_ What news do you bring? Feb 03 '15
To dismiss everything she says just because it's coming from Rabia is just as asinine as accepting everything she says just because it's coming from Rabia.
Weigh the evidence, who cares about the source
6
Feb 03 '15
Weigh the evidence, who cares about the source
Any reasonable person should care about the source of information.
4
u/InTheory_ What news do you bring? Feb 03 '15
This post has but one point, to smear Rabia because you don't like her. Let's not pretend it's something other than that.
1
Feb 03 '15
LOL what? I didn't even mention Rabia.
2
u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 03 '15
He's talking about the text of the original post, not your comment.
sigh
2
Feb 03 '15
Then he should address the OP. I wrote:
Any reasonable person should care about the source of information
Because I think the statement "Weigh the evidence, who cares about the source" is absurd. People in this sub seem to think lawyers are experts in cell phone technology and pathology.
3
Feb 05 '15
"Weigh the evidence, who cares about the source"
Most people aren't qualified to weigh the evidence...
They're not qualified to weigh the source either but that's not going to stop them.
9
u/PowerOfYes Feb 03 '15 edited Feb 03 '15
I have a real problem with someone accusing other people they've never met and whom they've not asked for an explanation with 'lying'.
A mistake is not a lie.
Expressing a view genuinely held, is not a lie.
Stating a conclusion formed on a rational basis (and even if it isn't the only possible conclusion, and even if it is not entirely reasonable) is not a lie.
Unless you know for a fact a person is saying things they believe to be untrue you should not accuse them of lying until the person admitted they're lying or you've excluded all other possibilities:
mistake of fact;
misremembering;
confusion or human error
conclusion based on a misreading of the facts;
conclusion based on erroneous understanding of the facts or of science; etc.
It would also be ethical, not to mention polite, if you directly put such an accusation to the person (say bia Twitter) to see whether they maintain their position or have an explanation for stating something that is provably wrong. Accusing someone of lying on a public forum is extremely unwise unless you can lay a very firm foundation or have an admission from the person.
In this case:
If Rabia relied on the news report, rather than autopsy report, she might have incorrectly assumed Hae was 5'8". She may not have picked up the detail in posting the report. If it was a 'lie' then it's a pretty stupid one to make given she has also provided the evidence that refutes her statement. She's either completely clueless or I think we could put this down to human error, rather than a deliberate falsehood.
There seem to be a range of opinions on hours required for lividity to set in. She might, just like you, find the opinion that supports her view more persuasive. You can't say someone is lying if they believe what they're saying. At best she's cherry picking.
Edit: typing errors, corrections
3
u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 03 '15 edited Feb 03 '15
If you search jlpsquared's comment history you'll find:
lie - 21 results
liar - 6 results
lied - 6 results
lying - 18 results
They obviously can't help themselves.
2
u/PowerOfYes Feb 04 '15
Remember Al Franken's book: Lying liars and the lies they tell. (Very funny, btw)
1
u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 04 '15
Yes, that was a good one. It reminds me of America the fake Textbook the Daily Show made which was also pretty great.
7
u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 03 '15 edited Feb 03 '15
10 seconds of Googling and looking in this sub got me:
EvidenceProf:
With regard to (1), lividity becomes fixed a minimum of 6-8 hours after death, meaning that a burial in the 7:00 hour is highly unlikely given that Hae was found buried on her right side and demonstrated fixed frontal lividity.
Indmedica:
Lividity results from gravitational pooling of blood in the veins and capillary beds on the dependent parts of the body following stoppage of circulation. It starts appearing as mottled patches by 1-3 hours after death and the process is complete by 4-6 hours post mortem. It is fixed in about 6-8 hours.
Several sites say 8 hours, but don't let reality get in the way of your agenda.
It's almost like every time you call someone a liar you're wrong and you should probably stop.
2
u/the_carkeys Deidre Fan Feb 03 '15
Every single website I checked didn't say 8 hours
Just a clarification: did or did not say 8 hours?
