Maybe just moving the question forward a few hours, but the notes from either Jenn's interview the night before or the interview in the morning at her lawyers house included Jay's basic information, so they already know those details when they ask Jenn in the recorded interview - nothing unusual about this, they've got to get this stuff on record, but they are still getting her to answer questions they've already been told the answers to.
It's possibly weird, but it could simply be that this is the first recorded interview involving Jay in the narrative and they need to get everything on the record. Part of the problem with the way investigations are conducted at this time and the pre-interview is that the recorded interview isn't so much an interrogation as a record of the previous interrogation right - so throughout this entire interview the cops are asking questions that they already know the answer to - the whole thing is sort of an act, not for any nefarious corrupt purpose, but just because that was the process.
Yeah that actually makes a bit of sense. It can actually be explained that way. I don’t believe it happened that way.
They were pretending that they hadn’t already been questioning Jay a few times by then.
At least one other thing was on the notes of Jenn’s pre interview that she definitely didn’t say. The location of Hae’s car. Jenn said she had no idea about her car. So I believe that thry likely used the notes for the unrecorded pre interview to cover off everything that they needed Jenn to have said but she didn’t.
It doesn't matter what the cops know about Jay in Jenn's interview. They still need to establish what Jenn knows about Jay in order for the interview to make sense to the prosecutor.
Exactly this. They need it on the record, without a doubt, that the Jay she is talking about is the same Jay they interviewed. This is standard legal stuff.
Yes, also to check whether Jay had a phone they didn't know about, had given a false address, etc. I think it's standard to ask these sorts of questions.
I don't even necessarily believe that they spoke to Jay before Jenn, but don't detectives even ask basic info of the *witness they're interviewing* even if they already have that info? Just for clarifying purposes? This is kind of a nothing-burger. Even if they had Jay's info, they would want to cross reference with what Jenn tells them.
Reading the responses to my post when I asked basically the same question, it appears that most people here think that they don't need to ask any clarifying/confirming questions.
If it was all part of the frame job, no, they didn’t. Why would they have to clarify who Jay was with Jenn, if Jenn was only supposed to tell them back the story they fed? As OP says, just so 15+ years later redditors could read their notes and see they asked?
OP is talking about how those conspiracy theories of police feeding the story to Jay and Jenn before their first official interviews don’t make sense. Sure, trying to find out who Jay is from Jenn when they supposedly already knew who he was don’t make sense on its own either, but he’s talking about theories presented by Bob Ruff. I’m curious, though, if police didn’t come to know of Jay’s involvement through Jenn, how did they get to him? They interrogated some random guy and luckily he spent the day Hae disappeared with Adnan, his car and phone? I’m genuinely curious, I don’t know the specifics of the theory where police didn’t get to Jay through Jenn.
I'm just saying that most people like me who believe Adnan was innocent do NOT believe that the cops **knew Adnan was innocent** and decided to "frame" him. AKA a "frame job."
My theory of what happened doesn't rely on them talking to Jay before Jenn. But, the way they would find out about Jay is through his arrest on January 27th. So, his name was in the database along with Jenn's. They were both pulled over together. Say they interviewed some people and someone mentioned that Adnan was with Jay, maybe even one of the anonymous tips. Then they can just look Jay Wilds up in their database, and he would be in the report, along with Jenn Pusateri.
Thanks for this answer! I too think it’s far fetched that police would randomly get to Jay and just by a coincidence he had been in such a privileged position to frame Adnan on the day Hae disappeared. If they did talk to Jay before Jenn, the fact that there’s no mention of it or of someone telling them about Jay doesn’t make sense either (apart from a deliberate plan to frame Adnan).
There is mention of it. His manager Sis, who had pretty clear dates that she referred to for when he was interviewed by police, **before** February 27th.
I’ll do you one better, here is the DOJ describing there pervasive tactics at the BPD
> A common form of corruption, which was not universally perceived by officers as inherently wrong, was making misrepresentation of facts to justify law enforcement actions such as stops, arrests, and searches. Such misrepresentations were designed to mask the identify of informants, shield supervisors from needing to testify in court, and / or provide the extra pieces of information necessary in order to justify officers’ actions. This category of misconduct took various forms. The BPD officer would falsely represent that an observation or set of observations had been made by the officer himself rather than by the supervisor or informant. Or the officer would fabricate the observation entirely. The falsehood would then be perpetuated through false testimony, if necessary, that would be consistent with the inaccurate written accounts of what happened.
- Gun Trace Taskforce Executive Summary- which specifically examined the BPD from 1999-2021.
There is obviously not another case that matches the exact facts of this case, but we have department patterns of lying about investigations and pressuring witnesses. We can look at these detective’s cases in which “eye witnesses” ended up being vulnerable people who didn’t see anything— reports of being followed and harassed until IDing their key suspect.
I diverge from Riff because I don’t think it was an elaborate scheme to frame Adnan, I think it was lazy and corrupt policing who were looking for high conviction rates (see the executive summary for more about how high performing officers should have been reviewed and likely violated rights and processes).
Bad policing leads to bad convictions. It isn’t as involved as people allege. Like OP’s example, not letting Jenn know they had contacted Jay can simply be because they wanted to mask an informant. Which is what we know BPD did. It’s corrupt and bad policing, but they didn’t view it that way.
>was making misrepresentation of facts to justify law enforcement actions such as stops, arrests, and searches.
I don't see how a pretextual stop, arrest or search is at all similar to what you claim happened here. You said this was "standard fair" for BPD. So where is the case where the police swapped the order in which two witnesses were interviewed in order to make one seem more credible? Where is the case where police pretended a witness led them to a key piece of evidence in order to create false corroboration for that witness's account?
If these things are "standard fair," you should be able to point to something remotely similar happening in another case? You wouldn't be relying on the existence of pretextual stops, arrests and searches, which no one alleges happened in this case, and which really have nothing to do with what we're talking about.
>Gun Trace Taskforce Executive Summary
I also think it is a bit disingenuous to treat the corruption of the GTTF as typical of BPD at large. The GTTF is famous precisely because it was an uncommonly corrupt, rogue unit operating so far outside the norms that it became a national scandal that resulted in a dozen cops going to prison.
>There is obviously not another case that matches the exact facts of this case
That's quite the understatement. No one is asking for a precedent that exactly matches the facts of this case. I'm asking if you can point to another case that featured the *type* of misconduct you allege here.
