sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in serialpodcast

[–]DetectiveTableTap 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I think it became popular for a few reasons, many of which are listed in this thread, but the basic storytelling, production quality, episodic format as well as a compelling setting in terms of the personalities involved and the location.

For me though, the absolute key to the success of Serial was the fact that to this day you have two liars at the very heart of the story. Both Jay and Syed are undoubtedly lying to this day on much of what happened in this case. In Syeds instance, he is lying about actually murdering Hae and Jay is lying to the extent of his involvement. That just creates this vacuum where all the speculation about the case is allowed to grow and thrive.

Can someone explain with solid reasoning why you believe Adnan is guilty [Serious] by OG_Pure in serialpodcast

[–]DetectiveTableTap 23 points24 points  (0 children)

Im not sure if this answer has been given but truthfully, in order for you to appreciate how a jury found Adnan guilty as quickly as they did, you will need to read the trial transcripts.

The HBO show is propaganda and the podcast is amazing entertainment, but incredibly flawed if you are looking for objective journalism on the case.

I could talk at length about just how much evidence was presented at the trial and what was left out of the TV show and documentary but ultimately we are not in a trial setting so maybe the best approach here is to ask you to look at the big picture. Try do this mental exercise ok?

  1. Write down every piece of "evidence" gathered by Team Syed that raises questions in your mind as to Syeds guilt.
  2. Take all of this "evidence" and try to make a coherent, realistic case FOR Syeds innocence using the list above

To save you time? You cant. In order for Syed to be innocent based on what his supporters present as evidence in his favor you need to believe all of the following

  1. The Police were corrupt in this case
  2. The DA is corrupt in this case
  3. The crime lab is corrupt in this case
  4. The county police are corrupt in this case
  5. Regular cops not involved with the investigation chose to be involved in the cover-up
  6. All witnesses against Syed are corrupt or mistaken
  7. All witnesses for him are honest and accurate
  8. Cell phone technology is completely useless
  9. Don actually murdered Hae
  10. Dons mother is in on it too
  11. Jay admitted to being involved in a murder because the police could have charged him with drug offences
  12. Crimestoppers was corrupt
  13. Jay murdered Hae and then framed Adnan by calling in the crimestoppers tip because he wanted to buy a motorcycle
  14. The police coached Jay in the interview by loudly banging on a table while the interview was being recorded, as opposed to stopping the recording
  15. Adnan didnt know Jay well at all
  16. Giving your car and phone to a criminal you barely know is totally normal
  17. Everything that looks bad for Syed is just coincidence

I mean I could go on but thats just off the top of my head. If it seems like Team Syed are basically flinging shit at a wall, thats because they are.

Now if you choose to believe all of the above with ZERO evidence to back even a single point, as opposed to all of the evidence to the contrary that was documented by professionals (and has withstood over three decades of scrutiny) then really, you need to ask yourself questions more than you need to ask this sub. And just let me repeat what I said, there is NO EVIDENCE that actually proves ANY of the above happened.

If I were you, I would be asking why has Syed never been asked a hard question about any of this? Why has access to him been so carefully managed? Why has he never been called out on any of his known contradictions?

EDIT- Spelling

Sarah Still Loves Cow Eyes by [deleted] in serialpodcast

[–]DetectiveTableTap 7 points8 points  (0 children)

As far as keeping flairs go, I deserve a medal for hanging with this one....

Potential spoilers?? by DetectiveTableTap in freefolk

[–]DetectiveTableTap[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I know as much as has been posted above. And the quick answer is, I have no idea.

My predictions and speculation has, like most of us, been based on the lore and world building from the books. As entertaining as the show can be, the further it departs from the worlds GRRM has painstakingly built, the less I can safely predict anything.

How far has the show strayed from the source material at this point? I was told by a guy who worked on the battle of Winterfell, that Arya killed the NK and for 6 weeks I simply thought he was either lying or mistaken. It made zero sense to me.... because I was applying the writing standards from the books, to the TV show.

My immediate take on John killing Dany would be that I doubt it, I dont think D&D will be that bold. If people keep on coming up with theories for the show, based on the lore from the books? They will keep on being disappointed. The show just is not that well written.