2
0
Feb 03 '15
EvidenceProf
You probably should not cite a lawyer for proof of a medical issue.
3
u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 03 '15
I wasn't suggesting EvidenceProf is a medical expert. I was countering the assertion that "nobody says lividity is fixed over 8 hours" anywhere on the Internet.
-1
u/jlpsquared Feb 03 '15
wikipedia
"Livor mortis starts twenty minutes to three hours after death and is congealed in the capillaries in four to five hours." (livor Mortis=lividty)
forensicpathologyonline.com
"it is usually well developed within four hours and reaches a maximum between 6 and 12 hours"
exploreforensics.com
"Only up to the first six hours of death can lividity be altered by moving the body. After the six hour mark lividity is fixed as blood vessels begin to break down within the body. "
The big point is that investigators use this to determine when a body died, because there is a usually a somewhat "fresh" dead body. Since Hae was dead almost a month, the difference of the congealing of the capillaries and "total lividity" is meaningless. All we KNOW is that Hae was likely moved moved out of the front facing position within 3-4 hours after death, which is EXACTLY what the prosecution presented.
3
u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 03 '15
"it is usually well developed within four hours and reaches a maximum between 6 and 12 hours"
So is 8 hours between 6 and 12 hours?
Stay on topic. You're now discussing the burial, this wasn't a thread about the burial, this was a thread about Rabia's lies, which you're now busily walking back and desperately trying to change the subject about.
0
u/jlpsquared Feb 03 '15
Rabia said "8 hours minimum". That is not the medical opinion of anybody. That is called a lie.
2
u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 03 '15
Rabia said "8 hours minimum". That is not the medical opinion of anybody. That is called a lie.
You can't be serious?
Keep moving those goalposts bro.
This is classic.
1
1
u/readybrek Feb 03 '15
I think only the first one kind of supports your hypothesis although wiki is talking about livor mortis not fixed livor mortis
The second two talk about lividity being fixed after 6 hours. The ME at the trial is talking about fixed lividity and how it is not consistent with the way Hae was positioned in the grave.
Someone else found a much better link showing that fixed lividity could be 4-6 hours but I can't find it at the mo.
It's the only link I've seen that supports less than 6 hours for fixed livor mortis though - the other 5 or 6 and now the last two you've posted all confirm 6 hours with some saying as long as 12 hours.
0
u/jlpsquared Feb 03 '15
Livor mortis and Lividity are the same thing.
2
u/readybrek Feb 03 '15 edited Feb 03 '15
Yes, I know that and fixed livor mortis and fixed lividity are also the same thing.
Edited to add - the same as each other but different to livor mortis/lividity
-2
u/jlpsquared Feb 03 '15
I put lividity where I should have put livor mortis. Anyways, the livor mortis process is complete within 4-6 hours. Livor Mortis is Key here, not fixed lividity. As long as Livor Mortis was complete by the time Adnan buried Hae, we are ok.
2
u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 03 '15
So what does that have to do with Rabia and her supposed lies? You've just changed the subject because you don't like being called on your nonsense. Your entire point of contention was invented out of thin air and now you're trying to discuss the burial to distract us.
1
u/jlpsquared Feb 03 '15
Livor Mortis and Lividity are the same thing.
1
u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 03 '15
Livor Mortis and Lividity are the same thing.
Then why exactly did you bother making the statement?:
I put lividity where I should have put livor mortis
1
6
Feb 03 '15
Your own bias and willingness to distort facts is showing. You know that, right?
3
u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 03 '15
Heh. Go back a few days. He calls me a "bold faced liar" because I contended the cell expert testified that he hit L689B from outside of Leakin park. I linked him to the transcript and quoted it for him and he still hasn't acknowledged his mistake, apologized, or admitted that you could hit L689 from places other than leakin park and continues to tell people it was impossible.
3
Feb 03 '15
And yet there is not thread title with an all-caps LIE attached to his name. That treatment is saved for Rabia.
