IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags "Serial" podcast , "Undisclosed" podcast , adnan syed , Maryland cases , murder cases

Reply
Old 13th May 2015, 06:58 PM   #1
Desert Fox
Philosopher
 
Desert Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,147
Adnan Syed - Serial / Undisclosed Podcasts

Anybody been listening to "Undisclosed" podcast?

They are doing a very good job of shredding the prosecution / police case.
Episode Two destroyed the timeline used
Episode Three shows that it appears that Jay was coached by the police and the storyline is the police not his.
__________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
- - - -Bertrand Russell

Last edited by Desert Fox; 13th May 2015 at 07:12 PM.
Desert Fox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2015, 07:02 PM   #2
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
Link to podcast: http://undisclosed-podcast.com/
Background on the podcast: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/0...n_7057760.html
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2015, 07:10 PM   #3
Desert Fox
Philosopher
 
Desert Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,147
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
The podcast will also come up on any search. . . .Used "Duck-Duck-Go" and came up as the fifth entry.
__________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
- - - -Bertrand Russell
Desert Fox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2015, 08:02 PM   #4
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 54,892
Is this different from the original Serial podcast? I'm not familiar with the "undisclosed" in the title.

If it's the original, I listened to the lot and found it compelling. I believe that there is more than reasonable doubt about the conviction.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2015, 08:09 PM   #5
Desert Fox
Philosopher
 
Desert Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,147
Undisclosed is actually more technically and while the podcast lacks Serial's polish, has more actually dissection of evidence.
__________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
- - - -Bertrand Russell
Desert Fox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2015, 08:44 PM   #6
Charlie Wilkes
Illuminator
 
Charlie Wilkes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,177
I suppose the cops coached Jay Wilds etc., but I can have no reasonable doubt Syed did this murder. Wilds spent that day with Syed, and he was able to take police to the victim's car. That is a core of fact that won't budge.

Wilds was far more involved than he has ever admitted. He told a phony story that made him an accessory instead of a conspirator. That is why the pay phone never existed, and a timeline based on his story does not work. But the basic narrative of killing the girl, moving her car, and burying her body holds up.
Charlie Wilkes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2015, 09:45 PM   #7
Desert Fox
Philosopher
 
Desert Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,147
Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes View Post
I suppose the cops coached Jay Wilds etc., but I can have no reasonable doubt Syed did this murder. Wilds spent that day with Syed, and he was able to take police to the victim's car. That is a core of fact that won't budge.

Wilds was far more involved than he has ever admitted. He told a phony story that made him an accessory instead of a conspirator. That is why the pay phone never existed, and a timeline based on his story does not work. But the basic narrative of killing the girl, moving her car, and burying her body holds up.
There are three possibilities (that I can think of) which do not support Adnan's guilt.
1. Her car had unrepaired damage - he could have spotted the car.
2. Jay did it himself.
3. The police found the car previously and they fed him the information.

The next half episode is apparently going to argue that Jay did not know where the car was.
__________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
- - - -Bertrand Russell
Desert Fox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2015, 11:58 PM   #8
Charlie Wilkes
Illuminator
 
Charlie Wilkes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,177
Originally Posted by Desert Fox View Post
There are three possibilities (that I can think of) which do not support Adnan's guilt.
1. Her car had unrepaired damage - he could have spotted the car.
2. Jay did it himself.
3. The police found the car previously and they fed him the information.

The next half episode is apparently going to argue that Jay did not know where the car was.
Anything is theoretically possible. I'm considering what is most likely, which is as follows: Syed planned and committed this murder and enlisted Wilds as an accomplice. Wilds told his friend immediately after it happened. The police caught up with her because of cell phone records. She consulted a lawyer, who advised her to divulge what she knew and accompanied her to the police interview. The police went to Wilds, who eventually told a story that was a blend of truth and self-serving fiction. He then took police to the car and cooperated so as to keep himself out of prison.

That fits the evidence, and it fits the nitty-gritty world of criminal behavior as I understand it.

I could be convinced that something else happened, but I would need to see a credible theory supported by evidence, not just "anyone but Syed" speculation.
Charlie Wilkes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 09:41 AM   #9
Desert Fox
Philosopher
 
Desert Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,147
Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes View Post
Anything is theoretically possible. I'm considering what is most likely, which is as follows: Syed planned and committed this murder and enlisted Wilds as an accomplice. Wilds told his friend immediately after it happened. The police caught up with her because of cell phone records. She consulted a lawyer, who advised her to divulge what she knew and accompanied her to the police interview. The police went to Wilds, who eventually told a story that was a blend of truth and self-serving fiction. He then took police to the car and cooperated so as to keep himself out of prison.

That fits the evidence, and it fits the nitty-gritty world of criminal behavior as I understand it.

I could be convinced that something else happened, but I would need to see a credible theory supported by evidence, not just "anyone but Syed" speculation.
I am not sure how much of that is post hoc. I have a feeling that the whole narrative we have been given is just wrong.

