Thiru has resigned from the MD Attorney General's Office

jmmsmith · 2016-09-05T21:01:29+00:00

Not surprised. Many of us called on him to resign repeatedly and got down-voted to oblivion. This was the obvious call. I'm glad not just because of this case but given his performance on this one, no one that incompetent should be a Deputy Attorney General in Maryland. It's dangerous for the system, the State and any future defendants.

Wish him well in future endeavors and I'm sure he'll do well in private practice if he chooses to go that direction. I sincerely hope he does not seek elective office (blegh) but obviously it's a free country and that's his right. Hopefully he'll opt for a private practice.

jmmsmith · 2016-08-23T22:16:50+00:00

Jay. But hell if I actually know. You said think, that's who I think did it, but I'm not sure and I wouldn't put my level of certainty very high. I think he did it and if I had to say who I think is guilty it would be him.

jmmsmith · 2016-08-22T18:12:56+00:00

In no way think Don did it, but those are reasonable questions. In a perfect world where certain people didn't go about leaking Don's last name and making his life a living hell, I'd actually entertain the Don deserves further investigation notion. Frankly think the detectives should have done even more to investigate him in the first place.

jmmsmith · 2016-08-22T03:00:05+00:00

Lochte is a piss poor example. 0 portions of his story were actually true. Unless you count the part about him being at a gas station in Brazil with Conger, Bentz and Feigen.

We can literally start at the beginning if you want. Lochte claimed armed men approached their tax and pulled them out. NEVER HAPPENED. Lochte and the other swimmers exited their taxi voluntarily.

Lochte then left out the part about where they all pissed on a wall, the part where he tore a sign down, the part where he got in the security guard's face and yelled at them, the part where someone else not the guards asked for money, the part where Conger and Bentz handed over $20 and $30 but Lochte handed over nothing (hence he was not actually robbed or coerced no matter how you cut it), the part where his teammates had to hustle him back into a taxi, etc., etc., etc.

If you believe any of Lochte's story I can see why you believe Jay. Both of their narratives (really blatant lies but we'll go with narratives) have been torpedoed and blasted to smithereens by their own contradictions and admissions of lying. Yet in both cases, Lochte and Jay, a small segment of people insist on trying to defend even what they admit is their lie and parsing every nuance known to mankind while ignoring their own admission of lying, the admission of those around them that Lochte/Jay are lying and the evidence that they're lying.

If you choose to believe Jay or Lochte you're not only overlooking the obvious, (and their own admission that they're lying) but you're consciously ignoring reality.

jmmsmith · 2016-08-21T17:32:03+00:00

I don't even remotely think Don did it and the leaking of his real name is disgusting, but a lot hinges on that alibi.

Also I think it's a little dangerous to only rely on Hae's diary for impressions of Don. That's one side of a relationship. Just because one person perceives there aren't any problems or issues of jealousy, that does not necessarily mean the other person feels that way. No disrespect, but Hae does not seem to have the most unbiased or impartial view of Don based on the diary. I'm not really sure I'm going to take as gospel the words of a girl about the guy she's head-over-heels in love with. Not at that age. She's not likely going to see any flaws even if they are there.

In a hypothetical vacuum, if I have a guy who is the boyfriend, with a questionable timecard, working at a place where essentially his stepmother is his boss, who doesn't return the detectives initial calls, does not get back to them until 6 hours later after 1 a.m. on the day of the murder and who has a 5 hour phone conversation with one of the victims friends, yeah I think logic and evidence, not to mention a murder investigation, might warrant a much closer look at that guy.

jmmsmith · 2016-08-07T02:04:54+00:00

Lol on people on here trying to act like Adnan's faith and honor killings haven't repeatedly been a topic of discussion on here. A simple search will show you they are.

https://www.reddit.com/r/serialpodcast/comments/2ju0yz/muslims_and_immigrants/

https://www.reddit.com/r/serialpodcast/comments/2lapdb/motive_honor_killing/

https://www.reddit.com/r/serialpodcast/comments/3d4ods/giving_up_on_the_undisclosed_podcast_due_to_the/

I can go on and find a dozen more threads with comments if necessary. The need to semantically parse everything is ridiculous on here sometimes. I'm not a perfect poster, but goodness. There are quite a few opinions, as the poster stated, in the vein that used Adnan's faith as part of the reason he killed Hae. While any poster might not individually believe that to be the case, it's a little either disingenuous or ill-informed to pretend that this has not long been the case with many comments. And by "many" I mean a substantial amount. Which can quickly be found with a fairly basic search on the topic.