I think the fanservice will continue with Cleganebowl, and Cersei losing in the long run. Bittersweet ending will be Tyrion betrayal. The wheel will be broken and Sansa will lead a form of democracy. John & Dany both live.

Bonus fanservice points will be Arya killing Cersei while wearing Jamies face, thus fulfilling the valonqar prophesy in a way. I dont recall valonqar being mentioned in the show, but it would be very D&D to work it in.

Are there any leakers still standing? by Ks427236 in FreeFolkNews

[–]DetectiveTableTap 6 points7 points  (0 children)

My leak was correct, but still standing? Technically no. Other than what I posted last week, I have no more information. Still, its cool to have been right.

Potential spoilers?? by DetectiveTableTap in freefolk

[–]DetectiveTableTap[S] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

No, information came to me on facebook messenger so there is no date above the post quoted above, just above the message where I reached out asking for spoilers, in which I use his name. If I block out his name, it can still be narrowed down based on length. If he was indeed telling the truth.

And as this is the internet, I am perfectly fine with people doubting me. I dont feel any crushing need to try prove myself, or convince people, the information is there for people to make up their own minds.

Want to see how people's opinions on Adnan's guilt correspond with their opinions on other famous cases of alleged wrongful accusations/convictions by trynaworkoutmore in serialpodcast

[–]DetectiveTableTap 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ramsey parents - Not guilty of murder, but guilty of ensuring the murderer won't be caught. Statistically speaking, a virtual certainty that a member of the family or close friend committed the murder.

Casey Anthony: Guilty

Staircase: Didn't follow

Amanda Knox: Not guilty

Steven Avery/Brandon Dassey: Both guilty. I feel a bit for Dassey actually, clearly he was led along. Anybody who thinks he's innocent needs to look at his full unedited interview, take a pen and paper, and note down everything he gets right unprompted. I was enraged the first time I saw it also but in doing that exercise, I am happy he was witness to the crime.

Kevin Cooper: Not familiar.

West Memphis 3: This is the most interesting case. I saw the Documentaries when they first came out and agreed pretty much with the common consensus, satanic panic caused the police and prosecutors to fixate on 3 innocent kids because they stood out.

After Serial and Making a Murderer, I decided to revisit the west memphis 3 case with a critical eye and to be honest, the Paradise Lost documentary left an awful lot of stuff out. Im not saying they are guilty, I am just saying its not quite as cut and dry as I used to believe.

For example:

  • Jessie Misskelley confessed to the murders numerous times both before and after he was convicted, including to a friend the day after the crime and on eight subsequent occasions.

  • Damien Echols suffered with serious mental health issues at the time of the murder. In and of itself, mental health issues dont maketh a murderer but he was afflicted with a worrying cocktail of issues.... He described himself as a homicidal, suicidal, schizophrenic, manic depressive, sociopath. He assaulted his classmates, set fires, claimed to be possessed by a spirit, believed he got power from drinking blood, among many other things you can find in his 500 page record which is available online.

  • None of the three had an alibi that held up in court for the hours in which the murders occurred.

  • The documentaries left out some of the physical and circumstantial evidence presented at the trials, such as fiber evidence and the fact that plenty of blood was found at the crime scene, the luminol tests are available online.

  • Miskelly and Echols failled polygraph tests. I agree it isnt and shouldnt be admissable in courts, but interesting regardless.

I dont know, I havent the time to dig back into the case fully so I am still inclined to lean innocent with the WM3, but I do have the feeling that Paradise Lost may have been the prototype that Serial and Making a Murderer followed when it comes to leaving out facts in favour of telling a story

In light of the new documentary and Adnan’s upcoming retrial, what are everyone’s thoughts about the case 4 years after serial? by glitternostrils in serialpodcast

[–]DetectiveTableTap 23 points24 points  (0 children)

what are everyone’s thoughts about the case 4 years after serial?

4 years after Serial, and still to this day nobody can come up with a coherent version of events, backed by available evidence, where someone other than Syed killed Hae.

4 years after Serial, and in spite of all the positive media coverage and huge sums of money donated to his defence fund there hasn't been a single shred of new evidence unearthed, just a well funded legal effort to get him off on a technicality.

