What are /r/serialpodcast's favorite Products & Services?

From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

The even bigger one is that I think there's a reasonable inference that Urick had a handshake deal with Jay's lawyer that if Jay took the written deal (plead guilty to accessory, prosecutor recommends two year prison sentence) that after the trial Urick would change that deal to one more favorable to Jay by making "an additional plea for leniency" on behalf of Jay, effectively (plead guilty to accessory, prosecutor recommends no time served).

Plea agreements have to be disclosed to the defense. If Urick had such a deal it would be unethical not to disclose it, and zero years versus two years served is a significant discrepancy.

Syed argued the issue in his initial appeal but was unsuccessful. See Footnote 10.
https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-PUUcby-AZWfEhcuW/2002_WL_32510997_djvu.txt

Oh wow. I just noticed that Silverstein tweeted "God, I don't follow one guy on Twitter and he goes and writes a whole story on Medium. Very high on my list of things I won't be reading" in response to this article. Unreal.

EDIT: And now the author of the piece on The Medium is replying to the tweet, very reasonably I might add.

See, the problem is that searching for actual information on Cherry is useless. Google leads back to the same couple of articles. Westlaw has exactly one mention of him in a case, and it is simply citing one of those same articles. None of those articles mention his education or experience. It is circular.

In contrast, when I google Abraham Waranowitz, I get this: https://www.linkedin.com/pub/abraham-waranowitz/90/745/844

That is normal when you are dealing with an expert in the field. Michael Cherry's experience as an IT developer tells me nothing about why he would be able to opine about historical cell site data. He smells like a hired gun from 100 miles and if CG had put him on the stand he'd have ripped to shreds.

It wasn't days after he left; it was hours.

> 1012Z, LLVI receives traffic that an American Soldier with a camera is looking for someone who speaks English.

Her testimony from the second trial is referenced in Adnan's appellate brief, but...

there's no mention in the brief of her testifying that she saw Adnan at 2:45. That should be front and center in his brief, right? Did she change her testimony? Did CG forget to bring this up?

ROFL.

So now you're down to prevaricating over a single, one-word peripheral phrasing anomaly as your only bulwark against a cold, hard reckoning with reality?

So when Urick said:

> "The implication was she was trying to appease them and she didn’t want to have to stick by it."

That's not synonymous with him saying that she "recanted" her story? Because many other outlets believe that it was perfectly synonymous:

> "attorney Kevin Urick said that McClain recanted her original affadavit in 1999"

This guy. He turns smug into a kind of shameless high art.

Highlights: he thinks his and NVC's fearless reporting is basically the episode Serial was afraid to air:

> Presenting Pt 2 of episode #serial never aired (possibly because in combo w/evidence, makes whole podcast pointless)

Also, guys, guess what? He's not afraid of us! This is how he linked to Regurgitating Urick Part II:

> Fearless, adversarial reporting. And unafraid of Reddit.

He still believes Urick's account over SK's regarding how she tried to contact him. With no evidence other than Urick's word. Also, he's stealing "Fair and balanced" from Fox News! Nice touch, Ken:

> Sarah Koenig is super nice but @serial’s efforts to reach the lead prosecutor were totally inadequate. More coming. #Fairandbalanced.

He's obviously still deeply offended by Martin Austermuhle's opinion piece on Medium regarding the Intercept trolling Serial, so he decided to label it bad reporting (it wasn't reporting, it was commentary, FYI) and contrast it with his own amazing reporting:

> You can publish an article on Medium based entirely on reading Tweets or you can report. This is reporting.

Here's what Urick said about the cellphone records to The Intercept:

> “Jay’s testimony by itself, would that have been proof beyond a reasonable doubt?” Urick asked rhetorically. “Probably not. Cellphone evidence by itself? Probably not.”

> But, he said, when you put together cellphone records and Jay’s testimony, “they corroborate and feed off each other–it’s a very strong evidentiary case.”

The cell phone evidence only has meaning when it corroborates Jay's story. If we say Jay is lying about all this stuff, then all the cell phone records can tell us is that Jay is lying. But they can't tell us why he's lying, or what he was actually doing.

> Dumping cloths in a ice storm implies to me that Jay is very worried about what may be on his cloths.

True. But if Jay is a big fat liar, how do we know this even happened? Or that Jay didn't bury Hae alone/ with a third person? Not to mention that Jay could just as easily have said he dumped his clothes because he didn't want LE searching his home looking for them, regardless of whether or not he had actually thrown any clothes away- and we already know Jen doesn't mind lying to help Jay out.

Like I said, who knows, you might be right. But at the end of the day, like the rest of us with an opinion on all sides, you've made a guess and taken a leap into the deep blue yonder.

when Sarah is describing their off-air interview w/ Jay, and he answers one of their questions with: "I was there." So much more direct than: "If I were in that situation, I would probably..."

Sarah Koenig: That’s right, he said, “who did? I was there, I saw it, I know what I know.” He was very forceful, “I can’t even believe that he won’t even man up and admit it.” He just totally scoffed at the idea that, Adnan would be claiming his innocence. http://genius.com/Serial-podcast-episode-8-the-deal-with-jay-annotated

It terrifies me as well. Of course, I want truly innocent people to be exonerated; but some of the cases with the huge PR campaigns are more about an agenda than the innocence of the person used as a poster boy.

Have you seen A Murder in the Park? It had been only available on Showtime; but now Netflix is streaming it. You will be shocked at how far an innocence project will go to further their agenda. In this case, the agenda was to eliminate capital punishment in Illinois ... which was actually an excellent agenda IMHO. Unfortunately they chose an absolutely guilty person who was on death row, orchestrated a Machiavellian plot to get him freed by implicating another man as the actual murderer. The original defendant, Anthony Porter, was freed and pardoned by the governor. The other man, Alstory Simon, was convicted of the murders and sent to prison. It took years to sort it all out. As it turns out, Anthony Porter was the murderer after all. His conviction was not flawed; but the conviction of Alstory Simon was flawed. Long story short, they are both out of prison now. However, the real murderer cannot be punished due to the fact that his conviction has already been overturned and he has been pardoned by the governor ... double jeopardy in place. He gets to go scot free for the murder of two innocent people who were sitting on a park bench minding their own business.

https://www.netflix.com/title/80044562

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3168808/?ref_=fn_al_tt_2

Kind of a nice way to frame that quote from Jay, but I think it is so much nicer in context. From the interview:

>No. I would have told her the same thing: There’s nothing that’s gonna change the fact that this guy drove up in front of my grandmother’s house, popped the trunk, and had his dead girlfriend in the trunk. Anything that’s going to make him innocent doesn’t involve me. Hae was dead before she got to my house. Anything that makes Adnan innocent doesn’t involve me. There is a specific point where I became involved in this. What happened before that, I don’t know. Maybe Adnan had something to tell her, something magical that happens that changes all the facts in the case. But she can talk to him about that. I didn’t have anything to add. There’s no point in me participating in that conversation.

I would also add that Jay almost definitely meant to convey the idea that 'Anything that makes Adnan [appear] innocent doesn't involve me.' It's clear from the context that there is, in fact, no way that Jay thinks Adnan can actually be 'made innocent' as the result of 'anything'.