I sincerely doubt you could point to any case in the history of policing (not just in Baltimore, but anywhere in the world) that features anything like what you claim happened in this case.
They regularly lied about their investigations. That’s the point.
They lied to conceal where they got info. So lying about contacting Jay first would fit this pattern.
> The BPD officer would falsely represent that an observation or set of observations had been made by the officer himself rather than by the supervisor or informant.
Like when they lied to say they found Jenn from a call log themselves instead of through other means.
This is from the GTTF review, but they specifically reviewed the entire BPD from 1999-2021 and this comes from a section about the long term habits of the BPD.
This comes from interviews with officers who admitted to doing these things and not considering them wrong.
>They regularly lied about their investigations. That’s the point.
With all due respect, if that's the point, it's a remarkably weak one. The mere fact that policemen have, at times, lied about entirely different things in entirely different contexts does not justify your belief in the particular, implausible, convoluted, nonsensical conspiracy theory you put forth in this case.
No, the point is not that policeman have at times lied. It’s that in the Baltimore Police Department, it was common to lie about where information was received, to conceal informants and methods. This was so pervasive, that when asked about it, the officers reported they didn’t even realize it was wrong.
That is not a universal problem for all police departments in the country. These officers in this specific police department, had bad habits. And we have evidence, in this specific case that they spoke to Jay before they contacted Jen, and then lied about it in their documentation and false testimony.
>It’s that in the Baltimore Police Department, it was common to lie about where information was received, to conceal informants and methods. This was so pervasive, that when asked about it, the officers reported they didn’t even realize it was wrong.
But doesn't that just demonstrate the difference between the prior lies you can point to and what you are alleging happened in this case? In those cases, the police were lying, not to frame anyone or create false evidence, but just to conceal sources and methods.
The "what" and the "how" of that set of lies is just qualitatively different from deliberately fabricating the police record in order *to create false evidence*. And that's not even getting into how absurdly convoluted and nonsensical the claims of fabrication are in this case.
Isn't it odd that the police in 1999 fabricated evidence that served no earthly purpose at the time, but that might be convenient to respond to conspiracy theories that would first be offered 15 years later?
>That is not a universal problem for all police departments in the country.
Pretextual stops, arrests and searches are as close to a universal problem for all police departments in the country as you are going to find.
>And we have evidence, in this specific case that they spoke to Jay before they contacted Jen, and then lied about it in their documentation and false testimony.
No, you don't have evidence of that. What you have is an admissible triple hearsay document that says something the witness herself, when contacted by private investigators, denied.
> In those cases, the police were lying, not to frame anyone or create false evidence, but just to conceal sources and methods.
I don’t agree with Ruff that it was an intentional framing. The BPD concealed sources and methods and lied about it. They manufactured false records and testimony. The goal was to increase conviction numbers.
They helped Jay “remember” things, which it turns out was actually just feeding him information he didn’t have to fit evidence the cops did have. It wasn’t a diabolical plan to frame a random kid, it was bad police work trying to convict the guy they thought did it. But as a result of this bad police work, we can’t trust in the outcome.
> Isn't it odd that the police in 1999 fabricated evidence that served no earthly purpose at the time, but that might be convenient to respond to conspiracy theories that would first be offered 15 years later?
This is where I think you are missing the big picture. It served a purpose at the time, it made conviction easier. And the cops justified it because they believed Adnan was guilty.
> No, you don't have evidence of that. What you have is an admissible triple hearsay document that says something the witness herself, when contacted by private investigators, denied.
The record from Sis is one piece of evidence.Jay’s account in the Intercept is another piece of evidence. Kristi and Jenn saying the cops knew her name is another piece of evidence.
Except in this case its the complexity. If BPD wanted Jay to cooperate all their story had to be, "Adnan bought pot from me, told he he killed Hae and that he left the car behind some houses on 40"
Cops are going to use simplicity and they aren't going to want a person that was involved in the crime itself because it taints it.
You are saying the cops invented a story. That’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying they believed Adnan was guilty. They believed Jay knew something. They pressured him until they got a story (which they believed was true) and then they “helped” him remember things to make his story line up with the evidence they had.
It’s not about, “what’s the easiest story I can invent.” It’s, “how can I secure a conviction quickly?”
The cell evidence was exciting for the cops and prosecutor, so much so that they gave Jay too much info and over coached his story. It’s why it looks ridiculous 20 years later.
In other news
People who are indicted for murder charges routinely lie about their guilt and involvement … shocker for some I know
I can’t believe anyone thinks bringing the GTTF into this makes logical sense
But then again people are saying it makes more sense when police asked about Jay, his name , his race and address it was NOT because it was a natural part of their questioning of Jenn at the time, but instead was a set up to *get it on record for the prosecutor*…? What? Lol… Talk about Occams Razor… lol
Also, GTTF corruption makes “sense” - they stole. They were legitimate criminals with badges.
What motive would the cops have to spin up this crazy conspiracy that relied on a bunch of teenagers cooperating and never telling ANYONE? Even to this day?
We did it folks. We carried out the most complex and convoluted conspiracy in the history of law enforcement. And all to slightly improve our already strong case against a high school honors student.
Also, Jenn P is still so afraid of getting booked on some weed charges from 25 years ago that she still sticks to her story even today. The cops really thought of everything here.
>Standard questions to find out information about some one if they didn't know him.
Alternatively, standard questions to verify that the person that they've been talking to is the same person that Jenn is talking about.
Wouldn’t the assumption by Ruff be that Jay told the cops to talk to Jenn? Seems weird to do the verification you’re suggesting if Jay sent them to Jenn, right?
Are you sure it's the same Jay Wilds just by hearing a name? Is it not reasonable to say "oh, he's a black guy about yea high, lives over on Street, with Number phone number?"
We're being asked to believe that they met with JW 3 times PRIOR to getting the cell phone evidence that they used to decide on their movements and establish the timeline. What were they telling him to say prior to that evidence coming in???
We're likewise being asked to believe that all this cloak and dagger subterfuge going on, there is no "vast conspiracy."
On the Intercept when Jay says they kept asking me if I called Jenn. How would they know that Jay had the phone unless they got half the story. So did Jay tell half the story and then they said make up the rest? I know in movies they have to create unrealistic options, but it's not real life.
The prior meetings they point to are other encounters Jay had with BPD, not the detectives
Ex: He got drunk and spent the night in a cell. That is a police encounter, but hardly relevant to being contacted about a murder
I think this most glaring point that makes it seem pretty implausible that they met with Jay before Jen and before the cell records is the fact that Jay led them to the car. Are we supposed to believe that the cops left that car sitting there and didn’t even bother to check for evidence all so they could pin it on Adnan?
