Ok I kind of hate even getting hung up on such an inconsequential point, but you are clearly reading the transcript wrong and taking the mention of the letters out of context. If you read the whole transcript, Syeds counsel is trying to introduce four exhibits - the ones listed on the first page. The state is objecting to those. The four exhibits presented do not include the letters.
The state attorney does bring up the letters in context of arguing the affidavit should not be admitted. But it cannot be that she is trying to block the letters because Syeds counsel is not trying to admit the letters. In context of the hearing, her argument is clearer and does not strike me as "confused". She is discussing the letters in explaining why she thinks the affidavit is not reliable.
― walid foster dulles (man alive), Wednesday, 21 January 2015 14:31 (nine years ago) link
I'll grant that I have been snide in response to you so obnoxious (pot meet kettle to be sure too). Trolling not so much (also don't remember much Dane mocking but I can believe I made a joke about it--have to scan later to see if it was funny one.)
― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 21 January 2015 14:40 (nine years ago) link
She clearly says 'I respectfully ask that the Court not admit those letters' on page 12. So I guess I'm just assuming that the text of the letters are somehow included in the affidavit or in the correspondence to Ms Gutierrez?
― Frederik B, Wednesday, 21 January 2015 14:41 (nine years ago) link
xpost Fine, Frederik. But I would suggest either ignoring him in the future or just writing "..." or something archly dismissive.
― ancient texts, things that can't be pre-dated (President Keyes), Wednesday, 21 January 2015 14:46 (nine years ago) link
Hmm, I guess that's possible. It's a little unclear. I assumed "correspondence to Ms. Guttierez" meant letters to Guttierez.
― walid foster dulles (man alive), Wednesday, 21 January 2015 14:49 (nine years ago) link
It's a bit confusing, looking at page 11 of the opinion, it sounds like they were admitted later (they were Exhibit 7, the exhibits in the transcript are 1-4), so maybe we are both correct -- they were not presented that day but admitted later, and the subject had come up so part of the argument was about the letters themselves.http://www.courts.state.md.us/cosappeals/pdfs/syed/baltcityccmemorandumopinion.pdf
I still think the part about pressure from the family refers to the affidavit -- it says "statement".
It hardly matters, because the letters were admitted, and the reason the judge found them unpersuasive as to ineffective assistance had nothing to do with whether they were written under pressure.
― walid foster dulles (man alive), Wednesday, 21 January 2015 14:55 (nine years ago) link
And again, the "witness tampering" and "obstruction of justice" and "perjury" claims are absurd. Remember, again, Urick is no longer even an attorney for the state at this point. His only hypothetical interest in the case is "protecting the win" -- in a 15-year-old case where there's only a miniscule chance of things getting overturned. So what motive does he have to deliberately "obstruct" a witness from testifying? And again, giving someone your opinion as to whether it's worth testifying is not the same thing as tampering, which generally at a minimum has to involve some kind of intimidation.
― walid foster dulles (man alive), Wednesday, 21 January 2015 15:02 (nine years ago) link
Well, actually it says 'statements. The afidavit is only one statement. And now we've gone completely down the hole, I think... But, furthermore, further down, presumably the afidavit had already been admitted at this point? Adnan's lawyer says they will try to introduce the letters (page five), then the state attorney argues against 'any of the documents pertaining to Asia McClane' (page 11).
― Frederik B, Wednesday, 21 January 2015 15:11 (nine years ago) link
I'm sure Asia never thought she'd end up being a key player in a world famous case in 2014. That has to color how she feels about her interaction with Urick now. But really, why would she expect the guy who put Adnan in jail to tell her anything other than "Yes, he did it"?
― ancient texts, things that can't be pre-dated (President Keyes), Wednesday, 21 January 2015 15:15 (nine years ago) link
I can't say I'm 100% sure here, but the list of exhibits says "offered" so it's unlikely they are already admitted. It would be odd for a transcript to contain only a list of already admitted exhibits, and then for there to be a totally different list of exhibits being argued about but never given in the transcript.
― walid foster dulles (man alive), Wednesday, 21 January 2015 15:18 (nine years ago) link
ok.
― Frederik B, Wednesday, 21 January 2015 15:20 (nine years ago) link
However, as noted above, the opinion seems to refer to the letters as Exhibit 7, so I guess they were admitted some point, so \O/
― walid foster dulles (man alive), Wednesday, 21 January 2015 15:24 (nine years ago) link
Well this is unexpected:
http://www.maxim.com/entertainment/article/exclusive-serial-podcast-bowe-bergdahl-2015-9
― sean gramophone, Tuesday, 22 September 2015 23:01 (eight years ago) link
Heh forgot this crazy thread.
― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 23 September 2015 00:25 (eight years ago) link
memory is a funny thing, you know
― Why because she True and Interesting (President Keyes), Wednesday, 23 September 2015 01:22 (eight years ago) link
Lol at the serial producer complaining journalists are intruding into a story in process by promoting wild speculation.
― da croupier, Wednesday, 23 September 2015 02:05 (eight years ago) link
This is kind of dumb. That case in the 1st season was one very few people not directly involved even knew about. This is one that was a national discussion topic already. There's probably already sub-reddits devoted to it.
― Why because she True and Interesting (President Keyes), Wednesday, 23 September 2015 13:38 (eight years ago) link
otm xp
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Wednesday, 23 September 2015 18:20 (eight years ago) link
It's back.
― Ⓓⓡ. (Johnny Fever), Thursday, 10 December 2015 13:14 (eight years ago) link
Almost a year to the day since the last episode and it's about rumored subject.
― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Thursday, 10 December 2015 13:28 (eight years ago) link
I am still fascinated by the number of serial-related podcasts where people just talk about serial. I think there are 10 of them.
― Michael F Gill, Thursday, 10 December 2015 15:10 (eight years ago) link
another thread pls
loving the weirdo patriotix organ theme rmx
― crime breeze (schlump), Thursday, 10 December 2015 15:31 (eight years ago) link
that came out of nowhere
I was just thinking that a year ago they were nearly done with their run
― Blowout Coombes (President Keyes), Thursday, 10 December 2015 16:20 (eight years ago) link
I listened to one episode of "Undisclosed", Rabia Chaudry tries to affect that flat nasally NPR voice, it was funny
― rip van wanko, Thursday, 10 December 2015 16:26 (eight years ago) link
lol
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Thursday, 10 December 2015 16:31 (eight years ago) link
who does Adnan kill this time?
― hunangarage, Thursday, 10 December 2015 16:36 (eight years ago) link
Yeah, looking forward to some more shitty, possibly irresponsible Nancy Drew detective work from Koenig and crew. Hate this thing.
― circa1916, Thursday, 10 December 2015 16:42 (eight years ago) link
Did we ever decide if Adnan was guilty?
― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Thursday, 10 December 2015 16:46 (eight years ago) link
He was. But Serial got him a new trial. Journalism!
― Blowout Coombes (President Keyes), Thursday, 10 December 2015 16:47 (eight years ago) link
http://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/serial-season-two-is-here
reading this and listening to the first ep, its not really intended to be another whodunit and instead just a super long TAL episode, which i'm fine with
― gr8080, Thursday, 10 December 2015 19:21 (eight years ago) link
regardless of his guilt, he definitely deserved a new trial given how shady his lawyer was.
― just1n3, Friday, 11 December 2015 02:14 (eight years ago) link
Idk. Really I think sentences are too long and he should be out by now anyway. But seemed guilty to me.
― on entre O.K. on sort K.O. (man alive), Friday, 11 December 2015 08:52 (eight years ago) link
After listening to some of undisclosed my theory is that the Adnan did it but the police totally botched the theory. Jays story got tucked up because he was trying to match is hazy memories to an incorrect theory ( and also wanted to do what the police wanted from him since he was implicated and scared), and Adnan maintained his innocence because he saw the police had the story all wrong and thought he could exploit it.
― on entre O.K. on sort K.O. (man alive), Friday, 11 December 2015 09:01 (eight years ago) link
txt convo with my wife:
wifeI actually don't really thinkthis story they're doing forserial is very interesting
jimIt's not a whodunit this timearound eh?
wifeNo not at all it's more likea why'd they do it
And the guy that did it istelling them why he didit :/
― Karl Rove Knausgård (jim in glasgow), Friday, 11 December 2015 19:00 (eight years ago) link
TBF that's what the first serial season should have been too.
― on entre O.K. on sort K.O. (man alive), Friday, 11 December 2015 19:02 (eight years ago) link
I feel like the main draw of the first season was that it was an irl whodunit, that there was definite dubiety about adnan's conviction, yet not enough for it to be just a straight up, egregious, make-you-mad miscarriage of justice (e.g. the case against him seemed somewhat flimsy to me, though i think he's guilty). i found it somewhat compelling at the time, but also somewhat troubling - because of the voyeurism regarding a young girl's murder, and the slapdash, possibly irresponsible nature of them digging up clues and broadcasting them to a large audience, and because of the gross online stalking of the protagonists on reddit etc. - and in hindsight i feel like it was like a morally dubious "my stories" for the university educated.
