I think its meaningless, given the restrictions on the original cell tower testimony at trial. I don’t see how it would have impacted the expert testimony in any way – that is, it couldn’t have affected the results of the tests that were done, and would have been beyond the scope of what the expert could have testified to.
@calmom, thanks.
Whatever the facts in question at trial, I can’t get past the fact that Jay knew where the car was and knew details about the disposal of the body. He had no motive to kill Hae; Adnan did. But I also think that regardless of how the law treats this crime, Adnan was a juvenile and this should have been factored in to his sentence. If he got a new trial and was acquitted or was able to make a plea bargain and got off with time served, I think justice would be served.
Maryland law requires that anyone over the age of 14 charged with a crime that is punishable by life imprisonment must be charged as an adult. So no real discretion for sentencing once the jury came in with verdict; that’s just one more reason why the defense attorney should have been taking a serious look at plea negotiation.
It is extremely common for murders to be committed by young men in their late teens – think about all the gang violence. So of course the prisons are full of lifers convicted of crimes that took place when they were as young as or much younger than Adnan. I think that people who feel that is unfair should work to advocate for broad reform that would help all offenders in that situation – not simply choose the one the whose voice they heard on a podcast. There are many who are far more deserving than Adnan – young men who have essentially grown up in prison, who have shown genuine remorse for their offenses, and who have stayed out of trouble while in prison. (Adnan is currently in a maximum security prison because he got caught having smuggled a cell phone into the prison, which is an offense taken quite seriously by prison officials).
And there are MANY, MANY convictions where the evidence was much, much weaker than in this case. Think of, for example, drive-by shootings where key evidence is a stranger’s eyewitness identification of the shooter, made from seeing the shooter through the window of a moving car, in the dark, where the alleged shooter has an alibi from a biased source that the jury does not believe. (Mother who testifies that alleged shooter was at home playing Scrabble at time of shooting, or something). There are plenty of convictions in such cases. Or drug conspiracy cases where the girlfiend traveling with the drug dealer is convicted along with the drug-dealer boyfriend on very flimsy evidence.
For those who think the evidence is flimsy in this case, I’d recommend that you go down to the courthouse in a major metropolitan area and sit through a few murder trials being prosecuted by the hardcore gang units and give serious thought as to whether the evidence really is that much stronger than in this case.
If you think the evidence is insufficient in this case, you are really arguing for a broad overhaul of the criminal justice system.
^^ Yes, I am. I’ve said this repeatedly. I don’t view this as mystery-entertainment but as emblematic of systemic problems.
Listening to Undisclosed in the car this morning still (sorry @dstark!)
Episode 9 goes over several Baltimore cases in which police work performed by the two detectives in this case figured prominently in convictions that later were reversed. Some of the tactics included pressuring potential witnesses to implicate their suspect or be charged with crimes themselves. And there was a very interesting discussion of the “two-stage” interview that was used by Det. William Ritz with both Jay and Adnan at the station.
Here is described at FindLaw a 2005 decision involving this practice by Det. Ritz. In Cooper v. State of Maryland – judgment reversed and new trial ordered:
"Detective Ritz made a conscious decision to withhold Miranda warnings until appellant gave a statement implicating himself in the crime. Moreover, the second, warned statement followed on the heels of the unwarned statement, without any curative measures designed to ensure that a reasonable person in appellant’s position “would understand the import and effect of the Miranda warning․” http://caselaw.findlaw.com/md-court-of-special-appeals/1423587.html
In reading a portion of the trial transcript of Jay’s testimony, under questioning Jay agrees with Gutierrez that in his unrecorded “pre-interview,” the detectives walked through information they already had with Jay and threatened to charge him with the murder unless he turned on Adnan. Tin foil? Your thoughts?
Adnan murdered Hae.
That’s false.
That’s why it is best to read the transcripts yourself.
Since I did not listen to that episode of Undisclsed, I have no idea if that quote really was presented on that show.
@dstark - where can one find a copy of the transcripts?
It’s on reddit.
I should not have said that quote is false.
They wanted Jay to come clean and the detectives thought Adnan was involved.
I sm having trouble sending a link.
@mylanda, I will try and pm you the link.
@calmom originally gave me the link. I thank calmom for that.
@dstark Having read the transcripts, can you shed any more light on Jay’s role?
Does it seem to have been limited to assisting Adnan with the body, once Adnan asked him (out of the blue) to help?
Jay told Jen Adnan killed Hae before the detectives were ever involved.
As far as assisting, Jay drove Adnan’s car to the park where Hae was buried while Adnan drove Hae’s car with her body in the truck. Jay got the shovels used to bury Hae. Jay helped bury the body.
Jay did cover up the crime.
Thanks dstark.
I’m unable to understand why Jay helped Adnan instead of calling the police.
Of course, somehow Adnan intuited that Jay would not go to the police, so maybe that’s why he asked him.
Truth is sometimes stranger than fiction…
If somebody types in google search the following
self.serialpodcastorigins
And click on the first link that comes up…SerialPodcastOrigins-Reddit
The trial transcripts link will be under timeline on the right hand side of the page.
Then…the reader can pick and choose by date or who testifies what he or she wants to read.
@dstark - thanks - got your pm and saw the link you provided here as well. I have to read the transcripts to figure this out for myself. Right now I believe Adnan probably guilty, though I didn’t want him to be, and the trial seems like mistakes were made on both sides, but I am only basing that on what information I’m being fed. I thought SK on Serial was like me - wanted him to be innocent but at the end just couldn’t really buy it, but undisclosed is so very very biased that I probably roll my eyes 10 times per episode. Can’t wait to make the transcripts my holiday reading!! 
He was a young black man living in Baltimore, who used and sold drugs. He did not view police kindly. When the police interviewed him and asked why he had not come to them, he specifically referred to past incidents where the police had roughed him up. (He described the encounters as being beaten up; I’m being generous to the police by using more mild terms).
Yes. Reading the transcripts yourself is a good idea. It might take a little longer to read the transcripts compared to listening Undisclosed. I am not sure. Some of the transcripts can be skimmed.
@calmom Thanks for providing the sociological context - which goes far to explain Jay’s actions.
I sort of feel like Sarah Koenig didn’t explore that angle very much.
The whole podcast could’ve gone in a different direction if she had.
Heard it with my own ears from taped testimony. Christina Gutierrez had a distinctive voice to say the least.
Just read the whole testimony.