I thought Jay admitted to accessory after the fact.
@Cardinal Fang here I’m out of my depth but I believe it was before the fact as according to Jay, Adnan discussed his plans with him ahead of time, then afterward Jay helped dispose of the body.
@dstark, I don’t need Undisclosed to tell me that you can’t use cell towers like GPS. It’s not the same thing. Maybe jurors bought that line in 1999 but it wouldn’t fly today.
This isn’t entertainment to me, it’s just so messed up. It would be nice to believe in the fantasy that cops and juries always get it right.
@dstark, Syed’s lawyer fought like hell for him and she was successful in preventing a lot of damaging testimony from being admitted, particularly the testimony of the school nurse and Hae’s French teacher. She also made mistakes, but there are going to be mistakes made in any case. However, the attorney apparently failed to explore the possibility of a plea bargain, and that is inexplicable to me.
@Snowdog, I’m not going to debate this. You are listening to lies when the facts are readily accessible on the record. I’m happy to answer questions from someone about the record – I’m not going to discuss fiction being put out over the internet, whether it is this case or people claiming that vaccinations cause autism or that 911 was a hoax or whatever the fiction of the day is.
No you can’t. But that didn’t happen at Syed’s trial. In fact, the cell phone expert was specifically precluded from offering any opinion about the location of Syed’s cell phone, and also testified under cross examination exactly what you said: that the cell phone could NOT be localized to a specific are from a ping, and that the cell phone could have been anywhere within ranged of the towers it pinged at the time of the calls.
I’m not going to debate either, and I don’t think that vaccinations cause autism or that 911 is a hoax. It is however a FACT that innocent people are sometimes sent to prison for life - or worse. Please don’t pretend it isn’t. It will be interesting to see whether this case is retried.
Is it a fact that a plea bargain was never explored? That would be on the record somewhere?
If an attorney does not explore a plea bargain, a defendant should get a new trial?
I was involved in a case which was a by-product of a case where a guy was convicted. The criminal argued after he was convicted that he was never offered a plea deal. I can’t remember if the criminal said there was a plea deal and his attorney did not mention this or there never was a plea deal and he said that he wanted to pursue a plea deal.
In any case, the criminal lost.
As calmom said, that did not happen during the second trial.
I suppose the New York Times is nothing but tin foil and lies as well. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/08/us/judge-grants-new-hearing-for-adnan-syed-in-serial-case.html
Snowdog, nobody said cell towers are like gps systems.
This is the latest I have seen.
Is there anything since 10/18/2015 that Waranowitz has said?
It’s in the transcript of the first Post Conviction Relief hearing; the former prosecutor testified that the lawyer never approached him about a plea negotiations, and described the process he would have followed if he had been approached.
If you want to do more reading, you can start here: http://mdcourts.gov/media/
“Circuit Court for Baltimore City Memorandum Opinion” and “COSA Order Directing a Response” will give you a sense of that issue.
@calmom, Great. thanks.
I am very close to finishing the transcript for the second trial. I may finish. Maybe not. 
Don has an alibi. He did not kill Hae.
The cell tower issue may not be an issue. The page that the engineeer did not see dealt with incoming calls. There were also outgoing calls and messages to pagers.
The guy who found the body testified for the defense. There is nothing there.
Somebody testified she saw Hae at 3:00 at the school the day she died. The jury did not care.
When I first listened to Serial, I thought it was likely Adnan was not guilty.
Why would the Adnan story be featured?
Now… After reading all this stuff, I think Adnan is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That is what the jury decided in fewer than 3 hours.
Reading the opening and closing arguments of the trial will save a lot of time.
@dstark - I never mentioned Don nor suggested that Don is a murderer. My point is that from what I have read and understand, the evidence to put away a minor for life is and was very thin. I haven’t read the trial transcript. Might do that. Might not have to, as we may all be able to see a new trial.
That’s fine if you find Adnan guilty. A jury returned a verdict of OJ Simpson as not guilty. We can disagree about these things. With regard to the 3-hour verdict, Adnan’s orginal attorney (not Christina Gutierrez) polled the jury at the first trial (after the mistrial) and they had been strongly leaning to acquit. I’m not making that up, those are his words and they are a matter of public record. The second trial featured (correct me if I am wrong) what the first trial never did: the slam-dunk cell phone evidence aka junk science.
Here’s an interesting article from the BBC. Not about this case, about a man named Robert Jones. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-5ad914e1-afed-4e0d-b7ab-754bf3d0b1e6
@Snowdog, I watched the OJ trial. I should have been working, but I was my own boss and my boss was lenient. I think OJ was guilty too. 
I think you need more info before you come to the conclusion the evidence was thin.
A few more things that have bugged me about Undisclosed and Serial.
You can kill a person by choking a person for 10 to 15 seconds. The defense attorney admitted this in closing. The three lawyers on Undisclosed who are doubting this don’t know what they are talking about.
It is only 8 minutes driving from the high school school to Best Buy according to testimony in the trial. This was never disputed by the defense attorney at trial.
The testimony at trial by the lead detective was Jay led the detectives to Hae’s car.
I haven’t paid much attention to the mistrial because the trial was not completed.
@Snowdog, I understand innocent people are put away. I have a good friend who is an attorney who works on death penalty cases’ appeals. I hear lots of stories.
@calmom Do you think the staff of Serial were gullible or just wanted to tell a good story and so ignored aspects of the case that make it clear Adnan is (most likely) guilty?
If the staff of Serial were gullible, so was the staff of the Innocence Project who have also taken up this case.
Yep, so did I as did most anyone I knew with a functioning brain. I think of the Innocence Project as Barry Scheck’s atonement.
@fendrock, I think SK was framing a narrative I think she was naive about many things and did not understand some aspects of criminal procedure that led her to make mistaken assumptions. I don’t think others on staff particularly shared her view; its possible that the personal relationship she formed with Adnan made it more difficult for her to look at things objectively. But there was a a lot of story-telling sleight of hand going on – for example, pretending that there was mystery about whether or not there was a phone at Best Buy when the trial record made it clear that the defense attorney had visited the scene and wanted to bring the jury out specifically to see the phone.
@calmom, legally, what are your thoughts about the cell tower development?