Serial

Status
Not open for further replies.
Medulla said:
But if he killed her, either alone or with someone else, then he could well know. I mean, if I do someone in in whatever circumstances, dump or watch someone else dump her car, and then the police start sniffing around, isn't it plausible I might chuck the blame on the ex and throw in the titbit of the car's location as corroboration of my tale, when it's simply a fact I know tied with a pretty bow to a big fat lie?
Click to expand...

I expect I'm a lone voice on this but I'm always "meh" about speculation like this. There was no evidence which points to any of what you suggest. Having said that I suspect this kind of speculation is one of the pleasures of listening to the programme, which is one of the reasons why by episode 9 or so my interest was beginning to tail off.
 


janiep said:
I expect I'm a lone voice on this but I'm always "meh" about speculation like this. There was no evidence which points to any of what you suggest. Having said that I suspect this kind of speculation is one of the pleasures of listening to the programme, which is one of the reasons why by episode 9 or so my interest was beginning to tail off.
Click to expand...
There is reason to doubt his truthfulness beyond pure speculation though, so surely covering a reasonable state of affairs given that he is in the small pool of obvious suspects is fair? It's just looking at a fact from multiple angles.

Anyway, perhaps this is a busman's holiday for you. ;)
 
Medulla said:
There is reason to doubt his truthfulness beyond pure speculation though, so surely covering a reasonable state of affairs given that he is in the small pool of obvious suspects is fair? It's just looking at a fact from multiple angles.

Anyway, perhaps this is a busman's holiday for you. ;)
Click to expand...
I think busman's holiday is right and I can't help but bring to it the evidence-assessing point of view I have to have in the day job. But the car and the technical evidence that the phone was in Leakin Park decide it for me.
 
janiep said:
I think busman's holiday is right and I can't help but bring to it the evidence-assessing point of view I have to have in the day job. But the car and the technical evidence that the phone was in Leakin Park decide it for me.
Click to expand...
Out of interest, do you mean based on balance of probabilities or are you saying you would convict as a juror based on the evidence you've heard?

The phone records thing is something they cast some doubt on but I don't feel they explained well enough, so I was a little confused as to it's significance. I think I'd need to dig a little on that one, pun intended.
 
Medulla said:
Out of interest, do you mean based on balance of probabilities or are you saying you would convict as a juror based on the evidence you've heard?

The phone records thing is something they cast some doubt on but I don't feel they explained well enough, so I was a little confused as to it's significance. I think I'd need to dig a little on that one, pun intended.
Click to expand...
Yes I would have convicted I think - hard to say for sure as you need to be in the court room and see and hear the evidence for yourself.
 
janiep said:
Yes I would have convicted I think - hard to say for sure as you need to be in the court room and see and hear the evidence for yourself.
Click to expand...
True, I was saying to a friend that one of the problems is that you listen to it without really being able to readily distinguish between witness testimony at the time (pretty unreliable) and witness testimony a decade and a half later (f***ing unreliable).

Nevertheless, I still think it's all essentially built on Jay, and his testimony is nowhere close to being as solid as it needs to be to move me from reasonable doubt, in fact quite the contrary.

Just as a side point, the presenter is irritating as shit.
 
Listened to the newest one last night, thought the reveal at the end was very interesting, however just like the rest of the series it was all a bit disjointed.

Started listening to a new podcast the other day called Criminal, it had a similar feel to Serial but is a new story every month. First few were really interesting.
 
Decent series. I came out of it pretty convinced that Adnan did it and deserves to be in jail.

He was a 17 year old kid at the time who seems like he was put on a pedestal - "homecoming king" (or whatever the fuck it's called), mr popular, clever, good-looking, doted on by his family and so on. Him getting dumped was probably the first time in his life he experienced rejection and the feeling that he wasn't good enough. I think he couldn't handle it and he took it out on Hae in the worst possible way. Seeing her with the new boyfriend probably didn't help his state of mind either. I know people said that he appeared to be over the break-up, totally cool with it, moving on etc but it's easy to fake emotions and pretend you're ok when you're not - we've all done it.