If he did not know where the car was found, would that change your position?
__________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
- - - -Bertrand Russell
Desert Fox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 06:18 PM   #10
Ampulla of Vater
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: North of the White Line of Toldt
Posts: 3,141
Undisclosed is put on by 3 people who are extremely biased toward Syed's innocence. If you feel they are "putting on a good case" then you haven't read up on the prosecution's case and/or looked closely at the evidence. Rabia Chaudry will flat out lie and obfuscate to make Syed appear innocent to anyone unfamiliar with the facts of the case.
Ampulla of Vater is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 07:33 PM   #11
Charlie Wilkes
Illuminator
 
Charlie Wilkes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,177
Originally Posted by Desert Fox View Post
I am not sure how much of that is post hoc. I have a feeling that the whole narrative we have been given is just wrong.

If he did not know where the car was found, would that change your position?
Certainly it could. What is the evidence police knew where the car was before they talked to Wilds?
Charlie Wilkes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 07:44 PM   #12
Desert Fox
Philosopher
 
Desert Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,147
Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes View Post
Certainly it could. What is the evidence police knew where the car was before they talked to Wilds?
I think we will find out at least what the argument is next week since they are suggesting that is teh next subject to be discussed.
__________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
- - - -Bertrand Russell
Desert Fox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2015, 03:09 PM   #13
Desert Fox
Philosopher
 
Desert Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,147
Originally Posted by Ampulla of Vater View Post
Undisclosed is put on by 3 people who are extremely biased toward Syed's innocence. If you feel they are "putting on a good case" then you haven't read up on the prosecution's case and/or looked closely at the evidence. Rabia Chaudry will flat out lie and obfuscate to make Syed appear innocent to anyone unfamiliar with the facts of the case.
Did the state ever admit that they were going after an innocent man with David Camm?
__________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
- - - -Bertrand Russell
Desert Fox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2015, 04:26 PM   #14
Desert Fox
Philosopher
 
Desert Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,147
He might get a new trial
http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/19/living...eal-case-feat/
__________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
- - - -Bertrand Russell
Desert Fox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2015, 09:29 PM   #15
kwill
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 722
Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes View Post
I suppose the cops coached Jay Wilds etc., but I can have no reasonable doubt Syed did this murder. Wilds spent that day with Syed, and he was able to take police to the victim's car. That is a core of fact that won't budge.

... the basic narrative of killing the girl, moving her car, and burying her body holds up.
The cell phone evidence doesn't show that they spent the day together. It shows that for about an hour and a half in the late morning (11 - 12:30) they were together, and again for about two hours in the evening (5:50 pm - 8 pm).

That's it. An hour and a half in the morning, two hours in the evening. They didn't spend the day together.

There's strong evidence that Wilds' testimony about the events of the afternoon were crafted to match the cell tower records the police were showing him. During one interview they showed him a map with a tower incorrectly located, and he gave them a story about where he was with the phone when that tower was pinged. After they realized their mistake, they showed him a corrected map, and he gave them a story to match that one.

Why should any of his testimony be taken at face value?

The police believed that the key to the case was two incoming calls to Syed's phone just after 7 pm, both of which pinged a cell tower near the burial site.

That evidence lost a lot of its value recently for two reasons. One is that Wilds himself said in an interview last December that the burial took place "closer to midnight" and admitted to lying during the trial. The other is that the autopsy photos show that the victim was lying face down for 8-10 hours before she was placed in the shallow grave on her side.

So the burial site cell tower pings at 7 pm don't mean what the jury was told they mean. The victim was alive at 2:20 pm. She wasn't buried on her side 5 hours later, or the autopsy photos would show it.

Wilds also testified in court that his normal routine took him past the place where the victim's car was found . . . meaning that he didn't have to be involved in the murder at all to know where it was.

If you read the statements Wilds gave about the burial, you'll find a variety of colorful and self-contradictory details. I don't think there is a true story of that burial in which Wilds and Syed are together, because if there were it would be simple to tell. Instead Wilds changes it up over and over.

That can't be to protect himself or anyone else, because according to him only the two of them were there. Whatever happened to the victim, it doesn't seem to have any relationship to what the State presented in court, or to any of the stories told to detectives in an apparent effort to support their theories.
kwill is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2015, 12:46 AM   #16
Charlie Wilkes
Illuminator
 
Charlie Wilkes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,177
Originally Posted by kwill View Post
The cell phone evidence doesn't show that they spent the day together. It shows that for about an hour and a half in the late morning (11 - 12:30) they were together, and again for about two hours in the evening (5:50 pm - 8 pm).

That's it. An hour and a half in the morning, two hours in the evening. They didn't spend the day together.

There's strong evidence that Wilds' testimony about the events of the afternoon were crafted to match the cell tower records the police were showing him. During one interview they showed him a map with a tower incorrectly located, and he gave them a story about where he was with the phone when that tower was pinged. After they realized their mistake, they showed him a corrected map, and he gave them a story to match that one.

Why should any of his testimony be taken at face value?

