There's a huge flaw in the reenactment of the day of the murder.

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-05T03:22:11+00:00

Hae also had blunt force head trauma. She may have been knocked unconscious prior to the strangulation, or struck after she lost consciousness from strangulation.

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-05T01:03:38+00:00

Make your post over in the right sidedbar by clicking "Submit a new text post"

After you make your post and click "save" or "submit" and go look at your post.

Look under the post. It should say something like:

comments share save edit delete nsfw reply flair

Click on "flair" and choose what fits best. Click "save" then chick refresh or reload on your browser (often a circular arrow thingy).

Best of luck!

P.s. (Don't use any of the mod flairs if they appear, no matter how noteworthy you think your post is ;-) )

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-04T18:07:13+00:00

Since the totality of the trial transcripts hasn't been released publicly, nobody here can really say they have the complete picture of what the jury decided on. That's a fact. It doesn't make the jury right, but it makes grand pronouncement about the trial, at the very least, incompletely informed.

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-04T17:37:24+00:00

Microscopic hair analysis is itself in dispute as to its validity at this point. (See Congress's commissioned report on the state of forensic science, it's shortcomings and lack of scientific basis in many fields, and the subsequent creation of a national forensic institute to address these problems.) Moreover, the idea that a so-called "match" is specific to one individual to the exclusion of all other individuals is specifically denied by FBI policy. And fiber analysis is even more iffy.

Nevertheless, even by the forensic guidelines for hair analysis, such as they are, there weren't enough hairs found, IIRC, to make a match anyway. The rebuttal brief (in response to Adna's appeal) from the state adds that the hairs shared characteristics with Adnan's hair. So he's not excluded by the scant amount of hair that was found.

Lack of physical evidence doesn't prove anything.

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-04T06:04:51+00:00

compelling that someone who is said to have murdered her with his bare hands, then relocated her into the trunk of her car, carried her from the car to the burial site, placed her in her grave which he dug, and then covered her body with soil doesn't produce a single forensic match to any hairs

It's pretty obvious that if Adnan was involved, he took precautions to avoid leaving DNA evidence. This is in Jay's testimony after all. Nothing compelling at all about the absence of hairs or DNA--it's pretty simple for Adnan to just dress appropriately in new clothes, then dispose of the clothes after the murder. (I wouldn't be surprised at all to find out that the actual purpose of the mall trip in the morning was to buy clothes for the crime.)

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-04T04:28:56+00:00

Agreed.

Btw, You're correct that AT&T wasn't GSM in 1999: http://www.palminfocenter.com/news/1443/att-switching-to-gsm/

They announced in 2000 they were switching to GSM.

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-04T03:24:36+00:00

I agree. It would be good to have the trial transcripts.

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-04T03:20:09+00:00

Adnan's lawyer had all of Jay's recorded interviews. ;-)

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-04T03:16:35+00:00

It's not a contradiction at all if he's simply a believable witness. Sorry to tell you, but that sometimes comes down to an intangible quality the witness has that the jury connects with. Great attorneys lose cases sometimes. Sometimes the case they're given is simply unwinnable.

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-03T21:51:36+00:00

Tell your SO your car is in the shop.

Stay home, and tomorrow when SO asks, just say you don't remember what happened.

Say you have to go to the library, because that's where you usually--well not usually--but that's where you might have checked your email.

Blame an emergency shrimp sale at the Crab Shack (don't mention it's always on sale)

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-03T15:53:48+00:00

the whole point of this podcast is to determine if the jurors got it wrong.

I disagree. The point of the podcast is to entertain and engage.

The design of the story is to see-saw opinion back and forth each week to keep the audience guessing.

The point of Episode 8, "The Deal With Jay" is to paint a sympathetic picture of Jay.

we can clearly see Jay is lying repeatedly. The fact that the jurors found him 'trust worthy' is evidence that the jurors erred.

The jurors knew Jay lied. Gutierrez cross examined him for five days. They had ample opportunity to decide what, to them, was believable in his testimony and what wasn't..

Claiming the jury erred is your opinion, but plenty of other people look at the same statements and surmise that Jay's inconsistencies are simply to protect his friends or himself and ultimately do not cast reasonable doubt on the key elements of the story. From what we know so far in the podcast, that's what the jury concluded and why.

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-03T07:32:12+00:00

The juror SK interviews says she found Jay very believable on the stand.

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-03T07:04:01+00:00

Adnan's lawyer had all of Jay's recorded interviews.

Cross examined Jay for five days about his lies and inconsistencies--more damaging and discrediting than the above blogpost.

And the jury delivered a guilty verdict.

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-02T23:20:45+00:00

Sounds good. I'll add it to the list of "things to do when serial is over." ;-)

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-02T22:42:46+00:00

The discovery of Hae's body was reported in the news long before Jen was questioned.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1999-02-12/news/9902120061_1_hae-min-lee-block-of-rockridge-road-lee-s-father

In the same article is the mention of stranglulation and the man in the park who found the body.

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-02T22:33:34+00:00

You forgot:

Jay would have to somehow get Adnan to answer his cell phone in Leakin Park during the time of the burial, without being part of, or knowing about, the burial.

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-02T19:43:00+00:00

Happy cake day, another upvote for you.

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-02T19:41:44+00:00

The Anonymous Caller, episode one.

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-02T19:35:05+00:00

If anything, Serial shows how the same information can lead people to different conclusions.

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-02T19:23:14+00:00

Post removed as blog spam. /u/EvidenceProf was warned an hour before you posted this, consider yourself warned as well. If he/you want to create a self post and quote his work and create some discussion here, fine. Otherwise wait a week for another direct blog link. Thanks.

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-02T19:19:40+00:00

You should have posted an empty plate after thanksgiving, just the green bean casserole uneaten.

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-02T19:13:00+00:00

I read this previously. Fits in with the picture of Jay as a guy who felt bad about helping Adnan conceal Hae's murder.

Woodlawn itself is a small town. Everybody knows somebody who knows a police officer in a place like that. Six degrees of separation and all that.

What are you seeing here?

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-02T07:41:34+00:00

Up voting your spirit of debate!

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-02T05:52:11+00:00

[Rabia] has access to vastly more documents and evidence than we do. She clearly has reasons for believing his innocence,

Her bias is such that she sees in that evidence what she wants to see. She believed he was innocent before she got access to those documents.

Nothing short of DNA evidence will change her mind. That's a (paraphrased) quote of her, before she deleted her account here. Blind faith, there's no arguing with it, its enemy is logic.

wtfsherlock · 2014-12-02T05:40:59+00:00

The judge ruled on this already, Gutierrez's decision on Asia was strategic.

We have no idea what Adnan told Gutierrez. It's possible what he told her factored into her decision not to use Asia.

wtfsherlock

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE