HBO: The Case Against Adnan Syed

edited March 11 in Other TV
What did everyone think?

I liked it, although I'm not sure I learned anything really new in Ep. 1 out of 4 versus listening to Serial. Parts of it I found creepy, such as the dream animations of Hae. But overall, I thought visuals and voiceovers gave the mystery more depth (vs the podcast). It also kept reminding me that the focus of the case should be the victim, which kept me from sympathizing too much with Adnan like I did during Serial.

Edit: I know it's a 4 part series and not everyone will watch it ASAP. For now, I'll avoid specific details from the episode, and just assume people have a general familiarity with the case from Serial or other sources.
mylifeaskirk
«134

Comments

  • I haven't watched, but will.  I've always thought that he was guilty...
  • I haven't watched, but will.  I've always thought that he was guilty...
    Can I ask why? I remember thinking at the time that his trial was bs, but I don't recall exactly why. But I don't think I ever reached a solid conclusion on his guilt. I think I was just like, I dunno. 

    Was there something in particular that led you to that belief?
  • calebthrowercalebthrower South Carolina
    I enjoyed and will watch the remaining 3. But my overall problem with these types of documentaries is we know nothing earth shaking will happen. If it had, it would have been in the news months ago. So I guess this is technically pointless tv watching. I've listened to Serial season 1 twice. First time, I thought he was innocent and second I came away thinking he was guilty. I'll be curious to see how I fall after this.
    rkcrawfhisdudeness915
  • rkcrawf said:
    I haven't watched, but will.  I've always thought that he was guilty...
    Can I ask why? I remember thinking at the time that his trial was bs, but I don't recall exactly why. But I don't think I ever reached a solid conclusion on his guilt. I think I was just like, I dunno. 

    Was there something in particular that led you to that belief?
    It's been years since I listened to Serial, so off the top of my head I can't really rattle of a bunch of things but after listening to that and then another podcast made by a group of defense attorneys (one of whom was a friend of Adnan's family) and nothing that I ever heard made me think that he was innocent.  His lack of alibi is damning.  The fact that when young girls get murdered the overwhelming majority of the time it's a boyfriend/ex-boyfriend is damning.  The gaps and inconsistencies in his story are damning etc.  I'm not saying that any of that is enough to find him guilty in court, but all things added up (above and beyond my off the top of my head examples) is enough to lead me to comfortably accept his guilt.
    Deerkcrawf
  • kingbee67kingbee67 Los Angeles Ca.
    This show has me. I barely remember the info from the podcast I remember listening to it around 2015. I must have slept thru it like I tend to do.
    Noel
  • lengmolengmo RTP, NC
    If you are interested in the case it's worth listening to the first season of Undisclosed.  It changed my mind: http://undisclosed-podcast.com/episodes/season-1/

    rkcrawfMarci
  • lengmo said:
    If you are interested in the case it's worth listening to the first season of Undisclosed.  It changed my mind: http://undisclosed-podcast.com/episodes/season-1/

    This was the podcast that I mentioned above but couldn't remember the name of - thanks! (also, it didn't change my mind at all!)


  • It was a really interesting experience for me.I agree with the creepy feeling. It suddenly felt a little gross. I felt shitty about being so enthralled with it and being part of the demand for more of this content. I think it was the diary stuff. It really hit home more than usual that her life is just Out There now through zero fault of her own. I just don't see how this is worth it anymore in terms of the dramatization. By all means keep investigating but even in the best case scenario - they found something during this filming and it's going to change history - that means they are putting all her, and her family's shit on blast again and moreso for no reason. Just tell us what you got! Even the decision to not release all at once bothers me: you're going to drag everyone for four weeks? At least if they dropped the whole thing it might have died down after four weeks but now that wound is open every. single. week.

    By all means they should do what they've gotta do to get Adnan free if that's what they think is right. But don't give me this "justice" and "let's remember the victim" stuff when you're playing this. The idea that she's this cute animation of teenage love and emotion in service of someone who very well may have strangled her to death is... ugh.

