While the state may have beat Adnan Syed in court sixteen years ago, maybe it shouldn’t have. In fact, the prosecution’s case was full of discrepancies, unsupported claims, dubious conclusions, contradictory statements, and conveniently forgotten information. Tragically, Adnan may have gone to jail for a crime he didn’t commit. Several factors about the evidence presented by the state leave lingering doubts. For example, the one phone call that supposedly put the final nail in Adnan’s coffin might never have connected. In court, prosecution uses Neesha, a friend of Adnan’s, to put Adnan and Jay together in the middle of the day, when Adnan claimed he was at school. Because Neesha testified that she spoke to both Adnan and Jay, defense couldn’t find a way around it. But perhaps that’s because of a little bad faith from the prosecution. When Neesha’s on the stand, she starts talking about how …show more content…
After calling in an expert witness to do fourteen cell site tower tests, the state only uses four of them, the ones after 6:00 pm. But this isn’t because four get the job done, and the rest are superfluous. This is a calculated move; the other ten tests contradict the prosecution’s story, so they sweep them under the rug and focus on sending an innocent kid to jail for the rest of his life. Although Jay’s story kept changing, both to police and at trial, no one ever pressed him on it. Prosecution didn’t actually care who killed Hae Lee, they just wanted a conviction. And Adnan Syed, Muslim ex boyfriend with strict parents was the easiest target. While deliberating over his fate, the jury even talks about how in Arabic culture, the men control the women. Adnan never had a chance, despite the fact that no eyewitnesses saw him in Hae’s car that day, and the state’s after school timeline was so tight it was nearly
Unjust Seventeen years ago, high schooler Hae Min Lee was murdered and buried in a shallow grave. After a controversial investigation and trial, her ex boyfriend Adnan Syed was sentenced to life in prison. He was nineteen years old. But Adnan Syed did not kill Hae Lee; not only is there evidence to support his innocence, the evidence against Syed crumbles under pressure and the sole reason he was convicted is because the justice system failed him. To begin, Adnan Syed simply did not murder his friend Hae Lee.
If a person murders someone and thinks they are guilty, why would there be so much evidence proving the opposite? Adnan Syed is guilty of Hae’s murder. On January 13, 1999 Hae Min Lee, a popular high school senior, disappeared and was found dead. Six weeks later, Adnan Syed, Hae’s ex-boyfriend, was found guilty of her murder. He claims to be innocent but there is evidence to prove that he was guilty.
Judge Wilson had been judging the DNA evidence and had decided that it was inclusive even though the state’s evidence says, although Smith’s fingerprints are not founded on the gun allegedly in his car, it does not prove that he never handled the gun. Judge Wilson’s final statement was that the court has come to conclusion that an urban heroin dealer not in possession of a firearm would be an anomaly. The newspaper feels that the term “urban” is frequently used as a racial code word and that Wilson expects a black heroin dealer to carry a firearm. Smith’s history of drug dealing should not be pre-judged by Wilson to make his final decision on the murder case. They say there is a biased ruling in favor that a white police officer who killed a (very likely unarmed) black man and that no justice is served to the victims, their families and any American who is fighting for greater racial equality in the justice system.
Adnan Syed was convicted of murder more than 17 years ago and has faced denial of multiple appeals. However, finally he was granted a new trial after his murder conviction was thrown out. The case of Adnan became a worldwide obsession over a night since he was subject to a globally popular podcast Serial. On the other hand, on 26th February 1999 I became obsessed with this case when he was arrested that morning. Since his arrest, Adnan has maintained his innocence and my family and I believe in him.
Throughout the entire course of the case, this problem was seen through the prosecutor’s use of cultural stereotypes, using biased and uncredited witnesses and poorly conducted court and investigation processes. During the trial, the prosecutors used many religious stereotypes to create a case argument. These points made were not validated, creating preconceptions, showing their views towards Adnan and his religion. Moreover, when the witnesses were interviewed by the police or prosecutor, they used the witnesses words which were not validated nor supported to paint a picture on the suspect, Adnan. Also, the improper use of the court and investigation proved to be untrustworthy.
