Serial

General Gibberish Forums The Pool Room
21

I am up to date now and get what you mean. Still leaning towards him having done it although not sure there was enough evidence to convict

 

It is very surprising he was convicted on the quality of evidence that existed.

 

But having said that, it's hard to conceive that he didn't do it. The particulars may be muddled, but the end result seems right to me. So far anyway... 

22

I think we’ve got to realise that people did, and do, get convicted on fairly flimsy evidence -just on how they conduct themselves in court.

In more recent years, I’m led to believe some jurors require Gil Grissom to front up with the DNA proof, but I’m sure lots get convicted on flimsy evidence. We always hear how people’s convictions are quashed years later.

In this case, he didn’t testify, and while judges tell jurors it’s not to be taken as a sign of guilt, I’m sure it is…ditto unsworn statements.

23

I think we've got to realise that people did, and do, get convicted on fairly flimsy evidence -just on how they conduct themselves in court.
In more recent years, I'm led to believe some jurors require Gil Grissom to front up with the DNA proof, but I'm sure lots get convicted on flimsy evidence. We always hear how people's convictions are quashed years later.
In this case, he didn't testify, and while judges tell jurors it's not to be taken as a sign of guilt, I'm sure it is...ditto unsworn statements.


There is also the point of the defence lawyer. She is described as a very successful and sought after defence attorney, but based on the snippets we've heard (which I realise is not enough to form a proper opinion), she sounds like she was arguing the wrong points.
But yeah, it seems he was convicted based on the fact that everybody's gut feel was that he did it, rather than compelling evidence.
24

Hard to believe a kid wouldn’t leave some sort of physical evidence.

25

No wonder he got convicted the defence attorney could melt shatter metal with that voice.

26

How annoying is she. Last week’s episode was a little bit of nothing. Time to rapm it up.

27

I do not think he did it.

 

[spoiler] It had to be Jay. His conflicting stories reek of someone making ■■■■ up as he went. The time line with the phone records make absolutely no sense to me as well. He did it, Jenn covered for him by faking an alibi that he was at her house longer than he actually was, Adnan was listed as a prime candidate as the ex, Jay had his phone (admitted in court) and Jenn was first questioned. This led to Jay and he dogged Adnan, probably after realising they were super suspicious of him.[/spoiler]

 

It is so weird though. [spoiler] The only reason I think Adnan can't really defend himself, is because he was insanely high? Also, wtf is Jays motive to kill Hae? [/spoiler]

 

Awesome podcast. Not so awesome story because its RL. 

28

[spoiler]The bigoted and ignorant ■■■■ america prosecutors can get away with is appalling during episode 10[/spoiler]

29

Am starting to lean a bit that way Barnz…

30

Disappointed by episode 11. Guess i am looking for closure i can’t possibly get.

31

Don’t think you’ll ever get that. seems to be what episode 11 is building too.

32

I’m glad there is only one episode left. The last couple have kind of dragged a little. While it would be awesome to think that a podcast could actually have an effect on a criminal appeal, it was never going to be any other ending bar ‘Guess we’ll never know.’ 


I still think he did it. I doubt it was premeditated, and Jay’s dodgy version of events is unlikely to be completely true, but he did it. Jay is the only other real possibility, but you’d have to be pretty unlucky to lend your car and your phone to a guy on the very day he ends up killing your girlfriend, and then smoke weed with him all that night. So if Jay did do it, it would have been on Adnan’s behalf anyway. The only mystery here for me is why jay would tell some of the lies that he did. The thing with the Walmart and the phones, is just too weird    
33

I think they both did it to be honest. not enough evidence to say he didn’t, not enough to say he did though so its very frustrating. The show seems to be look at how good adnan or how bad adnan is rather than piecing things together, its probably way too late to have this podcast change anything though.

34

Can’t see them coming to a firm conclusion, other than “ummmmm!”

35

I’ve only listened to episode 1 and I’m already frustrated about the library alibi not being followed up and that lady, I want to say it was his lawyer?, having died in the mean time too. If it’s 8 episodes of that kind of frustration I’m not sure I’ll survive.

36
[spoiler]I've only listened to episode 1 and I'm already frustrated about the library alibi not being followed up and that lady, I want to say it was his lawyer?, having died in the mean time too. If it's 8 episodes of that kind of frustration I'm not sure I'll survive.[/spoiler]

some episodes are good, others are just infuriatingly unsubstantial.

37

episode 12 is out, final episode of season 1.

I believe season 2 is a different person’s story?

38

■■■■ this show i just want some ■■■■■■■ closure

39

I’m pretty happy with that ending. I thought they did it well.

40

Quoted Post

I'm pretty happy with that ending. I thought they did it well.

could see it coming though, but couldn’t help but desire an actual outcome.