This is why it matters:

KU: I would’ve gone through the cellphone records. You called this person at this time. Jay talked to this person at this time. And my very last question would be: What is your explanation for why you either received or made a call from Leakin Park the evening that Hae Min Lee disappeared, the very park that her body was found in five weeks later? I think that was the stumbling block for the defense. They have no explanation for that. They went to extreme lengths to try to discredit Jay’s testimony.... They had everything. There were no surprises going into the second trial. They knew everything. And they tried for five days to do everything [to discredit Jay’s testimony]. Jay’s prior inconsistent statements, they presented all that. <strong>The problem was that the cellphone records corroborated so much of Jay’s testimony. He said we were at this place, and [they] were. And he said that in the police interviews prior to obtaining the cellphone evidence. A lot of what he said was corroborated by the cellphone evidence, including that the two of them were at Leakin Park.</strong>

You might be interested in the following facts if you are considering whether Asia has the correct day.

Actual weather for January 13, 1999: https://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KBWI/1999/1/13/DailyHistory.html

How did Asia get snowed in when there was no snow?

Serial caught this: https://serialpodcast.org/posts/2014/11/weather-report

I have poured over every single police transcript that I could find. There are transcripts from the appeal which certainly would mention anything/everything there was to mention (https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-sCEhpvo5xTiB4e40/2002_WL_32510996_djvu.txt) in favor or against Adnan.

You're right, due dilligence is the wrong word for the jury. That is at the fault of his defense team. However, it was irresponsibility on the jury's part. It was their responsibility to reach a verdict based on 1) evidence beyond a reasonable doubt (didn't have it) and 2) the direction of the judge

Er, this summer, all charges were dropped against the man they convicted of killing Chandra Levy:

>On Thursday, the United States attorney’s office in Washington issued a brief statement that said in part: “Today, in the interests of justice and based on recent unforeseen developments that were investigated over the past week, the office moved to dismiss the case charging Ingmar Guandique with the May 2001 murder of Chandra Levy. The office has concluded that it can no longer prove the murder case against Mr. Guandique beyond a reasonable doubt.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/29/us/charges-dropped-against-man-accused-of-killing-chandra-levy.html?_r=0

When the coach was initially interviewed he said he was pretty sure Adnan was there because he recalls speaking with him and it was unseasonably warm and January 13 was the only warm day. After Adnan was arrested and the word on the street was that Adnan was guilty, the coach backed away and said he didn't take attendance. So you get to decide - was Adnan there as per the coach's first statement? Or was the coach influenced by peer pressure and wanted to stay out of it?

https://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KBWI/1999/1/13/DailyHistory.html

Yes, he did. He told his lawyer that. He said Jay told him he was cheating and that he convinced Stephanie to stay for a voluntary assembly in order to prevent her from going to his house and catching him. See here.

> in certain circumstances it's going to look really bad if they don't.

What circumstances?

>She said they were surprised.

That is not the extent of what she said. Koenig asked if they were "bothered" by it, to which Flynn said yes. She also reported that she was "shocked" and "blown away," wondered why Adnan wouldn't testify, and arguably implied that the jury ceased to be impartial when they learned of his decision ("We were trying to be so open-minded, it was just like, get up there and say something."). Finally she says, almost as an aside, "...even though it's not your job to persuade us."

"Surprised?"

>What was yours? That she was an idiot and you're a better, smarter person?

Nothing that nasty or severe, no. But it did make me think that this particular jury probably deserves some criticism, whether or not those 12 people are generally skeptical of "the man."

I tend to agree with Jay's opinion that it would've just given her more ammo to use against him. Was pretty clear from episode 1 that Jay was the only other suspect in SK's mind and much of the show was basically just scrutinizing his account of events in an attempt to make us question Adnan's guilt. I found season 1 so entertaining, but I do think her "investigation" was fairly unethical. Assume that Jay is telling the truth (as I do) and then put yourself in his shoes during a re-listen. SK was very much out to get him.

Almost everything you mention here has a flip side. To me, the interesting issues raised by this case are how do you determine guilt in the absence of physical evidence, given the unreliability of witnesses, the institutional interests of police and prosecutors, the fallibility of lawyers, and the biases of jurors.

> The show said the investigation was above average.

Yet still suffering from significant flaws. Source: http://genius.com/Serial-podcast-episode-8-the-deal-with-jay-annotated (Jim Trainum But what I’m saying is this: the mechanics, the documentation, the steps that they took, and all of that, they look good. Okay? I would have probably followed this same route. However, what we’re unsure of is what happened to change Jay’s story from A to B, and we do not know what happened in the interrogating-- those three hours and that will always result in a question as to what the final outcome should have been.)

> They pointed out how CG could have done a better job, but in the end Adnan had better legal representation then most people who are charged with murder.

And as I and other lawyers have pointed out, that's a poor reflection on our system.

The note, the asking for a ride, the cell phone pings in leakin park have never been explained.

> Asking for a ride.

A matter of dispute whether that really happened on the day in question.

> Cell pings at Leakin Park.

Pings place a phone, not the person.

> The note

That says "I'm going to kill" It's like Mad Libs, you can fill anything in there. For example, "...myself if this teacher doesn't stop droning on?" Ambiguous.

Look, reasonable people can and do disagree. But I think it's silly to suggest that this is an open and shut case that doesn't warrant discussion.

This is in response to several posts below about how the jury could convict Adnan despite disagreeing with the State's tenuous claim regarding the 2:36 Best Buy call. This is true, but keep in mind the second part of my post: Inez testified that she saw Hae leaving school at 2:15-2:30 on January 13th. This was when Hae stopped at the concession stand and Inez said that she could see her car, which Hae had left running. This testimony was mentioned in Adnan's appellate brief: "Inez Butler Hendricks, a teacher and athletic trainer at Woodlawn High School and Hae's friend, testified that she saw Hae at 2:15-2:30 p.m. on January 13."

Now, I know that, at this point in time, a lot of questions have been raised about Inez's reliability as a witness. But this post isn't about Adnan's actual guilt or innocence. It's about how the jury could have convicted Adnan. There's nothing about Inez's testimony from the first trial that makes her seem anything but credible. The Court of Special Appeals of Maryland must have thought this as well because the first finding of fact that they list in their opinion is that Hae "was last seen alive about 2:30 p.m. on January 13, 1999."

So, unless something drastically changed in the second trial, we have: (1) one witness for the prosecution (Inez) consistently saying twice that she saw Hae leaving school between 2:15 and 2:30; and (2) another witness for the prosecution (Debbie) consistently saying three times (two trials plus recorded police interview) that she's sure she saw Adnan outside the guidance counselor's office at about 2:45.

The 2:36 Best Buy call is just the cherry on top of the sundae.

We know that Jay testified that the call was at 3:45, which was basically consistent with both of his recorded police interviews. Brief of Appellant specifically says that Jenn testified: "At 3:00-3:30 p.m., [Jay] left her house."

https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-PUUcby-AZWfEhcuW/2002_WL_32510997_djvu.txt

Adnan didn't testify. I don't know who could have testified that the call was at 2:36.