Approximately 40 percent of the nation's homicides go unsolved. In the podcast Serial, narrator Sarah Koenig analyzes the murder case against 17 year-old Adnan Syed, as she is convinced the murder has been left impenetrable. The murder took place in Baltimore, Maryland on January 13th, 1999, when Adnan was sentenced to life for the first degree murder of his ex-girlfriend Hae Min Lee. As no concrete evidence was ever collected in the case against Adnan, in her podcast, Koenig sought out to dive deeper into the investigation, deeper than the police ever did, to learn the full story, and potentially prove Adnan’s innocence. Episode three in the podcast, titled “Leakin Park,” presents a growing suspicion against a suspect in the case of the murder
In the year of 1999, in Baltimore Maryland, a teen by the name of Adnan Syed was arrested for the murder of Hae Min Lee. A friend of Adnan’s who sold weed to him, Jay Wilds, testified against Adnan admitting to be an accomplice, and to have seen most of the crime. However, Jay’s testimony changed in certain ways over the course of the interrogations and interviews, slightly different each time he told it. Spotty forensic evidence, forgotten memories, different accounts of what happened, and few to no witnesses make the murder of Hae Min Lee mysterious enough for Sarah Koenig to investigate, even after the case was closed 15 years ago. The evidence, testimonies, and inconsistencies all point to the fact that Adnan Syed is innocent as a labrador
In June 21, 1973, Miller was convicted on the ground of advertising the sale of what was considered by the court as adult material. He was found guilty as he broke the California Statute. The California Statute forbids citizens from spreading what is considered offensive in societal standards. The question that was being asked was that if the action of Miller was Constitution thus is protected under the law. However, he lost the case due to a vote of 5 - 4.
People are issued out.’ …, The issue isn’t what we want to write about. Everybody knows an injustice was done. How many know what actually went on inside?” (Foreword, Farewell to Manzanar).
“The worst form of injustice is pretended justice.” These words are spoken by Plato, a Greek philosopher; they speak for many injustices we have in today’s world and related directly to Adnan Syed and his conviction. In the podcast Serial, investigated by Sarah Koenig, released in 2014, she captures the journey of Adnan Syed’s conviction and the murder of Hae Min Lee in Baltimore, Maryland in 1999. Although there are many factors that point fingers at Adnan being guilty of the murder of Hae Min Lee, many things have been uncovered which can prove otherwise. Adnan Syed was targeted because of his racial, religious, and cultural differences; this, along with his lack of motivation to kill Hae Min Lee and the inconsistent stories of the State’s
Adnan Syed was a big guy who lived in Baltimore the location of low-income immigrants was convicted in the case of killing Hae Min Lee his ex-girlfriend on January 13, 1999. Who was described as a beautiful athletic girl, smart and responsible. Hae’s body was found February 9, 1999, in Leakin Park by a maintenance guy named Mr.S.The cause of Hae’s death was strangled to death. Adnan was arrested February 28, 1999, for her murder. The state thinks because Adnan is an EMT he would know how to strangle and revive.
During this podcast the case was analyzed, new suspects were interrogated, and new evidence brought to light. This case has recently been granted a new trial due to reasonable doubt. At the end of the podcast, the narrator leaves the audience to come to a conclusion themselves. By analyzing the evidence it is evident that Adnan Syed did kill Hae. To begin, the call log found on Adnan’s phone criminalizes Adnan.
Putting these circumstances aside, it was said by many that the relationship was pretty typical and Adnan got over the breakup easily. This was said by teachers and friends of both Hae and Adnan. One of Hae’s friends, Becky, explained the relationship as “just a silly, teenage, high school, relationship” (Koenig “The Breakup”) which proves that Adnan was not as upset as the prosecution made him out to be at trial. Another notable aspect is that after Hae and Adnan broke up, Hae got in a small car accident and asked Adnan to come help her, her new boyfriend Don also showed up and confirms that him and Adnan had a cordial meeting and explains that they talked for 10 to 15 minutes even after the car situation had been figured out (Koenig “What We Know”). If Adnan was really that broken up about the breakup, he would not have been so friendly towards the new guy who seemed to take his place in Hae’s life.
And no one, aside from Jay, says they spotted Adnan in her car at any time that afternoon. Adnan has no
To begin, physical evidence is an important artifact in any base of a murder trial. First off, there is no evidence of Adnan in Hae’s car liking him to her murder. Sarah says, “There was nothing linking him to the crime-no DNA, no fibers, no hairs.” This demonstrates that the conviction of Adnan is unfair because if there is nothing that shows that Adnan is in the car when Hae was killed, he cannot be convicted for this because theoretically, one cannot be convicted of murder without any physical evidence. Sarah says, “There was nothing linking him to the crime,” so how can the jury make an assumption about the murder without any physical evidence?