T he court may overturn any conviction and grant a new trial for many reasons including Jury bias, Insufficient evidence to support a conviction, Misconduct on the part of the prosecutor, and newly discovered evidence meaning evidence that was not known during trial. The season one podcast “Serial” by Sarah Koenig analyzed the structure of a murder case from 1999 and while doing so enlightened many people of new evidence and has everyone questioning what happened the day Hae Min Lee Died. However in the question of whether or not Adnan Syed should receive a new trial, the answer is clear. The main evidence that led to Adnan Syed's imprisonment was the testimony given by Jay and how that matched up with the cell phone records the day of the alleged murder. Not only was there insufficient evidence given in the inconsistencies told by primary witness Jay, there was an alibi for Adnan and a warning sheet was found after the trial stating that the cell phone records may not be reliable information for locating. This newly discovered and insufficient evidence give more than enough reason for a new trial. In the case that the However an affidavit signed by Asia McClain says that she was talking with adnan in the library the day that Hae was killed making it impossible for Adnan to fit the states timeframe. It also says that two other people (her boyfriend and his friend) also saw adnan that day. This alibi was never used in court. Because this evidence was never used in court it can be used as evidence, therefore meeting the requirements of a new trial. To conclude Adnan Syed deserves a new trial because there was a founding of new evidence and insufficient evidence, both of which fit the requirements of a new trial. A new trial would help us gain a better understanding of what actually happened the day Hae was
This reason makes sense because Asia and even a friend of hers claim that they saw and even spoke to Adnan that day and at that time Hae was murdered. This part of the story is when Asia found out Adna was arrested so she wrote him a letter explaining what she remembered about seeing him that day and time. This is from the letter “Im not sure if you remember talking to me in the library january 13’th,but I remember”. This means Adnan is innocent because he was not murdering Hae at the time he was at the library. Therefore Adnan is innocent because Asia’s letters prove that he was at the library at the time Hae was
In Episode 8 of Sarah Koenig’s podcast, Serial, Koenig claims that Jay isn’t a reliable enough source of information for the state to find Adnan guilty of the murder. She argues that there are too many inconsistencies in the story that he has told police over and over, and that there are too many problems in the story that the police use against Adnan.
...t his the evidence in front of a jury. Still believing in his innocence Jeff is filing for parole after fourteen years of eligibility. He is hoping to meet parole board criteria so he can be released on parole.
Adnan's innocence away from him? Jay's story was documented, but his first story kept changing, which seemed off, if he was there shouldn't there be one story and only one story? But his final story, the story that never changes is the one after the mysterious session. Although even that story has flaws. Many to be exact. He says Adan called him after he killed Hae, but we know that they were never friends, only mere acquaintances. Theoretically, would you call an acquaintance after you you killed
Holhan, 294 U.S. 103 (1935). In Napue, the court had held that the same result occurs when the State although not soliciting false evidence allows it to go uncorrected when it appears. In Brady, the Supreme Court had held that irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution, suppression of material exculpatory evidence required a new trial.
The Supreme Court used this evidence, and the fact that the pants and the blood had been transported to the crime lab in the same box, and that a vial and a quarter of autopsy blood were missing, to rule that, if known by the jury, could have created reasonable doubt (House V. Bell, 2006). This, along with the evidence, presented by House, that Mr. Muncey had a history of spousal abuse against Mrs. Muncey, and the fact that he had fabricated an alibi to cover his whereabouts for the time of the murder, could have created a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury, had it been presented at trial (House v. Bell, 2006). It was with these facts in mind that the Supreme Court reached a final ruling in this case. The Court’s final ruling was that while House had not presented sufficient evidence to exonerate himself completely, he did present enough evidence to create the question of his actual guilt, and warranted a new trial (House v. Bell, 2006).
based on the story of one witness, Adnan’s friend Jay, who testified that he helped
Based on information provided by Sarah Koenig’s podcast, Serial, Hae Min Lee is killed by Adnan Syed, he yet says he didn’t murder her. Adnan is convicted of committing homicide, which he didn’t do, should not be in jail. This is for 3 main accounts; if something important happens a person remembers that day, Jay knew where Hae’s car was, and by how Sarah and her friend go by the day Jay described.