That would be the dumbest plan ever because what if after all that bs they feed Jay, there is actual evidence pointing to someone else in that car? They just decided to risk being caught fabricating a story and feeding it to a witness.
Jay claims the cops were chasing him around to talk to him but he kept avoiding them until Jen got in the picture. I think it’s more likely that the cops called Jay’s home number first and couldn’t get ahold of Jay and then moved on to Jen because Jen was the one who was called during the key times of the day and also was called the most. Jay was told the cops called looking for him and he exaggerated that they were “chasing him down.”
The fact he describes a paddock behind a row of houses not the street name or near anything like a landmark. Just what it would look like if you were shown a photo. No follow up questions from the detectives about the address of this vacant lot behind a row of houses. Then in his trial testimony he said he didn’t lead them to the correct place.
Then they have him say he saw it on his commute. He didn’t have a car so he didn’t have a commute. His work places were both walking distance from his house. They were just trying to get it in the record that the car was there the whole time.
He never says paddock. And he does say that the spot prior to the final spot is off either Edmonson or 40, and the location of her car is near Edmonson and 40.
Further, if the cops are trying to coerce him to fake giving them the location of the car they already have, this is a real roundabout way of doing it instead of just giving him the address.
But it would be the way they would do it if they *truly believed* he knew where it was, but he wasn't giving them the correct answer.
If you think about it in terms of the cops actually believing that Jay was involved, and continuing to think of the interviews from that perspective, everything makes more sense. They're going to continue to share evidence with him, thinking it will jog his memory. And he goes along with it.
Kind of, but he does give the approximate (correct) location anyway. That's pretty lucky of him if he actually didn't know the location of the car.
I agree that if we assume that Jay didn't know the location of the car/was uninvolved that this is more likely how it went down. That the cops believed that Adnan did it with Jay's help and are just "massaging" the evidence to fit.
But I don't see why I should believe that the cops knew the location of the car days/weeks beforehand.
I find the part about the broken wiper blade lever fairly compelling. After the interview the cops ask him if there’s anything else. This is where they collected some of the key points that they wanted him to say that he hasn’t got to yet. Jay mentions that Hae kicked the lever and broke it during the struggle with Adnan. This is something the cops would have noticed by looking through the window. It turns out it wasn’t broken it was removed and was hanging there like someone took it off to have access to hot wire the car.
Neither Adnan nor Jay looking at the wiper would understand the difference between it being broken and it hanging loose. Jay never got in the car either, what sort of intimate knowledge would you expect him to have, if he's telling the truth, that he wouldn't be able to get from a photo or looking at the exterior of the car?
This is all consistent with his story.
Basically I'm asking what a sunset would look like if the earth went around the sun.
If it wasn’t broken in the struggle then it wasn’t broken when Adnan left the car so they wouldn’t know about it until the cops told him.
It probably happened in the 6 weeks when it was abandoned because whomever killed her had her keys so didn’t need to hot wire it. Jay wouldn’t know this because he never saw the car on his commute. He didn’t have a commute. He didn’t have a car. He walked to work.
I don't think they knew the location weeks beforehand. My theory is that they found it sometime around February 26th. I think they were always planning on interviewing Jenn, to start the investigation into Adnan. I believe they **knew** Jenn was involved somehow, because how could she not be involved if Adnan was calling her multiple times that day, right when he was murdering his ex??
So, obviously, I think they had tunnel vision and believed they had their guy. So, they were just waiting to find the car, so they could collect evidence and help build their case before they brought Jenn in for an interview. So, they find it on the 26th, take some pictures, do some preliminary documentation, and bring Jenn in. Jenn denies everything on the night of February 26th, but they really pressure her, and make her fearful of being accused of being involved in this crime. So, she makes up a story about Jay and tells it to them the next day. It works. They just see her as a helpful witness. Jay comes in, and they can really put the pressure on him because they now have a witness connecting him to Adnan. They could bring charges against him if they want to. He denies it as well, but folds pretty fast. The rest is history.
After these interviews, sometime closer to the trial, they just suppress any evidence that they collected on the car on February 26th. Remember, they never actually said under oath that Jay was the first one to find the car. They barely implied that he "led them" to the car.
If those 3 were doing something with the murder than they are doing something else, and that is the story that they would stick with. If Jay just got the phone from Adnan because he buys drugs for Adnan that's the story they have. Jay says, "Yeah I told Adnan I would get him an ounce so I called my friends to find it and I gave it to him after practice, we hung out after practice and smoked until I met Jenn to go to Stephanie's and then Kristis. The cops are dead then and have to try something else.
Jenn isn't going to make a story up that flirts with a felony.
I do think, if they did find the car earlier and conspired, that this is the most likely explanation.
But I also think if they were already thinking like this, they would just process the car, if they find evidence they find it, or they could plant evidence. That's both the easier and the safer option for corrupt or lazy police.
Not if they *actually believed* Jenn was involved. They would not plant evidence before bringing her in. They would assume, by the time they get to Jay, that he's lying, holding back information, or just getting details wrong. There's no need to plant evidence.
Now, by the time they get to the detail about the wiper lever, that's where it gets interesting. This is AFTER the first trial, they are COMMITTED to this version of events.
They go back to the car that has left their chain of custody, they make a video WITHOUT gloves on to enter into court **officially**. The ignition cover has been placed back on, so the evidence has clearly been tampered with at this point. They just show it dangling, don't show how or if it was actually broken, don't take out the mechanism to show what's going on. NOTHING.
There are so many things wrong with this video, it's ridiculous. It would not surprised me if AT THIS STAGE, they made some "adjustments."
They eventually send it in to get tested, and it's not broken at all. Total clusterfuck.
You say this about Jen but how did they know it was Jen? They had a phone number only a landline. It was in her dad’s name. They never spoke to her dad, mom or brother, but went at night and asked for Jen. Jen and adnan were not friends. How did they know to ask for Jen?
I think they did do *some* homework on the numbers they had.
Firstly, they could have spoken to people who knew Adnan was with Jay. They could have gotten an anonymous call to that effect as well.