First thing I thought of was this from the official Serial website. The problem is this falsely gives the impression that Adnan has had only one story. For instance at various times Adnan claimed he was supposed to get a ride from Hae but she got tired of waiting and left, that he didn't ask for a ride because he had his own car, and that he wouldn't have asked for a ride because Hae was too busy. Another example would be that Adnan has variously claimed that after school he was at the adult video store with Jay (to Nisha), hanging out with Dion by the gym, or in the library with Asia.

Cheers to JWI for the Dion document.

Pagers had a greater variety of formats than cell phones.

So each vendor typically had it's own format and since networks were considerably cheaper than cell phones you can have more vendors. The vendor would only broadcast within one country (usually) so you can have duplication in other countries.

Additionally, there were some formats of pagers allowed tens of millions of users.

According to this source pager population was about 120 million in 1996 which is probably close to it's peak

Edit* Sleeping and woke up refer to the states of the pager. Each pager was split into groups sometimes based on tones. When a message was broadcast it addressed a specific group to wake it up and than a specific member in the group. This way a pager had to only listen to a small percentage of pages and could save power when a message wasn't addressed to it's group.

I think this letter response from a public defender in Brooklyn pretty much sums it up for me.

(Although he does get his 'their' and 'there' wrong in his final sentence.)

Zach was sentenced to life in prison. He and his parents continue to proclaim his innocence.

Here is a recent article outlining the case for a wrongful conviction.

Here is an article from April 2000 showing that Gutierrez was Zach's attorney. I've had trouble finding more articles linking her to the case, but have only tried some quick Google searches.

Maybe I'm mis-speaking, we're all aware of how bad memories can be :]

It's in this document, I'm at work right now and can't dig for it:

https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-PUUcby-AZWfEhcuW/2002_WL_32510997_djvu.txt

EDIT: I lied, I had time....

>This "post-plea" hearing was held at the request of the State, which waived its right to be present at the hearing. In the face of direct questioning from the trial court, the State hid the fact that sometime after the September 7, 1999 "guilty plea" hearing, Jay [redacted] became disenchanted with his attorney, questioned whether that attorney was given to him by the State solely for the purpose of advising him to sign the plea agreement, questioned whether the attorney was loyal to him or to the State, and thought about withdrawing his plea, (2/1 1/00-150, 160, 168, 171) [Jay] called Judge McCurdy to inform him of his doubts and problems. [Jay] also called the prosecutor and informed the State of his situation. (2/1 1/00-204-06)

>The trial court repeatedly asked the State specifically whether it knew if something happened after the plea to necessitate the post-plea hearing, and the State at least three times answered falsely that it did not. The State knew that [Jay] called Judge McCurdy to inform him of these problems, because [Jay] also called the State and informed it of the problems.

[EDIT] I removed Jay's last name, sorry about that.

> Citation needed.

Here's your citation, plusca.

No one can make a determination regarding lividity without being able to see the lividity. Is that really that hard to understand?

No. Here it is, right from the horse's -- err --- mouth:

>“Jay’s testimony by itself, would that have been proof beyond a reasonable doubt?” Urick asked rhetorically. “Probably not. Cellphone evidence by itself? Probably not.”

> But, he said, when you put together cellphone records and Jay’s testimony, “they corroborate and feed off each other–it’s a very strong evidentiary case.”

https://theintercept.com/2015/01/07/prosecutor-serial-case-goes-record/

> I've often wondered what people think they would have found at Jay's house. Even if there was ever something there, the cops were not tipped to Jay until well after Hae was killed. I doubt Jay had any evidence still laying around.

According to Jay, he had a deal in place. Whether we believe Jay or not is a different matter. But if he is telling the truth then that would explain why his house was not searched, following on from his multiple dealings with police, pre-confession.

I stonewalled them that way. No — until they told me they weren’t trying to prosecute me for selling weed, or trying to get any of my friends in trouble. ...

That’s the best way I can account for the inconsistencies. Once the police made it clear that my drug dealing wasn’t gonna affect the outcome of what was going on, I became a little bit more transparent.

He changed his statement after the police showed him the cell phone records:

>11

>Contrary. to [Jay's] testimony, MacGillivary said at no time did [Jay] request a lawyer, because if he had, all questioning would have ceased. (2/18/00-128-129)

>MacGillivary denied that [Jay] first took him to the wrong location before showing police where the car was. He also said that [Jay] told him that Appellant showed him Hae's body in the trunk on Franklintown Road, contrary to [Jay] testimony that it happened at the Best Buy. (2/1 8/00- 151)

>MacGillivary interviewed [Jay] a second time on March 15, 1 999, with Appellant's cell phone records, and noticed that [Jay's] statement did not match up to the records. Once confronted with the cell phone records, [Jay] "remembered things a lot better." (2/17/00-158)

>[Jay] gave yet a third statement on April 1 3, 1 999, and admitted that he lied on the two previous occasions to cover up the fact that he bought and sold marijuana.

https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-PUUcby-AZWfEhcuW/2002_WL_32510997_djvu.txt

Spoilers?

[Debbie testified that Stephanie admitted she was interested in Adnan. Jay claims he wasn't jealous, but I'm not sure if I believe him. If it was my girlfriend and I heard rumors she liked this guy before me, and they were the two most popular kids in school both in the honors program, and he was buying her presents... The police already suspect Adnan, Jay can tell the police what they want to hear and Adnan goes away.](/spoiler)

Source

As to your second question, I'm not OP, but I'm really trying to keep an open mind. I think it's possible Jay was more involved. I think it's possible Jay was less involved (and the police coerced him to implicating himself more to guarantee his immunity, which would explain the absolutely impossible Patapsco State Park trip).

This seems to be the full appeal hearing. https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-PUUcby-AZWfEhcuW/2002_WL_32510997_djvu.txt It also has some other information like another suspect and more details on the notes and diary. There seems to be more documents as well in a sequential order so 996 and 998 for example are both on the same case.

From the Intercept:

>What would you have done differently?

>I don’t know if me not moving in Adnan’s circle of people would have saved her life. Like, I don’t know if I sold more weed or less weed that Hae would still be alive. You know what I’m saying? I don’t know if there’s anything else I could have done. Maybe I could have listened better, and taken what I heard more seriously.

I think he's talking about how he wouldn't have been involved with Adnan if not for the weed dealing, not necessarily that the weed dealing had anything to do with her death. But I don't think Rabia's crazy or morally wrong to speculate about such things.

It's on Serial.

>It was about six o’clock at night. And they all three, Adnan, Jay, and Cathy, acknowledge being together at the apartment, there’s no dispute about that.

http://genius.com/Serial-podcast-episode-6-the-case-against-adnan-syed-annotated

Note the context. The context being the day of Hae's death. So it's fairly clear by a simple matter of inference that they were talking about the 13th. I can't picture SK deliberately trying to smudge around the edges here.

I would imagine CG was blindsided when Cathy approached the bench and testified. This would surely sway the jurors toward the states side. not to mention the cellphone pings at her house.

