|
ninjahedgehog posted:While I think Adnan probably did it (or at the very least was heavily involved), there's still a ton of reasonable doubt and if I were on the jury I certainly wouldn't have voted to convict him. I think this most peoples' (and the most sensible) take at this moment: he shouldn't have been convicted, but there's some strangeness floating around him that certainly makes him "a person of interest". I occasionally find Koenig's flow-of-consciousness talking irritating but, to put it in a positive light, it does reflect that way people thing about these cases, in very subjective cliches: He's a good kid. He's smart. That doesn't seem right. This is bad for Adnan. I don't know if that was a deliberate choice, but it reminds of interviews with jurors after trials: We just didn't like him. We didn't believe him. I'm slightly sceptical about Koenig's declarations that she doesn't know where the story is going. I doubt you would invest a whole year chasing a story that could implode in the second episode. (Adnan confesses. Another witness comes forward.) So I feel she's got some trump card ready to play. But this is just my subjective opinion.
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2014 11:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 16:32 |
|
|
Euthyphro posted:That word choice didn't really strike me as anything odd. Maybe it's just me. Weird analogy incoming, but if you watch Survivor, it reminded me of Season 20 (Heroes vs. Villains) when Coach betrayed Boston Rob, and as Boston Rob was walking out, he turned to Coach to say, "You're a little man, Coach." I think you can easily run into trouble once you start thinking: I'd never say that. If I was in jail for 15 years, I would ... I'd never do that. That's not how I'd think. Because people react differently, few of us have been in a situation remotely like his, a slip of the tongue or a single word uttered in the heat of the moment shouldn't be analysed that heavily, etc. etc. I looked at Reddit briefly for their Serial coverage and was glad to see a post admonishing people for this behaviour. Failing to conform to our preconceptions is flimsy evidence. Congrats to the OP for starting this thread. I had doubts it would get enough interest, but here we are.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2014 18:38
|
|
|
Combed Thunderclap posted:It is also living proof why the court of public opinion should never under any circumstances be allowed anywhere near the judicial system, which, unbelievably crappy as it is, is sometimes not collectively insane. The most basic legal rules and protections mean absolutely nothing to the vast majority of people there. Absolutely. I read a bit of true crime literature and occassionally venture into forums where people discuss it ... if they were running the legal system, the prisons would be overflowing and many innocent people would dangling from the end of a rope. Have just listened to the latest episode. Welp, I have no idea what happened that day. He supposedly strangled her in a carpark? That sounds like the work of a complete psycho. nonathlon fucked around with this message at 19:51 on Nov 14, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2014 10:32
|
|
|
Perhaps of interest: a collection of images from the Serial reddit. It has some useful maps and timelines: https://imgur.com/r/serialpodcast/
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2014 11:19
|
|
|
Watermelon City posted:If the serialpodcast subreddit is to be believed, Adnan is a perfect sociopath murderer. That might sound unreasonable, but some redditor dude's flair said he was Ph.D psychiatrist Muslim former prosecutor so we can trust him. It's funny how all the internet sleuths pick apart Adnan's every word for proof of lies when they are so credulous about unverified internet experts. I think they got most of their criminology knowledge from watching "Hannibal". (There was one "expert" postiing on reddit that was interesting, someone who had worked as a public defendant. He commented that almost everyone he had defended has some excuse, explanation or story as to why they weren't guilty. In that light, he said Adnan's inarticulate befuddlement was atypical. Subjective, but there you are.) The three revelations at the start of the latest episode? Certainly important, but the possibility of poor memory can't be ruled out. And what I'd really like is an answer to the question that's on everyone's mind: Asia? Aja? Ayesha? Which is it?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 10:32
