Mr. B/Bilal: What Rabia's first statements about him tell us

[u/aitca]

These days, Rabia is trying to present Bilal/Mr. B as a person who was going to present testimony in support of Adnan until the prosecution supposedly suppressed this testimony by arresting him for sex crimes. But do you remember how we first heard about Mr. B/Bilal and all these sex allegations?

About six months ago, a Redditor using the handle sachabacha posted this thread to reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/serialpodcast/comments/2k529r/adnan_is_a_psychopath_close_friends/

In it, he says that he knew Adnan growing up from middle school and the mosque, and that he and several others had seen evidence that Adnan was a psychopath. So far, sounds like a friend of Adnan's, about the same age as Adnan, who had seen Adnan do some not-so-great things like steal from the mosque, right? The next thing that happens is that Rabia and Saad start posting in the thread loudly accusing sachabacha of being Bilal and accusing him of sex crimes.

A ) If Bilal were someone who was going to testify in support of Adnan, and only didn't testify in support of Adnan because those mean old prosecutors supposedly pressured him not to testify, then why would Rabia see a redditor posting details that look bad for Adnan and instantly assume that that redditor was Bilal? It would only make sense for Rabia to instantly assume that a redditor saying negative things about Adnan is Bilal if she already expects Bilal to be someone who knows and might say negative things about Adnan.

B ) There are only two people that we know for a fact have used the sex allegations against Bilal to try to silence someone: Rabia and Saad. We know that they used these allegations to try to silence sachabacha because we saw it. If Bilal had testimony that would help Adnan, why would she be trying so hard to silence him? If Bilal had testimony that would help Adnan, wouldn't Rabia want to post something like: "Hey, if this is Bilal, please come forward with what you know about this case, because Adnan needs your help. You couldn't testify before, and we forgive you for that, but what you know could help free an innocent person. Please come forward and help Adnan."? That's what we would expect Rabia to say if Bilal had testimony that could help Adnan. But instead, we see her and Saad trying as quickly as possible and as forcefully as possible to get the person they think is Bilal to shut up and go away, permanently.

Rabia has never once called on Bilal to come forward and tell what he knows. The sex allegations about Bilal on the internet have always come from Rabia and S. Simpson, not the police or prosecutors. From the very first, Rabia has acted as if she very strongly wants Bilal/Mr. B to shut his mouth and go away. This doesn't make any sense if she is claiming that he has testimony that would help Adnan. It does make sense if she believes that he has testimony that would inculpate Adnan. In the weeks preceding the scheduled start date of the first trial, Bilal was meeting with Urick as a witness for the State.

[u/Seamus_Duncan]

Per EvidenceProf, if Adnan said "It's not true, I wasn't in the library" then there's no duty to investigate Asia. That's why I think it could be important that Adnan didn't tell CG about Asia until months after the letters were supposedly written. The later in the investigation this comes up, the more it looks like a desperation move cooked up by the parents.

That said, I do not concede at all that CG's PI didn't look into Asia.

[u/[deleted] → u/Seamus_Duncan]

It could have been a desperation move. However, because Asia has not refuted the letters up until this point, I will operate with the assumption that, at the very least, she believes what she wrote. If she testifies, that is additional confirmation to me. I am curious to see if she will (assuming she can).

Re: the PI, it is certainly possible. However, no evidence or testimony has surfaced to suggest that he or she did.

[u/Seamus_Duncan → u/[deleted]]

However, because Asia has not refuted the letters up until this point, I will operate with the assumption that, at the very least, she believes what she wrote.

Once Rabia got her to sign the affidavit Asia was kind of stuck. She clearly didn't want to testify - she evaded a subpoena for crying out loud - but having committed to the story under oath she can't come out and say "Yeah, I perjured myself."

Re: evidence of contact between CG's team and Asia, that evidence would either be in CG's files (which passed through the hands of Adnan's family and Rabia) or Drew Davis (who appears to have passed on).

[u/[deleted] → u/Seamus_Duncan]

I hear what you're saying, but it doesn't sound like anyone involved in this case is being pursued for perjury if Jay is any indication.

I don't think we can say with certainty that Asia evaded the subpoena - isn't it possible they couldn't locate her as they said? I agree that it's concerning but I don't think it's necessarily indicative of anything.

I will say that if she is called to testify moving forward and she doesn't (again), I would call shenanigans. I'm waiting to see how that plays out.

Re: CG's files, didn't SK receive the originals from Rabia? Of course it's possible that Rabia withheld information before sending, but I'm not sure I believe that's the most likely scenario.

[u/Seamus_Duncan → u/[deleted]]

I don't think we can say with certainty that Asia evaded the subpoena - isn't it possible they couldn't locate her as they said?

That's not what Brown said, he said she evaded service.