In episode 6 SK says al three of them acknowledge that he WAS at cathys, SK is so sure of it she says "there is no disputing it":

Then, there’s Cathy, that is not her real name, and we have changed her voice, but I’m calling her Cathy. I’ve mentioned her before. She saw Adnan and Jay, together, acting suspiciously, the word she uses is shady, at a critical time that evening of the 13th, the day Hae disappeared. If you go by Jay’s story, he brought Adnan to Cathy’s apartment after he picked Adnan up from track practice. So, after Hae had been killed, but before they went to bury her body. It was about six o’clock at night. And they all three, Adnan, Jay, and Cathy, acknowledge being together at the apartment, there’s no dispute about that.

http://genius.com/Serial-podcast-episode-6-the-case-against-adnan-syed-annotated

Clearly he lied to you as well Rabia. Or SK could be lying about all three of them acknowledging being there.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1391490/syed-defense-witnesses.pdf

After 40 hours of interviews SK says there is no dispute that he was at Cathys house

Then, there’s Cathy, that is not her real name, and we have changed her voice, but I’m calling her Cathy. I’ve mentioned her before. She saw Adnan and Jay, together, acting suspiciously, the word she uses is shady, at a critical time that evening of the 13th, the day Hae disappeared. If you go by Jay’s story, he brought Adnan to Cathy’s apartment after he picked Adnan up from track practice. So, after Hae had been killed, but before they went to bury her body. It was about six o’clock at night. And they all three, Adnan, Jay, and Cathy, acknowledge being together at the apartment, there’s no dispute about that.

http://genius.com/Serial-podcast-episode-6-the-case-against-adnan-syed-annotated/

But his original alibi is that he was at home until mosque time.

Syeds full lies LMAO

"One day you're cruising in your 7, next day you're sweating, forgetting your lies Alibis ain't matching up, BS catching up" ~ Jay-z

https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1391490/syed-defense-witnesses.pdf

Excited that it's out! https://www.producthunt.com/podcasts/serial-s2e1-dustwun

Not sure it'll be as gripping as S1, but I hope I'm wrong! Do you think he's a traitor? Do you think he should to jail for life?

> They also point out that he has been a model prisoner and received every commendation and award the institutions had to offer.

I wouldn't call Adnan a model prisoner. It is easy to cherry pick documents. Did you miss Rabia's guest appearance on a recent podcast where she revealed that Adnan had spent two terms of thirty days each in solitary confinement? The relevant portion of the podcast starts about 53 minutes in.

https://player.fm/series/series-1252410/the-kalief-browder-story-spike-exclusive

> Sarah interviewed an impartial detective who said it was good police work.

No. Trainum said it was above average police work. Not the same thing. He raised concerns about what the police did here.

Sarah Koenig Part of what Trainum does is review investigations, and he says this one is better than most of what he sees. The detectives in this case were cautious and methodical. They weren’t rushing to grab suspects or to dismiss them either. The evidence collection was well documented. I didn’t expect to hear that even though its basically a one witness case, the cell records mostly don’t match Jay’s statements, there’s no physical evidence linking Adnan to the murder. Despite all that, to an experienced detective like Trainum, this looks like a pretty sound investigation. Jim Trainum I would said that this is better than average.

Sarah Koenig Wow.

Jim Trainum But what I’m saying is this: the mechanics, the documentation, the steps that they took, and all of that, they look good. Okay? I would have probably followed this same route. However, what we’re unsure of is what happened to change Jay’s story from A to B, and we do not know what happened in the interrogating-- those three hours and that will always result in a question as to what the final outcome should have been.

Source: http://genius.com/Serial-podcast-episode-8-the-deal-with-jay-annotated

Be careful the conclusion you draw from Jim Trainium - he said the investigation is "better than average," which is not the same as good.

Sarah Koenig Part of what Trainum does is review investigations, and he says this one is better than most of what he sees. The detectives in this case were cautious and methodical. They weren’t rushing to grab suspects or to dismiss them either. The evidence collection was well documented. I didn’t expect to hear that even though its basically a one witness case, the cell records mostly don’t match Jay’s statements, there’s no physical evidence linking Adnan to the murder. Despite all that, to an experienced detective like Trainum, this looks like a pretty sound investigation.

Jim Trainum I would said that this is better than average.

Sarah Koenig Wow.

Jim Trainum But what I’m saying is this: the mechanics, the documentation, the steps that they took, and all of that, they look good. Okay? I would have probably followed this same route. However, what we’re unsure of is what happened to change Jay’s story from A to B, and we do not know what happened in the interrogating-- those three hours and that will always result in a question as to what the final outcome should have been.

Source: http://genius.com/Serial-podcast-episode-8-the-deal-with-jay-annotated

But Irrelevant evidence stays out. Period.

When you took the bar exam, was the rule taught differently?

Was hoping someone else would do it, but here it is:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/35NQZQG

I'll make a separate post about it.

ETA: Here's the post

Here's a similar job description for the role I had at Motorola.

https://www.linkedin.com/jobs2/view/23299534

Firmware is where the hardware meets the software, so the requirements are both RF and software programming. I had a broader scope than this role describes.

Also, two months ago when I started here, I didn't know I was the one on trial. I was just offering up information, trying to dispel much of the misinformation being presented.

Adnan has not played the majority of people on this page. If you look at the polls come up on this page, more people believe he is guilty.

Yes, Adnan being guilty is the most likely explanation. However, there's nothing really to talk about on this sub if you just believe he is guilty. It is interesting for a lot of people to come up with alternative explanations to the information we have.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s_thankyou.aspx?sm=EZCJS%252bO5A4kqzAFWzul06%252f19fx1AL3VBt60DbDBlDUk%253d

http://www.poll-maker.com/results211766x14084Ba7-8

Agree, excellent post and most importantly the anti-Islamic angle has not been explored by SK, I suspect very deliberately.

Jays original testimony contains the following:

Appellant allegedly said, “how can you treat someone like that that you are supposed to love.” He allegedly then said, “all knowing is Allah.” (2/4/00-142)

I've asked many Muslims, both religious and not, and this is simply not a realistic quote that could have feasibly been used by Adnan. It rather sounds to me like Jay (or the very upstanding Baltimore Police) trying to put a religious angle in the most clumsy fashion possible.

Link is here btw: https://www.scribd.com/doc/244492976/Westlaw-Document-11-24-29

> I've looked through those links and many others and it remains unclear whether or not the cops called him and asked him to come down, whether they swung by his house to pick him up for a ride, or whether he went down to the station himself.

Huh well. I can't find actual evidence to prove it. But nothing says he turned himself in. I know I've read and heard it stated that police picked him up. Not him going to the police.

https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-PUUcby-AZWfEhcuW/2002_WL_32510997_djvu.txt

It doesn't get more official than that. And I would think that it would be mentioned if he came to the police on his own.

> What is clear is that he was not charged or arrested before speaking to the cops.

Sure, but cops often bring people in for questioning without charging them or arresting them.

