Serial - the podcast *spoilers*

Please make up a story that fits the evidence in which Adnan is the killer. Jay tried to do this over and over, couldn't do it. The prosecution never managed to do this. If it is so easy, please, do so. If the internet has done it dozens of times, please, link to one.

Also, my story hinges on the Nisha-call being a buttdial. Which nobody thought possible at trial, but which I think is far more likelier than Adnan calling a girl he flirts with right after he killed his ex, and neither Nisha nor Jay being able to remember that call.

(though obviously, the Nisha-call being a buttdial could have happened if Adnan was the killer as well)

fwiw, here's a quote from a Georgia Supreme Court decision from around the same time that seems to confirm what Urick says about cellular tower tech being different back then:

At the evidentiary hearing, the State produced six expert witnesses who testified to the accuracy and reliability of records establishing the location of a tower which services a particular cellular call. In essence, the evidence established that a radio signal from a digital cellular telephone such as the one Pullin used is transmitted to the cellular tower which is geographically closest to the handset; if the handset moves out of the geographical area covered by the originating site during the call, the call is relayed or “handed off” to the next nearest site; the two cells which are the “originating” and “terminating” point of the call are automatically recorded; this “historical data” is relied upon for billing purposes, and has been an integral part of fraud investigation and prevention. The experts consistently testified that the historical data is accurate and has never been found to be incorrect. One expert opined with “100 percent certainty” that based on the information in this case, the calls at issue could not have originated in Stockbridge.

This makes me wonder about the calls at Cathy's, why they pinged two different towers. Maybe they were so geographically close that that was possible? Also, the "originating" and "terminating" thing raises new questions for me about any calls that might have been made while driving -- are we seeing the originating or terminating tower on the log?

argh, I am really annoyed with the grip this show has on my mind right now

I gotta say I'm totally baffled by that sort of response to this. I listened to the whole thing, thought it was an engaging expansion on the This American Life approach to reportage, was left with a lot to think about but I have no impulse to, like, start reviewing documents and trying to understand what "really happened".

otm

i think i am kind of bored by the whodunnit now. like i care about the people but i dont really need a bow on it. the whole thing is such a mess

i mean more power to you if you are down the rabbithole but imo there are better rabbitholes

Discussing this with someone elsewhere. He claimed that Jay was able to pinpoint times even before the police obtained the cellphonerecords. When I pointed out that that was obviously untrue, since the phonerecords let the police to Jay, he said 'well, that's not what the prosecutor said'. And I checked, and it's really really vague in the interview. First he says 'And he said that in the police interviews prior to obtaining the cellphone evidence.' and then 'And he said that in the police interviews prior to obtaining the cellphone evidence.' There is no way this is true, there was only one interview before Jay saw the cellphone evidence, and Jay did not pinpoint anything exactly right in that one. But it also misleads people into thinking something much different, even more untrue happened. It's such a shitty article, it's amazing. It's because of these shitty interviews that the discussion is flaring back up.

Also, remember Jay in the interview complaining about being described as having 'animal rage'? Checked it, turns out the producer is quoting Jay himself when she says those words...

if you believe she was quoting him accurately

That isn't really true. I mean, Jay says he hasn't heard the show, and of course he can't remember, no problem there. But no matter what, the article in the Intercept should have noted that it's allegedly Jay himself who says it. Such shitty shitty journalism.

Or maybe just boring trivia. It's an interview not a game of Gotchya.

even if Jay did really say "I'm feeling so much animal rage right now" (so believable!) to the two idiots who just bumrushed his family--it was SK's decision to play that post-ambush giggle-fest for an audience of millions after Jay had declined to be taped. It totally played as "Look at how brave we are! Two white girls entering the cave of this black monster who wants to bite our heads off!"

Isn't the Adnan kills Hae scenario basically just:

Adnan decides to kill Hae.
Adnan gets ride from Hae ~2:30.
Adnan kills Hae sometime/somewhere before 3:25 or so.
Adnan calls Jay either @ cell or Jenn's house or Jay's own house using a payphone.
Jay picks up Adnan at 3:30.
They drive around (doing things or not) and then drop off Adnan at track.
Jay picks up Adnan at track at ~5.
They go to Cathy's house ~6.
They bury the body in Leakin Park around ~7.
They drop off Hae's car after.
They go separate ways, etc, and Adnan goes to mosque and starts using his phone again.

How exactly does this not fit the "evidence"?

