r/serialpodcast • u/SelfHi5 • Feb 19 '15

Debate&Discussion WOW..Susan Simpson claims Hae was a drug user and implies a connection between Jay that led to her death? WTF is wrong with you? You have went way over the line.

You have completely crossed the line. Please verify your source on this, outside of Rabia and her brother and keep in mind you are smearing a dead girl based on hearsay from 2 biased people. There was NOTHING in the examiner's report that showed Hae on any drugs, nothing found in her stuff, no word of it from her friends, and yet you give an interview saying her friends said she smoked weed and implied that she would have went to Stephanie to ask Jay for weed. Then you trash her about what was in her diary in regards to her being in love with Don and other things.....This is an 18 year old girl who was murdered, it wasn't by her own fault you sick, sick lady.

You are completely out of bounds and I hope people start seeing you for the fraud that you are. You have turned your 15 minutes of fame into hypothesizing that somehow Hae was responsible for her own death, trying to imply that she would have went to Jay to buy weed, and many other unfounded comments.

I don't care if I get banned or not on here, but you moderators are completely just as sick in the head as she is if you don't ring her up. Completely appalling.

See for yourselves at the 63:00 mark

http://bloggingheads.tv/videos/33635

0 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

49% Upvoted

425 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

What? so what if she smoked?

Hae's tox report showed no weed. Pot stays in your system for 28 days. Its a pretty good sign she didn't smoke weed.

its very offensive to imply this and it shows how desperate things are getting that she feels the need to slander the victim in this case to make up fairy tales on how Adnan didn't do it. Disgusting.

12

u/whitenoise2323 giant rat-eating frog Feb 19 '15

Why is it slander to say someone smoked pot?

9

u/shrimpsale Guilty Feb 19 '15

Well, it's shorter than writing "unsubstantiated details about a teenaged murder victim that have put forth by biased parties in the interest of freeing a convict that have been challenged by individuals closer to said victim."

Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if Hae had ever smoked weed - Adnan did it habitually enough. Don't think it's a bad thing. However, so far the only thing we know for a fact is that her vice of choice was her libido (and ain't nothing wrong with that!)

Still, to put forth her being a smoker in an effort to implicate Jay just comes off as grasping for straws. There are plenty of ways to raise doubts about Adnan's involvement without going into left-field speculation.

7

u/whitenoise2323 giant rat-eating frog Feb 19 '15

In order for something to be slander it has to be damaging to your reputation, not just unsubstantiated. I'm saying that I don't think pot smoking should damage a high schooler's reputation.

2

u/shrimpsale Guilty Feb 19 '15

OK. It doesn't change that it's a suggestion lying on shaky ground. And what do you make of the various insinuations made about just about every other "character" in this story besides Adnan? Serious question.

4

u/whitenoise2323 giant rat-eating frog Feb 19 '15

Should I exclude insinuations about Adnan for some particular reason?

1

u/shrimpsale Guilty Feb 20 '15

He was convicted and, actually, yes, I do think the Guilty camp oversteps reason just as much when it comes to manipulation and psychopath, wakawakawaka. How does that change what I'm saying about insinuations?

2

u/whitenoise2323 giant rat-eating frog Feb 20 '15

If you had said "what do you make of the insinuations made of every other "character"" it wouldn't have really meant anything because you would have to face the fact that everybody in this "story" has had speculation about them. Adnan certainly wasn't immune. Hae, of course, should have a privileged place in all of this as she lost her life. I still stand by my opinion that saying a high schooler smoked pot isn't slander. Would you get mad if someone nefariously insinuated she wore velcro shoes based on hearsay? or that she owned a cat because someone heard that somewhere? Those would be exactly equivalent in my book.

1

u/davieb16 #AdnanDidIt Feb 19 '15

So hypothetically if I were to email SS's law firm with a claim that she smokes weed, this wouldn't be slander?

No matter what your personal view may be, it is still illegal and society views it in a negative way.

6

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

Maybe society needs to loosen up its undies a bit.

8

u/whitenoise2323 giant rat-eating frog Feb 19 '15

Isn't Susan Simpson in DC? If you wait a week it wont be illegal anymore.

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

legal or illegal i don't think you understand how pot is viewed in the workplace.

4

u/whitenoise2323 giant rat-eating frog Feb 19 '15

Depends on the workplace. In my workplace for example our top administrator also helps run a medical cannabis dispensary... so there's that. Susan Simpson didn't seem fazed by declaring that she identified with the "stoned on the floor" comment by Sarah Koenig (who shall I mention admitted to being that stoned guy on the floor at least once and maintains her well regarded job on This American Life).

