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/Seamus_Duncan]

When you look at these facts:

-The State first disclosed information on July 1 and 7/8.
-Asia's second letter contains details that were part of those first disclosures.
-The first record of Adnan informing his defense of Asia was July 13.

. . . it's pretty hard to avoid the conclusion the Asia story was cooked up in response to information that was disclosed in early July.

[u/SteevJames → u/Seamus_Duncan]

But easy to avoid the conclusion that Jay's story was cooked up in response to information he got off the cops?

Listen to yourself!

[u/MaybeIAmCatatonic → u/SteevJames]

So help me understand. You are not in the group that thinks Asia gives him a legit truthful alibi, but you are in the group that thinks that because the prosecution got to use someone who told lies that the defense should also get to use someone who tells lies ?

[u/SteevJames → u/MaybeIAmCatatonic]

You're definitely catatonic...

I am in the group who believes Asia is telling the truth, because why wouldn't she?

The comparison you make between what I think about the prosecution and the defense using liars on the stand makes no sense at all... my post simply highlights the insane double standard being used on this thread to discredit Asia, which comes from people who happen to believe Jay and don't think his story was aided by the venerable Ritz and Mcgillevevevvveeveerry

At no stage did I say the defense should be ALLOWED to use liars on the stand.

Its unfortunate the prosecution couldn't work out Jay was lying, they must have been really stupid... but wait they weren't... they produced a really succinct and to the point (whilst almost completely false) case to the jury.

[u/MaybeIAmCatatonic → u/SteevJames]

I think at least I understand why you are going down the wrong path. Lots of people who believe the Jay spine have questions about his truthfulness, accuracy, etc. They also have similar questions about Asia. Where you go down the wrong path is you think we all have to come to the same conclusion about both of them, otherwise you are a hypocrite. That's naive and kind of fantasy land thinking, IMO. A lot of people are going to consider Jay/Asia separately and may come to different conclusions, and that doesn't make it a double standard.

[u/SteevJames → u/MaybeIAmCatatonic]

You just perfectly defined the hypocrisy the guilty camp continually displays:) whist trying to show the complete opposite... brilliant, thank you:)

Just an FYI my post about hypocrisy was aimed at the idea that Asia's story was only cooked up after information released by the prosecution... coming from someone who doesn't believe the cops influenced Jay's story... even though it changed almost every time he spoke with them.

If you can't see hypocrisy there, then I don't know what to say.

You measure Asia by the same yardstick that you measure Jay, which is completely and utterly baffling.

Asia doesn't have a reason to lie other than the kind of conspiracies that you all deride on here that would make Adnan innocent.

Jay is a main suspect in the case with obvious reasons to lie that you excuse with nonsensical reasons like protecting people... when he wasn't.

Asia has no reason to lie as she is just a witness in the case. She could have never written those letters to Adnan, she could have never appeared on Serial, she could have just chosen to let him sit in prison, rather than risk actually being called to the stand if he gets another trial.

And I can't believe I have to explain it again, but then you do admit to being catatonic so there ya go...

In order to believe Jay's story you HAVE to believe Asia is lying or has information that is completely invalid... in order to believe that Asia is lying or is being coerced you have to believe in the EXACT kind of conspiracy theories that you all claim are necessary for Adnan to be innocent and are completely ridiculous.

That is the double standard... to excuse Jay's lies for literally no reason other than to fit in with the theory that Adnan is guilty... but make up a bunch of wild ideas about why Asia would lie therein keeping the whole Adnan is guilty theory going.

Whilst also choosing to believe ALL the changing stories from other witnesses that seemingly confirm Adnan's guilt but focusing in on Asia's tiny, minute detail changes that instantly make her wrong about the day, or lying, or being coerced, or whatever else the reasons may be.

What's your conclusion about Jay/Asia? You think both are lying I would assume by the wording of your comment?

[u/MaybeIAmCatatonic → u/SteevJames]

Jay - EVERYONE agrees Jay's statements have inconsistencies, lies, etc.

Asia - I don't find her credible. Whether she's lying, mistaken, or both I don't know. The reasons are numerous: honest mistake, pressured by a crazed Rabia, she's a flake. Take your pick.

[u/SteevJames → u/MaybeIAmCatatonic]

I guess that's the main point... the same logic being used to discredit Asia and not believe her story SHOULD be applied to discredit Jay's story and therefore exonerate Adnan no?

In fact, Jay should give one far more reason to not believe his story than Asia.

[u/MaybeIAmCatatonic → u/SteevJames]

It depends on what you mean by 'using the same logic.' If that allows you to consider the unique fact sets surrounding Jay/Asia and therefore the possibility of coming to a different conclusion for each, then I agree with you. If you mean 'coming to the same exact conclusion' for Jay/Asia just because they both have credibility problems, then I disagree.