The police believed that the key to the case was two incoming calls to Syed's phone just after 7 pm, both of which pinged a cell tower near the burial site.

That evidence lost a lot of its value recently for two reasons. One is that Wilds himself said in an interview last December that the burial took place "closer to midnight" and admitted to lying during the trial. The other is that the autopsy photos show that the victim was lying face down for 8-10 hours before she was placed in the shallow grave on her side.

So the burial site cell tower pings at 7 pm don't mean what the jury was told they mean. The victim was alive at 2:20 pm. She wasn't buried on her side 5 hours later, or the autopsy photos would show it.

Wilds also testified in court that his normal routine took him past the place where the victim's car was found . . . meaning that he didn't have to be involved in the murder at all to know where it was.

If you read the statements Wilds gave about the burial, you'll find a variety of colorful and self-contradictory details. I don't think there is a true story of that burial in which Wilds and Syed are together, because if there were it would be simple to tell. Instead Wilds changes it up over and over.

That can't be to protect himself or anyone else, because according to him only the two of them were there. Whatever happened to the victim, it doesn't seem to have any relationship to what the State presented in court, or to any of the stories told to detectives in an apparent effort to support their theories.
Well, look. What no one disputes is that Wilds had Syed's car and phone for much of the day and was using both, Wilds and Syed were together for at least part of the day, and Syed's phone connected with a tower near where the body was found, on the evening the girl went missing.

So what do you think happened?

Did Wilds kill this girl himself or with a different accomplice, and Syed just happened to wander in and out of the frame without any involvement? If so why did Wilds kill her?

Or do you think someone else killed her and Wilds just made up a story from the whole cloth, and he happened to have spotted the car by coincidence?
Charlie Wilkes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2015, 01:16 AM   #17
Samson
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 11,941
As an innocent bystander I am looking forward to this debate. It appears Kwill is strong on detail, yet Charlie is a formidable analyst.

ETA

Ok this is not new, I am interested in this recent thread

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=284826

Last edited by Samson; 21st May 2015 at 02:25 AM.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2015, 02:32 AM   #18
Desert Fox
Philosopher
 
Desert Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,147
I know that it is kind of an argument from authority but it looks like the innocence project is willing to consider him innocent based on what they see. . . .I do not believe they will take a cause unless they believe a defendant is probably innocent.
__________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
- - - -Bertrand Russell
Desert Fox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2015, 02:41 AM   #19
Samson
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 11,941
Originally Posted by Desert Fox View Post
I know that it is kind of an argument from authority but it looks like the innocence project is willing to consider him innocent based on what they see. . . .I do not believe they will take a cause unless they believe a defendant is probably innocent.
Can you give a link to the website that has taken the case?
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2015, 03:11 AM   #20
Desert Fox
Philosopher
 
Desert Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,147
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Can you give a link to the website that has taken the case?
Damn, I swear I read it but I cannot find what I thought I read
__________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
- - - -Bertrand Russell
Desert Fox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2015, 06:13 PM   #21
kwill
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 722
Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes View Post
Well, look. What no one disputes is that Wilds had Syed's car and phone for much of the day and was using both, Wilds and Syed were together for at least part of the day, and Syed's phone connected with a tower near where the body was found, on the evening the girl went missing.

So what do you think happened?

Did Wilds kill this girl himself or with a different accomplice, and Syed just happened to wander in and out of the frame without any involvement? If so why did Wilds kill her?

Or do you think someone else killed her and Wilds just made up a story from the whole cloth, and he happened to have spotted the car by coincidence?
I think that we don't have enough information to know what happened, but I'm sure that the story as told to the jury could not have been true. There was no premeditation and plan made in an 18-second phone call the night before the murder. There was no burial at 7 pm. (Because of livor mortis evidence) There was no wiping down of the shovels used to dig the grave at 8 pm. (Because the burial could not have happened by 8 pm) There was no tossing of Wilds' clothes and boots the next day. (Because on the 14th of January the whole city of Baltimore was shut down due to an ice storm that began at 4 am that day)

The stories the State's witnesses (Wilds and Pusateri) told to the police were self-contradictory and contradicted one another. They also contradicted the facts. We don't know anything about the murder or about the burial, except that both happened.

One possibility about what might have happened in the investigation is that when the police first got the phone records for the cell phone they saw Jay Wilds' phone number on them. They certainly knew that number because it was used by others in his family, many of whom had done time for meth and/or gun-related activities.

The police were trying to use the cell towers like a GPS. They believed early not just that Syed (as a former boyfriend) was a suspect but that he was very likely guilty . . . because his phone pinged a tower close to the burial site twice on the night the victim went missing.

So (hypothetically) they go to Wilds and tell him they know Syed killed Lee and that they think he was involved, too. If Wilds is both innocent and ignorant, what should he do?

He can bet on option 1, which is that they really have nothing and can't pin it on him. In that case, he asks for a lawyer or refuses to talk.

Or he can bet on option 2, which is that they're right that his geeky pot buddy really did kill his girlfriend, and the cops really will let Jay go if he tells them enough to make a case.

