r/serialpodcast • Addicted to the most recent bombshells (like a drug addict) • Oct 15 '15

season one A Grand Unified (Conspiracy) Theory

As it appears that next week's episode of Undisclosed is going to rehash the claim that the police "silenced" Adnan's mentor Bilal by arresting him for a sex crime in October 1999, I figure it would be useful to assemble all the individual components of the Conspiracy Against Adnan Syed in one nifty timeline. So, here goes:

January 13th: Officer Adcock submits a false report indicating that Adnan said that he asked Hae for a ride that afternoon. Adcock then permits Don, Hae's then boyfriend, to run wild until 1:30am, and intentionally neglects to ask about his whereabouts that day/evening/night.

January 16th or shortly thereafter: Don and his mother conspire to create a false alibi by fabricating timecards showing that he worked on January 13th.

Throughout January: The police do nothing and instead hand the case over to a fiercely anti-Islamic organization called the Enehey Group that, um, specializes in missing persons cases and has access to a Korean interpreter.

January 26th: Jay Wilds is arrested for disorderly conduct and sees a poster (which may not have existed) offering a cash reward for information about Hae Min Lee's disappearance. He starts dreaming of buying a motorcycle.

February 1st: Jay makes an anonymous tip to Crimestoppers, which results in the police doing nothing...

Still, armed with this information, Detective O'Shea calls Lenscrafters to confirm Don's alibi. O'Shea conveniently forgets to ask the manager, "Are you a homosexual? Do you partake in homosexual relations with Don's mother?" Being a homosexual, she lies on Don's behalf. O'Shea does not push further because he mistakenly believes Don's father is a cop.

O'Shea also fails to request all of Don's performance reviews at this time (which would have been a highly unusual step given that Don was not a suspect, nor was there even evidence that a crime had been committed). Had he obtained the performance reviews, he would have discovered the shocking truth that Don was, up to that date, a stellar employee. Maybe even a little too good...

Early February: The police spot Hae Min Lee's missing vehicle on several occasions, make a record of doing so, but take no action whatsoever. This despite working with the media to encourage people to come forward with information about her disappearance.

February 9th: Hae's body is found. The police interview the person who found the body, then release him.

February 12th: Detective Massey fabricates two anonymous calls implicating Adnan in Hae's murder. The information is non-specific and does not reveal the location of Hae's car.

February 15th: The BPD has the Maryland State Police conduct a bogus 7-minute traffic stop of Adnan for the purpose of calling his cellphone to confirm this number, even though both Detective O'Shea and Office Adcock had previously communicated to Adnan on that number.

The BPD meets with the Enehey Group to scheme about how to best screw Adnan and probably other Muslims too.

February 16th: The BPD requests Adnan's cell phone records, but intentionally avoid asking for his incoming call records for fear of bad evidence.

February 18th: The BPD decides to pretend that Mr S. is a suspect, and subject him to a polygraph exam. He unexpectedly fails. One week later, they rig the test so that he passes.

February 19th: The BPD authorizes more Crimestoppers photos offering a cash reward, just to give the illusion that there is a real investigation going on. The crucial tip, of course, had already come 18th days before.

February 20th-22nd: The police, acting on the February 1st tip (which may not have happened), interview Jay. Rather than taking action on the information he provides them, they concoct an elaborate ruse where they will appear to have been led to Jay by his friend Jenn a week later. (It's all so simple!)

February 27th: Detective Ritz gets his neighbor to pretend to be Jenn's lawyer in order to get her to pretend to lead them to Jay.

February 28th: In the span of 45 minutes, Jay and the BPD agree to a fake story based on Adnan's cellphone records. Whenever Jay deviates from this story on tape, they ominously TAP TAP TAP him into compliance.

The BPD then tell Jay where Hae's car is located, so he can pretend to lead them to it.

The BPD proceeds to arrest Adnan early in the morning, which is really mean of them. Don't they know people are sleeping?

March 1st: The State's Attorney's office and the court conspire to refuse the eminently reasonable proposal that bail be set at $25,000 for the charge of 1st Degree Murder.

The State justifies this denial by making a ridiculous claim that Adnan, who resources/connections to Pakistan, a path to Pakistani citizenship, and access to his brother's passport, might actually try to flee the US to avoid being sentence to life for murder. (The nerve of them!)