|
|
|
bad day posted:I guess I just don't have whatever bone it is that makes people inexplicably outraged by (or obsessed with) literally everything that exists, or that large numbers of people enjoy. Well, you're right. But this is nothing to do with Serial and everything to do with the blogosphere / Twitterati / tumblr crowd and the media treating their tirades as if they were important. I mean Gamergate, Shirtgate, Miley Cyrus did a thing!, CancelColbert, this character in this movie doesn't look like I imagined!, Bendgate (or any other shitfit about iPhones) ... Every news outlet has become the Daily Mail and the millions of people ready to scream outrage about anything are just fuel for pageclicks. Next week there will be a new outrage, and journalists who have a quota to fill will write responses and responses to responses ... Anyways, back to Serial: - Still have no idea what went down - This is not an excuse for the police but: I wonder if we're getting a good idea of what was presented in the court case. Obviously Koenig has to summarise and shorten but I'm struck by the retired cops verdict that it was a decent solid case. Wait 15 years, add in a lot of people remembering (or mis-remembering) things that were never presented or available and a decent case might look a lot shakier.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2014 11:16
|
|
|
PaganGoatPants posted:Pretty sure that's Reddit's #1 theory. No, you see Adnan is a master manipulator sociopath. That he shows no signs of it is just evidence as to how good he is. And it must have been a revenge serial killing. I mean, can you prove it wasn't?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2014 13:43
|
|
|
Mister Chief posted:I just cannot make the theory that Jay acted alone work. He completely lacks any sort of motive and if we believe Adnan's narrative that he was at track that day then Jay would have been operating under the assumption that the person he was trying to frame would have an air tight alibi. It makes no sense. Motive is a real sticking point for any of the suspects. The most we've had are cliches that aren't backed by the evidence (e.g jealousy).
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2014 10:12
|
|
|
kdrudy posted:Then the next season they can do a ghost story too how about, that'd be about on par with a UFO story. Didn't Ira Glass say next season was going to be about a haunted house? I'd love to see another intricate true crime season, but I can understand they don't want to become pigeon-holed in that genre. So they have to do something quite different. Exactly what can yield 12 hours of coverage is another question. Even most controversial crimes have that much material.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2014 11:36
|
|
|
Just listened to the latest episode: that was a much needed expansion on the character and role of the lawyer Gutierrez, who previously was just tending towards a "sleazy lawyer" cliche. Mind, like much in the whole case we're left with a fragmentary picture. In some ways, she reminded of someone with oncoming dementia, seemingly trying to hold on to it all but randomly forgetting or losing track of things, rambling on. (Note: the above was just a comparison, not a reddit-like "guys, i've worked it out!" I have no idea what was up with Gutierrez, but MS and fraud don't seem to explain it all.) But the "magic evidence"? Stunning. That should have changed the whole case right there. And SK's final "psychopath" quip? Can't help but think that's a dig at the internet detectives. nonathlon fucked around with this message at 16:55 on Dec 5, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2014 10:57
|
|
|
Red Oktober posted:I'm not sure if it's viewable without (free) membership, but the FT has a good article on Serial, touching on what it refers to as the 'moral queasiness' of using real cases for entertainment. I think the FT is one of those sites that gives you a few free articles a month. It's a fairly smart article and largely absolves Serial itself and looks towards the audience, e.g. Reddit. There's a nice quote at the end too: quote:“I feel like the word for this whole series has been ‘ambiguity’,” says another, 28-year-old Anna Maltby Patil. “The crime was ambiguous, the ‘evidence’ was ambiguous, the characters involved have been ambiguous, everyone’s opinions about the podcast itself have been pretty ambiguous. I think we’ll be able to do a lot of interpretation about that but I don’t know that Sarah is going to provide it for us . . .”
