Serial

brick tamland

Is undisclosed worth a listen then or just tge same stuff rehashed? Seems to be quite a lot to listen to.

Paully D

brick tamland wrote: »

Is undisclosed worth a listen then or just tge same stuff rehashed? Seems to be quite a lot to listen to.

To be honest, I gave up on it after a pretty short time. Maybe I had Serial fatigue at that stage though as I had gone straight into Undisclosed after finishing Serial.

koutoubia

Just finished it today, finally!

And I say finally because after after ep 8 I got called for jury duty which was a murder trial.

After that was finished I gave my head a rest and then listened to the last 4 episodes.
It was very strange listening to them after what I experienced in court.
Like it was with a new perpesctive.
The trial was very similar to the podcast.
Nothing clear cut. Huge amount of variables with evidence pointing in all directions.

8-10

koutoubia wrote: »

Just finished it today, finally!

And I say finally because after after ep 8 I got called for jury duty which was a murder trial.

After that was finished I gave my head a rest and then listened to the last 4 episodes.
It was very strange listening to them after what I experienced in court.
Like it was with a new perpesctive.
The trial was very similar to the podcast.
Nothing clear cut. Huge amount of variables with evidence pointing in all directions.

What did you decide?

koutoubia

Not guilty.
We knew the defendant had a big part to play but the evidence wasnt concuslive.
Was there a reasonable doubt? Absolutley!

But we were given another option which I wont go into.

8-10

koutoubia wrote: »

Not guilty.
We knew the defendant had a big part to play but the evidence wasnt concuslive.
Was there a reasonable doubt? Absolutley!

But we were given another option which I wont go into.

Interesting alright. I was on a jury nearly a year ago right after I listened to Serial (or maybe it was in the middle of it) so I remember it being strange to be in that situation listening to and looking at evidence with the perspective of having listened to the podcast which was really focused on the facts that weren't put in front of the jury and facts that were distorted by the manner in which they were presented to the jury

dastardly00

koutoubia wrote: »

Not guilty.
We knew the defendant had a big part to play but the evidence wasnt concuslive.
Was there a reasonable doubt? Absolutley!

But we were given another option which I wont go into.

And how do you think you would have voted if you were on the jury for Adnan's trial?
Not guilty because there was reasonable doubt?

koutoubia

I think that Adnans lawyer really cocked up by not bringing Asia in. It could have easily swung a jurer from saying 'Yeah. Guilty' to ' Hold on. He was in the school when it was alleged he was somewhere else'.
But you have to remember what the jury were told at the time of the trial to what has subsequently appeared.
I would have to listen again just to concentrate on what the jury were told.

FWIW
After listening to it my opinion is that Jay and Jen set up Adnan but that doesn't mean Adnan is not guilty.
The definition of murder in Ireland is much different to what I thought it was. Dunno what it is there.
Here it is the intention to kill and the person ends up dead. Proof that ,let's say, you pulled the trigger is not necessarily needed.

Trojan

I think the original trial should have resulted in a Not Guilty given the Asia and cell tower coversheet information. He shouldn't have been convicted. That's not to say I think he didn't do it, just that if his lawyer had been competent he wouldn't be there. I'm not sure if he did it.

The biggest issue is figuring out who else had motive and opportunity. The situation with Jay and the detectives totally stinks, and Jay was my biggest suspect for it but few people seem to think he had motive or did it.

El Guapo!

New short episode up today. It's an update on the appeal etc.

Dubh Geannain

Short and sweet cast. Sounds like Asia's memory is going to be put to the test and perhaps found lacking a little bit.

Larsso30

Issue for me is this, Adnyan never ever could account for his movements with Jay that night and the tower pinging his phone at Leakin park.

He seems a really nice guy, but hard for me to call this a miscarriage of justice based solely on him being a nice guy!!

Larsso30

Issue for me is this, Adnan never ever could account for his movements with Jay that night and the tower pinging his phone at Leakin park.

He seems a really nice guy, but hard for me to call this a miscarriage of justice based solely on him being a nice guy!!

bren2001

Larsso30 wrote: »

Issue for me is this, Adnan never ever could account for his movements with Jay that night and the tower pinging his phone at Leakin park.

He seems a really nice guy, but hard for me to call this a miscarriage of justice based solely on him being a nice guy!!

I always found it odd that Adnan could not account for his movements. He was aware later that day that Hae was missing. If that was on of my ex's, I think I'd remember my movements from that point on.

However, Adnan's phone pinging the Leakin park tower is really irrelevant. It doesn't actually place him there at all. He could have been two or three towers away. You don't necessarily ping the tower beside you.

I also don't think people are saying it is a miscarriage of justice because he is a nice guy. I believe it is a miscarriage of justice because the State's timeline doesn't add up, Adnan has alibi's at the time the State say she was murdered, the apparent coaching from police etc.

