Serial

Anan's lawyer have filed a new affidavit by Asia with the court in hopes of getting another appeal heard:

EXCLUSIVE: New Filing Says ‘Serial’ Prosecutor Suppressed Key Witness | New York Observer

 

The article is an advocate's piece by Rabia.

I thought that it was pretty conclusively shown that the day that Asia said that she saw Jay couldn't have been the day of the murder because it didn't snow that night -- Asia remembers being snowed in with her boyfriend the night she saw Jay.

 

I also believe that Adnan specifically said that he was not at the library that day. As a result, Gutierrez probably didn't want to put Asia on the stand because 1) she would have been lying or 2) the prosecutor could have used Adnan's police statements to challenge her statements, which could have then forced Gutierrez to put Adnan on the stand.

 

According to Serial:
• The library is across the parking lot from the school, considered part of the school campus, so Anan's statement that he was on campus the whole afternoon is consistent, and
• there was a big ice storm that night which led to several snow days after.

Seems to me that the attorney's failure to even SPEAK to Asia, who could provide an alibi, was malpractice at the very least.

 

A lawyer's decision to ignore a lead is not necessarily ineffective counsel. That was the basis of the previous ruling.
The woman is not alive to explain why she didn't pursue the library angle and interview Asia; however, it is a big leap to assume the root is ineptitude rather than a strategic or tactical choice.

 

Appeal granted. Ineffective counsel. To be heard in June.

Adnan Syed, subject of 'Serial' podcast, granted appeal by Maryland court - Baltimore Sun

 

BUMP ...

HBO just trumped the Serial podcast.
They got a confession on a high profile 14-year-old cold case.

Robert Durst on HBO’s ‘The Jinx’: I ‘killed them all.’ - The Washington Post

 

I'll post this here...and repost it when YF wakes up and starts a new thread.

Robert Durst murder case complicated by HBO's big role - LA Times

Helluva ethical quandry the filmmakers faced; I'm OK with them waiting three years to release the info, I guess. After all, the authorities had plenty of time and opportunity to catch this killer on their own.

 

At first I thought Durst knew he was still mic'd up and was trolling Jarecki, et al, while he was in the bathroom. But now I don't know.

But obviously, he either (a) wanted to get caught, subconsciously or otherwise, or (b) enjoys the game of trying to wriggle out of trouble every time. Otherwise, he would never have participated in the documentary.

 

I've loved the series, but my question is why he still had the mic on if the interview was over?

I think that he obviously wanted to get caught or is just incredibly bored.

 

He jumped right up and went to the bathroom, so maybe they didn't have time to get his battery pack mic off.

 

The mic-in-the-bathroom thing happens more often than it doesn't.

The interview we saw probably took several hours. When it was over, he had to take a leak. The audio guy was busy checking his levels from what was just recorded or grabbing the lavs from as many people as possible, and didn't get to Durst.

So, I buy the version of events. At least, how they went down. What I don't buy is that the editor didn't hear the live-mic takes until a year or two after first taping.