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2014 10:40
|
|
|
Mister Chief posted:Am I crazy or was the Asia alibi debunked because she specifically mentioned the type of weather that day way which was completely inaccurate? Like she said it was raining heavily but it was clear all day or something? So she would have been remembering another day. Your memory is correct. While not entirely debunking Asia's story, it at least makes it unreliable. Like just about everything else in the case. In fact, about the only uncontested fact in the whole case is that Jay is somehow involved.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2014 10:20
|
|
|
Kojiro posted:What's this bullshit about some nearby serial killer having done it? How the hell would Jay know where Hae's car was if it was some unrelated guy? As above, but a few more details from memory: 7 months before Hae was murdered, there was a girl from the same school strangled, her body buried in parkland. It's a very similar crime and ordinarily, you'd would absolutely look at linking the two. But as you say, Jay's testimony is the spanner in the works. Why would he be covering for a serial killer he has no connection to?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
Bitchkrieg posted:Koenig managed to destroy the most thoughtful aspects of Serial today, reducing the series to an anti-climactic, 40 minute milquetoast college freshman Psych101 "well, everyone has the capacity for evil!" episode. I wouldn't go that far, but it was a wishy-washy aimless sort of episode. There are points where it stumbles across an interesting point (Adnan's protests at the beginning) but veers off to SK thinking aloud about her own thoughts.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2014 10:43
|
|
|
doctorfrog posted:I'm sometimes frustrated with SK, but overall I think she and her crew have done a good job on the podcast. Part of me hopes the next season is just as divisive and unsatisfying. Chipping in to agree. Much like TAL, it's easy to parody and pick out their foibles. Is Serial a whodunnit, an exploration of the justice system, a journalists self-examination, all/none of the above? But it's good and a worthy experiment.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
Rusty Shackelford posted:I forget which episode it was, but in one of the calls between Sarah and Adnan, there was a brief moment where it sounded like she had a little crush on him. She caught herself and totally changed her speech pattern the next time she spoke, but to me it sounded like she found him completely charming. After thinking that, I've been looking at how she presents things a little differently. Doesn't she actually describe him as "charming" a few times? It didn't even occur to me that she was ever very neutral on the subject of Adnan's innocence. She agonises over "but what if he's guilty?" more than the opposite. She's certainly strove for even-handed reporting but I don't think there's any doubt as to her opinion.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2014 18:07
|
|
|
Sivart13 posted:She didn't show up to pick up her cousin or whatever so unless you believe she was kidnapped and held for some time then her being killed on that day is the occam's razor solution. Absolutely. She was seen in one place, expected in another but didn't arrive so the simplest assumption is that something happened between those two points in time. However the simplest solution is not always the correct one and in the light of other difficult facts - trying to get Adnan to commit the crime and dispose of the body in that period, the caller who said they saw Hae in between, Asia's statement that Adnan was elsewhere - it's reasonable to examine that assumption and look for alternatives. (Note: I don't believe she was kidnapped and held for a lengthy period because we have no evidence of that. But that one assumption above is holding down the rest of the states case.)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2014 13:17
|
|
|
Toaster Beef posted:Yeah, I thought there was no way I'd suspect Adnan by the end of this thing, but we've only got one episode to go and I'm on board with the idea that he did it. Not at all on board with the notion that it's beyond all reasonable doubt, though, so I don't think he should be in jail. And the "why" and the "how" are still very ill-defined. The first is perhaps of only minor importance to the legal process, the "how" should be critical. Why? Uh, he was jealous or something. Even though he said he wasn't and had moved on. How? Somehow or other. Lemme get back to you on that ...
