View Single Post
Old 03-28-2015, 03:48 PM
bbonden is offline
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 241
Originally Posted by Do Not Taunt View Post
I actually agree that between Jay knowing about the car and the Leakin Park cell phone calls, there's a reasonable case there. But it's not enough: if those were literally the only two facts, it would be easy to put together a counter-narrative that Jay committed the murder, buried Hae, and had Adnan's cell phone the whole time. That's what the state attempted to actually put together a narrative, answering questions such as:

* When and where did the murder occur
* When was the body buried
* Who was involved
* What did the principals do in the meantime
* What did they do prior to the murder

And there's a fair amount of supporting evidence in there. The problem, thought, is that they ultimately relied on a witness who gave contradictory accounts, none of which matched actual evidence (the cell phone records), and presented a timeline at trial that didn't happen. They lucked out and caught a jury that didn't really care and let their biases slip into their decision making against the judge's instructions. But it should bother all of us that the state can do such a sloppy job and get a conviction at the end. And that should bother us regardless of how much we think Adnan 'did it', because it contradicts our ideals of how our criminal justice system should work: that defendants are supposed to have the presumption of innocence, they they should have an unbiased jury, and that the state is supposed to meet a high bar of burden of proof. Sadly, I didn't see any of that happen here.
I think that you are looking at a fictional detective/TV standard. In the real world, this is a pretty simple case.

Jay is complicit. There is no getting around that (unless you unwind the "knew where the car is," which no one even tried to do). The only question then is whether it is Jay alone, or Jay + Adnan, or Jay + someone else. That's it. That's the universe.

Jay + "I believe him when it comes to Adnan" = beyond a reasonable doubt. That's not an abdication of the jury's role, that is the jury's role. They saw the witnesses, they heard the contradictions in various parts of Jay's testimony, and they disregarded those contradictions when it came to assessing Adnan's guilt or innocence.

Nor is it a cop-out. Jay had Adnan's car and brand-new mobile phone. Of the many, many people who could have come forward and said that Jay did it, or at least that Jay had motive to do it, not one did. Not Jenn, not Stephanie, not even Adnan. Of the tens of thousands of people (at least) who know the essential facts of the case, not one has even come up with a plausible alternate theory that incorporates the undisputed facts, the timeline and motives.

Sarah Koenig did a wonderful job narrating, and built a compelling product. But she also is very lucky that Jay told so many different stories, because without them there would not have been much to talk about.