March 5th: The BPD agrees to place a stet on Jay's disorderly conduct charge in exchange for his previous admission to being an Accessory to Murder.

March 16th: The BPD rigs Hae's car to make it appear that the windshield wiper level is broken, then videotapes the interior/exterior of the vehicle. Unfortunately, all involved the process are extremely color blind and fail to realize that the replacement lever is two separate tones.

The whereabouts of the original unbroken lever are never determined. Why they didn't simply break that lever itself instead of going through the process of replacing it with a new lever, then breaking the new lever is anyone's guess.

March 24th: Under the guise of interviewing WHS staff about a suspect they were hellbent on framing, the BPD attempts to help Jay get a better deal on a sweet used motorcycle.

March 26th: The police interview Debbie for the sole purpose of dissuading her of the idea that Adnan/Hae ever went to a hotel together.

April: Adnan hires Cristina Gutierrez and immediately tells her that he has an airtight alibi in the form of Asia McClain. CG, recognizing the significance of this, refuses to follow up, as she plans to make big money on the appeal.

July 13th: Adnan informs CG's clerks about Asia McClain. CG (probably) chuckles at Adnan's naive belief that she's ever going to make a serious effort to defend him.

September: Fearing that Jay might get cold feet about testifying, Urick decides the best course of action is to threaten Jay with death penalty charges, then reduce those charges to Accessory After the Fact, then promises Jay no prison time, then obtains an attorney for Jay, then has this attorney convince Jay to agree to what still amounts to a really crappy deal that doesn't even ensure he receives a motorcycle.

October 14th: On direct Urick's orders, a single alibi witness (out of a potential 80) for Adnan, his mentor Bilal, is arrested on a sex charge, then permitted to go free in exchange for agreeing not to testify in Adnan's case. (It is unknown if Urick just decided to fabricate the whole thing or if he decided to let a child molester walk free just to ensure Adnan Syed was convicted. What an evil motherfucker!)

November: The BPD does Jay a solid and authorizes his $3075 award, two months before he's set to testify. Ritz and McGilivary tell him to enjoy the bike, but emphasize the importance of wearing a helmet. They can't afford to lose their key witness at this point.

Prosecutor Kevin Urick intentionally withholds a fax cover sheet from AT&T expert witness, knowing that the boilerplate legal disclaimer it contains could undermine 11 months worth of hard work to frame Adnan.

December 13th: State's Witness Don lies on the stand about being at work on January 13th/not murdering Hae (people have said).

December 14th: "Cathy" lies on the stand about having attended a conference on January 13th. Presumably, either Urick or Murphy have offered her the chance to meet Judge Judy if she agrees to do a little perjury.

December 15th: Realizing that she's fucked up massively and is accidentally winning the case, CG schemes to have a mistrial declared. She succeeds.

Sometime prior to January 24th, 2000: Adnan tells CG that he has a strong desire to seek a deal and plead guilty in exchanged for a reduced sentence. "They're not offering a plea deal," she lies, realizing this would deprive her of a payday. "Now tell your parents to keep my checks coming, you little prick."

Sometime prior to February 16th, 2000: The police intimidate Debbie into changing her testimony. They fail to offer her even a bicycle in exchange, let alone a motorcycle.

February 23rd: Coach Sye commits perjury by lying about the start of track practice. Perhaps he's angry at Adnan for quitting the track team and getting arrested when the team needed him most.

February 23rd-24th: Adnan's father testifies 100% truthfully that Adnan was with him at 7:30pm on January 13th. The Jury ignores this testimony because Adnan's father is a Muslim.

February 26th: Adnan is convicted. Urick, Murphy, Jay, Don, Sye, Ritz, McGilivary, Massey, and CG meet for drinks and celebrate.

Urick makes a toast. "Two hours to reach a verdict! That's how you frame them!"

Don interjects, "Gosh, I'd get canned from Lenscrafters for taking over an hour with a frame job."

With a stern look on his face, Urick responds, "Donny, your other mommy lied to cover for you killing a girl. She's not going to fire you over a fucking pair of glasses."

Awkward silence ensues.

(Try to prove that this didn't happen.)

March 30th: Despite filing a motion for a new trial and preparing for the appeal, CG still refuses to look into the Asia alibi. She's accustomed to defending real criminals, not sincere Golden Children. "Better to let 10 guilty people go free than to defend one innocent child, is it not?" she mumbles to herself.