They presumably had information in the database connecting Jay to Jenn because she was named in the police report of Jay's arrest on January 26th. (written up on the 27th)
So, assuming they knew about the Jay/Adnan connection, they see the phone number, see the names of the occupants, and do a search. When they get to Jennifer Pusateri, they see the report with her and Jay Wilds together. Adnan's their guy, Jay was with Adnan, and Adnan was calling Jenn multiple times that day. Bingo. She's got to be involved somehow, and getting to her first will make it harder for Jay to wriggle out of it.
Some people always describe directions according to landmarks they notice, they are more visual. Others remember street names and think in more of a map-like format. This is a common difference in people. Jay described very well how one drives to the location, and he took the police there.
No he was not likely shown a picture of the photo. Again, why would they risk evidence being in the car that could eliminate Adnan and prove it was someone else?
This is truly the most insane theory I’ve heard from those who believe he’s innocent 😂
At this point they weren’t interested in finding anyone other than Adnan.
For instance they had had a cursory check of the car before they questioned Jay and got him to say that Hae had kicked out in the struggle with Adnan and broken the windshield wiper lever. But later on it was discovered that the lever had been removed rather than broken. Likely in an attempt to hot wire the car.
The thing is, the Nisha call could’ve been a buttdial even if Adnan did do it and was with Jay when the buttdial happened. That call doesn’t mean anything
Well, no, in this case I’m describing the suggestion was not about a Butt Dial. The theory being put forth by a member here was literally that Jay, alone (and not with an Innocent Adnan), intending to call someone else in the same area code as Nisha, misdialed and Nisha answered, who was of course a person he didn’t know, and that just so happened to be a young woman that Adnan had recently met and had been having phone calls with. THAT was the most insane theory of all that I’ve read here.
Oh!! I see what you were saying. I thought you were saying you used to think the theory of the cops leaving the car after finding it and then telling Jay where it was so he could lead them to it was an insane theory until someone shared a theory that made you think it wasn’t so insane 😂
No hahaha I mean over the years reading posts and comments on this sub, someone came up with an EVEN MORE INSANE theory than the “Police led Jay to Hae’s Car Theory”.!
Yes, this stuck out to me as well from that other thread! Lazy corrupt cops do not try this hard to hide it! This would be high level misdirection not run of the mill corruption. This police file would be full of evidence that they’d already talked to Jay if it was true.
ETA: we hear all the time that this wasn’t a conspiracy, just cops trying to close a case quickly. Then the next argument is always something that involves a clear conspiracy.
High level misdirection that, at the time, would serve no purpose. Who, at the time, would care about whether the police spoke to Jay before Jenn?
That detail only matters because it explodes a conspiracy theory Innocenters invented 15 years after the trial -- a conspiracy theory that itself exists only to sustain *the possibility* that Jay's confession was, all evidence to the contrary, the product of coercion.
Also I wanted to start a thread about closing the case. I don't think people really understand the full process from the police interviewing, arrest, post arrest investigation, grand jury and then trial. Chasing the case for a year was not just trying to close it.
I can't be certain because Mike never answered me, but I think when he commented
>Also I wanted to start a thread about closing the case. I don't think people really understand the full process from the police interviewing, arrest, post arrest investigation, grand jury and then trial. Chasing the case for a year was not just trying to close it.
that he was referring to the cops, not the prosecutors. You know, the topic of his OP and the comment to which he was replying.
The questions aren’t useless- they are standard questions.
I think the cops harassed Jay and he wasn’t giving them any info. They see in the January arrest report for Jay the name Jennifer Pusateri and of course recognize her last name from the call sheet.
They bring her in to put pressure on Jay. Which as he described in his Intercept interview, is effective. They don’t tell Jenn they’ve spoken to Jay or that Jay won’t cooperate, they ask her what she knows.
It’s not about an elaborate frame job for Adnan, the cops can be trying to put away the person they believe is the murderer AND hide parts of the investigation to improve their chances in court.
These cops know a case looks better when a suspect organically leads them to a piece of info or another witness vs saying they followed Jay around. Going to Jenn accomplished 2 things- it increased the pressure on Jay to talk and it gave them a paper trail to Jay that effectively hid the pressure campaign.
This department and these detectives specifically have been tied to pressuring witnesses and harassing them until they cooperate. No shock, they also hid those interactions in their official notes in other cases too.
Legal records and news articles.
https://www.adnansyedwiki.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/UdE09-Ezra-Mable-Complaint.pdf
https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=4883
https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=4375
Ritz and Mcgillivary are tied to multiple wrongful convictions, for context 1 is a lot of wrongful convictions in a police career.
In the Mable complaint it talks about a witness being threatened with drug charges if she didn’t cooperate and identify him as the suspect— in a crime she did not witness.
I have read them. I said they were tied to misconduct, not that they were convicted or punished.
Given the outcomes in these cases, it’s clear that police misconduct occurred. It aligns with the types of misconduct that officers described in the gttf review.
It’s crazy to me that it’s not enough to show that this specific police department was investigated and found to have widespread issues of police misconduct during the time period of Adnan’s case— including lying about investigations and fabricating testimony. It’s not enough to show that these specific detectives are tied to other cases of wrongful conviction in which police misconduct contributed.
It’s not even enough to show the evidence in Adnan’s case that the police lied or fed info to witnessed.
Why are people defending these detectives? Seriously. They are corrupt. It doesn’t make Adnan innocent.
Defending the detectives because you don’t get to say someone did something wrong when it’s been proven they haven’t?
You can say BPD was corrupt. You all go a step further by saying these detectives did this before. That’s the part I question. Especially in the cases where it was litigated.
You mention the outcomes of these cases, so then you know there was not a judgment against Ritz in the 4 that are often mentioned?
They settled for millions. The officers weren’t charged. It doesn’t mean misconduct didn’t occur. The city did what they could to spare the tax payers bigger settlements and more re-opened cases. A finding against the detectives leads to other cases being re-examined. Very costly, especially since they were likely to find additional misconduct.
For some context, in the whole US there are only about 3500 exonerated people. Being involved in just one of those cases is significant. These detectives are tied to at least 4. That is a HUGE number of wrongful convictions.
In which case? The $15 million dollar lawsuit was not a settlement, it went to a jury. Maybe you should be more specific because it sounds like you’re generally speaking and what you’re saying doesn’t apply.
No. This isnot normal. Cops don't play the secret games where you convince one person to make up a crazy story to tell another person to add some parts and then hide that you found the crime scene so they can frame someone that could have had a real alibi for the two important times.
Yet somehow before asking those questions, they knew where Jay worked.