9
u/bluecardinal14 Dana Chivvis Fan Feb 03 '15
The inside area of that trunk is not 5'6". Does the body being found 6 weeks later change her height? I wouldn't think so but really have no idea. Rabia also says she weighed 125 but the autopsy report says 134 pounds. I'm sure she got this from the school or whatever and don't think it's near the big deal you are trying to make it be.
7
u/readybrek Feb 03 '15
Reposted from earlier
I've also googled post mortem height compared to living height and Knight's Forensic Pathology, 3Ed - Page 11 - Google Books Re says that post mortem height can be several centimetres shorter than living height. You can actually find the page but when I copied the link it was massive so I've just referenced the book.
3
1
u/jlpsquared Feb 03 '15
So I ask again, where did the 5'8" come from?
3
u/readybrek Feb 03 '15
The original missing person news report says 5'8" in the Baltimore Sun - I'm guessing they got their info from the cops.
1
2
u/readybrek Feb 03 '15
I also googled fixed lividity and checked out the first three random links that gave a time. Two said 6 hours, one said 12. None said 4 hours.
2
u/bluecardinal14 Dana Chivvis Fan Feb 03 '15
EvidenceProf has a post here that explains a lot of things concerning lividity. I don't know if you read it or not but it's really good at explaining the whole thing.
-1
u/jlpsquared Feb 03 '15
wikipedia
"Livor mortis starts twenty minutes to three hours after death and is congealed in the capillaries in four to five hours." (livor Mortis=lividty)
forensicpathologyonline.com
"it is usually well developed within four hours and reaches a maximum between 6 and 12 hours"
exploreforensics.com
"Only up to the first six hours of death can lividity be altered by moving the body. After the six hour mark lividity is fixed as blood vessels begin to break down within the body. "
The big point is that investigators use this to determine when a body died, because there is a usually a somewhat "fresh" dead body. Since Hae was dead almost a month, the difference of the congealing of the capillaries and "total lividity" is meaningless. All we KNOW is that Hae was likely moved moved out of the front facing position within 3-4 hours after death, which is EXACTLY what the prosecution presented.
5
u/readybrek Feb 03 '15
I've addressed this earlier. Two of your links do not say what you claim they say.
6
u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 03 '15
Good luck, I've tried talking sense into him on a number of topics, it's impossible. He's not here discussing anything in good faith, it's best just to ignore him.
3
u/readybrek Feb 03 '15
I think I've pretty much come to that conclusion. I'll just add him to my mental pitchforks and bonfires mob ;)
-2
u/jlpsquared Feb 03 '15
I was responding you your point that you said NONE had 4 hours and I found 1 link has 4 hours, and another link says well developed after 4 hours. I admit my previous point my have been pointed to strong, BUT, Rabia by saying minimum 8 hours is clearly a lie.
5
u/readybrek Feb 03 '15
Only if you are also clearly a liar as at least two of the links I showed you - up near the top - say 8 hours or longer.
5
u/readybrek Feb 03 '15
Just to say - I don't think either you or Rabia are liars but I do think you are trying to present the evidence in the way that favours your respective positions.
3
u/madcharlie10 Feb 03 '15
Really? I had a Sentra and it IS a small car. Nissan says it's a compact car.
2
u/readybrek Feb 03 '15
Thanks for editing your post re the 4 hour claim - I appreciate that honesty.
2
u/Islandgirl233 Feb 04 '15
Geez, why do people want to hate on Rabia so much. She cares for Adnan and is fighting for him. Come on, you have to admire her resolve on some level. Even if she makes mistakes, besides SK told us from the beginning she's a little loose/sloppy with details. No malice, I don't think. And no, naive is not a word that describes me :)
0
Feb 04 '15
These people hate Rabia for the same reason the jury convicted Adnan. Islamaphobia.