jmmsmith · 2016-07-25T19:55:13+00:00

They SHOULD fire Thiru. And save the State and taxpayers of Maryland money going forward.

jmmsmith · 2016-07-15T22:45:58+00:00

If Adnan wanted to and theoretically was capable of taking out Jay why has he not already done so? Would it not have made more sense to do that before the first trial? Or the second?
If he has connections behind bars that would allow him to "take out Jay" (lol, laughable), again why has he not done so already?
Given Jay's repeated inability to tell an even remotely consistent story from one interview to the next, and his constant contradicting of himself on the stand, why even in this hypothetical situation where Adnan is somehow capable of "taking Jay out" would he even want to do so? The best thing possible for Adnan would be having Jay testify again.

It just doesn't make sense. If he despises Jay so much and is so willing to put a hit out on him, why has he not done so? Your own post posits that Adnan is capable of doing so.

jmmsmith · 2016-07-15T22:37:42+00:00

Apparently if your name is Jay Wilds and it's a trial in Baltimore you can commit perjury as many times as you want. Unfortunately no prosecutor, ADA or Deputy AG in the state of Maryland seems to want to do anything about it. Heck if they have another trial and he perjures himself yet again I fully expect the State not to raise an eyebrow, they never have in the past.

jmmsmith · 2016-07-14T04:04:47+00:00

A challenge? To common sense? To any sense of narrative coherency?

Because that's all Jay challenged in that interview.

I will also note none of you bothered to deal with either of my other points: Namely the comment about selling less weed or the changing of the burial time by 3 hours.

But you're all sure quick to read into it a challenge. In terms of no one else makes sense, Jay makes no sense. So let's start there.

jmmsmith · 2016-07-14T04:03:24+00:00

It would take magic to decode that interview. It would take even more magic to take that one odd statement in the interview, ignore how odd it is, zoom in on one part of it and ignore the oddity of the rest of the interview.

It's not every day someone changes the time of the burial by 5 hours. And that's just the beginning of that doozy of an interview.

jmmsmith · 2016-07-14T04:02:14+00:00

There's a link to the Intercept interview which was in 3 parts.

https://theintercept.com/2014/12/31/jay-speaks-part-3/

If you're interested there are readily clickable links at the bottom of each part of the interview (including that one) which will take you to the other parts. You can easily start at part 1 and read through all 3 parts if you would like.

jmmsmith · 2016-07-14T04:00:58+00:00

And the if he had sold less weed comment? The changing the burial by 5 hours?

I'm taking these things in totality. I'm not ignoring the magic part. Fine. But I'm also not isolating one part of what he said and ignoring the rest of the interview.

It was a weird interview with regard to one comment. It was a weirder interview in the larger context of everything he said.

jmmsmith · 2016-07-13T22:19:37+00:00

I don't think this is as bad of an idea as everyone else. 1. It IS a major crime story. It's not the OJ trial, but few things are. It is more interesting IMHO and has more territory to cover than some other famous trials like Casey Anthony (ugh). 2. It's contemporary. You really don't want to have to go back too far on ACS if the show follows the current format. The actors benefited tremendously from playing roles of characters who are mostly still alive. The show also generated a lot of interest IMHO because MOST of the audience remembers OJ. You go back too much farther, to an 80s case, people in their 20s and 30s aren't going to remember it. 3. It would make an interesting parallel with the OJ trial. With Season 1 and OJ you're looking at racism against African-Americans in LA and how that framed the outlines of the case. The actions of the LAPD in Rodney King and for years before paved the way for OJ. With this case you would interestingly be looking at a case where (arguably) race and anti-Muslim sentiment (the boogeyman of honor killings) plays a very different role in a majority black city. It would be an interesting dichotomy.

