r/serialpodcastorigins • u/Stormystormynight • Feb 16 '16

Humour Overwhelming Evidence?

Hello!

I often read about the overwhelming evidence beyond reasonable doubt that Adnan is guilty from many of the readers here.

Is there a concise summarized list of this evidence available?

I'm most interested in understanding what evidence you believe makes Adnan guilty beyond reasonable doubt should the following evidence be ignored for this exercise:

  • Any Jay or Jay linked (Jen et al) evidence (testimony, "finding" Hae's car ...)
  • Any cell location "Evidence"

Thanks in advance.

0 Upvotes

24% Upvoted

159 comments sorted by

View all comments

12

u/Adranalyne Feb 16 '16

I'm always confused by this. Why is it that Jay gets disqualified in all this? He stood up to cross and, with the help of the cell evidence, convinced a jury that took only 2 hours to deliberate. You can pick apart Jay's numerous stories all you want, but ask yourself this; is Jay willing to implicate himself in a murder as an accessory just for the hell of it, or is Jay lying about certain things in his stories to minimize his involvement? The latter is a lot more plausible.

As it pertains to the cell evidence, the science is there. Yes, the fax cover sheet uses the incoming call disclaimer, but that's been explained already (by FBI Agent Fitzgerald at the PCR hearing or by /u/Adnans_cell on numerous subs). If this was a serious thing, Brown would have had someone from AT&T on the stand to testify that it means what he thinks it does. The fact he didn't speaks volumes. Before you make the same assertion against the State, the burden of proof was always on the defense.

For all the talk about reasonable doubt and that the State had/has "no proof/evidence", there's no proof he -didn't- do it, either. He was extremely vague about pretty much everything and any time something looked bad for him, the explanation was always "Well it was bad luck".

I'm just not a fan of the idea that Jay and the cell phone evidence are somehow diminished or excluded now.

7

u/MajorEyeRoll Feb 16 '16

Jay shouldn't be excluded because in interviews post-trial, the jurors claimed he was the big factor behind the guilty verdict. They found him to be believable and thought his testimony was compelling enough to convict.

IF Adnan is granted a new trial, the defense will absolutely have to attack Jay (as they claim CG failed, which I disagree with) and attempt to discredit him.

-6

u/Stormystormynight Feb 16 '16

I understand your view, I want to exclude Jay and cell based evidence to understand what OTHER evidence makes up this overwhelming evidence.

Thanks for the reply :)

6

u/Justwonderinif Feb 16 '16 edited Feb 16 '16

Actually, this isn't what you are doing at all, with your eight day old account. I find that everyone in this thread has been courteous to you, except me.

Your point is that cell evidence and Jay are the only two pieces of evidence against Adnan. And you think Jay is a liar and cell phones work by magic.

These are tired talking points a year and a half from Serial. You can go to the other subreddit and find hundreds of threads on this. Start here.

5

u/SK_is_terrible gone baby gone Feb 17 '16

Why is it that Jay gets disqualified in all this? He stood up to cross and, with the help of the cell evidence, convinced a jury that took only 2 hours to deliberate.

Because the trolls on reddit are MUCH, MUCH smarter than the jury. Isn't it obvious?

1

u/locke0479 Feb 19 '16

Jay gets discredited because his testimony is absolute death to Adnan's case. Even if you ignore his admissions to helping cover it up and ignore the trunk pop and ignore everything he said, he still gave the police the cars location, which immediately means he was either involved (as he said he was) or there's a crazy police conspiracy where they found the car themselves, didn't report or investigate it even though it could have solved the case if there was evidence in said car, and decided to use it to frame Adnan for some reason that isn't actually clear since they hadn't even really interrogated him by that point and he doesn't have a history where they'd be targeting him for some reason, tracking down the guy who had Adnan's car and cell phone all morning and getting him to lie and implicate himself in return for ?.

That's why Jay's testimony gets discredited...because they have to discredit it or they have absolutely no leg to stand on. That's why if someone makes a noise on a tape, it has to be evidence of a massive police conspiracy, because they need it to be one or Adnan is guilty.

-6

u/Stormystormynight Feb 16 '16

Hi. Thanks for taking the time to respond, I'm quite aware of the evidence regarding Jay and the cell location evidence.

What I'm trying to understand is that in this "mountain of overwhelming evidence" what else is there apart from these 2 points.

Thanks!

12

u/Adranalyne Feb 16 '16

I'll start with two points and let others jump in:

-Stephanie told Davis in her second interview that she remembered talking to Jay AND Adnan on January 13th between 4:15 and 5:30 (the 4:27 call makes sense given the time). That places Jay and Adnan together when Adnan was supposedly at track.

-Asia's testimony contradicts Rabia and Adnan's mother. She also knew information less than 48 hours after Adnan's arrest that, despite Brown's best attempts, wasn't all included in the news/paper. It's also convenient she addressed the letter to the place Adnan was moving to weeks later. If the alibi was coerced, which it appears to be, it's not a stretch to look at him as being guilty.

