View Single Post
  #109  
Old 11-15-2014, 09:03 PM
brickbacon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 4,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
But her "feelings"and impressions of Jay, and those of her assistant, 15 years after the fact are completely irrelevant. As were the stories shared by Jay's friends, 15 years down the road.
I disagree. It's an important counterbalance to what we have heard from Adnan, 15 years down the road. It's hard to fairly compare the two of them when our impression of Adnan is based on present day conversations while our impression of Jay is based on taped interrogations/confessions 15 years ago. I think a lot of what makes people believe Adnan is innocent is his supposedly charming calm present day demeanor relative to Jay's shifty inconsistency 15 years ago. Up until now, we heard a teenager without the ability to respond arguing against a grown man with 15 years of hindsight and contemplation. Giving Jay the chance to answer some of those critiques, and a chance for SK to judge his demeanor, was important.

Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Now, what the ex-cop detective said was much more insightful, i.e. cops want to build a case and they are not inclined to work very hard to tear down their only material witness if it will lead to something inconclusive. Cops want closure. They want to solutions neatly wrapped up with a bow, if they can get them.
I think you are overstating their motivations a bit, and understanding the reality of the situation. Yes, there is something a bot unseemly about the concept of "bad evidence", but it is largely a reflection of how hard it is to piece together past events or crimes involving uncooperative people absent really compelling direct evidence.

When you are dealing with circumstantial evidence, the weight of the evidence is primarily based on the narrative you can uncover or entirely create to explain it's relevance. Not testing or not probing too deeply into things that don't fit a reasonable narrative is less likely to impede justice in the long run if your narrative is sound.

Similarly, witness testimony is also problematic because memory is malleable. Yes, they could have pressed Jay and others on their inconsistencies, but if even honest people tell conflicting stories. The heart of the matter is presenting a cogent and cohesive story to a jury that implicates the guilty party. That more than anything is what ensures justice.

Last edited by brickbacon; 11-15-2014 at 09:06 PM.