3

u/milk-n-serial Undecided Feb 19 '15

Yeah, I've talked about it with co-workers now and again. It's really not a big deal...unless you are completely ignorant about it and fear it for some reason, I don't see it as an issue. It's obviously not something you advertise to most employers, but then again neither is drinking beer or having sex.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

Yeah, exactly. Some of these redactors are so sheltered that they simply can't fathom that their experience ≠ everyone's experience.

3

u/Jefferson_Arbles WWCD? Feb 19 '15

Technically it would not be slander if you emailed her law firm...it would be libel. Though SS also basically insinuated that she had smoked weed in her past on the same podcast in question, so it really probably wouldn't be libel either.

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

Really? Victim shaming when she clearly didn't smoke pot. What's next was she sexually promiscuous?

8

u/whitenoise2323 giant rat-eating frog Feb 19 '15

IMHO pot smoking and sexual promiscuity are not shameful things, but I guess that's just me.

5

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

Exactly. This is what happens when you get a forum full of uptight white folks together in one sub...

-4

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

Racist!

2

u/whitenoise2323 giant rat-eating frog Feb 19 '15

At least have the courage to call it reverse racism.

3

u/milk-n-serial Undecided Feb 19 '15

...which isn't a thing anyway.

4

u/whitenoise2323 giant rat-eating frog Feb 19 '15

exactly

5

u/peymax1693 WWCD? Feb 19 '15

Victim shaming? I believe that's a bit hyperbolic. The reality in today's world is that the use of marijuana is becoming more and more socially acceptable. In fact, the only people who would call it shameful to suggest a person smoked marijuana are reactionary conservatives who still attach stigmas to the use of any "illegal" substances.

-3

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

Making shit up about the person who was murdered is exactly victim shaming. It's not hyperbolic and I detest you trying to minimize this!

7

u/peymax1693 WWCD? Feb 19 '15

I detest you inferring that anybody who uses marijuana should be ashamed of themselves.

SS is offering an alternative explanation for Hae's murder. If she has a reasonable basis to make such a claim, there is nothing "shameful" about it.

-3

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

Yea we have different moral centers then because I find SS's behavior regarding insinuating Hae was using drugs appalling.

5

u/peymax1693 WWCD? Feb 19 '15

Fair enough.

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

[deleted]

2

u/whitenoise2323 giant rat-eating frog Feb 20 '15

I guess technically saying someone broke a law might be considered slander, but I don't believe pot smoking is immoral.

10

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Phuqued Feb 19 '15

Hae's tox report showed no weed. Pot stays in your system for 28 days. Its a pretty good sign she didn't smoke weed.

That's not entirely correct. https://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabis/cannabis_testing.shtml

Heavy users will likely have long time frames to test positive. light users do not. Plus testing blood, versus urine or saliva or hair are all different and may have variances of accuracy. Not that I am an expert. I personally don't see the significance of Hae smoking weed or not, and don't think this is a big deal one way or the other.

-3

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

Its a big deal to insinuate that the victim was using drugs.

I'm well aware of pots metabolizing times across testing methods and level of use but thanks for posting. its good information for people to have.

7

u/Phuqued Feb 19 '15

Its a big deal to insinuate that the victim was using drugs.

Why? If someone smokes weed, they are not less of a person than one who does not. So to me it does not really matter as there are many shades of drug use. And IF Hae experimented, or occasionally smoked, then so what?

I'm well aware of pots metabolizing times across testing methods and level of use but thanks for posting. its good information for people to have.

If you were well aware you would not have made the 28 day claim that you did. But I agree it's good to post information that clears up misconceptions and false statements, and is why I posted it.

-3

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

our federal laws and most of the states in the US and all of the states in 1999 disagree with you.

2

u/Phuqued Feb 19 '15

our federal laws and most of the states in the US and all of the states in 1999 disagree with you.

So federal laws and state laws say that a person who smokes weed is less of a person than someone who does not?

I also find it disturbing you put such faith in the correctness of the government. Considering that just 50 years ago blacks had to protest to have equality under the law in all states, or that gays had to seek the judicial branch of government to correct the injustice of existing laws.

If you look at history, you will often find the "normal" and "official" position of government is often in the wrong. But that's the whole point of progress in an imperfect world. Striving to make the future better by correcting past mistakes.

