Jump to content

The Curios Case of Adnan Syed


Recommended Posts

Don't know why Koenig spent so much time querying the existence of the Best Buy phone booth. Of course it existed. Maybe not where Jay initially said it was, but she doesn't think the police at the time might have noticed if there wasn't actually a phone booth there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Adnan or Jay killed her after listening to undisclosed

I think it's some random that nobody even knows about, absolutely terrible work from the polis back in 99, so so many things that they should've done that they didn't

Piss poor.

I watched a documentary 'Central Park 5' on Netflix, great watch, recommend it, police attitudes very similar I think, I think they just wanted to prosecute Adnan as they thought he done it and they actively tried to get him put away instead of keeping an open mind and going down all avenues

Fucking mindfuck of a case though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't know why Koenig spent so much time querying the existence of the Best Buy phone booth. Of course it existed. Maybe not where Jay initially said it was, but she doesn't think the police at the time might have noticed if there wasn't actually a phone booth there?

Aye one of the lassies she speaks to stole from that Best Buy store and swore there weren't any pay phones inside or outside yet it turns out in the blue print for the building there was a bit allocated for the pay phones.

It's hard to think back 15 years. I struggle to remember lay outs of shops that have changed over the years ect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any particular recommendations?

AJC Breakdown/Undisclosed/Missing Maura Murray (just started but sounds decent)/Generation Why, this talks about alot of cases and issues. Quite interesting listening if you're interested in the topic/True Murder, again it's very interesting if you're interested in the case they speak about, have listened to a few of them and went and looked into them myself afterwards. Love this sort of stuff. Can't wait for serial season 2.

I've also got 'Who Killed Elsie Frost' that I've not listened to but it's In England so find it less interesting. Fascinated in America as a country so I generally find most of the cases interesting. Plus they all sound cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 years later...
On 03/07/2015 at 14:38, H_B said:

I was left in no doubt whatsoever about his guilt though. I think he quite clearly did it.

 

10 hours ago, sergie's no1 fan said:

 

So he wasn't guilty after all. Really sad story all round then. Can he sue for wrongful conviction? 

Jay is a lying p***k. I wonder if it was her current boyfriend at the time, Don? 

Shocked that Detournement was well off the mark. He's usually bang on with this conspiracy stuff too!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

Some of the calls on this thread looking particularly rotten.

I think some people, for whatever reason, have an aversion to the idea that miscarriages of justice happen - far more than many people realise.

I think its more likely they listened to the podcast, considered the facts they were presented with as well as the interviews and formed an opinion.

Why would they even listen to the podcast if they had a preconceived idea that everyone convicted is guilty, as debating that is exactly what the podcast is about.

Its pretty easy not offer an opinion and come in 7 years later and point score after the acquittal.

Edited by BingMcCrosby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, BingMcCrosby said:

I think its more likely they listened to the podcast, considered the facts they were presented with as well as the interviews and formed an opinion.

Why would they even listen to the podcast if they had a preconceived idea that everyone convicted is guilty, as debating that is exactly what the podcast is about.

Its pretty easy not offer an opinion and come in 7 years later and point score after the acquittal.

There is no point scoring going on.

I also listened to the podcast around the time it came out and thought he was not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Pretty surprised he was fully acquitted though, and it's almost certainly as a result of the podcast. Many similar cases are still not being heard.

The subsequent seasons of Serial were not as good but still worth a listen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Satoshi said:

There is no point scoring going on.

I also listened to the podcast around the time it came out and thought he was not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Pretty surprised he was fully acquitted though, and it's almost certainly as a result of the podcast. Many similar cases are still not being heard.

The subsequent seasons of Serial were not as good but still worth a listen.

Yet offered no opinion at the time

Its absolutely point scoring, calling their opinions at the time "rotten". And guessing at an ulterior motive for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BingMcCrosby said:

Yet offered no opinion at the time

Its absolutely point scoring, calling their opinions at the time "rotten". And guessing at an ulterior motive for them.

I did, just not on this site (as I wasn't a member then?) Surely I don't need to point out something so obvious?

I have no interest in point scoring, sorry to disappoint.

I honestly have no idea where you're coming from, or what your point is. It's a good podcast, and miscarriages of justice happen (and some people steadfastly refuse to believe in them).

I'm sure any predictions from years ago would look rotten now, have a look at the future Scotland team thread. 

Maybe best to not take everything so personally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Satoshi said:

I did, just not on this site (as I wasn't a member then?) Surely I don't need to point out something so obvious?

I have no interest in point scoring, sorry to disappoint.

I honestly have no idea where you're coming from, or what your point is. It's a good podcast, and miscarriages of justice happen (and some people steadfastly refuse to believe in them).

I'm sure any predictions from years ago would look rotten now, have a look at the future Scotland team thread. 

Maybe best to not take everything so personally.

You absolutely do, as thats all that was. Its a plain as day.

Everyone who happened to disagree with you had arrived at that because they "have an aversion to the idea that miscarriages of justice happen" rather than formed an opinion like you did. And their views were "rotten".

How exactly is that not point scoring?

Edited by BingMcCrosby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, BingMcCrosby said:

You absolutely do, as thats all that was. Its a plain as day.

Everyone who happened to disagree with you had arrived at that because they "have an aversion to the idea that miscarriages of justice happen" rather than formed an opinion like you did. And their views were "rotten".

How exactly is that not point scoring?

You're just making stuff up, read my original post again.

But I really see no value in continuing this conversation so if you are deeply offended at any of my posts and want to white knight about it - oh well I guess. Life goes on.

2 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

He could still have done it.

Well of course he could. I didn't even say that he didn't.

I don't think he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and the courts now agree - prosecution dropping all charges and an inmate being released? It's incredibly rare.

Sadly, still a lot of innocent people languishing in jail (and guilty people free).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BingMcCrosby said:

I think its more likely they listened to the podcast, considered the facts they were presented with as well as the interviews and formed an opinion.

Why would they even listen to the podcast if they had a preconceived idea that everyone convicted is guilty, as debating that is exactly what the podcast is about.

Its pretty easy not offer an opinion and come in 7 years later and point score after the acquittal.

You think posters on P&B gave careful consideration to something and reached a rational conclusion?

That would be a significant deviation from how this site normally works.  And a change for the worse.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BingMcCrosby said:

Im literally quoting you.

You quoted part of a sentence, and put your own words around it to change its meaning.

How thick do you think we are? 😂

To be clear, my original post said some of the views on this thread were rotten (they were) and that some people have an aversion to miscarriages of justice (they do). That's all.

How you transposed this into a personal point scoring attack on everyone I disagree with (?!?) is solely on you and your warped mind. What a boring conversation this has been. Best not to take everything so personally and if you want to white knight you will have to do a lot better than this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...