Should Adnan Syed (Serial) be granted a new trial?

[Slander and/or Libel]

This is idiotic. You're essentially saying that your opinion about this is just as valid as anyone else's despite the fact that you know nothing about it and have no interest in finding out.

If you know it happened 15-16 years ago, why did you say it happened 12 years ago?

I keep saying the same things because you keep refusing to respond satisfactorily to them.

[Beet]

Because I'm an old foagie and it hasn't yet sunk in for me how long ago 2000 was.

I've read a lot about this case. You're acting as if just because I haven't heard the podcast I have no interest in it or knowing anything about it. That's clearly false. My entire post was that a podcast shouldn't define the discussion around this case, as it so clearly does.

I don't trust the podcast, or any podcast, to tell us about a criminal case in such a way that we would be qualified second guessing a judge or jury. It's a stylized presentation. It must be written a certain way to bring in listeners- the producers' and journalists' jobs/careers depend on it. The goal is primarily to entertain. There are no controls, no deliberative processes put in place that we would put in place of the goal was to inform listeners so that we could make a judgement or opinion about the case, as opposed to being entertained. Listening to it doesn't make you a juror, and I have no desire to be.

There are good reasons to think the podcast is biased. First of all, the defendant and his family participated in the story, as did another witness favorable to the defense. Meanwhile, none of the family members of the victim participated, despite strenuous efforts to get them to do so. One witness favorable to the prosecution only gave a public interview after his home address was given out in reddit. Second of all, there would be no "story" if Koenig had concluded that the verdict was right. Whens the last time you heard of an investigative journalism piece or advocacy piece that concluded "all is well." "After all those episodes, I concluded that the system worked." That would be a boring story. Koenig was incentivized from the start to reach the conclusion she wanted. Third, there's the fact that she literally comes out and says she thinks Adnan is innocent. That's a clear endorsement of one side in an ongoing dispute. Fourth, people who have heard the podcast have said that it is biased. I don't have to watch Obama's SOTU to have an opinion on his proposals, or know if the speech was a success or which party's policies were advocated. I may still listen to it, but I don't think itll resolve the concerns I've raised here.

[Slander and/or Libel]

This is where it would help if you had any idea what you were talking about. Sarah Koenig did NOT say she thought Adnan was innocent. She said she can't say for sure, but that as a juror she'd have to vote to acquit.

And when you say "people" found the podcast biased, what people? Why am I supposed to find your anonymous invocation of "people" remotely credible?

EDIT: email did not show me that you had actually posted a link. Apologies. Point stands, though. The link you posted expressed a point of view not shared by every listener. Why should I give that author special weight?

[Beet]

This is where it would help if you had any idea what you were talking about. Sarah Koenig did NOT say she thought Adnan was innocent. She said she can't say for sure, but that as a juror she'd have to vote to acquit.

What? She can't say for sure? Shocking.

She concluded that most of the time, she didn't think he did it, even though she won't "swear" he's innocent because she still harbors doubts - but that even if she thought he was guilty she would have to vote to acquit. That's about the most pro-defense statement you can possibly get while still retaining plausiblility.

[Slander and/or Libel]

I wish I could say this has been fun, but it started pointless and devolved from there. I'm bowing out way later than I should have.

[Beet]

I guess so, because you never engaged me to begin with. You just came here to castigate me for daring to have an opinion, after I was honest about not having listened to the whole podcast.

[The Other Castro]

Beet you really should listen to the whole podcast as it is very entertaining and thought provoking. As an avid Serial fan that's listened to it a few times, I believe it is completely justified that Adnan Syed be given a new trial. I personally thought that Sarah Koenig was fair in her assesment of the case and didn't notice any substantive bias. The entertainment factor here is that it successfully brought to attention a case that needed to be brought to attention, not that it unfairly persuaded the judges.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

I think there's enough red flags in the original trial for him to be granted a retrial.

I also think there's a good chance he's fairly found guilty again.

[ingemann]

I fail to see why this is something new, the media have created media storms before to give other prisoners retrials. Those people wasn't necessary innocent either. This is the way all medias functions.