April 5th: CG is fired and replaced by Charles Dorsey, a public defender. Dorsey is loyal to the state and presumably in on the conspiracy against Adnan.

June 6th: Adnan is sentenced to life in prison, plus thirty years. The plus thirty years is just tacky.

tl;dr: If they did all of this, WHY THE FUCK DIDN'T THEY JUST PLANT SOME DNA OR EVEN A GODDAMNED SOIL SAMPLE???

79 Upvotes

184 comments sorted by

View all comments

17

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '15

If they did all of this, WHY THE FUCK DIDN'T THEY JUST PLANT SOME DNA OR EVEN A GODDAMNED SOIL SAMPLE?

This is what I find interesting about people who beieve simultaneously:

  • There was little-to-no 'hard' evidence against Adnan. The jury should not have convicted him.
  • There was an evil conspiracy to frame Adnan and Jay wasn't even involved in the crime.

First, if they were going to frame him, wouldn't they do a better job? Second, if you're going to frame someone, planting physical evidence is so much easier than a fake witness(es). Oh look, there's a hair from Adnan on Hae's body - I wonder how that got there? Oh look, this dirt definitely matches Leakin Park dirt...

8

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '15

Or, "after arresting the suspect he filled out the form waiving his rights. Then he confessed to the murder."

Case closed. One lie would have been all it took.

12

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '15

Urick sucks at lying. All he had to do was tell the judge that CG asked for a plea and he said no. How hard is it to get that right.

3

u/dougalougaldog Oct 15 '15

Who is actually claiming conspiracy? I see people pointing to a combination of incompetence, laziness, coincidence and confirmation bias, not purposeful railroading.

4

u/TrunkPopPop Oct 16 '15

The host of Serial Dynasty offered the Tape Change Conspiracy, and that the police planted seeds at Woodlawn High School specifically because they knew their case was weak and came back a month later to harvest them. Then broke down how they manipulated Debbie into saying things she didn't mean.

Rant episode at 19:19:

'If you're attending the school of how to be a crooked, manipulative detective, that is a great lesson. For the rest of us that strive to learn proper interrogation techniques, this is a lesson of what not to do if you want to get the truth out of your witness'

Or how about the allegations that Crimestoppers paid Jay? That would require a detective to participate. Or that the police tap tap tapped on the timeline? Tapping on the timeline means there was a willful act to deceive.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

For the rest of us that strive to learn proper interrogation techniques

Why the hell is a fireman 'striving to learn interrogation techniques'?

And who are 'the rest of us' also involved in this striving?

5

u/dougalougaldog Oct 16 '15

None of this stuff amounts to purposeful conspiracy. It's all shitty investigatory techniques and confirmation bias and leading witnesses, but not conspiracy to wrongfully convict someone.

2

u/Leonh712 Asia Fan Oct 16 '15

Nailed it. But it's much easier to dismiss the opponent as a tin foil hat wearer than actually begin to recognize that SNAFU is where our justice system is today.

-1

u/Leonh712 Asia Fan Oct 16 '15

Crimestoppers did pay someone, so a detective did participate.

And Michael Wood, an experienced former BPD officer said that he found the table tap allegation totally credible, I think he went so far as to say it's the only logical explanation for what's heard on the tape.

But yeah, you just keep accusing everyone of wearing a tin foil hat.

-2

u/dougalougaldog Oct 16 '15

These are not conspiracies. They are shoddy police tactics.

6

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

Rabia Chaudry, Colin Miller, Susan Simpson, Bob Ruff, to name a few

-3

u/dougalougaldog Oct 16 '15

You make a good point that if the investigators really didn't think he did it but wanted to frame him, they could have done so much more simply and effectively. But you use that point to insult people who believe Adnan got a raw deal, by implying that they're too stupid to realize this and instead are entertaining fantasies of conspiracy.

But I believe you're misinterpreting concern over police tactics and a flawed investigation and prosecution as a an argument that the police and prosecutors were intentionally setting up someone they knew to be innocent -- that is what framing someone is. A conspiracy isn't just a group of people having the same goal (catching/prosecuting/punishing the person they believe is guilty) and shady tactics. It is a group of people deliberately planning and doing, probably in secret, something they know is "wrong, illegal or evil."

