When the jury dropped the hammer on Adnan Syed and found him guilty of murdering Hae Min Lee, there were some flaws in the case that may have skewed the case against the 17-year old from Baltimore, Maryland. The case is about Hae Min Lee, a responsible Woodlawn High student, being murdered by strangulation, and Adnan is the supposed killer. Sarah Koenig is a radio announcer that took interest in this case because the story was interesting. The case is about Hae Min Lee, a responsible Woodlawn High student, being murdered by strangulation, and Adnan is the supposed killer. Sarah Koenig is a radio announcer that took interest in this case because the story was interesting. First, Adnan did not kill Hae because getting to the Best Buy takes a …show more content…
Here Sarah is commentating on Jay’s testimony. Jay says, “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”(Ep.1 pg. 10). This means that Jay saw Hae’s body in Adnan’s car. Therefore, Adnan did kill Hae because there was a witness that saw her body. However, this argument is wrong because if Adnan did strangle Hae, he would leave evidence on her body. And there is none. Here is Saad and Rabia’s opinion about the murder. “So just on motive alone, Saad and Rabia found the whole thing ridiculous. As for physical evidence, there was none-- nothing. Apart from some fingerprints in Hae's car, which Adnan had been in many times, there was nothing linking him to the crime-- no DNA, no fibers, no hairs, no matching soil from the bottom of his boots” (Ep.1 pg. 7). Because usually when somebody murders someone else, there is DNA evidence from the killer on the body. But here, the is no evidence of Adnan on Hae’s body. Because there is no evidence on Hae that links the murder to Adnan, he did not kill her. Therefore, Adnan did not kill Hae because there is no evidence linking them together. In conclusion, Adnan did not kill Hae because he could not have reached the Best Buy and killed Hae in 21 minutes, Jay lied to investigators about the story, and there is no evidence linking Adnan and Hae. Even though Adnan was sad when Hae broke up with him, he is ultimately innocent because there is nothing there to prove that he is guilty. The key things that can be learned from this is that even though something may seem simple, it can be quite complicated at a further
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
This incident involved Victim Athena Marie Herbert being a victim of an attempt rape at Suspect Gayk Chuldzhyan’s residence.
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.
When Hae Min Lee disappeared on January 13, 1999, all of her friends (including the subsequently charged killer, Adnan Syed) thought that she moved to California. Hae’s body turned up a few weeks later on February 9, and the police later charged Adnan Syed, her ex-boyfriend with her murder. Jay Wilds, an alleged accomplice to the crime, confessed to the police that he knew that Adnan killed Hae and Adnan tasked him with burying her. The state later used Jay’s testimony as the foundation for their case, even though it contradicted some of the state’s own physical evidence. While Jay’s eyewitness testimony does identify Adnan Syed as Hae Lee’s murderer, it is self-serving and inconsistent, with no physical evidence to corroborate it. Therefore,
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
Teachers, friends, classmates, relatives and parents could not believe he kills his girlfriend. The reality sometimes is very hard to face especially when feelings are involved. Parents never will accept that their own child who was raised with comfort, love and support could be capable of murder somebody. Disturbing people could be disguised very well under a charming appearance. Many serial killers were known as decent, brilliant and admired persons. When a teenager is carrying a burden as Adnan was, probably feeling guilty for giving back to his parents, his religion and customs could transform him in another person for a few moments when he felt betrayed, humiliated, dishonored and abandoned by the person for whom he did all this. Then he kill Hae Min Lee in a rage 's attack or probably as Jay said Adnan was planning the murder in detail; that is why the police could not found enough evidences to probe him clearly
First of all, if something monumental happens a person remembers the day it happened. In contrast, Adnan didn’t remember January 13. Yet, Jay remembers close to everything which points an arrow in his direction. However, Adnan says he didn’t ask Hae for a ride, but witnesses say he did. We can point that at Adnan for lying, but he may have failed
The evidence presented to myself and the other juror’s proves that Tyrone Washburn is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the murder of his wife, Elena Washburn. On March 12, 1979 Elena Washburn was strangled in the living room of her family’s home. Her body was then dragged to the garage, leaving a trail of blood from the living room to the place it was found. Her husband, Tyrone Washburn, found her in the family’s garage on March 13, 1979 at 1:45 A.M. When officer Dale Chambers arrived at the scene he found her lying face down in a pool of blood. The solid evidence in this case proves only one person, Tyrone Washburn, is guilty of murder.
The first piece of evidence against Adnan is a testimony given by his acquaintance and partner-in-crime, Jay. The State uses this as one of their main claims. However, there are many reasons why this was the wrong way to go. First
There was several pieces of evidence that helped build the case, but none was enough to actually convict Adnan of murder. For instance, there was no DNA evidence that proved Adnan killed Hae. DNA evidence was found in Hae’s car that belonged to Adnan, but then again Adnan had been in Hae’s car before since they had dated for a while. Sarah even asked her own nephew, Sam, to recall what he did on a specific night six weeks ago and he seemed very torn about his answer. Sam says, “Not a clue”.
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
While reading the case about Mr.Hossack 's murder i saw the wife, Mrs.Hossack, as innocent at first. The children all claimed that the two did not argue for over a year, so why would she kill him now verses a year ago? When the youngest child, Ivan Hossack, came to the stand and "told his story in a straight, unhesitating manner" it made it easier for me to believe in Mrs. Hossack 's innocence. The child even said that he saw his mother aiding his father when he called out for help. If she had been the one to swing the axe, why would she help him and risk getting in trouble? Most importantly, if he was conscious and talking, why wouldn 't he say who to murderer was? He could have easily identified his wife in the dark after being married for over twenty years, and yet he didn 't identify who had tried to kill him. Dr. Dean first stated that the axe did not hit the speech portion of the brain, so he could have been conscious and yelling out for his wife. Dean later stated that the fatal blow from the axe would have left Mr.Hossack unconscious. The murder weapon had blood on in and apparent hairs stuck to one side; "Prof. John L. Tilton of Simpson college... was unable to say definitely that the hair had been
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
The court must find more evidence and not to depend on eyewitness testimony and to look for the best people as possible. Besides, there more evidence that DNA testing. Eyewitness must be proven in order to arrest the right suspect and question the suspect to get more evidence in steady of keeping in prison for false witness. The police for tracking everywhere the suspect went and people the suspect contact with that time. It will solve the problem by asking the eyewitness question and the suspect questions to see if both things they said