For me, there's only 2 people who could have done it; Jay or Adnan and only 1 of those has a motive as far as we know. I don't even think Jay had met Hae had he? The fact that Adnan claims not to know where he was that day and does not have an alibi seal it for me - how lucky would Jay have to be to stitch him up and Adnan can't provide any alibi or evidence for his whereabouts that day. He "can't remember" because he knows it could trip him up. How unlucky do you have to be to give your car and phone to someone who kills your ex-girlfriend and then you can't remember a f***ing thing about where you were that day? Nah, don't buy it.

I think Jay's version of events are probably what happened. I think the inconsistencies are most likely down to him being a f***ing idiot (he did help bury her body after all, not the sharpest tool in the box by the sounds of it) and being stoned as fuck at the time probably. His version of events is the most logical explanation IMO.
 
Behind Enemy Lines said:
I think Jay's version of events are probably what happened.
Click to expand...
Which one? ;)

In seriousness, you can't afford Jay the benefit of the doubt with failings of memory owing to smoking tons of weed without offering the same to Adnan, especially since one was claimed to be a Billy Bullshit by three separate people and the other was universally regarded as a stand up bloke.

Incidentally, Adnan does have an alibi. There are problems with it but it is nevertheless an alibi.
 
I went down the rabbit hole of Reddit, but quickly realised it was mostly uninformed idiots spouting off (a bit like this place;)).

However I now follow three people on Twitter and the work they are doing is really interesting.

Rabia Chaudry, @rabiasquared on Twitter, blog: www.splitthemoon.com.
Susan Simpson, @TheViewFromLL2 on Twitter, blog:www.viewfromll2.com.
Colin Miller, @EvidenceProf, he also blogs on the subject on his Twitter feed.
 
Behind Enemy Lines said:
Decent series. I came out of it pretty convinced that Adnan did it and deserves to be in jail.

He was a 17 year old kid at the time who seems like he was put on a pedestal - "homecoming king" (or whatever the fuck it's called), mr popular, clever, good-looking, doted on by his family and so on. Him getting dumped was probably the first time in his life he experienced rejection and the feeling that he wasn't good enough. I think he couldn't handle it and he took it out on Hae in the worst possible way. Seeing her with the new boyfriend probably didn't help his state of mind either. I know people said that he appeared to be over the break-up, totally cool with it, moving on etc but it's easy to fake emotions and pretend you're ok when you're not - we've all done it.

For me, there's only 2 people who could have done it; Jay or Adnan and only 1 of those has a motive as far as we know. I don't even think Jay had met Hae had he? The fact that Adnan claims not to know where he was that day and does not have an alibi seal it for me - how lucky would Jay have to be to stitch him up and Adnan can't provide any alibi or evidence for his whereabouts that day. He "can't remember" because he knows it could trip him up. How unlucky do you have to be to give your car and phone to someone who kills your ex-girlfriend and then you can't remember a f***ing thing about where you were that day? Nah, don't buy it.

I think Jay's version of events are probably what happened. I think the inconsistencies are most likely down to him being a f***ing idiot (he did help bury her body after all, not the sharpest tool in the box by the sounds of it) and being stoned as fuck at the time probably. His version of events is the most logical explanation IMO.
Click to expand...

Just finished it, really enjoyed it, I am pretty torn but one thing I am sure of is that this should never of been taken to trial, just not enough evidence

Agree with a lot of points you make, and questions I struggle with.

I don't really agree with your motive though, just don't by it, heard from a lot of there friends and it seemed like a pretty relaxed relationship to me

All Jay really gave the police initially was the location of the car wasn't it? There is no doubt he is lying still mind, as the call records prove, so he was clearly more involved in the murder

the question is whether Adnan was too.