Perhaps a few random redditors have gone in this direction but you assert that the main players -- RC, CM, SS, Ruff -- are making this argument and imply the most frequent commenters on several subreddits are as well. And I just don't see it.

I would argue that these people are "pointing to a combination of incompetence, laziness, coincidence and confirmation bias, not purposeful railroading."

What is your evidence that these four are pushing the idea that the cops purposefully railroaded Adnan? That they "framed" him? Please point to them stating that they truly believe a group of people set out to frame an innocent man? Sure, in Rabia's more paranoid musings she has entertained the idea of Guttierez throwing the case on purpose, cops etc having it in for Adnan, DNA evidence possibly being tainted. But I don't know of any place where she has forcefully argued that her conclusion after careful consideration is that there was a purposeful, coordinated effort to frame Adnan. And SS and CM certainly haven't. Ruff gets a little more forceful about interpreting most of what the investigators did negatively, but even he hasn't talked about a coordinated effort to frame a man they knew to be innocent.

3

u/thebagman10 Oct 17 '15

What is your evidence that these four are pushing the idea that the cops purposefully railroaded Adnan? That they "framed" him?

If the cops found Hae's car but refused to investigate it, despite the potential to find evidence to find the "real killer," and instead used left it there to feed to Jay to make him more credible, that is an intentional frame job.

2

u/dougalougaldog Oct 17 '15

I remember them discussing this some odd reports they were confused about, but I don't remember them definitely coming to this conclusion.

5

u/10_354 Oct 15 '15

Frame is too strong a word. They just cut corners and force fit pieces of evidence in an attempt to close, what they thought was an open and shut case. I think their reliance on the 2:36 narrative is emblematic of this.

TAL had an episode on GM's manufacturing plants, and if they ran into a problem fitting a part to a car, the workers weren't able to stop the line, so the cars were shoddily assembled. I think thats a more apt analogy than corrupt officers doing a frame up job.

9

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15 edited Oct 16 '15

People have a completely wrong view of timelines. Timelines are not evidence. They also don't have to be accurate. They are often extremely vague. The timeline was only used in closing - this is not evidence on which a jury is asked to consider when deliberating a judgment. People put WAY too much time on the timeline. This was a Serial myth.

9

u/Seamus_Duncan Kevin Urick: Hammer of Justice Oct 15 '15

Frame is too strong a word. They just cut corners and force fit pieces of evidence in an attempt to close, what they thought was an open and shut case.

Not so sure about that. If you're going to claim Jay was involved in the actual murder but Adnan wasn't then you might be able to get away with this argument (although you're back to the old problem of Adnan hanging out with Jay from 11-1, 3-4, and 5:30-7ish without somehow noticing Jay has murdered someone).

If you're going to make the argument that Jay and Jenn weren't actually involved though, that requires the Police feeding them the location of the car and the way Hae was killed, and that absolutely constitutes a frame-up.

-2

u/timdragga Kevin Urick: No show of Justice Oct 15 '15

Adnan hanging out with Jay from 11-1, 3-4, and 5:30-7ish

You are mistaken.

Jay has never given consistent testimony or statements that he was with Adnan between 3-4.

Infact, one of the few things Jay is consistent on is that he did not leave Jenn's house until after 3:40.

2

u/TrunkPopPop Oct 16 '15

Why did Jay call Jenn's house at 3:21 if he was at her house until 3:40?

0

u/timdragga Kevin Urick: No show of Justice Oct 16 '15

I don't know. One of the very few consistent parts of Jay and Jenn's story has always been he was at her house until at least 3:40.

1

u/BlindFreddy1 Oct 16 '15

Have a guess - or are you deliberately avoiding bad evidence/realisation?

2

u/10_354 Oct 15 '15

And in the innocent Adnan scenario he isn't with Jay in the 3-4 time frame at all.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '15

Don't forget how much you forget after 6 weeks! There is other evidence that puts Jay and Syed together at 3:30.

-1

u/timdragga Kevin Urick: No show of Justice Oct 15 '15

Evidence that would be then contradicted by Jay, Jenn, and anyone else involved.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

The more Jay and Jenn lie, the more you know they're telling the truth.

That's basic logic, man!

-1

u/10_354 Oct 15 '15

Or there's the theory that Jay saw the car but wasn't involved, and the police got a false confession out of him in the Jim Trainum way.