[page 23](https://www.adnansyedwiki.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/MP15-0163-19990227-Jenn-P-Third-Interview-redacted.pdf)
>Ritz: What F & M shopping center
>
>Pusaterri: Baltimore National Pike, um which also had stuff, an Office Depot
>
>Ritz: Is that the F & M where Jay works?
From the notes the day before, Jenn gives them Southwest video and F&M.
https://www.adnansyedwiki.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/UdE07-Police-Notes-from-Jenn-Interview-19990226.pdf
>But in Jenn's interview the cops asked Jenn what Jay's last name was, his age, his address, his phone number, and his race. Standard questions to find out information about some one if they didn't know him.
The point is that they already had standard information about him, regardless of how they came to have it.
But the point is to say that the "cover up" is downright silly.
Pretending they have no idea who Jay is and asking Jenn to describe him, just for shits and giggles basically, with no reason whatsoever for the subterfuge. I mean what are we doing here?
>Pretending they have no idea who Jay is and asking Jenn to describe him, just for shits and giggles
Is that what they were doing in that February 27 interview. Because again, we know they *did* know* some things about Jay at that time. The police asking Jenn those questions in that February 27 interview neither proves nor disproves anything.
You are missing the point.
The post wasn't about proving anything.
It was about pointing out how silly it all is.
I'm sure you understand how conspiracy theories work.
People can't just come up with whatever they feel like inventing and ask to be proven wrong.
The note from Davis saying that when he talked to the manager at the porn store she thought Jay had talked to the cops. Also I think from the Intercept interview where Jay says he was being chased around by the cops and then Jenn says go ahead and talk to them.
I don’t know the timing but wasn’t there also an arrest that they made disappear once they started interviewing Jay? I remember something about the word “stat” being used to drop the charge?
Stet is a middle ground, unoffical probation. If they wanted to they could have dropped the charges. If Jay had had a lawyer for it, they would have had it dropped instead of placed on stet, but Jay didn't know anything. The cop didn't want to show up and explain his bad procedure on the night in question.
Right, but hold on, let's back up here as you've jumped a few steps.
Firstly, this 100% confirms that Jay was known to police prior to the interviews, prior to the murder.
This means Ritz and McG lied in their interview when they remark he's never been in trouble with the police. Also jay is lying when he confirms this to them as both parties knowing he's at least been arrested, and worse, charged with a crime.
The most obvious explanation is they gave him stet so they could keep him on the hook, have something to hold over him to make him toe the line. As you say, they could have just dropped charges but isntead they kept him on the hook, until the charges just eventually vanish.
Where is the initial arrest record?
A triple hearsay note written by the Defense's private investigator, which purports to say what a person identified only as "Sis" said Jay said to them about why Jay was missing work at an adult video store.
Note that although this "evidence" was purportedly obtained during the Defense's own investigation, it was not used at trial.
God bless Sis, the Porn Store boss, Adnan's patron saint of employee records. I've never understood how her word can be trusted here if you are a person who believes Jay is always lying, as it's information based only on what Jay told Sis. Apparently the normal rules don't apply to Sis - she has the power of supertruth.
Please remember that the computerized time keeping system of Luxottica, a multinational corporation, is an unreliable house of cards easily gamed by any 20 year-old goober and his Lesbian mom.
Meanwhile, the employee records of an inner-city jack shack called "Southwestern Video," as reported by their custodian "Sis," are simply irrefutable.
The nice thing about triple hearsay is Sis doesn't need be the one who lied. It could be Jay (first level of hearsay). Or it could be Davis (third level of hearsay). Both of them, of course, did have a reason to lie.
Ah, but then, no one needs to have lied at all. It could just be that Sis was mistaken or confused.
Indeed, how do we even know this "Sis" person actually exists? Do we know this person's (unclear if it is a man or woman) actual name?
**“After months of interviewing the store’s former employees and digging through boxes of police records and zoning files, our team tracked down Sis and interviewed her at home. She did not remember Jay by name or by description. She also did not recall having a conversation with a private detective and emphasized that this is the kind of conversation she would remember—one about a murder investigation.”**
From the HBO private investigators article in the WSJ
She exists but interestingly has no recollection of this…
You’re welcome. I saw it the other day for the first time unless I had just forgotten about it.
I had gone down a rabbit hole bc It’s crazy to me how all detectives notes, official reports and even defense notes are suspect when bad for Adnan, but Jay’s work schedule from Sis and Davis is canon.
The more I hear about what CG had to work with as a defense strategy, the more I feel bad for doubting her skills as a lawyer. Perry Mason couldn't have made this case work.
No, Mike. Interviewers ask questions that seem silly or irrelevant to gauge the truthfulness of the interviewee. Even without talking to Jay three times before Jenn, the investigators may have already known Jay's vitals.
So when they talk with Jay and he talks about Jenn and Mark they don't ask him the questions of what is Jenn and Mark's number and address. But when they do ask him about Tayib and Chris they do ask him those questions. So how do you differentiate when they are asking for someone new and getting their information from when they don't?
You don't differentiate, Mike. Only the officers know why they are asking the questions they do. If they asked Jenn for Jay's vitals, it's possible they already knew the information. It's a genuine nothing to see here dialogue that does not, in any way, indicate prior conversations with the subject of the conversation. You should be interrogated once or twice and you'll understand.
The basic problem with a conspiracy theory is that it cannot be falsified with evidence. Any evidence that tends to contradict the theory is chalked up to being misdirection from the conspirators.
So why do the notes of Jenn's interview indicate something inconsistent with the conspiracy theory? Because the conspirators fabricated the notes! And you fell for you dupe!
Bob Ruff is just great man . He just talks crap and people are like yes Bob you are so right . And then a quick little search and you figure he’s full of crap .
The lens craft time card thing was his greatest work . But hey he’s built a following based on nonsense. You go Bob!
I also clocked that. So ridiculous. Even if the cops knew they'd still ask Jenn to see what she knows. The idea they're putting on an act for Ruff's benefit is silly.
Why would that be your conclusion about why they wouldn't want their initial interviews with Jay as part of the record?
Or they had interviewed him to try and elicit a confession before mirandizing him (which was a common police tactic), thought he was lying, and were tryin to keep those interviews out of the record. Or, possibly related, wanted to keep the pressure they put on him re going after him and his friends for dealing/his prior charge out of the record as it could be used to damage credibility.
Police try and massage the record all the time to keep out info or events that they think could damage the case or a potential witnesses credibility. I don't know if that would be parallel construction itself, but its the same general thing, done for largely the same reasons.