    Maybe I'll end up being wrong but right now I need a shower and a hard look at why this stuff interests me.
    CretanBullrkcrawfFlukesken hale
  • I'm surprised people are still making media projects about this case. I guess it's good timing for HBO that his granted new trial was just reversed, but is there still a ton of interest in this case? Especially when the ending will doubltess be the same "we can't know for sure, he continues appealing his conviction." 

    I have no idea if he did it or not (everyone who's done a story on it so far had an agenda, Serial wanted to tell a good story even if that meant ignoring some boring stuff that was relevant, undisclosed is interested in freeing him, etc), but it's so abundantly clear that he didn't get a fair trial (his attorney was losing her mind and was clearly ineffective, although that bar for not being ineffective has been lowered so far by SCOTUS that it's literally underground, the prosecution clearly committed brady violations, Jay's statement was obviously coached, there was completely inappropriate character evidence at trial based on him being a muslim, etc) that all these did he or didn't he arguments just kind of annoy me, cause they don't matter. Even if he did murder her, the conviction should be reversed and they should retry him. 
    mylifeaskirkrkcrawfmajjam0770
  • Entertaining enough, but, this will only be worth it if serious new information is revealed.  Otherwise - why??
    mylifeaskirk
  • lengmolengmo RTP, NC
    This was the podcast that I mentioned above but couldn't remember the name of - thanks! (also, it didn't change my mind at all!)
    Certainly we don't know if he is guilty or not, but he should never have been convicted.  The cell phone evidence was worthless and he had an alibi witness for the supposed time of the murder, for ex.  Asmallcat lists some of the other reasons.  Jay or the murderer of another young woman in the area round that time seem much more likely than Syed.
    mylifeaskirkMarciBourbonQueen
  • edited March 11
    It was a really interesting experience for me.I agree with the creepy feeling. It suddenly felt a little gross. I felt shitty about being so enthralled with it and being part of the demand for more of this content. I think it was the diary stuff. It really hit home more than usual that her life is just Out There now through zero fault of her own. I just don't see how this is worth it anymore in terms of the dramatization. By all means keep investigating but even in the best case scenario - they found something during this filming and it's going to change history - that means they are putting all her, and her family's shit on blast again and moreso for no reason. Just tell us what you got! Even the decision to not release all at once bothers me: you're going to drag everyone for four weeks? At least if they dropped the whole thing it might have died down after four weeks but now that wound is open every. single. week.

    By all means they should do what they've gotta do to get Adnan free if that's what they think is right. But don't give me this "justice" and "let's remember the victim" stuff when you're playing this. The idea that she's this cute animation of teenage love and emotion in service of someone who very well may have strangled her to death is... ugh.

    Maybe I'll end up being wrong but right now I need a shower and a hard look at why this stuff interests me.
    I was mixed about this. I guess I was under the impression her family was okay with the diary reading, but I really have no idea, tho. If the series did help uncover some new evidence, I am okay with it. I seriously doubt going through her stuff on air yields any benefit. But yeah, it definitely feels dirty at times. Had some ex killed me, I sure would not want my private thoughts on display for the world unless it helped incriminate the guilty. It is also weird that they have narrations from real people mixed in with some actor pretending to be her.  There is a line with true crime, and so far, this thing has a foot on either side of it. 

    I have trouble buying Adnan and friends rolling into a house party a few days after one of them killed her. To play that situation cool is hard for me to process. I also have trouble believing some indecent exposure dude just happens to take a leak in the woods on the stretch of a road right where her mostly buried body is. But yeah, the stuff about Adnan's alibi doesn't add up. 


  • NoelNoel Dallas, TX
    Part of the reason I’ll be watching it because it’s on HBO and I give most HBO productions a shot just out of principle. The other part (was stated above) is that I forgot most of Serial’s first season. I remember the core info but I’m sure that there will be plenty of times that I’ll be reminded about all the different detail surrounding the case.