In my rational world, the obvious choice is option 1. Innocent people are never railroaded by cops, right? If I haven't done anything wrong, I can't be charged, much less convicted, right? Wrong, and Wilds -- as a black kid from Baltimore -- certainly knew that the cops could in fact mess with you pretty much at will.

So, he goes for option 2. And then he and the cops, over a series of many untaped conversations, land on a story that will sell to a jury. You can read his taped conversations and hear for yourself that he really never seems to be operating from his own memory. He just manufactures details on the spot without any concern for how much they contradict the evidence.

Wilds told the cops he helped to bury a body, destroyed evidence, and failed to report a homicide he knew was being planned . . . and they sent him home to sleep in his own bed.

So what about the car? Wilds knew the victim. He sat next to her in biology the year before. He knew her car, because she was friends with his girlfriend at the time, and because he'd seen her and Syed together in it.

He testified in court that he'd seen her car in the course of his normal routine between the time of the murder and the day he told the cops where it was. So, yes. It's possible that he knew where it was without being involved in anything.
kwill is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2015, 08:13 PM   #22
Charlie Wilkes
Illuminator
 
Charlie Wilkes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,177
Originally Posted by kwill View Post
I think that we don't have enough information to know what happened, but I'm sure that the story as told to the jury could not have been true. There was no premeditation and plan made in an 18-second phone call the night before the murder. There was no burial at 7 pm. (Because of livor mortis evidence) There was no wiping down of the shovels used to dig the grave at 8 pm. (Because the burial could not have happened by 8 pm) There was no tossing of Wilds' clothes and boots the next day. (Because on the 14th of January the whole city of Baltimore was shut down due to an ice storm that began at 4 am that day)

The stories the State's witnesses (Wilds and Pusateri) told to the police were self-contradictory and contradicted one another. They also contradicted the facts. We don't know anything about the murder or about the burial, except that both happened.

One possibility about what might have happened in the investigation is that when the police first got the phone records for the cell phone they saw Jay Wilds' phone number on them. They certainly knew that number because it was used by others in his family, many of whom had done time for meth and/or gun-related activities.

The police were trying to use the cell towers like a GPS. They believed early not just that Syed (as a former boyfriend) was a suspect but that he was very likely guilty . . . because his phone pinged a tower close to the burial site twice on the night the victim went missing.

So (hypothetically) they go to Wilds and tell him they know Syed killed Lee and that they think he was involved, too. If Wilds is both innocent and ignorant, what should he do?

He can bet on option 1, which is that they really have nothing and can't pin it on him. In that case, he asks for a lawyer or refuses to talk.

Or he can bet on option 2, which is that they're right that his geeky pot buddy really did kill his girlfriend, and the cops really will let Jay go if he tells them enough to make a case.

In my rational world, the obvious choice is option 1. Innocent people are never railroaded by cops, right? If I haven't done anything wrong, I can't be charged, much less convicted, right? Wrong, and Wilds -- as a black kid from Baltimore -- certainly knew that the cops could in fact mess with you pretty much at will.

So, he goes for option 2. And then he and the cops, over a series of many untaped conversations, land on a story that will sell to a jury. You can read his taped conversations and hear for yourself that he really never seems to be operating from his own memory. He just manufactures details on the spot without any concern for how much they contradict the evidence.

Wilds told the cops he helped to bury a body, destroyed evidence, and failed to report a homicide he knew was being planned . . . and they sent him home to sleep in his own bed.

So what about the car? Wilds knew the victim. He sat next to her in biology the year before. He knew her car, because she was friends with his girlfriend at the time, and because he'd seen her and Syed together in it.

He testified in court that he'd seen her car in the course of his normal routine between the time of the murder and the day he told the cops where it was. So, yes. It's possible that he knew where it was without being involved in anything.
I would need to see the details of livor mortis evidence that "proves" the body could not have been buried at 7 pm. My understanding is that a pathologist can tell if a body was moved more than a couple of hours after death, but can't say it was at least "X" hours.

Is your thesis that the cops talked to Wilds before they talked to Pusateri? Why would she concoct hearsay to corroborate Wilds?

I can see that the evidence in this case is thin, and it could be picked apart by a good legal team. It's the same with Scott Peterson, and I feel the same way about Syed as I do about Peterson. It's conceivable either of them could be innocent, the victims of unfortunate circumstances. For someone to convince me there is a strong affirmative case for innocence, however, I would need a plausible theory of what really happened, backed by evidence.
Charlie Wilkes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2015, 09:15 PM   #23
Desert Fox
Philosopher
 
Desert Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,147
Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes View Post
I would need to see the details of livor mortis evidence that "proves" the body could not have been buried at 7 pm. My understanding is that a pathologist can tell if a body was moved more than a couple of hours after death, but can't say it was at least "X" hours.

Is your thesis that the cops talked to Wilds before they talked to Pusateri? Why would she concoct hearsay to corroborate Wilds?