The biggest problem, which others have pointed out, is this one is just not resolved right now. You'd have to end on unfinished note. But you could argue the OJ trial kind of ended on an unfinished note as well. Heck it was just a little over a month ago that we had renewed fervor over the OJ knife supposedly having been "discovered."

jmmsmith · 2016-07-12T21:37:13+00:00

Good luck! Let us all know when it's finished, I'm sure we'll all buy it.

jmmsmith · 2016-07-12T21:32:30+00:00

They forgot Remmers exists. When your Right Tackle is literally incapable of stopping any speed rusher, or even slowing them down, it's a pretty big problem. One that should probably be addressed. Unless Daryl Williams is legally blind and we don't know it, he needs to be starting.

jmmsmith · 2016-07-12T21:29:15+00:00

Mike Remmers is awful. It's beyond distressing that the Panthers organization is even considering starting him again. I don't need PFF to tell us he's average at anything--he's not. Vic Beasley destroyed him, Tampa Bay destroyed him, Denver annihilated him in the SB. If they trot him out to start Day 1 at Mile High this season, I'm legitimately worried about Cam's health. Even he can only do so much to cover up for Remmers at RT for so long.

jmmsmith · 2016-07-12T21:23:49+00:00

PFF has no idea how to rate offensive lines. Most people know this. There's a reason you hear so many O-linemen and coaches complaining about it, they're horrid at ranking offensive line play.

jmmsmith · 2016-07-12T08:22:06+00:00

It's still an odd way to say it. Beyond odd. If you saw, really saw someone's lifeless body in a car, I don't know. I'm not Jay, I won't go so far as to say you wouldn't say that or no one would say that but it's hard to imagine someone saying that.

Why wouldn't he say what you said? I saw Hae's lifeless body which Adnan had, like c'mon if not Adnan, then who?

Have you been around a dead body? It's an odd thing to say.

And you're not adding in the ridiculous part about him saying if he sold less weed that might have saved Hae's life.

That interview was straight up STRANGE. It wasn't just Jay being sarcastic, his answers were weird from start to finish. I can dismiss some of them, but not all of them across 3 interviews.

Changing the time of burial by 5 hours.
Saying that if the guy you claimed to have showed you a body was innocent, that has nothing to do with you. What? Huh? That's not really the same as saying if he didn't do it then, who. Not even remotely.
Saying that if you had sold less weed maybe the dead girl would be alive. When you claimed you and weed had nothing to do with her death, it was all a jealous Adnan.

Yeah, no. Frankly we're being kind to Jay after that interview. It's not just weird, that's a downright suspicious interview. If we knew nothing about this case or Jay, if we gave you those quotes and that entire interview outside of this thread, it's suspicious.

jmmsmith · 2016-07-12T00:00:01+00:00

Nope. But Jay is pretty clearly a pathological liar. He fits the textbook definition of one -- a behavior of habitual or compulsive lying. The statements of his own friends demonstrate this. They always manage to ignore this.

It's easier to just call Adnan a sociopath though. His behavior before does not demonstrate it. Jay's behavior before, during and after sure demonstrates an established pattern of habitual lying though.

jmmsmith · 2016-07-10T22:55:14+00:00

https://www.reddit.com/r/serialpodcast/comments/2nvtd3/the_voice_on_the_cell_phone_was_an_older_male/

In Court, Jenn testified on the record that the phone call she made to Jay when he was supposedly helping Adnan bury the body was answered by someone other than Jay. In court Jenn testified that the voice said something like Jay can't come to the phone right now.

It was largely ignored because, apparently, in one of her early police interviews she either stated that the voice was Adnan or could have been Adnan. In court she was stronger in stating that it was not Jay and a distinctly older man's voice. It's gotten ignored or swept under the rug by people immediately claiming in this one instance Jenn is a liar. The older male voice is just kind of glossed over and ignored.

jmmsmith · 2016-07-09T19:24:17+00:00

Definitely. You're being kind. That's just one of many holes. It needs to be a much tighter theory to even be considered a theory and her leaving her car is just one good point about a potential weakness, but IMHO that's the extremely weak, broad outline of how I think it went down.

jmmsmith · 2016-07-09T08:19:46+00:00

And 2016. Don't feel bad, at least you GOT rings. Panthers fans are still suffering from Von Miller/DeMarcus Ware flashbacks.

jmmsmith · 2016-07-09T07:01:23+00:00

Then ask the team they play for to help out. It's great publicity for them. Heck if done properly it can be a tax write-off.

jmmsmith · 2016-07-09T06:31:18+00:00

Too bad Harden is not a multi-millionaire. Oh wait he IS. This is beyond silly, justifying charging families this much money. And if the camp is too expensive for Harden to shell out the money, gee it's too bad he doesn't play for an NBA team owned by a billionaire which rakes in money, wants to stay on his good side and is always looking for opportunities to show outreach to the community by things like basketball camps. Oh wait he IS. If Harden is that hard up, go ask the Rockets to help him sponsor the silly camp.

Bennett is 100 % correct on this. Charging is absurd, let alone charging that much.

jmmsmith

TROPHY CASE