Serial - the podcast *spoilers*

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.

Like, why isn't that photo man alive just posted bad atitude?

that was self-mockery, not you dude

Because she stopped to buy it on her way to picking up her cousin and then something went down? C'mon, that's easily as believable as Adnan killing his ex right before he knew she would be reported missing if she didn't pick up her cousin. At least acknowledge that it would have been a viable theory to pursue for the police at the time. But instead they went to lenghts to make Jay's story work even when it clearly didn't.

But Frederik's theory, to which I was responding, has Hae dying after the time she's supposed to pick up her cousin.

that's easily as believable as Adnan killing his ex right before he knew she would be reported missing if she didn't pick up her cousin

But this theory matches up with people hearing Adnan asking Hae for a ride, giving him an opportunity, which is far more significant than whether he thought through when she would get reported missing.

At least acknowledge that it would have been a viable theory to pursue for the police at the time.

We don't know to what extent police pursued any theories involving Jay though. We know (at least I think we know) that they didn't turn up his prints in Hae's car. We can assume that they didn't hear anything in the interviews with Jay that made them suspect Jay. We also can assume they didn't get anything from anyone else they interviewed that made them suspect Jay. It's possible they were complete boneheads, of course. But I don't know why people are assuming Jay was never looked at, that the cops never discussed the possibility that it was really Jay. I would think it would be pretty standard to at least consider that your sole witness is actually the killer.

"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"

Haha yeah it's been all me you were just responding in kind. Keep living the fantasy dude.

So I broke it up.

1) why doesn't Hae show up to pick up her cousin,

Well, you lead off with the very best question. My theory solves all the problems with the cellphones, but it does so by moving the murder forward by 15 min or so, putting it over the 'deadline' where Hae had to pick up her cousin. Keep in mind, though, since the 2:36 call has been discredited, we're only talking about 15 min. And the 3:15 murder theory can't really explain this as well, if Hae was giving Adnan a ride at this point, she was probably late even so. My best explanation is that Hae had something to do - keep in mind, everyone who said that Adnan asked for a ride also says that Hae said no - got delayed, was on her way to pick up her brother when she ran into Jay. Which leads to the next point.

2) and where do she and Jay meet,

Well, somewhere around Woodlawn, that's where the cellphone is. It isn't really important, and impossible to know, really. Best Buy, still? Hae doesn't meet up with Jay for anything Jay-related, she sees Adnans car, goes over to say hi.

3) 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?

Impossible to know. My guess? Since it was Stephanies birthday, something Stephanie-related. Which, btw, is also the reason Jay was in Adnan's car, so it isn't really that big of a coincidence. But impossible to know.

4) And how does Jay get Hae's car to its final resting place,

Obviously, he drove there (I might be missing the point of this question) But btw, according to the cellphonerecords, after the two incoming calls at Leakin Park, the next two calls are outgoing, to Jenn, from right around the 'final resting place' of Jay's car. So if we're discussing the final moving of the car, once again, the evidence points to Jay.

5) and why aren't his (or Jenn's or anyone else's of interest) fingerprints found in Hae's car?

And this question isn't really a problem for my theory. Because Adnan's fingerprints weren't found in Hae's car either. Actually, this supports my theory, because in my theory, the murder took place in Adnans car. Everything in Hae's car happened after the murder took place, so the murderer would know to be careful.

Adnan's fingerprints were found in the car, it was just not necessarily that significant since he had been in the car lots of times.

They were found on an atlas. Which, you know.

Not only on the atlas.

But again, point being that Jay's are not found anywhere, when he supposedly DROVE the car.

And then, I guess, walked wherever he went next?

And also walked from wherever he strangled Hae, I guess, since it's not like he called anyone to pick him up in your theory, (unless he got a ride from "Phil")

edit: nm the last thing I posted, I guess in your version he gets back in Adnan's car and drives away

But he would still have to walk or get picked up from the Park & Ride

And there's time enough for that, when you're no longer dealing with track practice.

i'm unbookmarking now, you guys have crossed over to reddit string diagram territory, it's super weird

the big red flag of adnan's guilt imo is him asking for a ride - more than one person says they heard him asking hae, he himself tells a detective he asked for a ride. and then in talking to sk he vehemently denies that he would ever EVER ask for a ride. that is super weird to me. but the fact that he asked her within the hearing of friends suggests if he did kill her, it wasn't planned at all, bc he would fuck his own alibi in doing that.

i'm beginning to worry that we won't actually solve this thing itt

which make me question the ethics of this thread tbh

Jay in the study with the wrench

I think if we can make every theory equally unlikely and ridiculous then we may be able to prove that the
murder never happened at all

The alternate theories are starting to feel like grotesque fan-fic. It's getting hard to remember what I liked about Serial in the first place. The comparison to 9-11 Truthers is dead on.

In the end, the whole thing feels like an argument for good, old-fashioned journalism. Balanced reporting. Knowing where your story is going before publishing. Not withholding or spinning details.

But Serial worked as clickbait - so others will follow. Part of what made it intriguing was it's newness and the risks it took. Part of why it was a phenomenon was that it was designed to be imperfect, and that invited listeners to criticize/defend/participate in the story-telling. As we've been doing on this thread and others have done on Reddit and Twitter and Slate, etc. It really tapped in to how people engage with news stories now - but it amped up that engagement with TAL-style story-telling, compelling "characters", a plucky narrator with a conversational tone and her heart on her sleeve...

And I think some of this is really genuinely ground-breaking and positive. It's refreshing to hear a reporter acknowledge their biases, and admit to making mistakes, or being unsure. It's good that not all stories are told with NYT-style omniscience and over-confidence.

But ultimately Serial - and the Intercept's follow-up interviews - have been really sloppy, and driven by a biased view of the case. And if this is where a Peabody-winning journalist and a team of veteran producers from This American Life ended up following this approach, I'm not optimistic about how it will play out in imitators' hands.

I think some of the new new journalistic stuff actually backfires in a way, it's like there's almost the impression of a meta-objectivity, not just acknowledging ones own biases but harping on them to the point of lulling the audience into even greater trust. So that sometimes SK editorializes in a way that makes you forget she's editorializing, and that I find slightly (although probably not deliberately) manipulative. "I think we can all agree that..." etc. Maybe it's not actually worse than with any other journalism.