    Definitely a binge watch through all four episodes though
    mylifeaskirktom_grkcrawfChinaskiBourbonQueen
  • Doctor_NickDoctor_Nick Terminus
    edited March 11
    While I loved seeing faces to finally put to names, it was gross. Reading her diary, having Adnan defining the relationship and telling us about her sexual abuse was a bad choice.  Also not sure why all the diary entries about their puppy love was relevant, as if it made a difference whether he could do it or not. 

    Dragging Don through the mud was also terrible. I just really, really hope that in all the stuff the producers and free Adnan people have that isn’t necessarily public knowledge that Gutierrez’s PI didn’t find that Don had more than a timecard alibi, which is highly possible as CH was looking at alibis. 

    Im intrigued as to how Jenn and Jay are going to fit in a Don did it theory. 
    CretanBullmylifeaskirkjhpark
  • Neither of these is true. Old style cell phone  cell site evidence like this has been used many times in court. The AT&T disclaimer applies to what happens to voicemail routing. In any case there were plenty of made calls by Adnan’s phone that give the same location information and were consistent with each other. 

    It it is quite possible, even probable, that the state got the timeline wrong.  The state doesn’t have to prove the timeline, that’s why Asia McClain’s alibi doesn’t matter. You move the state’s timeline back half an hour and nothing has changed. 

    lengmo said:
    This was the podcast that I mentioned above but couldn't remember the name of - thanks! (also, it didn't change my mind at all!)
    Certainly we don't know if he is guilty or not, but he should never have been convicted.  The cell phone evidence was worthless and he had an alibi witness for the supposed time of the murder, for ex.  Asmallcat lists some of the other reasons.  Jay or the murderer of another young woman in the area round that time seem much more likely than Syed.

    CretanBull
  • kuman07kuman07 Kansas City
    edited March 11
    I think there is going to be more stuff than what was in the podcast. Just the fact in the last part of last nights episode they talked about how the documentary crew hired a private investigation firm to conduct their own investigation. That makes me think new stuff is going to come out. I don't think it will be anything huge or groundbreaking but certainly more pieces to the puzzle to think about.
  • Teresa from ConcordTeresa from Concord Concord, California
    I listened to the podcast and came away thinking he’s guilty. But the details are a bit weak and hope the jury heard more substantial evidence. 
  • CretanBullCretanBull Toronto
    edited March 11
    lengmo said:
    This was the podcast that I mentioned above but couldn't remember the name of - thanks! (also, it didn't change my mind at all!)
    Certainly we don't know if he is guilty or not, but he should never have been convicted.  The cell phone evidence was worthless and he had an alibi witness for the supposed time of the murder, for ex.  Asmallcat lists some of the other reasons.  Jay or the murderer of another young woman in the area round that time
    Most of our knowledge about the details of the case come from what is publicly known - things said on Serial, Undisclosed, newspapers etc.  all of those things have a bias.  I'm not using the word 'bias' with a negative connotation, I just mean that information was mediated in a particular light for a particular purpose.  None of us heard what the jury heard, so I think arguments about the fairness of a trial are both hard to make and hard to argue against.

    I say this without commenting on Adnan's guilt or innocence, but the odds of the killer being either Jay or the random killer are pretty much zero - low enough where they shouldn't be seriously considered until all other avenues have been exhausted.  All of the circumstances and evidence regarding how Hae was killed point to a crime of passion by someone that she was intimately familiar with.  I'd suspect her brother or father before suspecting Jay or a random person (and I don't suspect her father or brother at all).  I'd focus 99% of my attention on Adnan and Don, and if I could clear both of them then I'd start looking at that other 1%.  Personally, I can't clear Adnan.


    majjam0770mylifeaskirk
  • While I loved seeing faces to finally put to names, it was gross. Reading her diary, having Adnan defining the relationship and telling us about her sexual abuse was a bad choice.  Also not sure why all the diary entries about their puppy love was relevant, as if it made a difference whether he could do it or not. 

