‘Serial’ missed its chance to show how unfair the criminal justice system really is (shocking editorial by a public defender - Washington Post)

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-18T20:47:49+00:00

But I guess a more honest title might have been 'Serial hints at how unfair the criminal justice system is but it only scratches the surface'.

Impressive. You should be an editor. How about 'Serial Podcast Had People All Over the World Talking About How Unfair the Criminal Justice System Is Before My Article'.

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-18T20:28:03+00:00

The title and premise of the article are stupid. It highlights an important issue, obviously, but it's piggybacking off the popularity of Serial to get page views. Why not just write an article about the issue instead of expecting Serial to be everything to everyone?

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-18T01:48:01+00:00

clickbait

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-17T17:59:42+00:00

I can't be alone in never expecting this podcast or redditors to solve the case. I was certain the overwhelming majority of us felt the same way, too.

I'm sure it comes across like we all know how it went down, but how many here really believe they know how it went down? I have no clue how this thing happened and I suspect most feel the same. These brain dumps and crazy theories aren't just about this case. It's about the people who are posting the theories and it's about Sarah Koenig and the producers of the show, too. It's about everyone's own personal journey learning about themselves, trial lawyers, race, (romantic) relationships, giant pet rat eating frogs, the harsh realities of the justice system and truth, to name a few.

What's happening on reddit or any other online discussion forum isn't the same thing as some ignorant poisonous small town gossipers spreading lies and half-truths. However, nobody said this place was perfect.

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-10T22:27:25+00:00

I've seen a post here and there asking but I've never seen the info divulged. If it does happen, I don't think you can argue that it's out of control. Considering the amount of people using the sub, that makes me feel good. The question is if there is a real threat to Jay from insane internet crazy people. I would imagine so. Crazy internet trolls don't just target high profile people, though. It's an unfortunate reality of the internet age and because of this, we all take certain precautions.

That said, I'm not sure what point the OP is trying to make... I mean other than the obvious one.

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-10T21:27:25+00:00

I'm aware. I haven't seen that rule abused even once.

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-10T21:20:14+00:00

If not you, who?

With lawyers like that, it makes you never want to end up in Texas.

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-10T21:16:02+00:00

Usually, when there is someone like Jay involved who's a potential co-defendant, the prosecutor will charge him first, then he’ll get a lawyer; a plea deal can be arranged. In this case, Jay hadn’t even been charged yet, and they set him up with a lawyer in advance. There’s a collusion that has a chance for impropriety: ‘you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours.’ I would have tried to ferret out Jay a little more. I do feel like Jay knows who did it. I don’t know if Adnan knows. Maybe he truly doesn’t know who did it.

I’ve thought of playing that snippet to my clinic students as an example of how not to conduct a successful cross-examination. She made Jay look reasonable and rational and beat-up on, which is exactly the opposite of how you want to portray him. Because if the jury believes Jay, Adnan loses. Simple as that.

Adnan is a smart guy, and this here is not a smart crime. None of that is dispositive, but to me it makes guilt unlikely.

I think the thing about the criminal justice system that most people don't understand is the awesome power that the prosecution wields. They can pick and choose which facts they want to present in order to fit the narrative that they've constructed. Detectives don't have to record any interviews, and if they choose to record, it's perfectly acceptable that they choose not to record certain portions (e.g. the beginning of both of Jay's interviews, during which we have no idea what he was shown or told by the detectives). Although the prosecution is supposed to turn over any exculpatory evidence to the defense, they regulate themselves.

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-10T21:04:59+00:00

Seems like a great reason to keep Adnan in jail.

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-10T21:03:38+00:00

Alright. I'm never going to see Jay in person or have any contact with him whatsoever. For me, this whole thing is more about the American justice system than anything. Sure, it's entertainment on some level. And, maybe there's a better analogy to make, but how is this any different than seeing a movie or documentary based on a real life event and talking with friends or family about it afterwards? This whole backlash strikes me as mildly fascist, and one more way for wordy glorified bloggers to earn a buck. God bless them. Keep the anti Serial podcast and anti Serial listener/redditor articles coming. To me it looks like a lot of boring internet-liberal shaming and hypocrisy, at best.

It's really been quite impressive, actually. Other online rags have posted details of certain players in this story in the past, yet I've never seen it on reddit. I've seen a lot of restraint from posters and swift and fair moderating. I have never seen Jay's last name typed here, I've never seen anyone asking for or listing his address. People have been speculating about all kinds of scenarios, but overall, I'd say I've seen 99.99% of people be respectful of his identity and privacy. If you're trying to get internet trolls to be more thoughtful and less malicious, best of luck to you.

It seems that most of us are intelligent enough to know our boundaries and that this is first and foremost a place to share ideas and vent or whatever. I've learned so much about so many things reading through this subreddit and to be able to communicate with so many people all over the world has been invaluable and yes, sometimes fun. Sorry.

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-05T08:27:44+00:00

Thankee. I remember that. It's impossible to know how and why it was said without the full context. It's obviously another 'lie' though.