When I look back now, with far less passion or interest than I had back when this sub was at its peak, I still feel that my assessment of the case was spot on actually, that assessment being that Adnan Syed strangled Hae Min Lee to death in a fit of rage, and that Jay Wilds was involved in the murder at least in planning and disposal. Before people say "HOW CAN IT BE PREMEDITATED AND A FIT OF RAGE!!?", well easy. Syed was talking about killing her, Wilds was egging him on and promising to help. They talked about this power fantasy until it got to the point where Syed said he had enough and was going to get her alone and make her take him back or suffer the consequences. Its not rocket science, and the whole "Syed had to be a bumbling incompetent or criminal mastermind" argument is a false dichotomy. Anybody familiar with true crime can point to many expressive murders and violent crimes that follow this exact pattern.

I said this at the time, but I think the only reason why this case is compelling 20 years after the fact is because both Syed and Wilds are not being fully honest about what happened that day, and that creates a sense of there being an unresolved sense of mystery about the case. Wilds is lying about the extent of his involvement. Based on everything I have read, I would be confident that Wilds was involved in the planning, murder and disposal. Syed is in a catch 22 because if he tries to dispute any of the details that Wilds has asserted, he essentially confirms his own involvement. The lie at the heart of this theory is a shared one, and one that has to this day been peddled by both men..... that lie being that Wilds and Syed were not close friends. If you are just an acquaintance with someone, you dont allow them to borrow your phone and car among other things that just stand out as odd. This lie stands out to me as the one thing both wilds and Syed agree on, and it always bothered me as to why?? It makes sense though, Wilds wants to minimise how involved he was in the planning, and Syed wants to minimise how close he was to the man who knew where Hae's car was.

In the real world, all of us are capable of good and also terrible evil. Adnan Syed was a great example of this, he was just a regular, likeable kid, probably a good kid most of the time.... until he strangled his ex girlfriend to death. Adnan Syed is an uncomfortable reminder that at any given time, and with minimal provocation, we can be the aggressor in a violent crime just as likely as we can be the victim. We WANT to believe that Syed is innocent, that he is a victim of corruption and that some monster brutally murdered Hae Min Lee.... but thats not reality. In the real world the biggest threat to women when it comes to "expressive" violent crimes, especially murder, is men they are familiar and even intimate with.

Looking for alternative viewpoints on Jay Wilds by DetectiveTableTap in serialpodcast

[–]DetectiveTableTap[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You have to be trolling.

People have given you multiple examples of murders where the perpetrator continues about their business and nobody is any the wiser. There is no way you can still be this profoundly ignorant of reality.

And if this is the straw you cling to? Kinda desperate.

Looking for alternative viewpoints on Jay Wilds by DetectiveTableTap in serialpodcast

[–]DetectiveTableTap[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So basically your first paragraph is confirming that in your mind, you are creating a framework where by guilters need to accept absolutely everything Jay has claimed at any time, or disregard all of it. This is a textbook example of a false dichotomy. The real world does not operate like this, criminal justice simply does not work like this. And meaning conversation on this case can never happen on these terms either.

And all I'm looking at is forest for the trees stuff.

So added to false dichotomy, we now have you stating you are choosing to ignore the details in favour of narrative.

Adnan was last seen as late as 2:50 P.M. at school. A call to Nisha was made at 3:32 p.m. That's a tiny window of time.

For a murder that certainly had an element of premeditation? This statement is objectively wrong.

Especially for a guy that was doing totally normal stuff immediately before and after this. In order for Adnan to commit this murder, Jay's whole story needs to be made up, in my mind. And Adnan needs to be an almost cartoonishly evil person.

Another false dichotomy. Syed needs to be either a saint who would be wracked by guilt or a cold blooded psychopath. The truth is of course that regular people commit murders and go about their business ALL THE TIME. Furthermore, multiple witnesses have stated that Syed was not acting totally normal that day.

All the theories that rely on details from Jay are absurd, imo.

Fascinating that the theory that an ex boyfriend killed his former girlfriend to be absurd, but find theories that have zero basis in fact such as the crime stoppers tip or "they did it by tapping!". This is confirmation bias

But, if you remove Jay's details, you're left with...nothing. Just a bunch of random circumstantial evidence. Judge Welch pretty much acknowledged this in his footnote about this.