It's a warm summer night in Aruba. 18 year old Natalee Holloway was out with friends, celebrating their recent high school graduation. At about 1 am Holloway's friends see her leave in a grey Honda, with 17 year old Joran Van Der Sloot, and his friends. No one thought this would be the last time they saw Natalee Holloway. It's clear that Joran Van Der Sloot is to blame for the murder of the blonde haired, blue eyed Natalee Holloway. There are two pieces of evidence that supports the accusation made against Van Der Sloot. The first piece of evidence is the witnesses testimony. The second piece of evidence is Van Der Sloot's different "confessions" and the changes in them.
Jay describes his active-involvement with Adnan in the crime. If Jay tells us the truth, he brings Adnan to school, holds onto Adnan’s cellphone and car so he could pick Adnan up when Adnan calls; picks Adnan up after he committed the murder, cruises around with Adnan, and brings Adnan to track practice. Additionally, Jay cruises around with Adnan in the afternoon, accompanies Adnan to LeakIn park and aids Adnan in digging the hole to bury Hae. Which criminal incriminates oneself? When Jay speaks about picking up Adnan he says: “I noticed that Hae wasn't with him. I parked next to him. He asked me to get out the car. I get out the car. He asks me, am I ready for this? And I say, ready for what? And he takes the keys. He opens the trunk. And all I can see is Hae's lips are all blue, and she's pretzeled up in the back of the trunk. And she's dead.” Jay goes to pick up Adnan from the actual murder and describes the episode in detail. Jay uses short sentences for dramatic effect, and speaks confidently, which is unusual when incriminating
Near the end of the episode, a girl is introduced who claims to clearly remember the day that Hae disappeared. Asia McClain believes that she saw and talked to Adnan in the library the day Hae went missing. She wrote two letters to Adnan and then an affidavit, but she was never contacted by a lawyer. When the case was petitioned, the judge ruled that Asia’s story is legally worthless as an alibi for Adnan because it contradicts his testimony.
You are 17 years old, still in school, your girlfriend just broke up with you, and now you are convicted of first-degree murder for the death of your ex-girlfriend. What would you do? Also, what if there wasn’t enough evidence to prove that you did it, but then not enough to prove that you didn’t do? What would you do then? What would you tell people? Would you lie to them if you actually did it? This is a story of a teenager who was in a similar situation. His name is Adnan Syed. He was convicted of killing Hae Min Lee, his ex-girlfriend, in Maryland in 1999. 15 years later Sarah Koenig started a podcast, Serial. In this podcast Sarah explores and digs deep into the two options, is Adnan guilty? Or is Adnan innocent? Adnan Syed should stay
Serial is about a murder case against Adnan Syed, Sarah Koenig is investigating his case as a journalism. Adnan was committed of the murder of Hae Min Lee, I think investigative journalism is truly a commitment because you have to do so much research about the so called murder, but also about the people you would think have nothing to do with the case. Its also a hassle to try and figure out who's really telling the truth and who's not. You have to go through cell phone records of people that might have something to do with the case, which sarah koenig did to find the people she needs. Sarah Koenig is trying to figure out if adnan did really kill hae or if jay his so called friend is lying. She was also asking people what they did in 1999 on
Asia claims that she now recounts information that could very well be used as a testimony in court in favor of Adnan. Asia says that not only herself, but her former boyfriend Derrick had seen Adnan on the day of Hae’s death. They had both seen Adnan in the public library that is practically connected to the schools grounds and that they would have seen Adnan around at the time Adnan was supposedly in the car with Hae. Adnan was assumed checking his email on the computer in the public library. Adnan’s alibi supplied by Asia not only proves he is innocent, but that he wasn’t even near the scene of the crime. Although the evidence seems to be game changing, the judge said that Asia can no longer be used due to the longevity of her testimony and can no longer be counted as legitimate proof. Not to mention that the surveillance cameras that the library had previously had is non-existent. And any other witnesses as well. This is extremely off, where were these witnesses during the
The existence of reasonable doubt is important because it stands to keep the innocent from being found guilty. It affected the verdict when it changed from 11-1 for conviction to a unanimous verdict for acquittal. The jurors were not able to decide he was guilty without reasonable doubt, so acquittal was the only verdict possible.