I can see that the evidence in this case is thin, and it could be picked apart by a good legal team. It's the same with Scott Peterson, and I feel the same way about Syed as I do about Peterson. It's conceivable either of them could be innocent, the victims of unfortunate circumstances. For someone to convince me there is a strong affirmative case for innocence, however, I would need a plausible theory of what really happened, backed by evidence.
Kind of in the area, maybe, is very different than being on a boat fishing and the victim washes up from around the area where you were fishing. I am more comfortable with Scott Peterson than with Syed.

You do agree that she was killed very soon after school because she just disappeared? My issue is that it is incredibly difficult to have done the murder in the time frame that he appears to have had. If there was a bit more time, I would feel more comfortable with him being guilty.
__________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
- - - -Bertrand Russell
Desert Fox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2015, 09:29 PM   #24
kwill
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 722
Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes View Post
I would need to see the details of livor mortis evidence that "proves" the body could not have been buried at 7 pm. My understanding is that a pathologist can tell if a body was moved more than a couple of hours after death, but can't say it was at least "X" hours.

Is your thesis that the cops talked to Wilds before they talked to Pusateri? Why would she concoct hearsay to corroborate Wilds?

I can see that the evidence in this case is thin, and it could be picked apart by a good legal team. It's the same with Scott Peterson, and I feel the same way about Syed as I do about Peterson. It's conceivable either of them could be innocent, the victims of unfortunate circumstances. For someone to convince me there is a strong affirmative case for innocence, however, I would need a plausible theory of what really happened, backed by evidence.
A qualified ME, going on nothing but the autopsy photos:

Quote:
To me, the lividity looks fully frontal and fairly symmetrical with regards to areas of pressure. These B&W photos are not ideal by any means.

1. Anterior lividity means her body was in a fully anterior position for at least 8-12 hours in a temperate location (neither too hot nor too cold), so neither claim seems plausible. If she was stored in a hotter environment the time could be less. She was fully face down for a length of time and then placed in the grave.
source

Her body was was on its side when found. The lividity evidence -- at least according to this ME -- means that she couldn't have been placed in the grave in that position until 11 pm, assuming she was killed shortly after she left school that day. For what it's worth, Jay Wilds himself told an interviewer last December that the burial was closer to midnight.

That means the cell tower pings at 7 pm can't be associated with the burial. They might be associated with scoping out a site . . . but that's not the story told to the jury. Why was Wilds lying to the court about the burial time? To corroborate the cell phone records the State was using to show that Syed must have been present at the burial.

Wilds did have contact with the Baltimore police before they talked to his friend Jennifer Pusateri. That's not a thesis, it's corroborated by his boss (Sis) at the time.

Quote:
PD Davis was then advised that one of the days, either the 20, 21 or 22, Jay missed work when he responded to the Baltimore City Police Headquarters for an interview. Jay was questioned several times by the police at which time Sis asked Jay if they were questioning him in reference to the girl found in the Park. Jay advised that that was correct
source

Jennifer Pusateri wasn't interviewed until the 26th of February.

I think it's the case that the evidence isn't just thin, it's nonexistent. The cops thought they had the right guy. They were willing to let their main witness make up story after story, as long as he kept repeating that the suspect they liked was the killer. That's what he did.

I would suggest that if there were a true story about the burial in which Syed is present, Wilds could have told it. Instead he gave a number of different versions, some of which make no sense.
kwill is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2015, 10:20 PM   #25
Desert Fox
Philosopher
 
Desert Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,147
There is almost a pattern towards how people confess when they are guilty or involved. If they are are involved but trying to get themselves out, the events will at least tend to follow what actually happened.

If they fully confess and they are actually, the story lines tend to match what the evidence points to. They don't tend to create something that just does not seem to work.

It is really strange especially how they are suppose to have two cars yet the story Jay tells seems to involve only one car.
__________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
- - - -Bertrand Russell
Desert Fox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2015, 11:07 PM   #26
kwill
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 722
Originally Posted by Desert Fox View Post
It is really strange especially how they are suppose to have two cars yet the story Jay tells seems to involve only one car.
Yes. He describes conversations he and Syed are supposedly having while they drive around in two cars. The detectives remind him that at this point they're not together, & he apologizes and moves on.

I can't think of a reason for Wilds to invent details about the burial scene if he really did witness it. The fact that he tells multiple fanciful stories is one of the main reasons I don't think he was present.
kwill is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2015, 08:24 PM   #27
Ampulla of Vater
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: North of the White Line of Toldt
Posts: 3,141
Originally Posted by Desert Fox View Post
Kind of in the area, maybe, is very different than being on a boat fishing and the victim washes up from around the area where you were fishing. I am more comfortable with Scott Peterson than with Syed.