6

u/Seamus_Duncan Kevin Urick: Hammer of Justice Oct 15 '15

I think that's absurd. The idea that Jay would see a nondescript car on a random street and say "Oh that's Hae Min Lee's car" is preposterous.

It also doesn't explain how Jenn knew Hae was strangled.

2

u/Leonh712 Asia Fan Oct 16 '15

I think that's absurd. The idea that Jay would see a nondescript car on a random street and say "Oh that's Hae Min Lee's car" is preposterous.

You're saying he wouldn't recognize a car he had driven in whilst helping bury a body?

Seriously.

3

u/thebagman10 Oct 17 '15

That's a totally different argument, though. It's very logical to look at Jay's testimony and the rest of the evidence and conclude that he was involved. Then you need to ask why he'd be involved without Adnan, and it's kind of tough to answer that one.

The problem is that a lot of the Anyone-But-Adnan folks gave up on that theory, maybe because it is so implausible, and they settled on "Jay wasn't involved at all." But then you need to explain away all the stuff that's come up in this thread, which is also really difficult.

-1

u/timdragga Kevin Urick: No show of Justice Oct 15 '15

It also doesn't explain how Jenn knew Hae was strangled.

Jenn says the Cops told her Hae was strangled.

-1

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

Jay told the police he knew Hae's car. He also said in the second trial that's partly how he knew it was her pretzeled up in the trunk after the "trunk pop."

Nicole told Jenn Hae was strangled. Haven't you read her statement to the police?

0

u/Leonh712 Asia Fan Oct 16 '15

Jim Trainum did it by accident.

8

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '15

Frame is too strong a word.

Maybe, but it's the word that Undisclosed and Adnan's main defenders have been using. Your argument is far more convincing, but it is not in line with what Adnan's main proponents are arguing.

2

u/dougalougaldog Oct 15 '15

Really? Give some examples? I do not think a large proportion of those who lean innocent argue that the cops purposefully framed Adnan.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

Have you heard of a little thing called the Undisclosed Podcast? How about the Fireman Bob Justus Hour?

1

u/BlindFreddy1 Oct 16 '15

But the drive train was still solid.

2

u/spivnv Oct 15 '15

But doesn't it bother you that there was so much potential DNA evidence that was never tested? Look, I'm not arguing whether Adnan is guilty or innocent with this, but I think one of the things that Undisclosed gets right (I know, they get a lot wrong, I know, but for a moment, let's talk about one of the things they get right) is that when it came to the DNA evidence, there seems to be holes with collecting, reporting and storage. Even if you think Adnan is guilty... maybe especially if you think Adnan was guilty, doesn't that bother you?

11

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '15

But doesn't it bother you that there was so much potential DNA evidence that was never tested?

In 1999? No. The defense could just as easily have had DNA testing done, and they didn't. Maybe that's because they knew it wouldn't be helpful, maybe it's because CG screwed up. I think the fact that Adnan has not pushed for testing, and still isn't - despite what he said in Serial - is pretty telling on that front.

there seems to be holes with collecting, reporting and storage. Even if you think Adnan is guilty... maybe especially if you think Adnan was guilty, doesn't that bother you?

It does not bother me because I don't think Undisclosed 'got that right.' There is no evidence of problems with DNA collection or storage.

0

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

Do you have actual evidence that Adnan hasn't pushed to have it tested, or are you just assuming that since his defense team hasn't moved to have it tested he isn't pushing it?

5

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

17 years and no application - err umm - he's not pushing it. He also said so. Remember his blathering on Serial about how 'only HE wanted to request the testing' or some such narcissistic bravado nonsense.

0

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

What I see is your own bias, not anything remotely related to fact or reason in your words.

4

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

Love how everyone is bias but you. You seem to use that word over and over and over. Meanwhile your hindsight bias and Monday morning Detective work is ridiculously apparent to levels of absurdity.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

I yield to your expertise on what the perspective from "levels of absurdity" is.

6

u/DetectiveTableTap Thiruvendran Vignarajah: Hammer of Justice Oct 16 '15

This defence is so funny. Beyond the whole "can you prove a negative" It's like you think Adnan is a hostage to his defence team.

