Serial

I would take a look at what the brother said again. Pretty sure he said he did not respond to SK. He just used the email as proof she'd tried to reach him to the Reddit folks. He ignored her request.

 

Someone who claims to be Hae's brother posted on Reddit last week:

http://www.businessinsider.com/brother-of-hae-min-lee-responds-to-serial-podcast-2014-11

I think I am more inclined to believe Adnan than Jay in this case, mostly because everyone who knows them says Jay lies. And a lot of people who knew Adnan back then say they don't think he could do it. I do think they are both involved, though.

EDIT: and PCLoadLetter beat me to it.

 

That is the worst looking football field ever.

 

I actually find Jay *more* believable because that one friend of his said that he lied about little things constantly, but he wouldn't lie about something like this. It would explain why his story has so many inconsistencies (the prosecution's timeline based on his details is just completely implausible), but why he still got the biggest details correct. (Where her car was recovered, that they were both at the park that night, etc.)

That being said, from what they've present on Serial so far, I wouldn't be convinced of Adnan's guilt. I don't know - I think he did it, but I don't know that he did it. I'd be hesitant to vote to convict. Koenig spoke with at least one of the jury members, so I'm assuming there will be an entire episode focused on their deliberations at some point.

 

My bad. You're right.

 

The worst piece of evidence against Adnan is his phone call taken in Leakin Park at the time Jay said they were burying Hae. (per the ping off the cell tower)

 

I still haven't listened yet, but I'm wondering about some of the posts.

No juror can know, absolutely, that a defendant is guilty. It is not possible.

The standard is not "without doubt." The standard is "beyond reasonable doubt."

 

Which is why 12 Angry Men is so good. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzPll63y2b0

 

The Nisha phone call simply cannot be explained unless she is wrong about the lack of an answering maching (meaning it could have been a mistaken call which lasted for over 2 minutes) or the cell tower technology is incorrect. The podcast glossed right over the call like it was a bump in the road, but for me it is the biggest fact.

 

Bump in the road? They spent like 10 minutes on it. Of a 30 min show! Seeing how people's interpretations of this show often don't line up to the facts is making a very meta point, I think.

 

Also, Koenig often throws out a "Remember that. We'll come back to it." pretty often, it seems.

 

I guess for me it is the piece of information which makes this a slam dunk for conviction