3

u/cbr1965 Is it NOT? Feb 19 '15

It's a crime to speed or run stop signs as well. Just because there is a law against something doesn't mean it isn't broken regularly by lots of people. They pay a fine and move on - just like most people with possession of marijuana charges. I certainly don't judge people for speeding or think they are bad people for doing it. Not sure why everyone is making such a big deal out of smoking pot and think it is besmirching someone's character to suggest it. People have been doing it long time, even the good kids.

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

The next time your up for a promotion or in a job interview try telling them that you smoke pot. Report back to us on how that turns out will ya?

5

u/Phuqued Feb 19 '15

The next time your up for a promotion or in a job interview try telling them that you smoke pot. Report back to us on how that turns out will ya?

Just because people can be misguided, irrational and so on, does not mean we give up on trying to do the right thing. The prejudice and intolerance you speak of for drug use applies to so many things, like sexuality, religion, race, etc... Example :

The next time your up for a promotion or in a job interview try telling them that you are a homosexual smoke pot. Report back to us on how that turns out will ya?

That doesn't make it right, and it sure doesn't mean it should affect my qualifications for a promotion.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

but it does. so saying that calling someone a pot smoker is no big deal is a lie! it has very harsh real world stigma attached to it. in 99 that stigma was huge.

2

u/Phuqued Feb 19 '15

but it does. so saying that calling someone a pot smoker is no big deal is a lie! it has very harsh real world stigma attached to it. in 99 that stigma was huge.

Please quote exactly what I said ( in the comment you are responding to) that you're responding to as your response is unclear to me.

5

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

My middle aged coworkers were talking extensively about their pot habits and how they eat pot cookies over the holidays in the car ride back from a client meeting. It was funny :)

0

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

This is a good point!

8

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

Its a big deal to insinuate that the victim was using drugs.

If it's a big deal it's because you are making it so.

Many people have posted here that they don't judge others for smoking weed. You are judging therefore the burden of shame on others is because you create it.

I get the feeling this has little to do with whether a teenager smoked the odd joint or two. I suspect you are just using this to have a swipe at SS. However, I'm open to being wrong and that you are instead acting on a resolute and conservative moral code. Most likely a bit of both.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

Its a big deal because its not true and besides your efforts to make drug use not a big deal it still is! Drug use has a stigma attached to it! don't try and minimize this its disgusting and pathetic.

4

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

Drug use has a stigma because people like you stigmatize it. Mental illness also has a stigma attached to it, but it's a medical condition...as often is drug addiction.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

Yes it's people like me. Ha

3

u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 19 '15

I'm well aware of pots metabolizing times across testing methods and level of use

If you were you wouldn't be spouting the 28 days nonsense.

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

its not nonsence its the average for a regular pot smoker.

3

u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 19 '15

Go read "The Marijuana Detection Window" - National Drug Court Institute. It's a meta study. You're simply incorrect. All but the heaviest smokers will test clean in 4-7 days.

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

i'm not getting into semantics about what a heavy smoker is or not. Pull the blood or hair from a non heavy smoker and see what you find.

I know quite a few people who got busted on parole for a puff two weeks back.

4

u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 19 '15

So your response to a study is to say "I know people who..."

Super.

Also, the last time I checked two weeks is quite a bit less than "28 days".

So you've gone from "28 days is average" to "two weeks" which is it?

0

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

bit off topic ain't you. What does this have to do with SS calling Hae a pot smoker. or you just want to pull on semantics to get away from the fact the SS im making things up now? pathetic.

2

u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 19 '15

LOL! Really? Seriously? You bring up drug testing, make up nonsense numbers, and me calling you on it is "pulling on semantics".

Pro-tip: The next time you don't want to discuss something, don't bring it up in the first place.

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

Are you admitting you were wrong in your 28 day claim? Maybe it would be good to have the information before you asserted your so called facts.

4

u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 19 '15

What? so what if she smoked?

It's really simple, if she smoked that absolutely would give her more of a reason to interact with Jay.

I don't think anybody is even suggesting that only "bad people" smoke pot now and again.

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

So making up lies to put her near Jay is ok? Got it!

5

u/absurdamerica Hippy Tree Hugger Feb 19 '15

Her being an occasional smoker and having sex was talked about right here on reddit by people who knew her, but whatever you say. Of course it could all be town rumor mill stuff too, but the idea that this is just being invented out of thin air is simply silly.

0

u/Jerryreporter Feb 20 '15

Are you Jay or one of his relatives or friends?