There isn't only 2 people who could of done it though is there, could of been anyone

Really enjoyed the series though
 
Medulla said:
The problem for me is that while there are a few alarm bells - the testimony about his response to the phone call at Jay's friend's house, the Nisha call, Jay's credibility as a witness to an extent - the prosecution timeline of events is essentially false and there is no physical evidence whatsoever linking him to the murder.

And the evidence for a motive is thin as fuck. It's basically a letter from the victim to him implying he was cut up by them breaking up. See all break ups ever.

It's rock hard to comb through though. I suppose you have to remember where the burden of proof lies.
Click to expand...

Yep I agree
the timeline is absolute shite, and literally a lie, so why is Jay lying about this?

That is the key to me, if the lad really did do it, then why is Jay lying about the timeline, just tell the truth surely?

Medulla said:
I still haven't looked at the reddit business, I feel like I might fall down the rabbit hole if I do.

TBH, there are three elements to this that appeal to me. The first is whether there was sufficient evidence to convict him, the second is whether he did it, and the third is, if he didn't, then who did. And I feel like the podcast can help me answer the first, can give me some idea on the second, but probably doesn't begin to address the third (if indeed it's applicable), and if I start looking for stuff outside the podcast to answer 2 and 3 before satisfying myself on 1 then I'll do my own head in.

Mind, like an earlier poster, I find it phenomenal to the point of actually being tantamount to dereliction of duty that the jury could convict in a few hours, including lunch.
Click to expand...

Absolutely

I have seen a few documentaries with similar outcomes in America, and it is definitely not something that would happen here

Have to say its hard to get off your mind who did it. That Jen must know something.

janiep said:
Not knowing where Hae's car was, no. In fact the opposite: he knew where her car was, and it was where he said it was. The programme never provided any comment, analysis or rationale for this. It's the one huge fact that corroborates Jay's story.
Click to expand...

Yes but its the only fact really!

Most of the rest is made up, none of it fits the phone records

Why would he lie about the rest of it if Adnan really did it? That doesn't make any sense, he is either protecting himself, someone else, or is a complete liar.

janiep said:
I expect I'm a lone voice on this but I'm always "meh" about speculation like this. There was no evidence which points to any of what you suggest. Having said that I suspect this kind of speculation is one of the pleasures of listening to the programme, which is one of the reasons why by episode 9 or so my interest was beginning to tail off.
Click to expand...

You have done exactly the same thing but speculated the other way!

Crazylegs said:
I went down the rabbit hole of Reddit, but quickly realised it was mostly uninformed idiots spouting off (a bit like this place;)).

However I now follow three people on Twitter and the work they are doing is really interesting.

Rabia Chaudry, @rabiasquared on Twitter, blog: www.splitthemoon.com.
Susan Simpson, @TheViewFromLL2 on Twitter, blog:www.viewfromll2.com.
Colin Miller, @EvidenceProf, he also blogs on the subject on his Twitter feed.
Click to expand...

For fuck sake mate why did you give these links! can't stop reading now

so it looks like she might not of been going to a wrestling match at all

worrying how the court reported that as fact
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've just started it yesterday and I'm already at the Jay episode. None of it really adds up. The timings, the testimonies....Jay is unreliable as fuck and they should have tested the beer and brandy bottles at the time.
 
For those who may be interested, a new podcast has come out called "Undisclosed" that might be worth investigating, although I've not listened to it myself.
 
The new series has just started, its about that American soldier who was 'captured' by the Taliban & released after 5yrs, very interesting!
 
Medulla said:
Free on iTunes.

The presenter interviews some of the people around the case and talks quite a lot to the convicted on the phone from prison, it's pretty compelling stuff.
Click to expand...

I loved it and don't want to spoil how it ended. I tended to go along with the woman who presents it, where with each area she investigated she would lean in a different direction as to whether he did it. How far in are you?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top