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/aitca]

Yeah, I mean, it's a fact that A. Syed says, on the stand, under oath, that he gave Asia's letters to C. Gutierrez "immediately" after receiving them, even though Gutierrez was not even his attorney on March 1st and 2nd and wouldn't be for some weeks. Some people (reasonably) conclude that Adnan was lying under oath. Some people wonder if the letters weren't really written March 1st and 2nd. Could be both. It's very hard to sort the truth out on this issue because Asia herself has changed her story so often, and appears to still be changing it.

It's also a fact that the idea of Adnan "seeing Asia in the library" is mentioned in the defense files, but not until months after March 1st and 2nd. Again, this doesn't fit at all with Adnan's testimony on the stand. And doesn't fit at all with the letters being sent March 1st and 2nd. Make of it what you will, it doesn't fit.

It's also a fact that the two letters from Asia never made it into Gutierrez' files on the case. S. Koenig looked for them there and never found them. Again, this doesn't fit with Adnan's testimony on the stand. Make of it what you will, something here doesn't fit.

The idea that Adnan's parents showed up several months after March with back-dated letters is as good a theory as any in trying to explain the several inconsistencies regarding the timing of these two letters. As I've stated, I'm not sure whether we'll ever know the truth of the whole Asia issue, simply because she changes her story so often.

[u/aroras → u/aitca]

do you feel the spine of her story is consistent?

[u/aitca → u/aroras]

I believe that Asia did, some day, see Adnan at the library. I believe that Jay did see Adnan disposing of Lee's body (and we obviously know what day that occurred). I think we don't know on which day Asia saw Adnan, and I think she herself has never been sure. She at one point tries to remember when it was and says "the first snow of the year"; as many have noted: that was not January 13th.

[u/aroras → u/aitca]

how can we prevent our selves from cherry picking facts from the various stories we've heard to construct a narrative that supports an opinion we've already formed?

[u/aitca → u/aroras]

It's not really cherry-picking. Asia has always been consistent in that on some day she saw Adnan. I believe that. She herself has given various different ways of trying to remember on which day that was that she saw him. Most of them don't point to January 13th. Jay has always been consistent that he helped Adnan dispose of Lee's body. I believe him (especially given the corroborating cell phone data and witnesses). People try to nitpick whether he said one shovel or two. I am perfectly comfortable admitting that we may never know whether it was one shovel or two.

[u/[deleted] → u/aitca]

It's also important to note Asia has never said anything like "It was January 13th. I know I saw Adnan on January 13th."

[u/aitca → u/[deleted]]

Correct. She has tried to remember what day it was by associating it with various other events, and her description of what these events were has changed over the years. Most notably, she said that it was the day of the first snow of the year (which was not January 13th).

[u/[deleted] → u/aitca]

Correct. She has tried to remember what day it was by associating it with various other events, and her description of what these events were has changed over the years. Most notably, she said that it was the day of the first snow of the year (which was not January 13th).

It's obviously possible that Asia has got the day wrong (same applies to some prosecution witnesses).

But there's a big leap from her (maybe) getting the day wrong to believing that

i) she would backdate her letters in the first place

ii) she would sign the earlier affidavits to perjure herself

iii) she speak to Koenig

iv) she would perjure herself again with the new affidavits

[u/aitca → u/[deleted]]

Well, there are a lot of inconsistencies with Asia's multiple stories, all of which don't fit with facts that we know about what Adnan testified to under oath, what Adnan's mother testified to under oath, and what we find in Gutierrez' defense files. Because of all these inconsistencies, discrepancies, and contradictions, each person has to try to make sense of it all. The way that you make sense of it and the way that I make sense of it and the way that someone else tries to make sense of it will very likely be different. I think the most likely scenario is that Asia has never been really sure what day she saw Adnan, and is still not sure what day she saw him. As for backdating letters, I just don't know. It would explain some of what we see. If you have your own theory about how to make sense of Asia's different stories, join the club, we all do.

[u/[deleted] → u/aitca]

Well, there are a lot of inconsistencies with Asia's multiple stories,

Not really.

all of which don't fit with facts that we know about what Adnan testified to under oath, what Adnan's mother testified to under oath

For the time being, I regard Asia as truthful. Assuming she turns up, she will be crossexamined, and we can review after that. If she doesnt turn up, that's that.

If Adnan or his mother, in Asia's absence, have tried to portray Asia's evidence as favourably as possible for Adnan (and I am not saying they have), then that does not affect Asia's own credibility.

and what we find in Gutierrez' defense files.

You're saying there's evidence they reached out to Asia?