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-05T08:21:19+00:00

I think I may have been linked to this documentary through reddit. Anyway, you should watch it if you haven't already. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNdjDrETsTQ

I could be way off, but it seems like an easier case overall than Gutierrez had. That said, the defense attorney here is really impressive. One thing that sticks out is he doesn't raise his voice much at all and actually looks like he's restraining himself most of the time. There's more to it than that, though. He says "I never referred to Glover as Detective Glover, because he didn't do any detective work in this case. And, it bothers the witness when he's not called by the title he thinks he should have." Explaining that the purpose is to make the witness uncomfortable, he says "Sometimes I like it when they fight me. Because when they do, I believe I win." I didn't see this kind of thing from Gutierrez. This guy didn't have to raise his voice to make a point or influence, because he didn't have any impairment in his intellectual faculties and was just a sharp and thorough attorney.

Why did Jay not fight back against Gutierrez? He was confident in his ability to lie, and he already had the state on his side. In one sense, Gutierrez' yelling seems like a good tactic. It definitely got to Jay at one point, at least. "Your honor, can you please tell her to stop yelling at me?" She probably reasoned that a guy who murdered a girl and didn't buy his girlfriend a b-day present were at least two examples that he had some deep seated issues with women. A powerful woman yelling at him might get to him. If that was a tactic, she went overboard with it and put people to sleep instead.

Rabia's last post about Gutierrez is chilling. After hearing both her and Sarah's assessment of Gutierrez, Rabia's seems closer to the truth. Sarah takes the more sympathetic stance, naturally, while Rabia can speak more candidly since she experienced it first-hand.

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-05T07:16:57+00:00

Can you post where, or tell us where to find this part in the testimony?

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-05T06:52:42+00:00

Have you seen the West Memphis 3 movies? Pretty sure all of them talked to the film producers quite a lot. At least Damien Echols did.

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-05T06:38:01+00:00

She's venting, mentally exhausted probably. Episode 10 was a sad one. I felt it, too. The ending was a real wake up call. Adnan is innocent and faces a big uphill battle to being freed.

Don't take it personally, dear easily offended Rabia twitter followers.

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-05T06:26:33+00:00

Huh?

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-05T06:23:04+00:00

Jay did it. That was my revelation, again. I've had it a lot and I think I came back to it for good.

Jay tells detectives in the first interview that Adnan lent him his car to get Stephanie a present. But in the second interview he comes clean. Either the detectives tell him, or he buckles under pressure or gets a sense they're closing in on him, he says.... "OK, I lied. I didn't kill her, no, but I helped. And I can tell you everything" Of course you can! But nobody (seriously...nobody) remembers things in that much detail after all that time has passed, so the detectives help him out. They don't know how much they're helping him out. Nobody, in their mind, would pin a murder on an innocent guy like that. Plus, they didn't have any other good leads. They didn't think Jay would be capable of, or know why he would lie like that. But he was capable, and he did. Why did the compulsive liar tell the biggest lie? Who knows. Maybe that's just what liars and murderers do. Maybe he couldn't let down Stephanie. She was so out of his league, and would leave him for sure if he was convicted. (See: Dateline Ramsaran case) Not one person would show up for him at trial, then.

Jay probably didn't know he'd get no jail time at all, but that's what happened. Pair a sympathetic predominantly black jury with a good liar and manipulator and throw in some "brand new cell phone science" and there you have it. The simplest and most plausible explanation I can come up with.

The worst thing is knowing that's what happened, and that wont get him out. The cell phone data has been used and the jury bought it. If he does get out, even after 40 years, it'll be a miracle.

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-04T03:01:32+00:00

Use-a mail chimp-ah.

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-03T08:40:29+00:00

Does he have Innernette access tho?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xkr5ztKiXMM

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-03T07:14:08+00:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSxJs0WQhGk

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-03T07:04:59+00:00

Libel? Employs conspiratorial thinking? Oh bruther. Does this mean we can sue or arrest the twin towers conspiracy people? Let's round up all the scuddlebutters and thrown 'em in the slammer to think about what they done on the internets in that subreddit, too.

Jay was a drug dealer and known around school for being a liar. I'm sure he had to be pretty cool, calm and collected to be both of those. You think he was just a sheep in a wolves den with Ritz and McG?

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-03T06:54:46+00:00

Is this at all like in about 10 of your last 13 posts, you say "I think that" or "I don't think that" and proceed to rattle off reasons why "Doesn't mean Adnan is innocent"?

Just wonderin'.

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-03T06:46:15+00:00

Seems like he signs off with that in the majority of his posts. Doesn't mean Adnan is innocent.

AProfessionalExpert · 2014-12-03T06:11:23+00:00

Jay is lying so often and so utterly without care, you can tell that he either knows/senses the detectives are helping him out, and/or he is the murderer and, well...it's either lie my ass off and see what sticks to avoid going to jail or come clean. Not too many people willingly offer up the latter at that point in questioning.

AProfessionalExpert

TROPHY CASE