    Dragging Don through the mud was also terrible. I just really, really hope that in all the stuff the producers and free Adnan people have that isn’t necessarily public knowledge that Gutierrez’s PI didn’t find that Don had more than a timecard alibi, which is highly possible as CH was looking at alibis. 

    Im intrigued as to how Jenn and Jay are going to fit in a Don did it theory. 
    It's generally a bad sign when defense counsel can't put forward a positive defense and instead rely on muddying the waters. There's nothing that can be said in Adnan's direct defense, so their approach is to manufacture doubt by tearing down Don, Jay, the police, his former counsel etc.  I'm not saying that it isn't effective or valid, but it's not a good sign.
  • CretanBullCretanBull Toronto
    edited March 11
    This is extremely anecdotal, but...

    I'm very far to the left, a 'bleeding heart' liberal, my degree is in criminology, I'm well versed in false convictions, understand the legal bias against people of colour (especially Muslims at the time of this investigation/trial), my job is to create second-chance programs for juvenile offenders etc.  I should be the easiest person in the world to be won over to Adnan's side, but I'm not - at all. I don't think that bodes well for him.
    Deerkcrawfsarahtatugaken hale
  • lengmolengmo RTP, NC
    Neither of these is true. Old style cell phone  cell site evidence like this has been used many times in court. The AT&T disclaimer applies to what happens to voicemail routing. In any case there were plenty of made calls by Adnan’s phone that give the same location information and were consistent with each other. 

    It it is quite possible, even probable, that the state got the timeline wrong.  The state doesn’t have to prove the timeline, that’s why Asia McClain’s alibi doesn’t matter. You move the state’s timeline back half an hour and nothing has changed.
    "If Gutierrez had paid closer attention to an AT&T cover sheet that included information about the cell phone towers pinged by Adnan’s phone on Jan. 13, the trial may have ended differently. The cover sheets stated, “outgoing calls only are reliable for location status. Any incoming calls will NOT be considered reliable information for location.” One of the reasons for this disclaimer was due to a glitch with AT&T at the time, which had incoming calls ping the tower near the person making the call rather than the person on the receiving end. The two key phone calls in the case, at 7:09 p.m. and 7:16 p.m., pinged the tower that covers Leakin Park and the surrounding areas. The State claimed the pings from those calls placed Syed in the park, where he allegedly buried Hae. However both of those calls were incoming calls, thus making it impossible to determine the location status."

    (the article also has other good info for people who haven't listened to Undisclosed yet)

    It's been a while, but IIRC the state's case/timeline was built around the cell phone "evidence" which put Adnan at certain places at certain times like the park where Hae was discovered.  Without it there's little to tie Adnan to the tragic event.

  • CretanBullCretanBull Toronto
    edited March 11
    lengmo said:
    Neither of these is true. Old style cell phone  cell site evidence like this has been used many times in court. The AT&T disclaimer applies to what happens to voicemail routing. In any case there were plenty of made calls by Adnan’s phone that give the same location information and were consistent with each other. 

    It it is quite possible, even probable, that the state got the timeline wrong.  The state doesn’t have to prove the timeline, that’s why Asia McClain’s alibi doesn’t matter. You move the state’s timeline back half an hour and nothing has changed.
    "If Gutierrez had paid closer attention to an AT&T cover sheet that included information about the cell phone towers pinged by Adnan’s phone on Jan. 13, the trial may have ended differently. The cover sheets stated, “outgoing calls only are reliable for location status. Any incoming calls will NOT be considered reliable information for location.” One of the reasons for this disclaimer was due to a glitch with AT&T at the time, which had incoming calls ping the tower near the person making the call rather than the person on the receiving end. The two key phone calls in the case, at 7:09 p.m. and 7:16 p.m., pinged the tower that covers Leakin Park and the surrounding areas. The State claimed the pings from those calls placed Syed in the park, where he allegedly buried Hae. However both of those calls were incoming calls, thus making it impossible to determine the location status."