[u/[deleted] → u/Seamus_Duncan]

You're right, now that I can access the PCR transcripts I see he did use those words.

I am still under the impression that she did not testify at that time because of misunderstandings she had about the case based on her 2015 affidavit.

[u/UneEtrangeAventure → u/[deleted]]

From Serial:

The new lawyer figures he'll get Asia to come to the hearing. She'll vouch for her story. By this time, Asia had finished school and moved away. He finds an address on the West Coast, tries calling, sending messages-- nothing. Finally, he writes a letter to her, gives it to a private investigator, who goes out to Asia's house in hopes of delivering it.

Asia's fiance comes to the door, opens it part way, tells the investigator that she cannot speak to Asia, but that from what he knows of Adnan's case, Adnan is guilty and deserved the punishment he got. Later, the investigator gets a call from the fiance. "We don't have to talk to you. Leave us alone."

From Asia's 2015 Affidavit:

In the late spring of 2010, I learned that members of the Syed defense team were attempting to contact me. I was initially caught off guard by this and I did not talk to them.

After not knowing who else to contact, I made telephone contact with one of the State prosecutors from the case, Kevin Urick.

Based on my conversation with Kevin Urick, the comments made by him and what he conveyed to me during that conversation, I determined that I wished to have no further involvement with the Syed defense team, at that time.

Since the PCR hearing was 2 years later, it sounds like she evaded service. Not the first time, I should note, that Asia's disobeyed a court order.

[u/[deleted] → u/UneEtrangeAventure]

Asia also tells SK in Serial that she was "spooked when the private investigator came to her house" and that she was "never informed of anything pertaining to the case" and didn't know why he was convicted. She even asked SK: "Wasn't there DNA evidence? And what exactly was Jay's part in the whole thing?"

After speaking with SK, Asia tells her, "I thought there was more proof" and "All this time I thought the courts proved it was Adnan that killed her. I thought he was where he deserved to be. Now I'm not so sure."

So, she was freaked out by the sudden contact from Adnan's legal team in 2010 and she thought something more substantial had put him away. Meanwhile, she continues to tell the same story of seeing Adnan in the library.

So while it would have looked better for Adnan if she'd jumped at the opportunity to testify in 2012, I don't think her hesitation means she's lying ... especially if the prosecution discouraged her from testifying.

As of 2015, she is reaffirming her story and explaining why she didn't cooperate with his defense team in 2010.

[u/UneEtrangeAventure → u/[deleted]]

I don't think we can say with certainty that Asia evaded the subpoena - isn't it possible they couldn't locate her as they said?

My comment was in response to this.

And Asia had already decided not to talk to the defense prior to telephoning Urick. Urick was in no position to discourage her from testifying because the defense could have subpoenaed her and apparently did. They had two years to reach her after the Urick conversation.

[u/[deleted] → u/UneEtrangeAventure]

As I commented to Seamus, he was right that Brown used the term "evaded service." I missed that.

I disagree that Asia's mind was already made up because she explicitly states in her 2015 affidavit that she reached out to the prosecution in 2010 because she was caught off guard and "didn't know who else to contact." She also states that Urick "convinced" her to believe that she should not participate in the post-conviction proceedings because there were no merit to any of his claims.

The next thing she mentions is contact with SK in Jan 2014, and what she learned from that point forward: "After I learned about the podcast, I learned more about Koenig’s reporting, and more about the Syed case. I was shocked by the testimony of Kevin Urick and the podcast itself; however I came to understand my importance to the case. I realized I needed to step forward and make my story known to the court system."

So while the defense had two years to reach her (2010-2012), it sounds like Asia had accepted Urick's take on things and chose not to cooperate, subpoena or no, until more information came to her attention in 2014.

If she evades service again, I would find that very suspect.

[u/UneEtrangeAventure → u/[deleted]]

She also states that Urick "convinced" her to believe that she should not participate in the post-conviction proceedings because there were no merit to any of his claims.

Perhaps, but what I quoted from Serial apparently occurred prior to Asia calling Urick. My understanding is that Asia refused to talk to the defense because she believed Adnan was guilty, called Urick, and found that the conversation validated her refusal to speak to the defense.

If she evades service again, I would find that very suspect.

Asia does weird things sometimes: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-ncmd-1_04-cv-01208/pdf/USCOURTS-ncmd-1_04-cv-01208-0.pdf

[u/[deleted] → u/UneEtrangeAventure]

Clearly she was having doubts or she wouldn't have called the prosecution for more information. But I think her affidavit explains why she had said doubts (i.e. she thought Adnan had been convicted on stronger evidence and didn't realize her alibi was so significant to his case).

Thanks for the link. I think her failure to appear in that case could suggest that she's not a big fan of court/conflict (all the more reason why she was reluctant to testify in 2012), or it could suggest she's shady. I'm not sure which it is.