No it does not fit. And it's up to you to make it fit, so please do so.

Sorry missed the part where you explained how it doesn't fit?

The NVC interviews are not great, but otoh, hey she got them to talk, more than SK can say. Also, they'll never be good enough to satisfy camp Adnan.

x-post: I didn't. It's not my job. But it doesn't.

And it's not about the interview being 'Gotcha'. The Serial crowd is really impasssioned - obviously - so publishing interviews where you allow your subjects to say untruth after untruth, and even repeating a few of them yourselves, is just a bad idea. People has begun repeating all the false things that is said, and using it to attack Sarah Koenig and the other producers. Even though it's provably untrue.

Actually Adnan was convicted with that scenario so basically yeah now it is your job to prove it sorry.

It's your job to prove Obama was elected President

No he wasn't. He was convicted on 2:36 scenario. And I'm not a lawyer, so no, even if he was, it's still not my job. I asked you to make up a story that fit the evidence, you didn't even mention any evidence, it's not my job to list it all for you. Of course, it's not your job to make such a story, it was just something I asked you to do. But you haven't.

Also, the interviewer from TheIntercept didn't get Jay to talk. He reached out to her. No work having been done there.

He was convicted of murdering Hae. 2:36 is not an element of the crime. If it turns out to be at 2:58 or 3:26 or 1am none of that would be a basis for overturning the conviction. I too would like to know why there is no possible way that that scenario could fit. All of the "debunkings" I've heard require assumptions about the accuracy of certain memories vs other ones. If you don't feel like doing that, I will continue to feel comfortable with my conclusion that there is absolutely not even a shred of evidence that Jay did this, leaving the only possible conclusion that Adnan did it.

Wtf you didn't mention any evidence either with your asinine story. The whole point of what I thought you wanted was someone to provide a story that fits the evidence which is the phone calls/tower hits and Jay's testimony that Adnan did it, showed me body, we buried it in Leakin Park and got rid of the car. The story above does that and it also makes about a million times more sense than the bullshit "Jay just killed her and then hung out with Adnan for the rest of the day".

I would like to see even one example of a case where a teenager strangled a mere acquaintance to death over an off the cuff argument fwiw.

Shot or stabbed, maybe. Strangled?

I don't need the story to fit Jays testimony. Obviously no story would do that, since he lies over and over and over. I just need a story that I feel makes sense of the cellphonerecords. And I don't think your story does. I'm guessing your using 3:15 call? So, after Adnan calls and says that he killed Hae, Jay's response is to phone Jenn? And Adnans response on getting his phone is calling Nisha? And then Jay also calls Phil and Patrick for fun ten minutes later? And the last phonecall before Jay turns home is at 4:12, after Adnan would have gone to track, but it's all of a sudden far further to the east, but still nearby where Jay says the body was stacked.

My story fixes that. Jenn call at 3:21 is ok, because nothing has happened. Nisha call buttdial while murder takes place. Calls to Phil and Patrick to get help/rides, because Adnan wasn't there. And 4:12 call is no problem, because Adnans track-practice isn't involved. On top of that, this story actually makes sense of Jay's lies right away, including his stubborn insistence that he was at Jenns house until 3:40, which would be just enough to give him an alibi.

It's an asinine story. Because something asinine happened. Wouldn't be the first time in the history of the earth. Until I get better explanations of how the evidence fits with Adnan being the killer, I'm going to go ahead and believe the story that fits the evidence best, even though it has no motive. And I honestly don't care if you care.

the main thing ive taken away from all this is never get a lawyer with a weird screechy valium voice

Also, if you are likeable def take the stand. You're sure to charm some of the jurors

You're using a lot of unwarranted assumptions - for example you're not giving any good reason why he couldn't have called jenn 6 mins after the come get me call, you're just conjecturing that it doesn't seem like what you think someone would do.

xpost i think there's a lot to that, average joe listening to hour after hour of shrill lawyer lady drone on vs well-turned out polite young man. get in that backroom, make a decision, gtfo

I'm asking for explanations of the calls. In my story, every call is explained. In your story, every call is 'well, it COULD happen'.

like in this thread, started reading it undecided then alex in sf bowls up acting like a sneery arsehole to people and boom, im 100% jay did it

Exactly! (and also, please don't read further down...)

WOO HOO FREE ADNAN!

Pretty sure I've only acted sneery towards Fred B who I think other folks have had some uh issues with too, but I think this is my probably my queue to beat it either way.