You do agree that she was killed very soon after school because she just disappeared? My issue is that it is incredibly difficult to have done the murder in the time frame that he appears to have had. If there was a bit more time, I would feel more comfortable with him being guilty.
Why did he need more time? It only takes a few minutes to strangle someone. Witnesses heard him ask Hae for a ride after school and then she turns up dead. His cell phone pings from the burial site, his stories change, he has no credible alibi and he never, ever calls her again after she goes missing, even though her body isn't discovered for a month. If you don't like the 2:36pm call being the come-and-get-me call, it could have been the 3:15 call. Either way, he is the only one with motive and means and no other scenario matches the known evidence.
Ampulla of Vater is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2015, 08:35 PM   #28
Ampulla of Vater
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: North of the White Line of Toldt
Posts: 3,141
Originally Posted by kwill View Post
A qualified ME, going on nothing but the autopsy photos:

source

Her body was was on its side when found. The lividity evidence -- at least according to this ME -- means that she couldn't have been placed in the grave in that position until 11 pm, assuming she was killed shortly after she left school that day.
No, just no. We cannot go on an ME who is going off nothing but the "not ideal" black and white autopsy photos. Moreover, do we have a photo of her position in the grave? No, I didn't think so. Rabia has pics. Why do you suppose she hasn't produced any? Probably the same reason she hasn't produced any of the missing trial transcript pages: none of it supports her golden boy being innocent.
Ampulla of Vater is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2015, 12:12 AM   #29
Charlie Wilkes
Illuminator
 
Charlie Wilkes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,177
Originally Posted by Desert Fox View Post
There is almost a pattern towards how people confess when they are guilty or involved.
Oh, yes, and that's the thing... Jay Wilds fits it to a tee. He tells the shifting, self-serving, half bogus tale of someone who was very much involved, and knows exactly what happened, but wants to minimize his role.

Have you followed murder cases where multiple kids are in it to some degree? Look at the case of Elizabeth Haysom and Jens Söring. Each of them tells a completely different story, and both have changed their stories many times. Each seeks to blame the other while minimizing their own role. Hence no one is sure about the details of what happened.

BUT there is no doubt one or the other of them physically murdered her parents, and they planned it together. Police found correspondence in which they discussed the plot explicitly, before they did it.
Charlie Wilkes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2015, 12:59 PM   #30
Desert Fox
Philosopher
 
Desert Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,147
Originally Posted by Ampulla of Vater View Post
Why did he need more time? It only takes a few minutes to strangle someone. Witnesses heard him ask Hae for a ride after school and then she turns up dead. His cell phone pings from the burial site, his stories change, he has no credible alibi and he never, ever calls her again after she goes missing, even though her body isn't discovered for a month. If you don't like the 2:36pm call being the come-and-get-me call, it could have been the 3:15 call. Either way, he is the only one with motive and means and no other scenario matches the known evidence.
My mind is running in a few different directions on how to answer you.

I would start by arguing that I am not as sure about this case as I am with many other cases. As a skeptic, I am never sure about anything but I would the best I can in each case.

I do not consider anything definitive enough to say his is guilty, or innocent for that matter. As such a case, I operate as he is "not guilty."

The thing is that he has to get out of the school parking lot, strangle her, and get back to track before he is noticed being missing. He has to do this without acting strange while there.

In order to make a judgement call about the cell phone, one really needs to know what his normal patterns are. In addition, this was the days of early cell phones where there was nowhere near the amount of towers or the ability to locate people.
__________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
- - - -Bertrand Russell
Desert Fox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2015, 01:04 PM   #31
Desert Fox
Philosopher
 
Desert Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,147
Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes View Post
Oh, yes, and that's the thing... Jay Wilds fits it to a tee. He tells the shifting, self-serving, half bogus tale of someone who was very much involved, and knows exactly what happened, but wants to minimize his role.

Have you followed murder cases where multiple kids are in it to some degree? Look at the case of Elizabeth Haysom and Jens Söring. Each of them tells a completely different story, and both have changed their stories many times. Each seeks to blame the other while minimizing their own role. Hence no one is sure about the details of what happened.

BUT there is no doubt one or the other of them physically murdered her parents, and they planned it together. Police found correspondence in which they discussed the plot explicitly, before they did it.
I know a about the case but I am not certain exactly what you are referring to? I at first thought the Amanda Knox case was something like the Diane Zamora case but found it was something quite different.
__________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
- - - -Bertrand Russell
Desert Fox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2015, 02:51 PM   #32
Ampulla of Vater
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: North of the White Line of Toldt
Posts: 3,141
Originally Posted by Desert Fox View Post
My mind is running in a few different directions on how to answer you.

I would start by arguing that I am not as sure about this case as I am with many other cases. As a skeptic, I am never sure about anything but I would the best I can in each case.

I do not consider anything definitive enough to say his is guilty, or innocent for that matter. As such a case, I operate as he is "not guilty."

The thing is that he has to get out of the school parking lot, strangle her, and get back to track before he is noticed being missing. He has to do this without acting strange while there.