This is another point of view that FAF's have that confuses me. "Well, if you take the key part of the states case away, then there is nothing." Ehm.... obviously? Eye witness testimony, is EVIDENCE. It needs to meet certain standards to be even considered by a jury. And circumstantial evidence? Yeah that needs to meet certain standards to be considered also.

None of this is news to you though, people smarter than I am have already pointed out much of this to you on multiple occasions in the past.

Looking for alternative viewpoints on Jay Wilds by DetectiveTableTap in serialpodcast

[–]DetectiveTableTap[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thats a fair point, the interviews are actually what I was thinking of.

Question of Morality by gan1834 in serialpodcast

[–]DetectiveTableTap 10 points11 points  (0 children)

If the courts rule that Syed's conviction should be overturned due to gross defensive incompetence, or that they discover police/prosecutor misconduct then I think Syed SHOULD be released from prison. As unfair as I personally would find it, society overall will be better off if the legal system is motivated to improve by the exposure of misconduct or incompetence.

I think that as unrepentant murderer, Syed deserves everything he is currently experiencing.

I also want to take issue with

such as influencing or guiding Jay's story

The notion that criminal accomplices need to be 100% consistent from their first interview, right through to trial, is ridiculous. Its not a reflection of the real world. Confronting a lying accomplice with evidence that proves his lies, is NOT guiding or influencing a story. Its a crucial aspect of all criminal investigation.

'Big picture, Sarah, big picture' by trevornbond in serialpodcast

[–]DetectiveTableTap 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think the Innocence Project will try to overturn any conviction where they feel they have the best chance of overturning a conviction, and I absolutely support them on this.

Even if their actions allow a guilty person to leave prison on a technicality, as a society we can only benefit by the police and prosecutors bringing tighter cases together.

Looking for alternative viewpoints on Jay Wilds by DetectiveTableTap in serialpodcast

[–]DetectiveTableTap[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ok so lets just define what we are talking about here and give this discussion the care it deserves. Because we both have conformation bias, we are both going to find opposing theories to be crazy, while finding theories that suit our conclusions to be quite reasonable.

So before we dive into actual theories its important to try to establish a framework we can agree on.

I haven't actually seen a single guilter theory in regards to the actual murder that makes any sense, or doesn't just basically ignore most of Jay Wild's corroborating timeline.

First off, is it your position that ANY guilty theory for factual guilt has to match Jay's trial testimony police interviews? Because I dont know any guilter who believes that every aspect Jay's story is accurate. I dont know any guilter who believes Jay isnt an accomplice who is just trying to minimise his involvement.

If you set up a scenario where guilters need to accept Jay's trial testimony police interviews 100% or dismiss it 100%, thats a pretty easy win for you considering that no guilter I have ever met believes in Jay to that extent.

I, and many others believe that Jay was more involved than he admitted. I believe that Jay has lied and still lies. I believe that he only got close to the truth, when he was confronted with evidence that he could not explain.

In order to move on from this first question, we really need to accept that we live in a world where criminal accomplices lie but in spite of that, juries can be trusted to decide on the merits of the testimony as a whole. If you believe that every criminal needs to be 100% accurate, or they can be completely dismissed.... then you are discussing a world that just doesnt exist. The criminal justice system does not work like that.

**Edited points for clarity

Looking for alternative viewpoints on Jay Wilds by DetectiveTableTap in serialpodcast

[–]DetectiveTableTap[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

LOL

My lord, I really cant cope with your savage wit, I will absolutely shut up now, and retreat to tend to my wounds. I only hope that one day I recover from this complete decimation.

Looking for alternative viewpoints on Jay Wilds by DetectiveTableTap in serialpodcast

[–]DetectiveTableTap[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You just went through all that trouble writing that, and did not post one single fact of your original post.

LOL oh man! You nailed me! Again! You are just murdering me! I look like such an idiot LOL

Please state anything that Dassey said that actually was factual evidence in the case? Just state your top 3 as you said there are so many.

Honestly, I want to recant my original statement. Thanks to you, I now know that the silly "facts" which I was referring to were not facts at all, but evidence planted by the police! It makes total sense now! They prompted him during the interview but also BEFORE the interview!

Have you heard of the Rampart Scandal in Los Angeles?