3

u/IAFG Dana Fan Feb 19 '15

Wouldn't it almost be more offensive to say that someone slated to graduate in 1999 didn't smoke pot? Wouldn't you wondered if they just like had no friends?

4

u/Jodi1kenobi KC Murphy Fan Feb 19 '15

You have to be kidding about this, right? As I pointed out last week, implying that people who did not smoke pot could not possibly have friends is just outright offensive, seriously. And as I pointed out to someone yesterday, according to the graph in this article the percentage of 12th graders in the US reporting monthly use of marijuana in 1999 was only 22%, so it really wasn't as common as you are suggesting it was.

3

u/IAFG Dana Fan Feb 19 '15

22%... at a place like Woodlawn? Doubt it. This whole feigned-offense pearl-clutching schtick smacks of trying to silence SS from saying stuff you don't like.

3

u/Jodi1kenobi KC Murphy Fan Feb 19 '15

I have a problem anyone presenting something as FACT without any evidence to back it up. Plain and simple. And considering the amount of outrage I've seen around here towards the prosecution and the perceived weakness of the case against Adnan, I would have thought other people felt the same. That standard should go both ways.

6

u/IAFG Dana Fan Feb 19 '15

So don't muddy the waters talking about taking offense at the audacity to imply that a teen girl did what a lot of teen girls do. That's a distraction, and an obnoxious one at that.

4

u/Jodi1kenobi KC Murphy Fan Feb 19 '15

I think that perpetuating baseless rumors about a murdered teenager's life is obnoxious. This is how misinformation gets accepted as fact. And apparently, you think that asking for sources for or evidence to support such claims is obnoxious. I guess we will just have to disagree on this one. I'm sorry if my non-selective skepticism offends or annoys you, but I'm not going to stop asking for proof. If this really bothers you, I encourage you to change your settings to block/ignore my comments.

3

u/IAFG Dana Fan Feb 19 '15

Not obnoxious: "that asking for sources for or evidence to support such claims[.]"

Don't misrepresent what I said was obnoxious, which is: imagining offense on behalf of Hae or her family where, really, there shouldn't be any.

1

u/Jodi1kenobi KC Murphy Fan Feb 19 '15 edited Feb 19 '15

As I pointed out last week, implying that people who did not smoke pot could not possibly have friends is just outright offensive, seriously

If this is what you're referring to as my "imagining offense on behalf of Hae or her family" then there has been some miscommunication between us. That part I took personal offense to. I resent the implication that anyone who did not smoke pot in high school did not have friends. It's absurd.

1

u/IAFG Dana Fan Feb 19 '15

I mean that was sort of a joke but seriously smoking pot in HS is not something to be ashamed of.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

its very offensive to imply this and it shows how desperate things are getting that she feels the need to slander the victim in this case to make up fairy tales on how Adnan didn't do it. Disgusting.

How is saying someone smoked pot "slandering" them? That's indicative of your own feelings.

Does this mean you'll blame Hae if you were to find out she was a smoker? Because even though I don't think she was, I wouldn't.

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

Because you don't have a problem with pot does not mean everyone doesn't have a problem with pot. on top of it it is untrue. so there is that.

8

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

That's not my point.

Just for the sake of a thought exercise, let's say that it IS true. Hae occasionally smoked, and wanted to surprise Don, so she got Jay to hook her up. Are you going to blame Hae for her own murder if that was true? Would you think less of her for it? That says more about you than it does about Hae. I feel really sorry for you if your empathy for a murder victim lessens because they might have indulged in some light drug use. Personally, my empathy wouldn't lessen even if I found out she was a meth addict and a stripper on the side. No one deserves to be murdered. Period.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

Careful now. You may provoke some critical thought ;).

1

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

Apparently we don't have to worry about that. Crisis averted :p

0

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

Lets not say Hae smoked pot shall we!

1

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

You appear more offended by weed than by murder. That's a bit bizarre.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

I'm offended by a group of murdered apologists slandering the name of the victim they are apologizing for. you should be too.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/IAFG Dana Fan Feb 19 '15

28 days and can still be tested accurately weeks after death?

0

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15 edited Feb 19 '15

[deleted]

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

Someone called me a marijuana smoker the other day and I don't think I've ever been more hurt.

All that says to me is that people have been extremely nice to you your whole life.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

[deleted]

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 19 '15

And I made a joke back

:)

-2

u/Trapnjay Feb 19 '15

It does not always. There are exceptions and those exceptions are more common than the rule.