    (the article also has other good info for people who haven't listened to Undisclosed yet)

    It's been a while, but IIRC the state's case/timeline was built around the cell phone "evidence" which put Adnan at certain places at certain times like the park where Hae was discovered.  Without it there's little to tie Adnan to the tragic event.

    The fax cover sheet has been discredited, in terms of it disproving the accuracy of the user reports.  It's been years since I looked into it, but the gist of it was that the cover letter was a generic letter that wasn't updated as often as the reports that it was attached to were updated.  By the time it was used for the subscriber activity reports that were used for the trial, the cover letter only applied to a particular column of information and not the entire report.

    Edit:  A quick google (I'm on my phone and not at home):  "AT&T tech has confirmed that the document in question (the cover letter) only applied to the activity report in regards to voicemails and not incoming or outgoing calls.  Forensic analysists at Purdue and Stanford did complete data checks on over 200 incoming and outgoing calls recorded in Adnan's call log.  Every single one of them was found to be recorded accurately and as expected."
    rkcrawf
  • lengmolengmo RTP, NC

    Edit:  A quick google (I'm on my phone and not at home):  "AT&T tech has confirmed that the document in question (the cover letter) only applied to the activity report in regards to voicemails and not incoming or outgoing calls.  Forensic analysists at Purdue and Stanford did complete data checks on over 200 incoming and outgoing calls recorded in Adnan's call log.  Every single one of them was found to be recorded accurately and as expected."
    I'm sorry CretanBull but please post the link to this.  Usually one can take a quotation from an article and google it to find the article, but google's not finding yours, including or not the mispelled "analysists".  Remember that the cell phone evidence was hashed out in the PCR hearing with experts.  https://www.reuters.com/article/us-maryland-serial-case-idUSKCN0VD2ST

  • lengmo said:

    Edit:  A quick google (I'm on my phone and not at home):  "AT&T tech has confirmed that the document in question (the cover letter) only applied to the activity report in regards to voicemails and not incoming or outgoing calls.  Forensic analysists at Purdue and Stanford did complete data checks on over 200 incoming and outgoing calls recorded in Adnan's call log.  Every single one of them was found to be recorded accurately and as expected."
    I'm sorry CretanBull but please post the link to this.  Usually one can take a quotation from an article and google it to find the article, but google's not finding yours, including or not the mispelled "analysists".  Remember that the cell phone evidence was hashed out in the PCR hearing with experts.  https://www.reuters.com/article/us-maryland-serial-case-idUSKCN0VD2ST

    It was cut and pasted from reddit, but the reddit post linked to sources - I'm not at home & I'm on my phone, I'll find and repost it later tonight.
  • I don’t think I will watch it. I got drawn into the first Serial season but was left frustrated and it did feel exploitative. I don’t know if Adnan is guilty or not. I feel that as thorough as the podcast was it still left some things out and was a bit manipulative in how it presented the information. I remember wanting to know more about Hae’s family that she may have been planning on running away from and thinking why were they not more suspect. Which I am sure I’m not the only one so this would be definite unwanted attention for most likely innocent people who lost their daughter and didn’t want to talk about it on a podcast.

     I also remember it hyping itself for a big revelation at the end but mostly it was just “we don’t know what happened but Adnan probably shouldn’t be in jail based on the amount of evidence there is and his poor defense.” which was kind of a let down because it wasn’t a reveal, just was what the podcast said happened already. 






  • Ok, this sort of dishonesty is what’s wrong with True Crime. If the truth doesn’t make your story interesting, well sorry don’t embellish it for narrative effect. 

    This is the doc producers’ private investigators:

    “But Clinedinst had an alibi for that day: He was working at a LensCrafters store in Hunt Valley, another Baltimore suburb, where his mother just happened to be the manager. The internet was ablaze with the idea that Clinedinst’s mother had doctored her son’s Hunt Valley timecard, creating what some saw as a phantom shift that put Clinedinst far from the scene of the crime.

    After interviewing more than 15 current and former employees of LensCrafters, employees of Luxottica Group, LensCrafters’ parent, and even the developer who built the timekeeping software, we debunked the timecard theory. It was, we concluded, impossible to adjust the computerized timecard retroactively without leaving a trace.”