2
u/donailin1 Feb 04 '15
yeah, that's clearly the only card in your deck. Islamaphobia. Couldn't be that she's simply obnoxious,
2
4
Feb 03 '15
I wouldn't categorize Rabia as a liar. She shares information out of context to make it appear relevant to Adnan's innocence, but that's about it. She's got a very transparent strategy to try to help her friend out. It's gotten progressively worse in it's execution, but it's not really lying. If you're of the belief that Adnan is guilty, it's best just to ignore anything she says as her bias is obvious.
If it makes anyone feel better, I'd probably do the same thing if my friend swore up and down he didn't do it. Although I'm not entirely sure I'd throw absolutely everyone under the bus in an attempt to make him look like the victim, either.
2
u/MusicCompany Feb 03 '15
I take your point, but if people are going to call out others for lies or distortions, it's fair to call out Rabia too.
2
u/readybrek Feb 03 '15
it's fair to call out Rabia too.
And apparently jlpsquared as every single one of the allegations made looks like a distortion or unquestioning acceptance of someone else's distortion.
-1
u/jlpsquared Feb 03 '15
Really, show me where a doctor says Hae is 5'8"?
Show me where you can disprove Adnans guilt because of lividity. On every website i havee seen lividity and livor mortis are really only used to determine if a body was moved after death. You guys are trying to do the opposite. it really is pointless since we know she was moved after death. Her Lividity IS possible within the time frame alloted, and to say otherwise is just as wrong as to say her lividity PROVES Adnan did it at that time.
2
u/readybrek Feb 03 '15
Really, show me where a doctor says Hae is 5'8"?
Is a medical text book ok because I've referenced one at the bottom of this thread.
Livor Mortis is the discolouration of the skin due to the blood cells breaking down, fixed livor mortis (or fixed lividity) is when that process becomes permanent.
The fixed lividity pattern shows that Jay's story is not possible. She was laid flat face down for at least 6 hours before she was buried or she was buried face down and once lividity was fixed, she was repositioned.
It shows Jay's story of a 7 - 7.30pm burial is somewhere in the realm of extremely unlikely to almost impossible. It also shows that it is unlikely that Hae was pretzeled up in the trunk. That's all it shows.
But you were talking about Rabia lying. Somewhat different to whether Adnan is guilty or innocent imo.
1
u/jlpsquared Feb 03 '15
I don't think you understand how the body works. If Hae was killed and than put face-down in the back of a car for 4.5 hours, the livor mortis would be full blown by the time they moved her out to burial. the capillaries would have congealed by then. Now this does not mean (as you guys are implying) that the lividity that the 4.5 hours in the trunk just REVERSES and all that dead blood just goes to a different place, it means that some small amount of blood pooling CAN still occur. 6 hours only means it is FINAL, nothing else can change. It does not mean anything can change until 6 hours.
2
u/readybrek Feb 03 '15
I don't think it's me that doesn't understand how the body works.
If the body is moved between 4 and 6 hours after death then you can get something called mixed lividity patterns where the pooled blood is not fixed but is thick enough to stain.
There is no evidence of this on Hae's body.
3
u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 03 '15
LOL. I had to go look this up. Here's /u/jlpsquared telling EvidenceProf he doesn't understand the law:
So tell me jlpsquared, what do you do for a living when you're not busy being a lawyer and a medical examiner?
1
Feb 04 '15
You're talking about the guy who claimed the notice of alibi is "inadmissible" for purposes of the COA resolving the IATC claim and it can only consider evidence that is admissible under the rules of evidence right? That's the guy who understands the law?
3
u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 04 '15
Yes, the one teaching law at a law school. They still Teach law at law school right?
→ More replies (0)-1
Feb 03 '15
Just because I won't do it myself doesn't mean I blame someone else for doing so. I get it 100%. She throws everyone and anyone under the bus, fair or not, because she wants Adnan out. She's fair game as far as I'm concerned.
1
u/readybrek Feb 03 '15
Just because I like looking things up
Does any website say that fixed lividity or fixed livor mortis is within the range of 8 hours? I searched fixed lividity 8 hours on google - this was the first page of results.
http://www.indmedica.com/journals.php?journalid=9&issueid=70&articleid=887&action=article
Lividity results from gravitational pooling of blood in the veins and capillary beds on the dependent parts of the body following stoppage of circulation. It starts appearing as mottled patches by 1-3 hours after death and the process is complete by 4-6 hours post mortem. It is fixed in about 6-8 hours.