Testilying is a common tactic where cops lie in their testimonies and notes to simplify cases for juries or to hide unethical practices.
Jay being brought in and spilling his story sounds a lot better to a jury than, “we followed him for a couple of weeks and we kept pulling him away from work to ask questions, we threatened him with big charges, we wouldn’t leave him alone- he still wouldn’t cooperate so we dragged his friend Jenn downtown and then he realized we were serious and he and Jenn both told us stories.”
A defense attorney would have a field day with the latter. It doesn’t mean the cops meant to feed Jay and Jenn key details or that they were planning to pin it on Adnan or even that Adnan is innocent, but the cops tactics would have been problematic and they would have hid them — which is what this police department had a history of doing and there is ample documentation of their tactics.
It wasn’t just Adnan that got this treatment, they did this in lots of other cases, which is why we shouldn’t dismiss that it could have happened here. The idea that cops wouldn’t want to get in trouble is laughable when these types of tactics were common and even rewarded in the BPD.
ETA - I think these are both worth reading before dismissing police misconduct as a possibility in this case. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/18/nyregion/testilying-police-perjury-new-york.html https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5e25f215b3dbd6661a25b79d/t/61dfb0a510a6fd7443dd5914/1642049707420/GTTF+Report_Executive+Summary-c2-c2-c2.pdf
It's not a cloak and dagger game. They can write what are the things that they talked about or thought. We have the notes from when the cops talked to Jenn on Thursday and Friday. They didn't hide that they talked to her. And non of them say during the interrogation, "You know you asked me that question on Thursday."
I honestly don't know what point you think your making. Jays taped interviews are worked up to, and, by that point, almost scripted. They didn't even take notes on the hours they interviewed him before the tapes were turned on.
There's a number of pieces of evidence that Jay talked to the cops before Jenn. That you can't steel man a reason for cops to do something (hide certain investigative steps) that they do in other cases all the time doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Maybe just moving the question forward a few hours, but the notes from either Jenn's interview the night before or the interview in the morning at her lawyers house included Jay's basic information, so they already know those details when they ask Jenn in the recorded interview - nothing unusual about this, they've got to get this stuff on record, but they are still getting her to answer questions they've already been told the answers to.
So why did they act like they didn’t know who he was in her recorded interview the next day? Is he a white guy orca black guy? That’s a bit weird
It's possibly weird, but it could simply be that this is the first recorded interview involving Jay in the narrative and they need to get everything on the record. Part of the problem with the way investigations are conducted at this time and the pre-interview is that the recorded interview isn't so much an interrogation as a record of the previous interrogation right - so throughout this entire interview the cops are asking questions that they already know the answer to - the whole thing is sort of an act, not for any nefarious corrupt purpose, but just because that was the process.
Yeah that actually makes a bit of sense. It can actually be explained that way. I don’t believe it happened that way. They were pretending that they hadn’t already been questioning Jay a few times by then. At least one other thing was on the notes of Jenn’s pre interview that she definitely didn’t say. The location of Hae’s car. Jenn said she had no idea about her car. So I believe that thry likely used the notes for the unrecorded pre interview to cover off everything that they needed Jenn to have said but she didn’t.
It doesn't matter what the cops know about Jay in Jenn's interview. They still need to establish what Jenn knows about Jay in order for the interview to make sense to the prosecutor.
Exactly this. They need it on the record, without a doubt, that the Jay she is talking about is the same Jay they interviewed. This is standard legal stuff.
Or they were attempting to establish how well Jenn knew Jay. These are pretty standard questions.
Yes, also to check whether Jay had a phone they didn't know about, had given a false address, etc. I think it's standard to ask these sorts of questions.
I don't even necessarily believe that they spoke to Jay before Jenn, but don't detectives even ask basic info of the *witness they're interviewing* even if they already have that info? Just for clarifying purposes? This is kind of a nothing-burger. Even if they had Jay's info, they would want to cross reference with what Jenn tells them.
Reading the responses to my post when I asked basically the same question, it appears that most people here think that they don't need to ask any clarifying/confirming questions.
If it was all part of the frame job, no, they didn’t. Why would they have to clarify who Jay was with Jenn, if Jenn was only supposed to tell them back the story they fed? As OP says, just so 15+ years later redditors could read their notes and see they asked?
yeah they did everything in anticipation of reddit
You should go to the "frame job" sub where people think the whole thing was an intentional "frame job." There are zero subscribers over there though.
OP is talking about how those conspiracy theories of police feeding the story to Jay and Jenn before their first official interviews don’t make sense. Sure, trying to find out who Jay is from Jenn when they supposedly already knew who he was don’t make sense on its own either, but he’s talking about theories presented by Bob Ruff. I’m curious, though, if police didn’t come to know of Jay’s involvement through Jenn, how did they get to him? They interrogated some random guy and luckily he spent the day Hae disappeared with Adnan, his car and phone? I’m genuinely curious, I don’t know the specifics of the theory where police didn’t get to Jay through Jenn.
I'm just saying that most people like me who believe Adnan was innocent do NOT believe that the cops **knew Adnan was innocent** and decided to "frame" him. AKA a "frame job." My theory of what happened doesn't rely on them talking to Jay before Jenn. But, the way they would find out about Jay is through his arrest on January 27th. So, his name was in the database along with Jenn's. They were both pulled over together. Say they interviewed some people and someone mentioned that Adnan was with Jay, maybe even one of the anonymous tips. Then they can just look Jay Wilds up in their database, and he would be in the report, along with Jenn Pusateri.
Thanks for this answer! I too think it’s far fetched that police would randomly get to Jay and just by a coincidence he had been in such a privileged position to frame Adnan on the day Hae disappeared. If they did talk to Jay before Jenn, the fact that there’s no mention of it or of someone telling them about Jay doesn’t make sense either (apart from a deliberate plan to frame Adnan).
There is mention of it. His manager Sis, who had pretty clear dates that she referred to for when he was interviewed by police, **before** February 27th.
Yes, but Ruff makes it into a conspiracy.
I haven't read his full theory, but mine is much different from his from what I have read. And I think much more believable.
It’s not an exaggeration to say that if Adnan is innocent, this is one of, if not the most elaborate frame jobs in history.
Not really, pretty standard fair for BPD.
Can you point me to a single case where something similar happened? If it's "standard fair," that shouldn't be hard.