I doubt that there's a specific rule covering it because it basically never happens. According to Adnan's appellate brief, he wanted to "present testimony from Ms. Julian, a member of the Office of the Public Defender, who would have testified that the actions of the State in the present case in procuring a free private attorney for a witness was so rare that she had never even heard of it before."

https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-PUUcby-AZWfEhcuW/2002_WL_32510997_djvu.txt

Just FYI, it wasn't the final night. It was one of the last ten nights. The final night is followed up by Eid the next day. The date of Eid can vary by a day depending on your specific mosque, but it was likely on Jan 19 in 1999.

http://www.timeanddate.com/holidays/us/eid-al-fitr

I get your point, but I think the fact that it was just one of ten nights doesn't give the day the same level of memorability as say Yom Kippur, Diwali, Eid, Easter, etc.

> The real issue is that she testified that the call was early evening

Not that I disagree with you... on this one point though... it was January and the days were short and sunset was at 5:05. It might have felt like evening because of a setting sun, maybe it was overcast (not sure) or other conditions that would have made it feel later than it was. Memory is pretty fallible so that could be why she remembers it being evening.

https://www.webmd.com/drugs/2/drug-6661/accutane-oral/details/list-sideeffects

RARE side effects

If experienced, these tend to have a Severe expression

Abnormal Liver Function Tests Acute Infection Of The Nose, Throat Or Sinus Acute Inflammation Of The Pancreas Aggressive Behavior Anemia Bloody Urine Bone Overgrowth Bronchospasm Cataracts Corneal Scar Decreased Blood Platelets Decreased Calcification Or Density Of Bone Decreased Neutrophils A Type Of White Blood Cell Decreased Pigmentation Of Skin Decreased Vision At Night Deficiency Of Granulocytes A Type Of White Blood Cell Depression Elevation Of Proteins In The Urine Erythema Multiforme Fast Heartbeat Glomerulonephritis Having Thoughts Of Suicide Hearing Loss Hemorrhage From The Gums Hepatitis High Amount Of Triglyceride In The Blood High Amount Of Uric Acid In The Blood High Blood Sugar Inflammation Of The Gums Inflammation Of The Tendon Inflammatory Bowel Disease Life Threatening Allergic Reaction Mood Changes Muscle Pain Obstruction Of A Blood Vessel By A Blood Clot Osteoporosis Pink Eye Premature Closure Of Growth Plates In The Bones Pseudotumor Cerebri Psychosis Caused By A Drug Rhabdomyolysis Ringing In The Ears Seizures Stevens-Johnson Syndrome Stomach Cramps Stroke Sudden Blindness And Pain Upon Moving The Eye Suicidal Swollen Lymph Nodes Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis Ulcers Of Esophagus Visible Water Retention

1. In the most recent episode of SD (14) Bob says around the 36 minute mark that he was upset because the podcast he had recommended to his listeners didn't go over well. From the beginning of the episode he rants on about it. At the 36 minute mark he gets angry because apparently this other podcast said that Hae wrote things in her diary that made Adnan sound controlling. Bob then goes on to say that that absolutely did not happen, there is no evidence of that anywhere.

Well except a simple google search says otherwise. According to the Serial transcripts there are diary entries where Hae is upset because Adnan is angry that she was hanging out with a certain friend or at another point was upset she didn't respond to his messages fast enough (link below). Although you might claim this is normal teenage behavior, there is some evidence from Hae's journal that Adnan exhibited controlling behavior.

It is not factually correct to say that it doesn't exist.

Sorry you had to wait 20 minutes.

http://genius.com/Serial-podcast-episode-2-the-breakup-annotated

> If so, do people imagine this was because it was a cold day ...

It wasn't a cold day. The temperature in Baltimore was about fifty-seven degrees when the last bell rang at Woodlawn High School on January 13, 1999.

Oh, and BTW, it wasn't snowing either.

https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/KBWI/date/1999-1-13?req_city=&amp;req_state=&amp;req_statename=&amp;reqdb.zip=&amp;reqdb.magic=&amp;reqdb.wmo=

https://theintercept.com/.../exclusive-interview-jay-wilds-star-witness-adnan- syed-serial-case-pt-1/

Follow this link and read what Jay has to say, very believalbe.

I just completed the podcast and something stuck with me.

• In a latter episode it was revealed that Adnan had twice asked his lawyer to cop a plea and make a deal but for whatever reason she did not. Adnan admits to this and then goes on to justify it by saying he began to accept that what people in jail where telling him was true, that whether you are guilty or not, if they find you guilty, you will spend the rest of your life behind bars. Furthermore he goes on to say that there are people that came into the system the same time as him that took the deal (life sentence to serve 20 yrs, etc...) and they will be getting out soon. I get the hind sight of making a deal and you'd be getting out soon but to seek a deal and plead guilty to murder when you are 17? Innocent people don't do that. Hell you're only 17, 20 or 30 years is a life sentence in your mind and also you have to be thinking (if truly innocent) that there is no way they find you guilty because you didn't do it. You didn't, you know it and nothing could make you say otherwise.

Am I being naive? There are other things that convince me of his guilt as well but I've said enough for now.

I agree that she was probably buried at a later time based on lividity.

I also think that it is possible that Hae could have been in the trunk for some period of time before the lividity became fixed. Since it doesn't become fixed immediately, should could have been in the trunk for long enough for Jay to see and then moved at a later point in time to a prone position in which the lividity became fixed.

The cold would cause the fixation of the livor to be quicker, let's say 2 hours. Still time for her to be in the trunk for a period of time and then moved before livor became fixed. I doubt it was cold enough for it to happen within 15 minues.

https://books.google.com/books?id=oNsbKIeZpcQC&amp;pg=PA152&amp;lpg=PA152&amp;dq=cold+temperature+livor+mortis&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=S9ysrvD7Gg&amp;sig=Ehgw0Ke1egsnWGatRCE9S7Wtgeo&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ei=pP3QVPjnKpejyATNnIFA&amp;ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#...

> Rabia is a civically engaged legal practitioner with significant experience in immigration law, national security, civil liberties, interfaith relations, nonprofit and program management, and grassroots advocacy.

> Rabia is the President and Founder of the Safe Nation Collaborative (www.safenationcollaborative.com), a training program for law enforcement and American Muslim communities that aims to foster cooperative relationships in order to combat violent extremism.

> Rabia is currently a Fellow in the National Security Studies Program at the New America Foundation, a Fellow of the Truman National Security Project, and a Fellow of the American Muslim Civic Leadership Institute. She is the immediate past president of the Muslim Coalition of Connecticut, a nonprofit organization committed to coalition building, interfaith relations, and community service. Rabia currently serves on the Board of the Muslim American Citizens Coalition and Public Affairs Council and is an advisor to the Center for American Progress’s Faith and Immigration Roundtable. Rabia is a frequent blogger and OpEd contributor, writing on national security policy and American Muslim relations.

> Rabia has been an advocate in the American Muslim community on the grassroots level for many years, working hard to correct misperceptions and build interfaith relationships. She has provided cultural competency training on Islam and Muslims to dozens of audiences, including to Federal, state, and local law enforcement and works towards greater engagement, mutual respect, and cooperation between American Muslims and law enforcement to further the security of the United States.

