You have said this a couple of times. What are you basing that on? Rabia disagrees.
[QUOTE=Rabia Chaudry]
The trial was hard, really painful to sit through. I was thoroughly confused. How was she a star attorney? From my bench in the courtroom her defense was a disaster.
[/QUOTE]
She does say that she did not attend the first trial.
Thanks for the correction. My apologies for the mistake.
Just poking my head in to mention that I’m pretty sure people that worked with CG on this or other cases have said that she was distracted and taking on too much while battling illness. I thought that specifically came from an assistant on this case but I may be wrong.
What professional credentials do you have to state that, and why would you state that without seeing all the evidence? Again, please link to documents outlining the sum total of their case?
No, it is my editorializing obviously. The fact that you think it means I was quoting you as opposed to saying that that was the thrust of your argument (which it was), shows how you don’t grasp basic English concepts.
I personally know of many others. You can just search on reddit or google to find others who came to the same conclusion given what Adnan said even if they think he should think she did a bad job.
I think he clearly explained WHY he wasn’t saying much at all about Jay. The same reasoning doesn’t apply to CG.
I am saying we don’t know what we don’t know. And if you think you know all of the evidence, please link to something outlining all the evidence presented in both trials?
How disingenuous you are. Let’s look at how this started. You said:
Which is demonstrably false. When I linked to the relevant text, you said:
Which is probably true, but unrelated to your first claim. Then you said:
Here is where you start with the hyperbole and histrionics. The fact that you can even argue hearing snippets and the time of jury deliberations means the lawyer was bad is mind boggling to me and really shows how out of your depth you are.
Then you continued to move the goalposts by arguing this:
Bonus points for the anonymous lawyer friend who defends celebrities, but you have completely changed the issue. I never said CG was a good lawyer or that she did a good job. I said Adnan seems to think she did a pretty good job and that WE, people who have seen just a snippet of her performance, are not in a position to accurately judge that.
Then it just devolves from there. I get that you disagree and think CG was clearly bad because you heard her talk for 30 seconds and she lost the case, but the reality is MOST lawyers lose the vast majority of murder cases. That, in and of itself, doesn’t mean much in terms of how well they represented their client. The fact that you feel so desirous to deem CG incompetent is just strange given how little we know about what happened in court.
I don’t need to have credentials. I have linked to several people who do. Your entire argument is that nobody is qualified to judge her performance. Everyone here, plus numerous other attorneys, disagree with you.
Ah, another personal attack. So predictable. It makes no sense if you aren’t attributing that stance to me. Try again.
But none who can show that Adnan said anything remotely close to it, right?
Cite, please.
Here. If you don’t think that’s a fair summary of all the pertinent evidence, then you really have no business in this thread.
Another personal attack. So, I guess this is where you demonstrate why I’m disingenuous on that point.
Here it comes…
Not yet…
Not yet…
Not yet…
Not yet…
Wow, what does any of that have to do with personal attacks? You really went off on a bit of a rant there, didn’t ya.
I don’t need to have credentials. I have linked to several people who do. Your entire argument is that nobody is qualified to judge her performance. Everyone here, plus numerous other attorneys, disagree with you.
Ah, another personal attack. So predictable. It makes no sense if you aren’t attributing that stance to me. Try again.
But none who can show that Adnan said anything remotely close to it, right?
Cite, please.
[I am saying we don’t know what we don’t know. And if you think you know all of the evidence, please link to something outlining all the evidence presented in both trials?
[/quote]
Here. If you don’t think that’s a fair summary of all the pertinent evidence, then you really have no business in this thread.
Another personal attack. So, I guess this is where you demonstrate why I’m disingenuous on that point.
Here it comes…
Not yet…
Not yet…
Not yet…
Not yet…
Wow, what does any of that have to do with personal attacks? You really went off on a bit of a rant there, didn’t ya.
(Plus, you’re putting words in my mouth again. I never said she was incompetent. Or a shit lawyer.)
Really? In what post can I find those links?
Nope. My opinion is that only people who have seen the actual performance are qualified to judge the performance.
Again, your lack of comprehension gets you in trouble. There is a difference between accusing someone of saying something explicitly and summarizing their sentiments in your own words. You accused me of the former, demanding I cite you saying that, when that was not the point.
None that have withheld judgment? I already linked to one person. Again, I have never said she did a good job. My point was that Adnan seems to think she did and that we don’t have evidence she did a poor job. How this very basic concept manages to continually escape you is beyond me.
In short, criticizing Jay hurts his appeal, his image, and opens him and SK up to various charges. Criticizing CG doesn’t do any of that, doubly so since he is appealing on grounds of ineffective counsel.
Ah, the podcast is my cite. You must be joking? GIVE ME A LIST OF ALL THE EVIDENCE THE PROSECUTION PRESENTED. If it’s so easy, why are you just linking to the front page of the podcast?
You stated the childish behavior and personal attacks by calling my analogy stupid among other things.
Where did I say you said she was incompetent?
Here is one.
We’ve only heard the opinion of one attorney who was present at the trial. She said CG did a terrible job. We also heard from Adnan and at least one juror, both of whom said that CG failed to put forth a coherent outline of what her defense was supposed to even be.