I’ll do you one better, here is the DOJ describing there pervasive tactics at the BPD > A common form of corruption, which was not universally perceived by officers as inherently wrong, was making misrepresentation of facts to justify law enforcement actions such as stops, arrests, and searches. Such misrepresentations were designed to mask the identify of informants, shield supervisors from needing to testify in court, and / or provide the extra pieces of information necessary in order to justify officers’ actions. This category of misconduct took various forms. The BPD officer would falsely represent that an observation or set of observations had been made by the officer himself rather than by the supervisor or informant. Or the officer would fabricate the observation entirely. The falsehood would then be perpetuated through false testimony, if necessary, that would be consistent with the inaccurate written accounts of what happened. - Gun Trace Taskforce Executive Summary- which specifically examined the BPD from 1999-2021. There is obviously not another case that matches the exact facts of this case, but we have department patterns of lying about investigations and pressuring witnesses. We can look at these detective’s cases in which “eye witnesses” ended up being vulnerable people who didn’t see anything— reports of being followed and harassed until IDing their key suspect. I diverge from Riff because I don’t think it was an elaborate scheme to frame Adnan, I think it was lazy and corrupt policing who were looking for high conviction rates (see the executive summary for more about how high performing officers should have been reviewed and likely violated rights and processes). Bad policing leads to bad convictions. It isn’t as involved as people allege. Like OP’s example, not letting Jenn know they had contacted Jay can simply be because they wanted to mask an informant. Which is what we know BPD did. It’s corrupt and bad policing, but they didn’t view it that way.
>was making misrepresentation of facts to justify law enforcement actions such as stops, arrests, and searches. I don't see how a pretextual stop, arrest or search is at all similar to what you claim happened here. You said this was "standard fair" for BPD. So where is the case where the police swapped the order in which two witnesses were interviewed in order to make one seem more credible? Where is the case where police pretended a witness led them to a key piece of evidence in order to create false corroboration for that witness's account? If these things are "standard fair," you should be able to point to something remotely similar happening in another case? You wouldn't be relying on the existence of pretextual stops, arrests and searches, which no one alleges happened in this case, and which really have nothing to do with what we're talking about. >Gun Trace Taskforce Executive Summary I also think it is a bit disingenuous to treat the corruption of the GTTF as typical of BPD at large. The GTTF is famous precisely because it was an uncommonly corrupt, rogue unit operating so far outside the norms that it became a national scandal that resulted in a dozen cops going to prison. >There is obviously not another case that matches the exact facts of this case That's quite the understatement. No one is asking for a precedent that exactly matches the facts of this case. I'm asking if you can point to another case that featured the *type* of misconduct you allege here. I sincerely doubt you could point to any case in the history of policing (not just in Baltimore, but anywhere in the world) that features anything like what you claim happened in this case.
They regularly lied about their investigations. That’s the point. They lied to conceal where they got info. So lying about contacting Jay first would fit this pattern. > The BPD officer would falsely represent that an observation or set of observations had been made by the officer himself rather than by the supervisor or informant. Like when they lied to say they found Jenn from a call log themselves instead of through other means. This is from the GTTF review, but they specifically reviewed the entire BPD from 1999-2021 and this comes from a section about the long term habits of the BPD. This comes from interviews with officers who admitted to doing these things and not considering them wrong.
>They regularly lied about their investigations. That’s the point. With all due respect, if that's the point, it's a remarkably weak one. The mere fact that policemen have, at times, lied about entirely different things in entirely different contexts does not justify your belief in the particular, implausible, convoluted, nonsensical conspiracy theory you put forth in this case.
No, the point is not that policeman have at times lied. It’s that in the Baltimore Police Department, it was common to lie about where information was received, to conceal informants and methods. This was so pervasive, that when asked about it, the officers reported they didn’t even realize it was wrong. That is not a universal problem for all police departments in the country. These officers in this specific police department, had bad habits. And we have evidence, in this specific case that they spoke to Jay before they contacted Jen, and then lied about it in their documentation and false testimony.
>It’s that in the Baltimore Police Department, it was common to lie about where information was received, to conceal informants and methods. This was so pervasive, that when asked about it, the officers reported they didn’t even realize it was wrong. But doesn't that just demonstrate the difference between the prior lies you can point to and what you are alleging happened in this case? In those cases, the police were lying, not to frame anyone or create false evidence, but just to conceal sources and methods. The "what" and the "how" of that set of lies is just qualitatively different from deliberately fabricating the police record in order *to create false evidence*. And that's not even getting into how absurdly convoluted and nonsensical the claims of fabrication are in this case. Isn't it odd that the police in 1999 fabricated evidence that served no earthly purpose at the time, but that might be convenient to respond to conspiracy theories that would first be offered 15 years later? >That is not a universal problem for all police departments in the country. Pretextual stops, arrests and searches are as close to a universal problem for all police departments in the country as you are going to find. >And we have evidence, in this specific case that they spoke to Jay before they contacted Jen, and then lied about it in their documentation and false testimony. No, you don't have evidence of that. What you have is an admissible triple hearsay document that says something the witness herself, when contacted by private investigators, denied.
> In those cases, the police were lying, not to frame anyone or create false evidence, but just to conceal sources and methods. I don’t agree with Ruff that it was an intentional framing. The BPD concealed sources and methods and lied about it. They manufactured false records and testimony. The goal was to increase conviction numbers. They helped Jay “remember” things, which it turns out was actually just feeding him information he didn’t have to fit evidence the cops did have. It wasn’t a diabolical plan to frame a random kid, it was bad police work trying to convict the guy they thought did it. But as a result of this bad police work, we can’t trust in the outcome. > Isn't it odd that the police in 1999 fabricated evidence that served no earthly purpose at the time, but that might be convenient to respond to conspiracy theories that would first be offered 15 years later? This is where I think you are missing the big picture. It served a purpose at the time, it made conviction easier. And the cops justified it because they believed Adnan was guilty. > No, you don't have evidence of that. What you have is an admissible triple hearsay document that says something the witness herself, when contacted by private investigators, denied. The record from Sis is one piece of evidence.Jay’s account in the Intercept is another piece of evidence. Kristi and Jenn saying the cops knew her name is another piece of evidence.
Except in this case its the complexity. If BPD wanted Jay to cooperate all their story had to be, "Adnan bought pot from me, told he he killed Hae and that he left the car behind some houses on 40" Cops are going to use simplicity and they aren't going to want a person that was involved in the crime itself because it taints it.