> Specialties: National Security, American Muslim relations, interfaith outreach and education, immigration, public policy, public speaking, writing

Source: https://www.linkedin.com/pub/rabia-chaudry/5/506/675

The problem is that Jay has very little credibility on his own. This is both because of his general propensity for lying (as told by his friends on Serial) as well as the specific situation he found himself in with the cops threatening to charge him with the murder if he didn't "come clean." In light of this, the details of Jay's story do matter because those details can be corroborated or contradicted by other evidence.

Urick says exactly this in his Intercept interview:

>Those same cellphone records also corroborated Jay’s testimony about Adnan’s movements on the night of the crime.

>“Jay’s testimony by itself, would that have been proof beyond a reasonable doubt?” Urick asked rhetorically. “Probably not. Cellphone evidence by itself? Probably not.”

>But, he said, when you put together cellphone records and Jay’s testimony, “they corroborate and feed off each other–it’s a very strong evidentiary case.”

You see? Even Urick agrees. If we can't corroborate the details of Jay's account with other evidence, then there is certainly reasonable doubt as to whether he's telling the truth about Adnan killing Hae.

Motive is not an element of the crime and the state does not have to prove motive. We can put it out there as an explanation but it’s not essential to prove guilt. It may be supporting evidence that makes the jury understand it. But motive does not need to be proved.

-Prosecutor Kevin Urick

https://theintercept.com/2015/01/07/prosecutor-serial-case-goes-record/

Did you do this while Woodlawn was actually letting out of school, start from inside the building, walk to your parked car, wait for the busses to clear, stop at the gym to get a snack, then get back in your car and drive to Best Buy? Because thats what SK did...and she says it took her 17 minutes total, almost 12 minutes of which were just to get to the point where she was getting out at the gym to get a snack...leaving probably a 3-4 minute drive from the school to Best Buy. Almost exactly the same amount of time it took you to actually drive from the school to the Best Buy. Seems a little unfair to insinuate SK "pretended" the time it took her to recreate this sequnce since what you recreated and what she recreated were not remotely the same thing. Here's the episode transcript if you want to read what she actually said:

http://genius.com/Serial-podcast-episode-5-route-talk-annotated

It was in episode eight.

http://genius.com/Serial-podcast-episode-8-the-deal-with-jay-annotated

Even Rabia confirmed it:

> Some folks find this detail telling – Steph knew Jay intimately, and she stood by him, which means she believed him, which means he was probably telling the truth. Fair enough.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/splitthemoon/2014/11/serial-episode-8-confirmation-bias-ftw/#ixzz3NIyTq8Ol

Great post!

It's very likely that all this kerfuffle would have been easily avoided if we actually had heard (or at least read) Abe Waranowitz's testimony. Mr Waranowitz worked as an RF engineer for AT&T Wireless and was the person they sent to testify on this matter at trial (https://www.linkedin.com/pub/abraham-waranowitz/90/745/844).

This is one of the reasons why it's laughable that people here often suggest we have more evidence than the jury.

Here is a super annoyingly formatted document transcript of some of the appeal, if you control-f 'diary' you can read a lot of her diary. https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-PUUcby-AZWfEhcuW/2002_WL_32510997_djvu.txt

Actually this archive document https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-PUUcby-AZWfEhcuW/2002_WL_32510997_djvu.txt tells a different story to the one SK puts forward

>The last time Debbie saw Hae on January 1 3 was in gym class, and Hae was happy and rushing to go somewhere at 3:00 p.m. Debbie could not remember where Hae was going, but she told police on January 28, 1999 that Hae said she was going to the mall with Don. (2/16/00-306, 2/17/00-70)

When was gym class or is that another way of saying in the class where gym was held?

>the call was more towards the evening

Evening

1 >a : the latter part and close of the day and early part of the night

>b : chiefly Southern & Midland : afternoon

>c : the period from sunset or the evening meal to bedtime

Maryland is part of the Midland region

One would hope they would clarify, but words don't have a uniform meaning between people, or regions. Evening can mean afternoon in some places. Don't take my word for it, just look at the dictionary.

As it turn out, I was wrong about the wrestling schedule being in evidence (track is, but not wrestling). However, the Baltimore Sun (1/6/1999) did report the results of the Woodlawn-Randallstown meet held on Jan. 5 1999. You can view the entire page in the Undisclosed Wiki.

ADD: The meet is the very last one reported, fifth column of the sports box scores. ADD2: There was also a meet on Jan 12 at Loch Haven.

In the intercept interview, Jay states that the cops kept questioned him before and he did not cooperate until after Jenn started talking. He tells this story after they ask, why his story is different...

Edit: This is definitely a smoking gun that it was not as we see it in the files.

i wonder what people on this sub would say about this kid who was sentenced to life at 14. should his conviction be overturned? Joshua Phillips

Something like this?

https://librivox.org/dictionnaire-des-idees-recues-by-gustave-flaubert/

Edit to Add: I'm concerned my linking this might be read as a slam on librivox, which is not the intention. Librivox is an amazing project. Volunteers actually did read a funny dictionary and you can listen to it, is my point. Enjoy!

Because human arms are straight and the arm in the ground that comes out from the body's shoulder is pointed in a different direction than where the rock had been.

And sorry, I don't need to be an ME to know what an arm looks like.
And they don't look like this.

According to Adnan's appeal brief, Hae "was supposed to pick up her 6 year-old cousin at 3:00 or 3:15 p.m. that day. (1/28/00-25)"

This creates 4 possibilities: (1) Hae was supposed to pick up and also drop off her cousin before 3:00 (prosecutor's opening statement); (2) Hae was supposed to pick up her cousin at 3:00 (possibility #1 from brief); (3) Hae was supposed to pick up her cousin at 3:15 (possibility #2 for brief); and (4) Hae was supposed to pick up her cousin at or after 5:00 (CG opening statement).

They already tested hairs and fibers found on Hae's body and they didn't match Adnan or his clothes: https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-PUUcby-AZWfEhcuW/2002_WL_32510997_djvu.txt The cops didn't test them against anyone else though, because they're corrupt idiots.

They can actually run the DNA through the CODIS database, to compare it against any convicted offender or arrestee DNA that is already on file. So it could match Ronald or even another criminal, who knows. http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/biometric-analysis/codis/codis-and-ndis-fact-sheet

https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-sCEhpvo5xTiB4e40/2002_WL_32510996_djvu.txt

Police recovered a page torn from a map in the rear seat of the victim's, Hae Lee, vehicle. (1/31/00, 58). The page included the map area of Leakin Park, the location where Lee's body was found. (1/31/00, 60). Syed's fingerprint was found on an identification card in the glove compartment of the car. (2/1/00, 24-25).' Syed's palm print was found on the back cover of the map recovered fi-om the car. (2/1/00, 27). Syed's fingerprints were also found on floral paper recovered fi-om the back seat of the car. (2/1/00, 29). Two hairs recovered fi"om the victim's body matched Syed's physical characteristics, but did not match his hair exactly. (2/1/00, 117).

Yes, those issues were raised. I think the appellate decision was no prejudice. Meaning, if could have been a Brady violation but Defendant didn't prove it would have made a difference in his case.