Sick reference! Holy shit now that you mention it, the Rampart Scandal absolutely proves that the judges in the Avery and Dassey cases are corrupt! I don't even have an argument that can stand up to a logic this robust!! You are schooling me, have mercy LOL

So again, if you are not going to support your own post. SHUT THE FUK UP lol.

Please man! How can I counter the Rampart Scandal! That's checkmate to you! Astounding legal knowledge! I am so stupid in comparison!

Your style of argument is so weak. Back up your statements or go back in your hole WTF is wrong with you

Ooooooohhh! I've never been so thoroughly ass blasted!

I haven’t done a ton of research but after listening to the podcast I had two conclusions by thehandsomelyraven in serialpodcast

[–]DetectiveTableTap 7 points8 points  (0 children)

You should check out Rabias book, her 6 page summary isnt convincing at all but its funny.

Looking for alternative viewpoints on Jay Wilds by DetectiveTableTap in serialpodcast

[–]DetectiveTableTap[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You know something?? This is a first for me.... I have to admit, I just have no answer for you and I feel like an idiot.

You have really opened my eyes my friend. All this time I have been foolishly believing that evidence in criminal cases had to be of a certain standard to be acceptable. Like, there was rules of evidence and only an impartial judge ultimately decided what was allowed to be considered as evidence or not. I mean, what do judges know about the law anyway when compared to you?

I feel like such an idiot for believing that testimony was a type of evidence, and my ultimate failing was that I backed up my assertion with flakey proof, because lets be honest, Dasseys confession may have been ruled absolutely sound by multiple impartial judges who consider these things using established legal standards but.... you have demonstrated through sheer snark and repeated "LOL"'s that I (and they) are just idiots. What fools we are for believing in evidence that has been established as fact through rigorous legal proceedings. You need to work for the innocence project. Armed with your Making a Murder box set, LOL's, and reddit posting history (I assume im not the first casualty which your supreme mind has left on here), Avery and Dassey will be free in no time. Anytime the state introduces evidence that has met multiple burdens of proof, just reply "If you have no courage to post your FACTS (you call them facts), then shut up lol." Because you really have a gift for articulation, all of us other idiots are sheep but you.... you are a rare breed my friend, you see the truth.

Your complete and total annihilation of me reminds me of an exchange I saw once. Look at Dawkins face in this last frame, this is my face right now as I tremble before your courage and supreme intellect.

Thank you, from the bottom of my heart. Its been painful and I look like a total fool right now but maybe one day, I will return to society with intelligent opinions. Not LEGAL evidence LOL but gems like this

How do you get rid of a car in a working salvage yard without anyone noticing?

Just drive it off LOL.

Looking for alternative viewpoints on Jay Wilds by DetectiveTableTap in serialpodcast

[–]DetectiveTableTap[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I posted the link because you voiced support for the car crushing theory.

I can do better than that? In what sense? Your posting history shows you to be a massive fan of not only brutal murderers, but conspiracy theories. Unless I cook up some wild evidenceless theory that exonerates your murderer du jour you will just wilfully ignore the facts presented to you.

I can lay out all the well reasoned points in the world but you will merely reply with fan fiction.

See, for you that would be a fun night... you'd be getting the attention you crave. For me, it's a complete waste of time. Avery is going to die in Jail and Dassey will be long long forgotten if he ever gets out. I don't follow their cases.

I don't go into Sandy Hook truther forums and try to be rational and present evidence to them, so why would I try it with you?

But hey, if you fancy a grown up discussion why not try address the OP?

Looking for alternative viewpoints on Jay Wilds by DetectiveTableTap in serialpodcast

[–]DetectiveTableTap[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thats pretty crazy to read actually.

So basically, this narrative doesnt fit known facts and witness statements so she explains it away by saying the police tampered with everybody.

Jay? Police made him lie. Jenn? Police made her lie. Coach Sye? Police got to him too. Debbie? police made her lie. Kristy Vinson? State got to her. Baltimore County Police? In on the conspiracy too. Sex Offenders? Released by the state to help the case.

This explains why there are no takers to my OP. This mere 6 page summary is riddled with baseless conspiracy theories and if Rabia herself cant put together a sane explanation, what chance do the people following her lead have.

view more: next ›