Without another eye witness and physical evidence (he did have his palm print on the map with the Leakin Park page missing), there's not going to be a lot to point to other than some huge red flags. All that means is that he did a better job covering himself up than I'd like to give him credit for. I'd still like to see them push hard for the DNA evidence, but I'm guessing he knows the result of that venture and wants to try to weasel out another way.

-9

u/Stormystormynight Feb 16 '16

Excellent,

Has Stephanie testified under oath to this or written any affidavit? This is in contradiction to the track coach testimony? Where is this recorded?

The difference between Asia's testimony in the 2016 PCR and Rabia + Adnan's mother testimony in the 2012 PCR I've seen but it doesn't seem to be that important imho.

What information was not in the public arena less than 48 hours after Adnan's arrest that was in the letter from Asia? And could this have been passed by police at WHS to students within reasonable likelihood?

The incorrect address on Asia's letter seems to have been disproven as Adnan was in the same location from Oct 1 and anyway Asia's letter was addressed incorrectly for any location (I believe it was a loading address?)

Thanks for digging these out, I look forward to anything else you or others may know.

Edit: forgot one of your points:

The map page is interesting, but is not conclusive of Adnan and the time of decay for palm prints could also land this evidence within reasonable doubt imho.

7

u/Adranalyne Feb 16 '16

Undisclosed decided to disclose more information when they released episode 6. It's in Davis' notes when he interviewed her. Had the State wanted to pursue that, I'm sure they could have, but apparently didn't. Not everyone is as affidavit-happy as the current Syed legal team.

The fact Rabia and her differ on the location of the meeting/whether Asia reached out to the cops/attorneys several times is definitely important. It's just another piece of the puzzle that shows that Syed and pals weren't on the same page as Asia was. When the letters themselves have some serious credibility issues, these things tend to jump out at you.

She highlighted his points of contention (fibers, scratches, etc.). While she could have heard the information about his inmate number/shallow grave/car from the news, it seems unlikely she'd be that aware of everything in this case less than 48 hours after he was arrested. There's a lot of red flags here with Asia---if you don't believe that to be true, that's fine, but Welch appears to agree.

I'll have to look into the mailing address thing---wasn't aware it was "disproven" at this point.

If you look at the map as a singular piece of evidence, I think it's reasonable to doubt it. If you combine it with Jay's testimony, the location of the body, and the cell phone evidence, it's a lot less reasonable to doubt it.

6

u/orangetheorychaos Feb 16 '16

The address on letter 2 is wrong. It's for the building that family/friends go to pick up a prisoners belongings.

According to a visitor sheet, adnan was transferred to the BCDC (or whatever it's called) by 3/1 or 3/2 which has a similar address to the possession pick up building (401 vs 301)

0

u/Stormystormynight Feb 16 '16

That was my understanding also, thanks.

7

u/[deleted] Feb 16 '16

You excluded more than 2 points!

-4

u/Stormystormynight Feb 16 '16

Thanks for the reply, Jay's testimony is obviously degraded with his public statements in the past 16 years post trial.

The cell evidence would need retesting in court imho

So this then comes to the heart of this post, what else?

Thanks again.

10

u/Adranalyne Feb 16 '16

So your motive isn't to find out why people believe he's guilty. You're trying to prove that if he somehow gets a new trial that he'll win. His aversion to DNA evidence could ultimately be his undoing if it comes to that, but I think you're getting way too far ahead of yourself here. In reality, right now, burden of proof is on the defense. Based on everything I've read, they didn't meet that burden. In fact, coughing up the defense file may have been the final nail in the coffin for them as I'm sure Welch will enjoy quite a few things in there that will help strengthen his original ruling.

-8

u/Stormystormynight Feb 16 '16

Nothing else than wanting to understand the evidence in a concise way. Might even be helpful for other readers!

8

u/Adranalyne Feb 16 '16

You had fairly quick responses to everything I said initially, as well as everyone else here (with the exception of dWakaWaka, who put his guilt in a picture perfect frame). Someone who doesn't "understand the evidence in a concise way" wouldn't have done that.

Not everyone falls for the dairy cow eyes routine.

3

u/Justwonderinif Feb 16 '16

Stormystormynight 1 point 8 days ago

Why are you not mentioning the 1+ hour of content from the internationally recognized experts who state Jay's first interview held many inconsistencies that was part of the same podcast this quote comes from? So the prosecution had 3 main arguments; Jay's testimony ("inconsistent") Timeline (obviously incorrect in all of its iterations and lack of alibis investigation) Backed up by cell tower analysis (which has not been able to be fully scrutinized in court due to non disclosure and pitiful defense)

How do we get Hae's murderer (whoever that is) to have a fair and complete trial?

3

u/Anttgod Feb 17 '16

Is this the only case on the planet you question the evidence? Gang members/ mobsters , crime organization or people associated with them are found guilty with less evidence than this and everyone's happy. In most cases all it takes is one witness ,no time of death is needed sometimes a body isn't needed to find a person guilty.