I believe Adnan did it but not the way the State say it. I believe the State did no have the evidence to convict him and hence, it is a miscarriage of justice.

kev1.3s

Well said, it's clear as day that the right man is in prison (or at least one of them) but the case is weak and shouldn't have been enough to convict.
I don't think he should be exonerated either and wouldn't deem him to be rehabilitated until he admits the truth.

Rayne Wooney

It's funny in the same way I think Steve Avery is most probably guilty but shouldn't have been put away for it I think the same about Adnan. There just wasn't evidence there, it would have been fairer to put them both in prison because I think the only certainty is that one or both of them did do it. You wonder how many of these accidental justices there are and then on the flip side how many murderers are walking around because of luck

There are plenty of scenarios that could have happened one likely for me is that Jay had an almost equal part, Adnan knew there wasn't much chance of getting caught but he didn't anticipate Jay talking and by then he had to maintain his innocence or admit he was involved. But then you wonder what the motive is, it's hard to believe the angry ex boyfriend line but it's even harder to find another reason and then more so to find a motive for Jay.

Then you look at timelines people make laid out with the phone records and what Jay says and you realise he lies about everything, literally you're sifting through lies looking for something true. And a lot of unnecessary lies like saying he threw his clothes away outside his house instead of driving somewhere further. Looking at the timeline it's perfectly possible that Jay did it all and made up a suitable story to fit but why?

Surely Adnan knows if he didn't do it then Jay did, where's the anger? Didn't Adnan whisper something along the lines of "you're pathetic" to Jay in court, that doesn't sound like real anger at someone who could put you away for life more taunting a co conspirator

Anyway again like after watching Making a Murderer I find it baffling how the jury could not see tonnes of reasonable doubt

steve_r

Have people been listening to the short podcasts from Adnan's hearing? It's more of the same stuff with cell towers and ailibis. There's nothing new so no

spoilers

Both sides will put their arguement in a court of law so it'll be up to the judge.

I don't think we'll ever know what happened. A lot of it is he said/she said. I found on the podcasts that Dana seemed very keen for SK to take a side which I felt she was uncomfortable with.

In contrast, the most recent Season 2 episode is facintating. There's no argement to the facts, and SK is able to present an objective take on things. It covers the main reasons why Bowe got disenheartened in the millitary.

kev1.3s

steve_r wrote: »

Have people been listening to the short podcasts from Adnan's hearing? It's more of the same stuff with cell towers and ailibis. There's nothing new so no

spoilers

Both sides will put their arguement in a court of law so it'll be up to the judge.

I don't think we'll ever know what happened. A lot of it is he said/she said. I found on the podcasts that Dana seemed very keen for SK to take a side which I felt she was uncomfortable with.

In contrast, the most recent Season 2 episode is facintating. There's no argement to the facts, and SK is able to present an objective take on things. It covers the main reasons why Bowe got disenheartened in the millitary.

On the contrary I think SK had made her mind up early on than Adnan was innocent and seemed to be more passionate when exploring facts that exonerate him than the ones that condemn.

Larsso30

In regard to new evidence, not sure there been enough presented to warrant a new trial.

Asia testimony while she sounded resolute could have holes poked in it and the cell tower stuff hasnt been spellbinding either. Prosection have done a good job.

His failure to go after Jay and his testimony and lack of alibi always worries me.

Also agree, SK made her mind up early days Adnan was innocent

steve_r

kev1.3s wrote: »

On the contrary I think SK had made her mind up early on than Adnan was innocent and seemed to be more passionate when exploring facts that exonerate him than the ones that condemn.

I'd say deep down she wants to believe he is innocent but she's conflicted as she wants also to be objective and unbiased.

Specifically on the recent ones, she was hesitant to draw any conclusions.

The way season 1 was setup, and in particular the earlier podcasts, the narrative was "this guy is innocent". It's only later on when they draw back and reconsider.

I think SK is being careful in Season 2 to be actually objective, rather than just being seen to be objective. I think she is a fantastic presenter and storyteller, but I don't think she is as strong at the journalistic aspects. I think all those phonecalls got her to personally invovled in the story at the expense of having a professional distance.

Larsso30

steve_r wrote: »

I'd say deep down she wants to believe he is innocent but she's conflicted as she wants also to be objective and unbiased.

Specifically on the recent ones, she was hesitant to draw any conclusions.

The way season 1 was setup, and in particular the earlier podcasts, the narrative was "this guy is innocent". It's only later on when they draw back and reconsider.

I think SK is being careful in Season 2 to be actually objective, rather than just being seen to be objective. I think she is a fantastic presenter and storyteller, but I don't think she is as strong at the journalistic aspects. I think all those phonecalls got her to personally invovled in the story at the expense of having a professional distance.

its easier for her to be objective in season 2 as she doesnt have the same type of relationship with Bo as she does with Adnan.

All the time they spend on the phone, it blurs her vision imo. Adnan comes across as so charming and sincere but still evasive with the truth

sillysmiles

I got caught up on the updates from the trial last night and was stuck at how much more I care and was engrossed in the Adnan case than the new season 2 case.

kev1.3s

sillysmiles wrote: »

I got caught up on the updates from the trial last night and was stuck at how much more I care and was engrossed in the Adnan case than the new season 2 case.