Last. One thing that is weird though right is that I think everyone hearing those tapes that I've interacted with has been ugh Gutierrez sounds terrible but that's just her right? I mean she didn't get shrill and annoying just for this one trial. And she was obviously a pretty successful attorney so either this tone matters less than us listeners think or just bad luck for Adnan that in this trial she came off particularly bad.

I have to wait in a queue to beat it now? RIP America.

dunno alex, your whole "a drug dealer would cross paths with a violent criminal? PSCHAW! RIDICULOUS" patter was pretty grating too

the intercept article with urich is infuriating. the entire intro accuses sarah koenig of having an agenda, but then immediately before the interview begins, it claims that this was definitely not a case where the justice system failed. so of course everything urich says is going to be presented as incontrovertible fact when the interviewers admit in the introduction to the interview that the case is clear cut and adnan is guilty. aside from the whodunnit, i can't understand how the entirety of serial doesn't at least throw into some doubt the basis on which adnan was *convicted* (not necessarily that he did or didn't do it). i didn't read the actual interview, since it seemed to me like the equivalent of inviting mike huckabee on fox and friends to explain why he's not a homophobe or something.

I'm going to go ahead and believe the story that fits the evidence best, even though it has no motive.

The story that fits the evidence best, however imperfectly, is that Adnan killed Hae. There basically is NO evidence of Jay killing Hae. Zero. No testimony, no physical evidence, no DNA, no circumstantial evidence beyond the most speculative kind. You are looking for some kind of airtight CSI-style theory of everything that happened that day in order to believe that Adnan was the killer, and you prefer a wholly fictitious airtight theory with no basis in evidence to a flawed one based in reality.

There is no evidence of anyone killing Hae, other than what Jay says. And when I look at what Jay says, it looks like someone who lies, and is covering something up, which probably happened right around the time he insists he has an alibi for. Which is right around the time of the murder. So to me, what little evidence there is, points to Jay being involved. Not Adnan.

(and the cellphonerecords clearly lead to Jay, not Adnan, as well. I mean, it was what literally led the police to Jay, so it isn't really in question)

But we've been over his over and over and over, and I don't really care if anyone believes me on this. I'm more engaged by these shitty new interviews, and ytth's otm there. And of course Free Adnan, nobody should be in jail for fifteen years for a murder committed when they were a minor, and especially not in a case with as much doubt as this one. That is separate from the question of guilt, though.

nobody should be in jail for fifteen years for a murder committed when they were a minor

how long should a 17 year old who strangles a girl to death serve?

I mean, if he were proveably guilty with all the pings timelining up and all

Well, lifetime in Denmark is generally 14 years for adults.

'Nobody' might be too strong a word. He would probably be granted parole right about now. Anybody with Adnan's behavorial record in prison shouldn't serve more than 15 years for murder.

BTW, in your pet theory, why doesn't Hae show up to pick up her cousin, and where do she and Jay meet, and what kind of argument leads him to strangle a mere acquaintance on the day he just happens to have borrowed the acquaintance's recent ex's car? And how does Jay get Hae's car to its final resting place, and why aren't his (or Jenn's or anyone else's of interest) fingerprints found in Hae's car?

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LVMU5SPFd9c/TPROIkfmewI/AAAAAAAAC_Q/cdQOn2MOuG4/s400/Frank%2BDrebin.jpg
And where the hell was I?

Well, since nobody ever bothers taking any of my questions seriously, I'm sorta inclined to just go 'none of that really matters, lol, you idiot'

But ok, I'll bite. brb.

Fred, I'm in complete agreement with you on the facts and am loathe to admit it because of the attitude you drip with in every post itt. Maybe reducing that somewhat would get your questions addressed less flippantly more frequently.

Jay and Hae meeting up that day isn't too hard to imagine. She smoked pot. He sold it. The two of them were acquinted through Adnan and Stephanie. If she wanted to reach him she would have.

But why would she be buying pot from him after the time where she was supposed to pick up her cousin and failed to show up? The responsible star student just doesn't bother to pick up her little cousin so she can buy weed?

Well, sorry HOOS, but I've been trolled over and over from Alex, attacked personally constantly, and nobody has told him to stop until a little while ago, even though everyone has been happy to tell me when I've got a shitty attitude. Go back and read, I didn't start this attitude. I am a bit annoyed at the guys I'm discussing with, I don't think they've been very fair.