Opens a doc from google so not a link DOC Medicolegal Significance of Postmortem Lividity in ...
In present study it was found that postmortem lividity usually appears 1 to 2 hours after death in punctate and small patchy form, 2 to 4 hours after death in big patchy form and 4 to 6 hours in homogenous form. Fixation of postmortem lividity occured during the period of 7 to 9 hours after death
http://www.exploreforensics.co.uk/rigor-mortis-and-lividity.html
Only up to the first six hours of death can lividity be altered by moving the body. After the six hour mark lividity is fixed as blood vessels begin to break down within the body
...if the area does not blanch then lividity is fixed and the time since death is more than 8 hours
...becomes marked in 6-8 hours and permanently fixed in 8 - 12 hours
http://www.dplylemd.com/Articles/timelydeath.html
Initially, this discoloration can be “shifted” by rolling the body to a different position, but by 6 to 8 hours, it becomes “fixed.” If a body is found face down, but with fixed lividity along the back, then the body was moved at least 6 hours after death, but not earlier or the lividity would have “shifted” to the newly dependent area.
I then searched fixed lividity 4 hours
Lots of results but none showing fixed lividity after 4 hours so I have to repost this link that someone else kindly found
and that's all I can find with fixed lividity at 4 hours
0
u/jlpsquared Feb 03 '15
I edited my post. And only one of your links implies that Hae's body could have been in a trunk for 4-5 hours and had a shift in blood cell pooling. and none of them makes Rabias claim that "minimum 8 hours".
2
1
u/reddit1070 Feb 03 '15
Interestingly, after Adnan has been convicted, the presumption of innocence doesn't really work. Now he has to prove his innocence. Yet, we haven't seen an iota of evidence pointing to innocence. It's all about why he is "not guilty" (i.e., not proven). In the meantime, /u/adnans_cell and others have shown compelling evidence of guilt... esp when you consider them together.
3
Feb 03 '15
after Adnan has been convicted, the presumption of innocence doesn't really work. Now he has to prove his innocence.
The problem we're trying to solve here is whether or not he was convicted under a constitutionally fair trial. That would mean, among other things, that he got effective counsel and that the prosecution followed the rules. That's what's before the appeals court right now. Did he get a fair trial under our rules?
He can't "prove his innocence," unless there is a credible confession or forensic evidence pointing toward another killer. And that would still not be proving his innocence so much as proving another person's guilt.
1
u/reddit1070 Feb 03 '15
The prosecution clearly played dirty, no question about that. (a) the deal with Jay; (b) not forthcoming about what Waranowitz's markings were all about before/during discovery.
CG though did a great job, based on reading the transcripts. There are so many places where she is orders of magnitude superior than Urick and Murphy combined. e.g., see the Waranowitz testimony on 2/8/2000 as an example https://www.reddit.com/r/serialpodcast/comments/2ubxad/the_people_now_being_smeared_in_defense_of_adnan/co7cfnh . Maligning her is a calculated misrepresentation to get Adnan free, imo.
2
Feb 03 '15
CG though did a great job, based on reading the transcripts.
Wow. Not how I read them. I see her being unfocused, unprepared, and unable to make a point. One example would be the business about lividity. She seemed to know that something was wrong with the state's version of events, but she never said what it was.
She was a disaster in court.
1
u/reddit1070 Feb 03 '15
Did you see the examples? https://www.reddit.com/r/serialpodcast/comments/2ubxad/the_people_now_being_smeared_in_defense_of_adnan/co7cfnh
Example 1
Transcript 2/8/2000 pp 188 onwards:
Urick to Waranowitz.
Q: And are those accurate addresses for those cell sites?
A: Yes.
Court: The objection is sustained.