― Karl Rove Knausgård (jim in glasgow), Friday, 11 December 2015 19:15 (eight years ago) link
and this season seems morally dubious because of the fact that the bergdahl case is still ongoing. and the justification they gave that "oh this won't influence the case because the facts are not in dispute" seems naïve or disingenuous
― Karl Rove Knausgård (jim in glasgow), Friday, 11 December 2015 19:27 (eight years ago) link
Yeah I mean I'm half joking, but I also rarely felt like it was really a whodunit because most of the season I felt pretty sure Adnan was the murderer. And I had a lot of the problems you had with it, only moreso, as I think I expressed a bunch of times ITT.
― on entre O.K. on sort K.O. (man alive), Friday, 11 December 2015 19:35 (eight years ago) link
Guessing this story will uncover something larger about the military in Afghanistan than just the search for this guy. Not My Lai, but something.
― my harp and me (Eazy), Friday, 11 December 2015 19:46 (eight years ago) link
maybe Bergdahl found the mountain Gog and Magog were shut in by Alexanfer the Great
― Blowout Coombes (President Keyes), Friday, 11 December 2015 19:49 (eight years ago) link
Listening to s2e1. This is boring and bergdahl sounds like a dumbass.
― on entre O.K. on sort K.O. (man alive), Monday, 14 December 2015 07:08 (eight years ago) link
5 years to work on his story, and Boal & Koenig willing listeners eager to be told a story. idk. Dubious... but somewhat interested to see where it goes.
― Flamenco Drop (VegemiteGrrl), Monday, 14 December 2015 07:31 (eight years ago) link
seems like w/o being able to talk to Bergdahl, Koenig's role might be more limited. None of the Night Listener phone calls with Adnan, little chance of Nancy Drew stuff like ambushing Jay at his home. But then again they made sure to end with "Hello, the Taliban speaking" thing to make everyone excited.
― Blowout Coombes (President Keyes), Monday, 14 December 2015 14:56 (eight years ago) link
I will give it a little more time -- I was too tired to finish the first episode but I also didn't find it particularly compelling so far, and I was kind of let down by "yeah so we spent all this time developing a show where we are basically piggy-backing off someone else's work."
― on entre O.K. on sort K.O. (man alive), Monday, 14 December 2015 15:20 (eight years ago) link
S1 at least had the teaser of "maybe we'll find out Adnan didn't really do it/someone else did," which made for great listening, for a while, as much as I criticized the show. This one I'm just not sure I should care.
― on entre O.K. on sort K.O. (man alive), Monday, 14 December 2015 15:22 (eight years ago) link
Finished e1 and e2 -- it's sort of interesting just as a story about the military and Afghanistan, but goddamn Berghdal sounds like such a stupid and self-absorbed jerk. I actually do understand why he was so hated now.
I do enjoy the humanizing portrait of afghanis and even of the local Taliban. The anecdote about them performing a dance to try to cheer him up was wonderful, just one of those absurd details that throws a wrench into any simplistic telling of the story.
― on entre O.K. on sort K.O. (man alive), Tuesday, 22 December 2015 17:32 (eight years ago) link
Yeah my biggest problem with this so far is definitely I really do not care about Berghdal's motivations.
― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 22 December 2015 17:34 (eight years ago) link
I mean if there were some possible intrigue angle or something maybe (what if he's actually CIA? what if he's actually a defector?), but it seems like most of those have already been discredited, and I also just kind of wouldn't believe it after hearing him talk. This is part of the problem with a story dealing with an already widely reported subject.
― on entre O.K. on sort K.O. (man alive), Tuesday, 22 December 2015 17:38 (eight years ago) link
He seems very naive/deluded or...idk. Assuming what he says is true & not just a polished turd 5 years in the making
Not gonna lie, I was not surprised/shocked to hear fellow soldiers wishing pain and/or death upon him...they seem pretty otm
And hearing his explanations now must be enraging for anyone who was on that search
― Flamenco Drop (VegemiteGrrl), Tuesday, 22 December 2015 19:33 (eight years ago) link
I'm glad the theme song got an upgrade, that plinky/tinny piano needed to go. Wasn't expecting a Morricone trumpet line though.
― Michael F Gill, Wednesday, 23 December 2015 02:17 (eight years ago) link