Adnan's brief

https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-PUUcby-AZWfEhcuW/2002_WL_32510997_djvu.txt

Appellee's brief (State)

https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-sCEhpvo5xTiB4e40/2002_WL_32510996_djvu.txt

Crap, I coulda sworn I read the appellate opinion but don't know where it is now. Rabia must have it. Maybe she can post it or already did?

I think the only people that ever questioned the plausibility of the butt-dial theory were the trolls looking for people to argue with. 'Was a butt-dial possible' is a pretty senseless question. A better question is, what are the odds it was a butt-dial?

A study found that of the ~256,000 wireless 911 calls made to the Sheriff's Department in Milwaukee County in 2003, between 40 and 50 percent were accidental. On the other hand, fewer than three percent of calls made from landlines were accidental. And according to Roger Hixson, the technical issues director for the National Emergency Numbers Association (which conducted the national survey referenced within the link), this difference can largely be attributed to the speed-dial function.

So, even if we're investigating things in a vacuum, it might not be fair to say that a butt-dial was 'highly unlikely.' When you consider this along with the rest of the cell information from that day -- such as the fact that the Nisha call was the lone call made to one of Adnan's acquaintances throughout a large block of outgoing calls -- it becomes even easier to believe that this call was made unintentionally.

If I recall correctly, the coach said Adnan could walk the track during Ramadan. He goes on to say that although he does not take attendance he remembers walking with Adnan during Ramadan on a warm day. The only truly warm day was the 13th. So it is likely Adan was at track on the 13th. https://www.wunderground.com/history/monthly/KBWI/date/1999-1

> he was trying to look not guilty and didn't really realize that it would be used against him

I could understand that behavior, but we have Adnan now specifically saying the exact opposite. Adnan says he never considered himself a suspect until arrested.

I never, not one time, thought they actually believed that I killed Hae. From episode 9.

> Someone has mentioned that people who are making up a story include extra details, whereas people who are telling the truth give the basic plot points only

I don't really buy that. If I were talking to the police about a murder I had witnessed, but for which I bore no blame, I'd tell 'em every last detail. That's easy for me to do, because I'm a well-off white guy with no criminal history, and probably wasn't easy for Jay because he wasn't.

> some posted a document with all of Jay's stories lined up on a timeline, and it occurred to me that his most recent story is the most sparse. This could be because he doesn't remember that much after 15 years, or it could be because for his original testimony and interviews, he was adding in a lot of detail because he was lying (to protect his family/grandmother's house?).

Here's mashable's timeline of Jay's stories and here's Serial's timeline of Adnan's and Jay's stories and the call log.

I think Jay's latest timeline (the interview) is the most sparse simply because it was produced in a brief, less-than-totally-confrontational interview with a reporter, rather than over many hours of police interrogation like the previous versions.

That would be a terrible reason not to contact an alibi witness. What if Asia started speaking to him before Adnan typed in his password and hit enter?

But in any event, the email and password are in the defense attorney notes from the summer I think, and Hotmail only retained records for 60 days, so looking for anything after March would have turned up nothing.

https://www.quora.com/Serial-Podcast-and-Death-of-Hae-Min-Lee-2014-15/Can-someone-from-Microsoft-help-exonerate-Adnan-Syed-by-helping-to-access-his-Hotmail-login-records-from-Jan-13th-1999

It appeals to young people who can relate to high school relationships, breakups and getting into trouble. It has a fairy tale aspect of a prom prince and a high school princess and a villain. The IP play the fairy godmother. There is hope and intrigue. The casual language is simple so young teens can understand and is without the formal tone of documentaries.

There is also a story within a story which appeals to older audiences with SK being the girlfriend seeing a new guy and Dana being her sensible girlfriend. Watch this to understand the sub-story

http://www.cnet.com/news/serial-turns-from-crime-to-romance-in-this-parody-trailer/

Here is the link to the transcript of the Serial episode in which Sarah talks to Chris. I wish she'd asked if he remembered when Jay discussed this with Chris. If it was before Jay ever had any contact with the police re: this crime, it's a big piece of corroborating evidence for the state. If the police had already been discussing the case with Jay, and had laid a theory before him that implicated him as an accessory, then it's also quite understandable that Jay would begin to discuss it with friends - almost as a form of rehearsal. But that is a big, speculative leap, of course.

http://genius.com/Serial-podcast-episode-8-the-deal-with-jay-annotated

Mr. S's sister in law was Hae's math teacher at WHS in 1999.

I tried every which way to figure out if he knew, or anyone in his family knew Adnan, or Jay, or any of the people Jay had told about the murder. And vice versa. Whether any of them had ever heard of Mr. S. I found no connections. The closest I got was, bear with me, I found out that Mr. S’s sister-in-law was a math teacher at Woodlawn back in 1999 when all this happened. So I called her. Hae was her student, she said. An excellent student. Top of the line. But she didn’t think Mr. S knew anything about the crime before he found the body. She put her husband on the phone, Mr. S’s younger half-brother. And he said, “you know what’s crazy? I used to live next door to the kid that did it!”

Source: Serial podcast transcript

http://genius.com/Serial-podcast-episode-3-leakin-park-annotated

edit remove bold

I don't understand why someone doesn't just ask Mary Anderson.

"Hey Mary - If you'd been asked for incoming call details in 1999, would you have been able to provide them?"

Any of the people listed here under AT&T Wireless Business Security Department - Florida - would be able to answer this.

It is not a mystery for the ages. The irony is that to get the answer, one need only make a phone call.

widely popular online survey tool. really easy to use. does the counting for you :)

https://www.surveymonkey.com/

used in ryokineko and other polls seen on here in past.

identity of answerers would only be knowable by author of survey, or any redditor, if they somehow gave it away in their answers.

Well at least you got the date correct.

>Seriously though according to this the temperature was 38f at the time they were burying the body

According to your link it was only 38f between 6:00pm and 6:30pm. Why do you think they were burying the victim then?

>That in no one references her opinions now. You are inferring with no evidence.

Jay is relating a phone call he made to Stephanie shortly before his interview with the Intercept:

"When was the last time you talked to Stephanie?

I called her yesterday. We’re only loose acquaintances now. But since I’ve been talking more, I just wanted to make sure she was OK with it—that I was opening up about all this. Because, like I said in the past, I had shielded her from as much of this as I could. We got into it a little bit. I told her that she was naive about Adnan. After the murder, she didn’t believe that he did it. We argued a little bit because I leaned on her and said, ‘I wouldn’t have ever really been in contact with Adnan had she not suggested that I sell weed to him.’

Upon rereading it, I'm not sure if when he says "We got into it a little" if he is referring to the call the day before the intercept interview or way in the past Either way, it sounds like Stephanie didn't believe it then and probably doesn't believe it now.

And Jay did not know about Asia before but does now. He said that he later learned that murder may not have happened at Best Buy.

"Q: Where was Hae’s car? Was it in the Best Buy parking lot?