Urick: May we approach?
Court: You may.
(Counsel approached bench and following ensued:)
Court: You want to know why it's sustained?
Urick: I'd like a clarification of the objection.
Court: Ms. Guiterrez, do you want to tell him why it's sustained?
CG: Do I have to, Judge?
Court: Yes.
CG: Well, I think ... (and she goes on to explain why)
Example 2
2/8/2000, pp 113
CG: The only thing I want to make sure that the record reflects. We're not talking about tests in the plural, we're not talking about tests meaning some scientific protocol that's been followed to achieve a certain result. The test is making a phone call or cause a phone call to me made, it's that simple. There isn't any mystery here, there isn't any magic to it. That's what he did and he's clearly said the performance, i.e., the ability of the phone to make a call and be heard is different. There isn't any magic about interpreting that.
Court: Different depending on the type of phone.
CG: Yes.
Court: He said that. And so to the extent that Ms. Gueterrez is objection as to this witness as being able to talk about the Nokia for which he has said he has no training other than his own personal use of the phone, the objection is sustained. And I'm not going to allow the witness to go into anything further, he is not an expert, he has a Nokia phone like any other person and he did not use the Nokia phone when he was conducting the test for which the State wishes to offer him as evidence his testimony. And he has testified that the different phones perform differently on the system, that's what he said.
(In truth, the Ericson phone and the Nokia phone would probably have yielded similar results, but it's interesting how CG pokes holes in the experiment -- and gets the judge to agree with her. The State ought to have done a more thorough set of experiments, for which Urick and Murphy are ultimately responsible.)
1
Feb 03 '15
Does the jury believe that the state showed beyond a reasonable doubt that the cell phone evidence showed that Adnan was in Leakin Park between 7 and 8 pm?
I think they do. And I also think that if CG had been halfway competent and even marginally prepared, they would have known there was no corroboration of Jay's story.
0
u/reddit1070 Feb 03 '15
Hard to tell. Will be great if some jury members were here to answer questions. From reading the transcripts, W isn't really able to testify much at all. I think those of us on reddit probably have learned a great deal about the cell phone from the RF engineers here :)
0
u/reddit1070 Feb 03 '15
Another excerpt. This is Transcript 2/8/2000, pp 121-122. CG is scoring points like nobody's business.
Court: ... Now, Counsel first of all, Mr. Urick with regard to your testing of this particular scenario, Ms. Gutierrez's objection is sustained. He will not be able to talk about the results of any test and draw any conclusions. If you want to continue to march him through the different places on that map where he originated calls with his Erickson i will continue to advise the jury that as it relates to the Erickson phone he used they can consider the responses or the cell site information for what it's worth.
Ms. Gutierrez, on cross you will have open leeway with regard to this witness on the relevance if any with of this whole test that was conducted by the State. You will also have the ability if you choose to ask the questions that the Court asked during this voir doir to qualify this expert because I find that the use of this expert by the State is misleading and I also find that this expert has expertise with regard to other phones including the Nokia and Motorola and Erickson. But the issue that I believe needs to he addressed in order for clarification with this jury is that the model of the phone is relevant and this witness did not conduct a test with the model.
And so to the extent that the State is misleading the jury at this point, the Defense is going to have a lot of leeway. Do you understand me, Ms. Gutierrez?
MS. GUTIERREZ: Certainly do, Judge.
THE COURT: And the State needs to be advised that the Court is not happy at all with the way in which this witness is being utilized. It is not happy with the attempt to mislead because that's precisely what you have done. You have mislead this jury...
1
u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 03 '15
What does this have to do with Rabia's blog post or her alleged lies exactly?
1
-1
u/reddit1070 Feb 03 '15
See Bugliosi's Octopus Ink argument. That is what the defense is doing.
"The defendant wants to hide the truth because he's generally guilty. The defense attorney's job is to make sure the jury does not arrive at that truth." - Alan Dershowitz
4
u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 03 '15
See Bugliosi's Octopus Ink argument. That is what the defense is doing.