No it doesn’t, but thanks for showing everyone that you haven’t abandoned your dependence on personal attacks.
I’m saying your summary bears no resemblance to anything he said, and is plucked from thin air.
Yes we do.
Personally criticizing CG would hurt his image just as much as criticizing Jay. I have no doubt that his attorneys have advised him to leave the criticisms of his council to them.
The entire podcast lay out the evidence available to the prosecution. If you want to dispute what she says, or claim that Serial leaves out important pieces of evidence, then you’re in the wrong thread.
You are not your analogy. I attacked what you said, not you.
Seriously?
I didn’t say she was incompetent, nor do I desire to call her incompetent. I think Adnan killed Hae, so I have no idea why you’re ascribing motives to me.
Where had you linked to that post in this thread? You said you already linked to several people before. What post did you link to that cite? More importantly, few of these people comment at all on the job CG did, and half of them are idiots. If you think voting not guilty because, “Adnan isn’t a psychopath” makes sense then I don’t know what to tell you.
So the opinions of two people mean she did a terrible job? First, Rabia is clearly biased and not really reliable. Second, the juror’s opinion could partly be the result of the evidence being what it is, not bad counsel. Adnan’s legal team has already been ruled against on some of the counts of ineffective counsel, so not everyone thinks she did a demonstrably terrible job. Either way, she very may well have. The issue is pronouncing this without having even read the complete (or even a large part) trial transcripts is foolish.
And you would be wrong. If multiple people come to the opposite conclusion you do, maybe you should reevaluate.
Great, please cite that evidence and the evidence you have that it was a misstep rather than a strategy, or that if it was strategy, please state why you think the strategy was bad?
Nonsense. He is appealing because of ineffective counsel. He is essentially accusing her of incompetence even if you want to argue it is a legal ruse. the idea he wouldn’t come out a say that if he believed it to be true is without basis.
Wrong. The podcast omits some things and introduces others that didn’t exist at the time or weren’t allowed into trial. Examples include the nurse’s testimony and summer’s testimony. I have no idea why you think a 10 hour or so podcast could introduce every piece of detail and evidence in a 2-month trial is beyond me.
Please don’t tell me where I can post.
And you are not your logical reasoning skills.
Because you keep questioning semantics like a petulant child despite it being pretty clear I am not intended to quote you verbatim.
On a lighter note, here is a present day interview with Jay.
I thought I linked to it earlier. If I didn’t, I just posted it. Why are you complaining?
That leaves several credible defense attorneys who think she did a bad job.
It’s further evidence that she did a bad job.
She’s reliable, and only biased in Adnan’s favor, not against CG.
Nope. They specifically spoke to Her ability to lay out a clear strategy.
That’s not true. They ruled on very specific points, not the quality of her overall defense.
No I woukdnt. The quotes I’ve heard from Adnan sound like a person who does not think she did a pretty good job.
[quotes]
If multiple people come to the opposite conclusion you do, maybe you should reevaluate.
[/quotes]
Right. Which is why I’ve shown you multiple people, somebody whom are criminal defense attorneys, who think CG did a bad job with this case.
Great, please cite that evidence and the evidence you have that it was a misstep rather than a strategy, or that if it was strategy, please state why you think the strategy was bad?
Nope. You let your attorneys hammer away at the technicalities, while you refrain from badmouthing her overall performance.
[quote]
Wrong. The podcast omits some things and introduces others that didn’t exist at the time or weren’t allowed into trial. Examples include the nurse’s testimony and summer’s testimony. I have no idea why you think a 10 hour or so podcast could introduce every piece of detail and evidence in a 2-month trial is beyond me.
[/quotes]
I said major pieces of evidence. Neither of the two examples you gave would turn the case either way.
Cite that I did?
[quote]
And you are not your logical reasoning skills. [/wuote]
Yes, I am. That is a part of me, personally, as opposed to the words I am saying.
Another personal attack. You’re on a roll.
Can you guys just argue without cutting and pasting each point like this? (See current ATMB thread about why this is annoying).
Sure, but it’s easier to address individual points that way. At least, it was before I started posting from my phone and screwed up the tags.
I think you could both save yourselves a lot of time and the rest of us a lot of scrolling if you’d just take turns writing “Nuh-uh!” and “Yuh-huh!”
Not to distract from the ongoing discussion, but Jay was interviewed (not by Serial) and gave another account of the day’s events.
Fair enough. He’s not worth wasting my time on.
I linked to that earlier.
You did indeed. Sorry I missed it.
Anyway, I think even if you don’t trust everything Jay says (personally I find the reasons for his lies to the police at least sensible), one thing to be drawn from it is that Jay doesn’t seem too convinced that it was really premeditated at all.
The possibility is then that Adnan did call him to come pick him up in the 2:[39?] call, but it was before Hae-Min was killed.
Easily the gretest punchline I’ve seen after a 5-day setup.
Last word.
Yes, but the whole thing is kinda perplexing given he is telling yet another story. He answers a few questions, then creates a few more. What is his deal exactly?