    Yet they track down Don and act like he’s a real suspect in film. Gross. 

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/adnan-syed-hbo-documentary-serial-murder-case-11552313829

    CretanBullrkcrawf
  • Sorry, it was a long night and I'm just getting home now.  Read through this, not just the comments by posters but check out the linked sources and scans of the original documents.  In short, this whole cover fax isn't the smoking gun that the defense thinks it is. Waranowitz claimed that had he seen the letter, his testimony would have been different...but if he'd actually seen the letter he would have realized that it didn't apply to both incoming and outgoing calls so his testimony wouldn't have been different.
  • Doctor_NickDoctor_Nick Terminus
    edited March 12
    Even if I were to grant you that the incoming calls might not be reliable, let's actually take a look at Adnan's call log

    1/12/99:
    7Yaser home9:26 p.m.3:51L651C
    8incoming9:24 p.m.0:09L651C
    9incoming9:21 p.m.0:15L651C
    10Jay9:18 p.m.0:18L651C

    1/13/99
    26Jenn home3:21 p.m.0:42L651C
    27incoming3:15 p.m.0:20L651C
    28incoming2:36 p.m.0:05L651B
    29incoming12:43 p.m.0:24L652A
    30Jenn home12:41 p.m.1:29L652A
     
    I guess these incoming calls just happen to be on the same cell tower sites as in the outgoing calls flanking them.  

    So let's look at the Leakin Park pings. Remember, Adnan is supposed to be across town to the west at mosque, according to his recollection.  The 2 most directly in Leakin Park pings are incoming.  But they are flanked by L651A and L653A outgoing pings, and the Leakin Park pings fit neatly between these two, almost as if the cell phone was moving west to east, on a trip through Leakin Park.
     
    lengmo said:
    Neither of these is true. Old style cell phone  cell site evidence like this has been used many times in court. The AT&T disclaimer applies to what happens to voicemail routing. In any case there were plenty of made calls by Adnan’s phone that give the same location information and were consistent with each other. 

    It it is quite possible, even probable, that the state got the timeline wrong.  The state doesn’t have to prove the timeline, that’s why Asia McClain’s alibi doesn’t matter. You move the state’s timeline back half an hour and nothing has changed.
    "If Gutierrez had paid closer attention to an AT&T cover sheet that included information about the cell phone towers pinged by Adnan’s phone on Jan. 13, the trial may have ended differently. The cover sheets stated, “outgoing calls only are reliable for location status. Any incoming calls will NOT be considered reliable information for location.” One of the reasons for this disclaimer was due to a glitch with AT&T at the time, which had incoming calls ping the tower near the person making the call rather than the person on the receiving end. The two key phone calls in the case, at 7:09 p.m. and 7:16 p.m., pinged the tower that covers Leakin Park and the surrounding areas. The State claimed the pings from those calls placed Syed in the park, where he allegedly buried Hae. However both of those calls were incoming calls, thus making it impossible to determine the location status."

    (the article also has other good info for people who haven't listened to Undisclosed yet)

    It's been a while, but IIRC the state's case/timeline was built around the cell phone "evidence" which put Adnan at certain places at certain times like the park where Hae was discovered.  Without it there's little to tie Adnan to the tragic event.




    CretanBullrkcrawf
  • HatorianHatorian Dagobah
    Even if I were to grant you that the incoming calls might not be reliable, let's actually take a look at Adnan's call log

    1/12/99:
    7Yaser home9:26 p.m.3:51L651C
    8incoming9:24 p.m.0:09L651C
    9incoming9:21 p.m.0:15L651C
    10Jay9:18 p.m.0:18L651C

    1/13/99
    26Jenn home3:21 p.m.0:42L651C
    27incoming3:15 p.m.0:20L651C
    28incoming2:36 p.m.0:05L651B
    29incoming12:43 p.m.0:24L652A
    30Jenn home12:41 p.m.1:29L652A
     
    I guess these incoming calls just happen to be on the same cell tower sites as in the outgoing calls flanking them.  