In order to make a judgement call about the cell phone, one really needs to know what his normal patterns are. In addition, this was the days of early cell phones where there was nowhere near the amount of towers or the ability to locate people.
Except no one testified that he was absolutely at track, let alone when he got there. Coach Russell testified that track attendance is not recorded.
Ampulla of Vater is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2015, 02:58 PM   #33
Ampulla of Vater
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: North of the White Line of Toldt
Posts: 3,141
Originally Posted by Desert Fox View Post
I know a about the case but I am not certain exactly what you are referring to? I at first thought the Amanda Knox case was something like the Diane Zamora case but found it was something quite different.
I believe Charlie is referring to Jay Wilds being such a lying liar. Jay was the state's main witness and he testified to having been shown the body (the trunk-pop) and helping to bury Hae and to get rid of her car. Jay's story is ever-changing and he is a horrible witness. He knew enough about the crime though, that he could not have been not involved. Many people say he was the sole perpetrator, however he really didn't have motive and lots of other evidence corroborates the main parts of his story.

Charlie's stance is Jay lied over and over to minimize his role in the crime, which is undoubtedly true.
Ampulla of Vater is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2015, 03:24 PM   #34
Desert Fox
Philosopher
 
Desert Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,147
Originally Posted by Ampulla of Vater View Post
I believe Charlie is referring to Jay Wilds being such a lying liar. Jay was the state's main witness and he testified to having been shown the body (the trunk-pop) and helping to bury Hae and to get rid of her car. Jay's story is ever-changing and he is a horrible witness. He knew enough about the crime though, that he could not have been not involved. Many people say he was the sole perpetrator, however he really didn't have motive and lots of other evidence corroborates the main parts of his story.

Charlie's stance is Jay lied over and over to minimize his role in the crime, which is undoubtedly true.
No, I am referring to the case of Elizabeth Haysom and Jens Söring.
By the way, there are some who consider Jens Söring to be innocent including an ex attorney general.
__________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
- - - -Bertrand Russell
Desert Fox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2015, 07:16 PM   #35
kwill
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 722
Originally Posted by Ampulla of Vater View Post
Except no one testified that he was absolutely at track, let alone when he got there. Coach Russell testified that track attendance is not recorded.
It was Coach Sye. And he told the detectives about 3 weeks after Syed was arrested that he remembered talking with Syed about fasting in Ramadan during a day in January when it was warm enough for the team to run outdoors. See last few pages of this document.

There were only a couple of days during Ramadan that were above 40; one was on the 12th, when the team had a meet, and the other was on the day the victim went missing.

It's possible, of course, that the coach was thinking of another day, or another student, or that Syed managed to kill the victim and then sneak into track late and have this conversation.

Not an ironclad alibi for 3:30-5:30, then. But this is an adult with no connection to the case, and his memory of the conversation is supported by both the weather and the season of Ramadan.
kwill is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2015, 07:25 PM   #36
kwill
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 722
Originally Posted by Ampulla of Vater View Post
No, just no. We cannot go on an ME who is going off nothing but the "not ideal" black and white autopsy photos. Moreover, do we have a photo of her position in the grave? No, I didn't think so. Rabia has pics. Why do you suppose she hasn't produced any? Probably the same reason she hasn't produced any of the missing trial transcript pages: none of it supports her golden boy being innocent.
Goodness, are you connected to this case?

For the uninitiated, Rabia is Rabia Chaudry, a family friend of the Syeds who happens to be an attorney and who gave the case files she'd been carting around for years to Sarah Koenig, who created the Serial podcast.

I don't believe anyone has photos taken at the gravesite, but I'd be interested to find out why you think Chaudry does. I read that the defense was allowed to look at them in preparation for the trial, but was never given copies.

It makes no sense to me that Chaudry or anyone else would be hiding transcript pages because they look bad for the defense . . . surely a tactic that dumb would backfire? The record is incomplete as it was given to her, but there is video of the trial, so eventually the truth would come out.

I think when a respected ME goes on the record based on autopsy photos, you have to give some credit to what conclusions she's drawn. I'd also point out that the State's chief witness told a journalist that the burial was closer to midnight . . . which aligns with the ME's conclusions.

He could be lying, of course. But he said it months before anybody talked about the lividity evidence.
kwill is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2015, 07:37 PM   #37
kwill
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 722
Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes View Post
Oh, yes, and that's the thing... Jay Wilds fits it to a tee. He tells the shifting, self-serving, half bogus tale of someone who was very much involved, and knows exactly what happened, but wants to minimize his role.

Have you followed murder cases where multiple kids are in it to some degree? Look at the case of Elizabeth Haysom and Jens Söring. Each of them tells a completely different story, and both have changed their stories many times. Each seeks to blame the other while minimizing their own role. Hence no one is sure about the details of what happened.

BUT there is no doubt one or the other of them physically murdered her parents, and they planned it together. Police found correspondence in which they discussed the plot explicitly, before they did it.
This case isn't like that, though. Wilds has of course told a shifting, bogus story about what happened. Syed has told no story, except that he let Wilds use his car that day (as he -- and other students -- had on other days), and that as far as he could recall, it was a routine day.

