Serial

It's interesting what they included in the HBO series and what they didn't. I've read several news accounts that say Durst has Asperger's, but I don't recall it ever being mentioned in the HBO series (that would certainly explain some of his behavior).

And also, they never mention his arrest for taking a leak on a candy counter at a Houston CVS this past summer. I kept waiting for that to come up, but it never did.

Another interesting thing that you might know if you're a student of LA geography ... Susan Berman's address (1527 Benedict Canyon Drive) is literally a half-mile from 10050 Cielo Drive, the site of the Sharon Tate murders.

 

Oh my ...

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/08/business/media/another-serial-chapter-from-group-of-lawyers.html

“Undisclosed: The State v. Adnan Syed,” which will “examine and explore the case in greater detail, from an investigatory perspective instead of a narrative one,” according to a statement. “Undisclosed” is being presented by Rabia Chaudry, a lawyer who has been a longtime advocate of Mr. Syed — as “Serial” fans know, she was the one who suggested that Sarah Koenig, the host of “Serial” and a longtime producer for “This American Life,” look into the case — along with two other lawyers, Susan Simpson and Colin Miller. None of them represent Mr. Syed but each has been investigating the case, Ms. Chaudry said in an interview Tuesday. New episodes of “Undisclosed” are to be released every two weeks. The podcast is sponsored by the Adnan Syed Legal Trust..."

 

Judge reopens 'Serial' case; new evidence to be introduced

I'm conflicted on this ...
I think he did it.
He's had at least 15 years to refine his story. He got a ton of media attention as a result of "Serial" and I have no doubt he's going to go free.

 

I'm kind of in the same boat. I think his legal defense sounds like it was really poor, so ultimately this is probably the right move... but I'm pretty convinced he did it.

 

I'm not convinced he did it, but there's no way he was completely innocent.

 

As the reporter how would you feel if he walks?
Again, I think he did, but he was convicted on a flimsy evidence. He serves 15 years for murder and (could) walk. As the person who resurfaced this case, and gave him a platform to resurrect his claims - how do you feel?
Me: I don't think I'd sleep well.

 

This is a merging of legal standard vs. "what you think happened."

We as a society have adopted and demanded the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard of proof to convict someone of a crime. This is what you want if you're a citizen.

Conviction based on "Flimsy" evidence? Is that how you want to be judged when faced with a murder charge? Or even a 6 mo. sentence (where you whole life then goes to sh*t?) Not me.

You want to be convicted where everything against you gets scrutinized; that's the ultimate protection since no one is omnipotent to render the verdict. That means a full and fair defense.

Wifey got caught up in this and would advocate for Syed. I listened for some of it and thought that second guessing should not be enough to retry the case. However, several things have arisen which make me think he did not get a proper defense.

 

S2, E1 posted today, bitches.

 

Stirring shit. Literally.

 

Oh cool. I'm going to be commuting a bit starting next week for the next month-plus.
Perfect timing for me.

 

Oh cool. I'm going to be commuting a bit starting next week for the next month-plus.
Perfect timing for me.