Jay: Hae’s car could have been in the parking lot, but I didn’t know what it looked like so I don’t remember. When I pick him up at Best Buy, he’s telling me her car is somewhere there, and that he did this in the parking lot. But that, according to what I learned later, is probably not what happened."

https://theintercept.com/2014/12/29/exclusive-interview-jay-wilds-star-witness-adnan-syed-serial-case-pt-1/

There's another photo of her here, from the same series with Bouknight.

Also, there should be a photo of her accompanying this Capital Gazette article, but unfortunately the Gazette only posts the text of old articles, and I can't find any digitised copies within the appropriate date range.

Brung- used in dialect in Huckleberry Fin: Mark Twain in Adventures of Huckleberry Finn wrote: "I give her a turn with the paddle and brung her nose to shore; then I got my gun and slipped out and into the edge of the woods." Other references to "brung"= https://books.google.com/books?id=HIJBAQAAIAAJ&amp;pg=PA404&amp;lpg=PA404&amp;dq=dialect+brung&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=MNX3j5P21x&amp;sig=BAOiq-BvQx4Iy-0n4ZPsIuuc_Cs&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ei=wp_XVI_nF8alNrGxgegN&amp;ved=0CDwQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&amp;q=...

https://books.google.com/books?id=Sd3byNeBdR4C&amp;pg=PT1139&amp;lpg=PT1139&amp;dq=dialect+tooken&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=lB-COsrLRc&amp;sig=U1F1zOmqueuNB8BtytFJcjrgcnI&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ei=MKDXVLe-AZDlgwSs3IKACQ&amp;ved=0CDoQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&a...

... I don't have time to go into this more at the moment, but dialect privilege is alive and well.

According to the weather it was a warm day and later that night there was an ice storm. So during the day when the coach and Adnan were walking around the outdoor track (Adnan was fasting) it was seasonably about the norm. Later in the evening when Asia was hanging out with her boyfriend the ice storm started and she used that as an excuse to stay over with him. It's not really that complicated. But you probably knew this already.

https://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KBWI/1999/1/13/DailyHistory.html

https://books.google.com/books?id=oNsbKIeZpcQC&amp;pg=PA152&amp;lpg=PA152&amp;dq=cold+temperature+livor+mortis&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=S9ysrvD7Gg&amp;sig=Ehgw0Ke1egsnWGatRCE9S7Wtgeo&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ei=pP3QVPjnKpejyATNnIFA&amp;ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#...

Here is a story out of Maryland.

https://player.fm/series/wrongful-conviction-with-jason-flom-1387140/s-e6-john-huffington-drug-deals-a-double-death-sentence-over-3-decades-in-prison

Around the 37:20 mark, John Huffington (32 years in prison, overturned conviction in 2013, Alford plea in 2017) describes his 15 year battle to get DNA testing. The State of Maryland (and the FBI) blocked him at every turn, actually submitted a motion asking to destroy the evidence (hairs), were eventually ordered by a Judge to test them & then outright lied to the same Judge about the reason for ignoring his order to do so. Previous to this order, the cost of testing, to the tune of $85,000, would have been the responsibility of the defendant and for a test that destroyed the evidence in the process.

It definitely helps to put Justin Brown's decision to hold off the DNA testing in perspective.

Incorrect.

> Please link to any source that defines "normal conditions" for lividity to include temperatures of 57 degrees dropping to below 38 degrees within 6 hours.

Here's the weather to refresh your memory.

> Burial position doesn't match livor.

Are you claiming you can prove this? Your comment implies proof, please provide it.

I can see that you are absolutely convinced that you are right; and, as I said, that's fine. Nothing I say will ever sway your opinion; and that's fine also.

However, regarding your allegation that the weather report shows no snow on January 8, that's not correct. Check the notation under Snow to find a depth of four inches with the Hourly Weather History & Observations showing snow all throughout the morning (some heavy) and turning to ice and freezing rain in the afternoon. You will also see under Wind the presence of both snow and rain that day. I understand that you hastily only looked at one factor that was not noted properly to lead you to believe there was no snow. I hope I have answered that issue well after examining all the factors.

https://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KBWI/1999/1/8/DailyHistory.html?req_city=&amp;req_state=&amp;req_statename=&amp;reqdb.zip=&amp;reqdb.magic=&amp;reqdb.wmo=

I took the quote straight from the Intercept.

I'm guessing he doesn't remember 16 years later if it was an incoming or outgoing call.

Hot Fries are a nasty food-like product that are as much like a french fry as an onion ring is like a funyon. I have absolutely no experience in this area and I am genuinely asking for your expertise here (rather than questioning it), can you tell from a list of ingredients whether your observations would be true of a food (and I use the term loosely) such as this?

http://www.fooducate.com/app#page=product&amp;id=A3730434-E107-11DF-A102-FEFD45A4D471

So let's get to it - what exactly did she observe?

eta So I read her testimony and police interview again.

If she ever had any formal grief counselling training, then she is not acting upon it.

> It is important to remember that there is no one way that an individual "should" react to loss, and that our discomfort with the reactions of others often occurs when their reaction contradicts values and beliefs we have developed in response to our own culture and experiences. http://www.encyclopedia.com/reference/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/grief-loss-and-bereavement

>The death of a pupil: Try not to be alarmed if some of the students laugh or make inappropriate comments, this is how shock can sometimes manifest. http://www.cruse.org.uk/for-schools/death-of-a-pupil

I think this was addressed in one of the episodes. It was because many of the suspects had been in her car many times before the murder, so there's really no way to slap a time-frame on prints. It was in the episode where they found a map page from a map book in the car.

from the transcript http://genius.com/Serial-podcast-episode-6-the-case-against-adnan-syed-annotated:

> "The most incriminating piece of physical evidence against Adnan Syed was a fingerprint, or rather, a palm print. On a map. It was one of those big map books you buy at a gas station, police found it in the backseat of Hae’s car. On the back cover was a partial print of Adnan’s left palm. One page was ripped out from the map. At trial they pointed out that it was the page that showed Leakin Park. The defense argued, ‘well, you can’t put a timestamp on fingerprints, they could’ve been six week-old fingerprints or six month-old fingerprints, there’s no way to tell.’ And Adnan had ridden in and driven Hae’s car many times, all their friends said so."

Box.com allows the owners of a document to see the IP addresses of visitors with a timestamp? That seems kind of sketchy https://www.box.com/blog/share-your-stuff-and-stay-in-control-using-box-shared-links/

(under the heading See Download and View Stats)

I hope you're responsible with that information, JWI.

ETA: If you want to avoid this or any potential security breach using Tor Browser is a good initial protection https://www.torproject.org/projects/torbrowser.html.en

Thanks, I will read.

I also came across this. It is fairly techie, which I can read, but it talks about how telecom billing systems work. It talks about the difference between the backend call detail records they gather, and the billing system which needs to interpret it in order to invoice customers. Think of the large number of plan options that the cell providers have - they need to collect enough data to be able to bill for every plan variation.

http://www.tutorialspoint.com/telecom-billing/

My Serial obsessed girlfriend created a clever and quick 1-minute survey following the final episode. https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/YGJCPCX Apparently this is her coping mechanism for the end of the show folks! Please take a look and fill it out, and spread it...