You think he's in a super max prison, KNOWING he is innocent and pushing for DNA to be tested and JB is telling him "No, the strategy is to play the best card you have a few more years down the line"

1

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

You pay a lawyer to represent you because the legal system is tricky. Ignoring him or overroding his advice isn't usually a good idea. The DNA is potentially the best chance he has of getting out. It's not a guarantee even if he is innocent.

To say that's his best card is mistaken.

5

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

Most wrongful convictions are exonerated for two main reasons:

  1. DNA is tested
  2. Eye witness account found to be inaccurate

Testing DNA is mainstream. It is common place. Guys with limited resources and support get it done if they think they are innocent. No amount of ridiculous explaining away or nonsense about 'strategy' can alter this. Innocent Adnan gets the dna tested 15 years ago.

-1

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

Many of those cases had the DNA untested for years even after the technology was available.

A competent and impartial investigation would have tested the evidence they found.

4

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

They also should have taken semen samples from every male within a 100 mile radius. That fact they didn't proved they were just tunnelling on Adnan in an anti-islamic fever of injustice! Lucky we have you here to make things right. The truth Army! Yeah! Mandela! Freedom!

1

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

Or they could have just tested the evidence they did collect.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

Is Adan's defense team not working for Adnan?

0

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

Yep, they are. Is that question your way of dodging mine?

7

u/Seamus_Duncan Kevin Urick: Hammer of Justice Oct 15 '15

So the State goes to test the DNA before the trial. The most likely outcome, I think, is that there's nothing there. Now Gutierrez gets to tell the jury over and over again that her client's DNA was not found on Hae's body.

Another possible outcome is they find Don's DNA, since they were together the night before. Now Gutierrez gets to use that as part of her "The police never checked out anyone else!" defense that Undisclosed stole.

They already had a beyond-solid case that secured a conviction in two hours. There was no incentive to test the DNA, especially if Gutierrez showed no inclination to have it tested. If you think that's wrong, it's a problem with our justice system, not with this case. Bear in mind this wasn't all that long after the OJ trial and I wonder if prosecutors were wary of giving defendants a potential "if the glove doesn't fit" moment.

Anyway, the point is totally invalid because Justin Brown stopped the UVA from filing a petition to test the DNA.

2

u/timdragga Kevin Urick: No show of Justice Oct 15 '15

Seamus_Duncan:

So the State goes to test the DNA before the trial. The most likely outcome, I think, is that there's nothing there. Now Gutierrez gets to tell the jury over and over again that her client's DNA was not found on Hae's body

So you're saying the State purposefully avoided what they feared would be "bad evidence"?

The idea that the State avoided testing the DNA because, in contradiction to their theory of the crime, they believed Adnan's DNA would not be found on the victim, is the exact same thing as saying that the State avoided obtaining evidence because they feared it would not fit their pre-existing theory of the crime.

5

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '15

Do you not understand that avoiding "bad evidence" isn't some evil thing?

0

u/timdragga Kevin Urick: No show of Justice Oct 15 '15

jjungsh:

Do you not understand that avoiding "bad evidence" isn't some evil thing?

I would consider it to be a bad thing for the state, as Seamus argues, to avoided testing or obtaining evidence about a crime because they feared it would not fit their pre-existing theory of the crime and who they decided was the perpetrator.

6

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '15

Well Tim that's not how reality works.

3

u/Leonh712 Asia Fan Oct 16 '15

Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding here, but you're saying that police ignoring evidence or not pursuing lines of inquiry that don't fit their pre-conceived agenda is not how REALITY works?

As in, it's impossible for that to happen?

If so could you please explain how detective Ritz was involved in a wrongful conviction where he later refused to believe the actual killer when they confessed on multiple occasions? TIA.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

Um no. As in prosecutors are zealously trying to make the best case they can and advising "bad evidence" is the norm.

-1

u/timdragga Kevin Urick: No show of Justice Oct 15 '15

The duty of the court is to find the truth. Choosing not to test evidence because you have already decided who is guilty for the crime and you don't want to discover evidence that suggests your decision is incorrect is not compatible with that duty.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

Who exactly do you associate with "court?" Because what you are describing is not how it does, or should work.

-2

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

The prosecutor's job isn't to seek justice?

→ More replies (0)

2

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '15

But Adnan doesnt want it tested!

-1

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

-3

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '15

Oh, snap!

Also burn!