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2014 13:58
|
|
|
Toaster Beef posted:SomeJazzyRat blew this out of the water, but I'll reiterate in case someone skips it: Koenig's a journalist. Not only does she know what she's doing, she's done a remarkable job over the past year (and even moreso over the past couple of months). She has maintained from the beginning that it isn't her job to exonerate Adnan or provide narrative closure because that's not what journalists do. I don't entirely disagree but: Maybe Serial isn't intended to be a murder investigation ... although it sometimes acts like one. And some have suggested it's an investigation into the nature of justice / the legal process / character / crime ... and certainly it looks like that at times. Sure, you could say it's about investigating "the story" ... but it's not very clear what the story is. And SK has spent a lot of the podcast on the process of chasing the story, the story of the story. So the confusion is understandable. Insert caveat here about this is a minor complaint and how I've found Serial very interesting. It's just that I can understand where some complaints are coming from.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2014 14:05
|
|
|
facebook jihad posted:So has anyone decided to use Mailchimp after listening to this podcast? Because it seems like the stupidest app, like who really needs help writing emails outside of maybe grade schoolers. My neighbourhood association uses it to send out newsletters to locals. They seem to like it and be able to use it easily enough, and this is after me trying to get them to use Google groups for the same purpose for years. nonathlon fucked around with this message at 23:35 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2014 15:54
|
|
|
Just finished listening to the final episode and it was fine. I've enjoyed the series as a whole, even while sometimes finding it a little "NPR" and waffly at times. They've set themselves up a real challenge for next season. I've had Serial in mind as I've read about other cases in the last month. There's a solid history of people who were put away (and some subsequently exonerated) on the basis of an involved party cutting a deal, or even just because it was decided they fit the profile even in the lack of motive or evidence: * The murder of Brian Carrick: 8 years after this unsolved disappearance, a con looking for a break on some charges implicates a third party who is jailed for 26 years. There is no physical evidence and the most likely suspect has meanwhile dies of a drug overdose ... http://abcnews.go.com/US/happened-brian-carrick-inside-unsolved-case-illinois-teen/story?id=25842096 * The famous Thin Blue Line case: a 16-year-old is picked up for a cop-killing but blames it on an adult acquaintance. Despite the evidence pointing to the youth, the older man is picked up for the crime, seemingly because only he could be put to death for the crime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thin_Blue_Line_(1988_film) * Michael Morton: jailed for the murder of his wife, again despite the lack of physical evidence, as the cops "liked him" for the crime and his neighbours found him a bit cold and standoffish. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Morton_(criminal_justice) * Stefan Kiszko: a local eccentric is arrested for the sexual assault and murder of a young girl because police felt he was the right sort of person. Finding him in possession of "girlie magazines" and a bag of sweets only served as further evidence. After a gruelling interrogation, Kiszko confesses and is jailed. Belatedly, he turns out to have been impotent, lame and incapable of carrying out the crime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lesley_Molseed
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2014 15:27
|
|
|
Nth Doctor posted:I thought the rumor was that he had stolen money from the offerings at the mosque. To the tune of some massive amount of money, so much as to be implausible as the mosque would have noticed it. Didn't Adnan cop to some petty theft from the mosque instead? To look at another side of the story, man this was just full of weird and unfinished angles: - body found by streaker - killer supposedly drives around with body in car, showing it to people - hotshot lawyer goes loco for no explained reason - chief witness is the guy who helped conceal the body and failed to report a crime for 6 weeks - witnesses pop up, give their story and then change their mind - mystery phone calls
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2015 01:34
|
|
|
moths posted:The mosque skimming also led to one of Adnan's more demonstrably manipulative moments: SK portrayed him in a negative light so he withheld communication and "friendship" for a week. I'm no court-qualified expert in identifying manipulative people, but this is the sort of thing people learn to recognize from lovely relationships or bossy co-workers. Or someone becoming exasperated with bullshit allegations. Are you really going to listen to every half-assed story by any so-called acquaintance and then challenge me to deny them? The hell with you ... Which is not a plea for or an assumption of Adnan's innocence. Just pointing out that psychologizing can cut both ways and that so many of the "facts" of this story derive from single witnesses tangentially connected to the case dealing in scuttlebutt and hearsay.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
Pillowpants posted:And Dons dad was a cop, and Some dude said Adnan stole a lot of money from his mosque, and what about jen? HE'S A MASTERMIND SOCIOPATH! But mention of Don brings something to mind: How long had he and Hae been going out? I didn't pay attention to this but read someone asserting that it had only been two weeks.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 16:32 |
|
|
African AIDS cum posted:They are really grasping for straws. Wonder how much they are paying the girl to lie. Doubt they (whoever "they" is) are paying. This case is littered with people who kinda sorta remember something, but it may have been a different day, I've changed my mind, I just remembered ... And the ensuring 15 years is only going to have exaggerated this effect.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2015 19:32
|
|