Same, I still listen and somewhat enjoy but with season 1 she really struck gold with a subject that captured the worlds imagination.

Real Psycrow

sillysmiles wrote: »

I got caught up on the updates from the trial last night and was stuck at how much more I care and was engrossed in the Adnan case than the new season 2 case.

Ditto.

I think a big problem for the subject of series 2 is that it's a subject that everyone had heard about in some form or other previously. The subject of series 1 was completely obscure.

On top of that, what happened in series 1 could happen to anyone (if indeed he is innocent) so more people can relate. Not every listener can walk of an army base into enemy hands.

Lucas Hood

Real Psycrow wrote: »

Ditto.

I think a big problem for the subject of series 2 is that it's a subject that everyone had heard about in some form or other previously. The subject of series 1 was completely obscure.

On top of that, what happened in series 1 could happen to anyone (if indeed he is innocent) so more people can relate. Not every listener can walk of an army base into enemy hands.

I never heard about it before. I just found it boring
What I've listened to so far . Serial are just talking over the film makers work not adding anything themselves.

Larsso30

that i think is the central problem too, SK has no direct access to Bo, she is merely a narator. She cant go and drive the distance Bo walked etc.. cant fact check like she did with Adnan case.

SK is way to distanced from this

nasty_crash

I just think that its a fairly black and white case and the fact that his trail hasnt been on yet kinda makes the show redundant - considering that Bowe left the camp etc - went awol - regardless of reason he is at fault. So the discussion is not whether its right or wrong but the severity of the punishment - he can be jailed for life etc... but because he hasnt had that trial yet then the show cannot say that the punishment was too harsh etc.

Also people might not think of him as a traitor - but the same people now that consider him a traitor will continue to see him that way - even if he has his reasons - and even if he didnt give them intel - but he left the camp and you just dont do that - thats why people see him the way they do!

I enjoy the way SK tells a story but i feel the topic isnt as strong as adnan's! Agree with the fact she didnt speak to Bowe at all has made her far more standoffish and neutral! As another note - i think sometimes there are too many characters in this story - where there are so many soldiers/afganhi's etc being interviewed - Case 1 was a lot more managable and personable

Paully D

Documentary dropping next week:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/serials-adnan-syed-case-making-8098314

As Maryland Court considers possible retrial for the convicted murderer, new documentary Adnan Syed: Innocent or Guilty? heads to Investigation Discovery UKFor those waiting for the 'next Making a Murderer' and for fans of the hit Serial podcast, you'll be pleased to know the Adnan Syed case has landed it's own documentary.

Sarah Koenig's podcast - first released in 2014 - looked into the conviction of the High School student and followed the 1999 murder of his ex-girlfriend, Hae Min Lee, 17.

Examining the new evidence submitted to Maryland courts and brought to light by the Serial podcast and others, Adnan Syed: Innocent or Guilty? heads to Investigation Discovery UK later this month (June 15).

Clare Laycock, Head of Investigation Discovery UK, said: "On Investigation Discovery we have real-crime all the time and following our special on the controversial Steven Avery case as featured in the hit Netflix series Making a Murderer earlier this year, we are excited to share the latest in this unfolding saga with viewers.

"The serialised podcast in 2014 has more than 130 million downloads to date, and made everyone a detective.

"With a judge expecting to make a decision at any time, we want to give our viewers not only the crucial information surrounding Adnan Syed's case, but also the personal, first-hand accounts of what to expect from key players."

In his first-ever one-on-one interview, Syed's current defense attorney, Justin Brown, goes on the record with Smith to explore the details on two critical pieces of evidence being reexamined by the Baltimore City circuit court.

Also interviewed in the special is Dr. William Manion, a medical examiner with nearly 30 years of experience who reviewed the autopsy report.

Additional interviews include:

• Saad Chaudry: Adnan's best friend
• Krista Meyers (Krista Remmers): friend of Hae and Adnan
• Douglas Colbert: Adnan's original attorney for bail
• Inez Butler: Hae's teacher and last to see her on campus
• Mohammad Jameel: president of the Islamic Society of Baltimore
• Bob Ruff: independent podcaster/ case expert
• Theodore Wojtas: jurour from the 2000 trial
• Philip Buddemeyer: former Baltimore City surveyor who assessed body at the scene
• Roberto Gutierrez: son of Christina Gutierrez

Adnan Syed: Innocent or Guilty? to premiere in the UK on June 15 at 9pm on Investigation Discovery UK

cailinoBAC

New trial apparently
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/us/serial-adnan-syed-new-trial.html

Mr E

Rabia Chaudry was interviewed on Newstalk this morning. She said that she doesn't expect it to go to trial. She said that the evidence is solid and that he'll just be released. She said he will be out by the end of the year, if not sooner.

She also expects that the real killer will be arrested and brought to justice.

https://twitter.com/rabiasquared/status/748614120950403072