View Single Post
Old 11-21-2014, 04:17 PM
brickbacon is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 4,895
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
That's really the bottom line, isn't it? SK has not uncovered any new evidence in her investigation.
In a sense she has because we hear from Adnan.

Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
All she's done is shine a new light on evidence that's been sitting around for the past 15 years. Given what's been presented thus far, I'm inclined to think that there is sufficient reason to have this case be brought back in front of a judge on appeal.
On what grounds?

Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Not because I'm convinced the wrong guy is doing life in prison but because there was insufficient evidence to convict him in the first place.
Insufficient evidence is up to a jury (or a judge in limited circumstances), and they clearly disagreed in record time. You can't just get a new trial because you think you lawyer should have been better. Ineffective counsel is very hard to prove and has a pretty high bar.

Originally Posted by totallyanon View Post
Actually it is. they have nothing physical, only Jay and the timeline he concocted with the police doesn't work anymore now that there are multiple people who saw Hae at school when the police say she was murdered.
Most murder cases don't have physical evidence. This study says only 13.5% of murder cases they reviewed did.

Plus, there is more evidence than that. Here is a fairly comprehensive list without Jay's testimony just off the top of my head. I am sure I left things out:

1. Jen's testimony
2. Hae's letter to Adnan about being controlling on which he wrote, "I'm going to kill".
3. Hae's diary
4. Adnan's prints on the map cover found in Hae's trunk which had the Leakin Park page torn out
5. The cell tower evidence showing his phone was in Leakin Park when she was likely buried
6. The Nisha call and the voice mail call
7. Adcock's testimony that Adnan lied about asking for a ride
8. Adnan's brother calling him a "masterful liar"
9. Cathy's testimony that Adnan received a call and was acting strange
10. The numerous holes in Adnan's account of where he was and why he did the things he did (eg. lending his car to Jay, calling Hae 3 times the night before she disappears, thinking Hae went to CA).
11. Adnan never trying to contact Hae again after the 13th.
12. He loans his car and cell phone to, and hangs out most of the day with Jay, a person who admits being an accessory to murder.
13. Hae being strangled, a very personal and inefficient way to kill someone
14. Hae likely going missing from the last place Adnan was, and a place Jay wouldn't be. Also that she wouldn't have stopped for just anyone before picking up her cousin.
15. Anonymous tipster with Asian accent fingers Adnan.
16. Yasser, Adnan's good friend states Adnan said if he ever killed his GF, he would dump her car in a lake or the woods.
17. Witnesses state Adnan asked Hae for a ride the day she disappeared.
18. Adnan essentially led a double life and has lots of experience lying convincingly.
19. Adnan has no credible alibi, plausible alternative theory of what happened, or desire to look for any exculpatory evidence.
20. Adnan, and AFAIK, only Adnan has motive, means, and opportunity to kill Hae.

I suppose no single numbered item above means he did it, but the totality of it all is very damning even absent Jay's testimony.

Originally Posted by totallyanon View Post
My god, there wasn't even a phone booth at the Best Buy - without the phone booth Jay's story is even more completely messed up and riddled with lies - especially when Jay notes specifically the Adnan was wearing red gloves while waiting for him at the pay phone. The phone that didn't exist. All Adnan's lawyer has to do is introduce in court that the phone booth wasn't there and Adnan never gets convicted.
Or, maybe the phone was there. Honestly, do you think his lawyer was THAT bad? Don't you also think someone would have caught that at the time if it were true?