The only thing that has changed about his story has to do with whether or not he asked the victim for a ride. One friend (still his friend to this day and convinced of his complete innocence, by the way) overheard him ask for a ride. She says it was just before class started that day. She says the victim said, "Sure."

Others say that they heard the victim tell him later in the afternoon that she couldn't do it after all, which he accepted.

He says he didn't ask for a ride.

That's the extent of the shifting story for Syed. Compare to Wilds, who spent many hours over a couple of months with the police and changed detail after detail after detail -- not in reaction to anything Syed was saying, but -- at least some of the time -- in reaction to things the police were telling him.
kwill is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2015, 08:19 PM   #38
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,571
Originally Posted by Ampulla of Vater View Post
however he really didn't have motive and lots of other evidence corroborates the main parts of his story.
You realize that some crime happens really without external apparent motive ? Most sexual crime for example. I can remember a guy that age strangulating a girl that age in my home city, because he tried to fondle/have sex with her, but she did not want to and started to scream then he wanted her to shut up, and strangulated her killing her.

No apparent motive. Because the real motive was only due to a crime of opportunity.
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2015, 12:11 AM   #39
Charlie Wilkes
Illuminator
 
Charlie Wilkes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,177
Originally Posted by kwill View Post
This case isn't like that, though. Wilds has of course told a shifting, bogus story about what happened. Syed has told no story, except that he let Wilds use his car that day (as he -- and other students -- had on other days), and that as far as he could recall, it was a routine day.

The only thing that has changed about his story has to do with whether or not he asked the victim for a ride. One friend (still his friend to this day and convinced of his complete innocence, by the way) overheard him ask for a ride. She says it was just before class started that day. She says the victim said, "Sure."

Others say that they heard the victim tell him later in the afternoon that she couldn't do it after all, which he accepted.

He says he didn't ask for a ride.

That's the extent of the shifting story for Syed. Compare to Wilds, who spent many hours over a couple of months with the police and changed detail after detail after detail -- not in reaction to anything Syed was saying, but -- at least some of the time -- in reaction to things the police were telling him.
Syed has consistently asserted his innocence and has not wavered from his story. That doesn't tell us much, one way or the other. My point is that the circumstances and nature of Wilds's statements are wholly consistent with someone who was involved with the murder. Once police had the hearsay statement, Wilds felt he was in a situation where he could no longer plausibly deny his involvement. He told a partially true story in which he sought to minimize his role, but it was rife with falsehoods that he can't keep straight and has revised over time.

Then he corroborated his statement by taking police to the car. Is it possible he spotted and recognized the car earlier, by coincidence? I can't say it is impossible. I think it is unlikely. The authorities had been looking for this vehicle, and the public knew it was missing. It would be quite a coincidence indeed if Wilds just happened to be the one guy who noticed it, and knew whose car it was, and didn't say anything to anyone, until he gave his account of the murder to the police.

You are doing an excellent job of picking apart the evidence and showing that it is weak and inconclusive. You have not, however, given me a good reason to think Syed is more than likely innocent.
Charlie Wilkes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2015, 08:03 AM   #40
Ampulla of Vater
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: North of the White Line of Toldt
Posts: 3,141
Originally Posted by kwill View Post
Goodness, are you connected to this case?
I guess my emotional side shows, huh? I am not connected, but I am from the area. I started the WHS Scholarship Fund in Memory of Hae. My emotional investment is because of my time spent on another site where there is an innocent camp and a guilty camp. I started out in the innocent camp, then I moved to the probably-guilty-but-not-a-fair-trial camp, then I moved to the guilty and Adnan's mouthpiece has-lied-all-over-the-place camp.
Originally Posted by kwill View Post
For the uninitiated, Rabia is Rabia Chaudry, a family friend of the Syeds who happens to be an attorney and who gave the case files she'd been carting around for years to Sarah Koenig, who created the Serial podcast.

I don't believe anyone has photos taken at the gravesite, but I'd be interested to find out why you think Chaudry does. I read that the defense was allowed to look at them in preparation for the trial, but was never given copies.

It makes no sense to me that Chaudry or anyone else would be hiding transcript pages because they look bad for the defense . . . surely a tactic that dumb would backfire? The record is incomplete as it was given to her, but there is video of the trial, so eventually the truth would come out.

I think when a respected ME goes on the record based on autopsy photos, you have to give some credit to what conclusions she's drawn. I'd also point out that the State's chief witness told a journalist that the burial was closer to midnight . . . which aligns with the ME's conclusions.

He could be lying, of course. But he said it months before anybody talked about the lividity evidence.
She is hiding transcripts. She agreed to release bits of transcripts for every $10,000 raised for Adnan's defense fund. Then she became angry on the other website, accused someone who had non-flattering details about Adnan of being a sexual predator and essentially blew a gasket and deleted her account. Eventually someone else, through FOIA, obtained several days of full transcripts.

I have to be somewhere now, but I will post some information about the case here - some factual information, as opposed to emotional information.

Last edited by Ampulla of Vater; 24th May 2015 at 08:04 AM.
Ampulla of Vater is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:55 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.