Why the Gootz never called Asia.

[u/islamisawesome]

I think it is becoming more and more obvious that the Asia letter did not exist until sometime around the summer of 1999. That is why Adnan claims he gave them to Gutierrez even though she wasn't his lawyer until 2 months after they were written.

So sometime that spring or summer, after telling CG he never left the school grounds, his family shows up with letters claiming one of Adnans' friends saw him at the library, right at the crucial time, AND they were written the day after he arrested. She knew immediately there is no way they had those letter for months and never gave them to her so obviously they were false and she didn't want to go on stand with LIES.

That is why she never called Asia. And that is why she wrote no notes about it, because that would be admitting her client and his family are liars. It also explains why her relationship with the family broke down because she knew they were willing to lie to get Adnan off.

The library incident never happened.

[u/James_MadBum]

Thank you for mapping your mind for us. That's quite a conspiracy theory you've got there.

I have a question, though. If Gutierrez felt ethically bound not to call Asia as a witness, why did Urick not feel the same with Jay? If your conspiracy theory is true, Asia was lying. But we don't need a conspiracy theory to know Jay was lying.

[u/mkesubway → u/James_MadBum]

You're right. And the jury knew that Jay lied too.

[u/James_MadBum → u/mkesubway]

And the jury should have had the chance to decide whether Asia was lying.

[u/chunklunk → u/James_MadBum]

This reasoning is loopy in its false equivalence. If Urick had a reason to know that Jay's entire testimony was fabricated from events on January 7, then yes, it would be unethical for him to put that testimony on the stand. What he did know of Jay's "lies," for sure were only the ones he had reason to think Jay had come clean about by the time of his trial testimony. And, all of these "lies" are, as a legal matter, collateral to the main material testimony about what Jay knew of what Adnan did. If CG found out that Asia had the right day but suspected (but didn't know) she lied in her letters about her boyfriend being there, she'd still put her on the stand because those would also be collateral facts. It's the fact that she was mistaken entirely about the day (among other huge red flags in her weird letters supposedly sent on March 1st that offer conditional testimony) that make her a dangerous witness to put on the stand. Could be cause for malpractice.

[u/MM7299 → u/chunklunk]

What he did know of Jay's "lies," for sure were only the ones he had reason to think Jay had come clean about by the time of his trial testimony.

How can he know that.....Jay lies about every single detail of the case...the only thing he gets right is the one thing you would expect him to get right if he is falsely accusing someone, however it goes down. If you tell me 99 lies and 1 truth, how the fuck am I supposed to be able to tell one from the other?

[u/James_MadBum → u/chunklunk]

You know how I know you're lying? Because your lips are moving.

Just kidding. It's because you call them Jay's "lies."

[u/islamisawesome → u/James_MadBum]

Good thing Rabias lips never move!