    So let's look at the Leakin Park pings. Remember, Adnan is supposed to be across town to the west at mosque, according to his recollection.  The 2 most directly in Leakin Park pings are incoming.  But they are flanked by L651A and L653A outgoing pings, and the Leakin Park pings fit neatly between these two, almost as if the cell phone was moving west to east, on a trip through Leakin Park.
     
    lengmo said:
    Neither of these is true. Old style cell phone  cell site evidence like this has been used many times in court. The AT&T disclaimer applies to what happens to voicemail routing. In any case there were plenty of made calls by Adnan’s phone that give the same location information and were consistent with each other. 

    It it is quite possible, even probable, that the state got the timeline wrong.  The state doesn’t have to prove the timeline, that’s why Asia McClain’s alibi doesn’t matter. You move the state’s timeline back half an hour and nothing has changed.
    "If Gutierrez had paid closer attention to an AT&T cover sheet that included information about the cell phone towers pinged by Adnan’s phone on Jan. 13, the trial may have ended differently. The cover sheets stated, “outgoing calls only are reliable for location status. Any incoming calls will NOT be considered reliable information for location.” One of the reasons for this disclaimer was due to a glitch with AT&T at the time, which had incoming calls ping the tower near the person making the call rather than the person on the receiving end. The two key phone calls in the case, at 7:09 p.m. and 7:16 p.m., pinged the tower that covers Leakin Park and the surrounding areas. The State claimed the pings from those calls placed Syed in the park, where he allegedly buried Hae. However both of those calls were incoming calls, thus making it impossible to determine the location status."

    (the article also has other good info for people who haven't listened to Undisclosed yet)

    It's been a while, but IIRC the state's case/timeline was built around the cell phone "evidence" which put Adnan at certain places at certain times like the park where Hae was discovered.  Without it there's little to tie Adnan to the tragic event.




    I Don't understand a single word you said but thats enough proof for me if i was a juror..of course i would milk the time off work and free food but then...guilty! and no thats not a joke. i do think he is probably guilty but i have also just been watching this whole thing from afar. even when the serial thing hit. 
    tom_g
  • From what I remember of Serial season 1, i remember believing that Adnan was probably guilty or at the very least knew more about what happened and was withholding certain info.  I just remember him acting weird at times and not all of his story checking out.  With all of that said, I also do recall believing that his lawyers did a crappy job and that there was enough reasonable doubt to not convict him.

    I can't say I was totally impressed by episode 1 of this HBO documentary.  Maybe because it's been a few years since listening to Serial and maybe because at the end of Serial i was more annoyed that Sarah Koenig refused to actually tell us her opinion.  I felt like she was hiding what she really thought and just flipped flopped about whether she thought Adnan was actually guilty or not.

    As for re-opening a wound to Hae's family, I kind of get the sense that they must have signed off on this to some extent.  But maybe i'm entirely wrong.  If they agreed to it, then that's partially on them. 

    I also agree with @CretanBull about the bias thing.  It's extremely difficult to make anything without having an agenda or bias to it.  So, with this HBO documentary, i really hope they show both sides to the case and not just slant it to Adnan's family saying he's innocent.  I totally understand why his family says that he didn't do it but part of me wonders if his parents saw a video of him actually strangling Hae if they would believe it at this point in time.  Not sure any parent can really accept that their child could do such a thing.  And for sure, with this case, I don't think there is any concrete proof showing that Adnan is 100% guilty.

    Lastly, i have issue with the whole "Don's alibi is his mother so clearly his mom would have lied to protect him and forged a timesheet".  Yeah, i can get the logic but that doesn't mean that's the truth.  Are people not allowed to work with or for their family and friends now?  Are we just to assume that all family members will lie for each other?  I feel like throwing this out there without any supporting evidence is just a little reckless if you're trying to actually uncover the truth.  Do a little more digging and actually prove it.

Sign In or Register to comment.