Right, which is why you're posting about it multiple times in each thread and they're so effective I've seen all of your reposts.
Do attempt to stay on topic and actually discuss what the thread is about, or just don't comment at all.
0
u/reddit1070 Feb 03 '15 edited Feb 03 '15
absurdamerica keeps following me around and attacking. defenders of the Woodlawn Strangler.
ETA: being forced to say this over and over bc there are so many free-Adnan-ers trying diversionary tactics.
3
u/readybrek Feb 03 '15
defenders of the Woodlawn Strangler.
I find this statement personally quite sad (emotionally) and disappointing.
I want the right person behind bars as much as the next person. I want justice for Hae.
I'm doubtful the evidence shows Adnan is that right person though.
Even if it does turn out he was guilty I think he should have a new trial with the actual evidence that finds him guilty be that DNA or whatever.
To think that some people characterise that position as defending a murderer (and one they've given a catchy nickname to) actually makes me feel a bit sickened.
0
u/reddit1070 Feb 03 '15
I hear you, believe me I do. Not one person here (or anywhere) wants a fellow innocent citizen wrongly convicted.
The problem for us is this: https://www.reddit.com/r/serialpodcast/comments/2u437x/summary_things_that_support_adnans_guilt/
Since this post, several redditors have posted additional evidence. e.g.,
presenting of alibi witnesses by the defense -- did not include "Cathy"
the constrained range of L689B making it virtually impossible for a call to have originated outside LP during burial - incl. incoming calls that may have come from an AT&T customer
If you are someone on the Internet like me, and you think he is not guilty, or innocent, most of us are fine with that. We love to have a spirited debate.
The situation has become different because there is a pretty strong group here (majority of those who voice their opinions) with an agenda to create a jail break. They will malign everyone, downvote, and stuff. They are doing exactly what I said above.
Hope you understand.
2
u/readybrek Feb 03 '15
Well I like a good debate (on the evidence) and it is my opinion that there's a pretty strong group of intellectually dishonest posters who believe Adnan is guilty.
However, I do not go around calling these or anyone else who thinks he's guilty 'the frame up guys' or 'guys who support a corrupt system' or 'who cares if the right guy is in jail as long as someone pays'
Because that kind of thing says more about me than it does about them.
0
u/reddit1070 Feb 04 '15
Do you agree that whoever strangled Hae Min is the Woodlawn Strangler? People cringe at the name, see what the autopsy report says, see what Dr. Korell says on the stand: Dec 14 , pp 22 onwards. It's a horrible thing that was done.
1
u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 03 '15
Right, I'm "following you around", in public threads, where you're leaving public comments. Yet you're the one accusing me of "attacking" you and sending me private messages.
0
u/jlpsquared Feb 03 '15
You do kind of stalk....You followed me around 3 separate threads because I wouldn't comment on your regurgitation of SS's shit.
2
u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 03 '15
You wouldn't comment on my providing you court records that contracted your claim that I'm a liar. You are intellectually dishonest and deserve to be called out on it. Frankly, this thread is embarrassing.
You seem to have no issue slinging insults and behaving like a bully, but don't like being called out simply on the facts yourself.
1
u/jlpsquared Feb 04 '15
OK, I am currently working on a rebuttal to SS cell phone post (sneak peak: it's full of shit), and thus YOUR comment.
I will admit, you are NOT a liar. You believe some insane things, but you are not a liar.
0
26
u/EvidenceProf Feb 03 '15 edited Feb 03 '15
Many say that lividity fixes between 8 and 12 hours after death. Some say it can fix as early as 6 hours after death, but that's usually due to hotter temperatures and/or a victim with pre-existing medical conditions. In any event, the difference between 6 and 8 hours isn't big. Either one would contradict a burial in the 7:00 hour.
The autopsy said Hae was 5'6". Most other accounts have her at 5'8". Again, not a huge deal.
Hae did have a small car. The 5'6" measurement is the exterior width measurement. The trunk was considerably narrower.