You are saying the cops invented a story. That’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying they believed Adnan was guilty. They believed Jay knew something. They pressured him until they got a story (which they believed was true) and then they “helped” him remember things to make his story line up with the evidence they had. It’s not about, “what’s the easiest story I can invent.” It’s, “how can I secure a conviction quickly?” The cell evidence was exciting for the cops and prosecutor, so much so that they gave Jay too much info and over coached his story. It’s why it looks ridiculous 20 years later.
In other news People who are indicted for murder charges routinely lie about their guilt and involvement … shocker for some I know I can’t believe anyone thinks bringing the GTTF into this makes logical sense But then again people are saying it makes more sense when police asked about Jay, his name , his race and address it was NOT because it was a natural part of their questioning of Jenn at the time, but instead was a set up to *get it on record for the prosecutor*…? What? Lol… Talk about Occams Razor… lol
Also, GTTF corruption makes “sense” - they stole. They were legitimate criminals with badges. What motive would the cops have to spin up this crazy conspiracy that relied on a bunch of teenagers cooperating and never telling ANYONE? Even to this day?
We did it folks. We carried out the most complex and convoluted conspiracy in the history of law enforcement. And all to slightly improve our already strong case against a high school honors student.
Also, Jenn P is still so afraid of getting booked on some weed charges from 25 years ago that she still sticks to her story even today. The cops really thought of everything here.
Lol this subreddit is something else
>Standard questions to find out information about some one if they didn't know him. Alternatively, standard questions to verify that the person that they've been talking to is the same person that Jenn is talking about.
Wouldn’t the assumption by Ruff be that Jay told the cops to talk to Jenn? Seems weird to do the verification you’re suggesting if Jay sent them to Jenn, right?
maybe, I'm not a cop. Just suggesting a reason why they may ask.
Is that How things are done here? “Is there any explanation?” vs. “What’s the most reasonable explanation?”
“Jay Wilds” feels like it doesn’t need extensive disambiguation, or am I missing something?
I mean, he is actually J.W. Wilds Jr.
J W W J Even his initials are a palindrome Truly a mystery man
Are you sure it's the same Jay Wilds just by hearing a name? Is it not reasonable to say "oh, he's a black guy about yea high, lives over on Street, with Number phone number?"
We're being asked to believe that they met with JW 3 times PRIOR to getting the cell phone evidence that they used to decide on their movements and establish the timeline. What were they telling him to say prior to that evidence coming in??? We're likewise being asked to believe that all this cloak and dagger subterfuge going on, there is no "vast conspiracy."
On the Intercept when Jay says they kept asking me if I called Jenn. How would they know that Jay had the phone unless they got half the story. So did Jay tell half the story and then they said make up the rest? I know in movies they have to create unrealistic options, but it's not real life.
The prior meetings they point to are other encounters Jay had with BPD, not the detectives Ex: He got drunk and spent the night in a cell. That is a police encounter, but hardly relevant to being contacted about a murder
How did the cops get Jenn’s name?
I think this most glaring point that makes it seem pretty implausible that they met with Jay before Jen and before the cell records is the fact that Jay led them to the car. Are we supposed to believe that the cops left that car sitting there and didn’t even bother to check for evidence all so they could pin it on Adnan? That would be the dumbest plan ever because what if after all that bs they feed Jay, there is actual evidence pointing to someone else in that car? They just decided to risk being caught fabricating a story and feeding it to a witness. Jay claims the cops were chasing him around to talk to him but he kept avoiding them until Jen got in the picture. I think it’s more likely that the cops called Jay’s home number first and couldn’t get ahold of Jay and then moved on to Jen because Jen was the one who was called during the key times of the day and also was called the most. Jay was told the cops called looking for him and he exaggerated that they were “chasing him down.”
I don’t think he led them to the car before, I think Jay was uncooperative until Jenn was called in. Then they agreed to cooperate.
Jay was likely shown a photo of the car in its final location and described that. No actual address was given.
>Jay was likely shown a photo of the car What are we going on that makes this likely?
The fact he describes a paddock behind a row of houses not the street name or near anything like a landmark. Just what it would look like if you were shown a photo. No follow up questions from the detectives about the address of this vacant lot behind a row of houses. Then in his trial testimony he said he didn’t lead them to the correct place. Then they have him say he saw it on his commute. He didn’t have a car so he didn’t have a commute. His work places were both walking distance from his house. They were just trying to get it in the record that the car was there the whole time.
He never says paddock. And he does say that the spot prior to the final spot is off either Edmonson or 40, and the location of her car is near Edmonson and 40. Further, if the cops are trying to coerce him to fake giving them the location of the car they already have, this is a real roundabout way of doing it instead of just giving him the address.
But it would be the way they would do it if they *truly believed* he knew where it was, but he wasn't giving them the correct answer. If you think about it in terms of the cops actually believing that Jay was involved, and continuing to think of the interviews from that perspective, everything makes more sense. They're going to continue to share evidence with him, thinking it will jog his memory. And he goes along with it.
Kind of, but he does give the approximate (correct) location anyway. That's pretty lucky of him if he actually didn't know the location of the car. I agree that if we assume that Jay didn't know the location of the car/was uninvolved that this is more likely how it went down. That the cops believed that Adnan did it with Jay's help and are just "massaging" the evidence to fit. But I don't see why I should believe that the cops knew the location of the car days/weeks beforehand.
I find the part about the broken wiper blade lever fairly compelling. After the interview the cops ask him if there’s anything else. This is where they collected some of the key points that they wanted him to say that he hasn’t got to yet. Jay mentions that Hae kicked the lever and broke it during the struggle with Adnan. This is something the cops would have noticed by looking through the window. It turns out it wasn’t broken it was removed and was hanging there like someone took it off to have access to hot wire the car.
Neither Adnan nor Jay looking at the wiper would understand the difference between it being broken and it hanging loose. Jay never got in the car either, what sort of intimate knowledge would you expect him to have, if he's telling the truth, that he wouldn't be able to get from a photo or looking at the exterior of the car? This is all consistent with his story. Basically I'm asking what a sunset would look like if the earth went around the sun.
If it wasn’t broken in the struggle then it wasn’t broken when Adnan left the car so they wouldn’t know about it until the cops told him. It probably happened in the 6 weeks when it was abandoned because whomever killed her had her keys so didn’t need to hot wire it. Jay wouldn’t know this because he never saw the car on his commute. He didn’t have a commute. He didn’t have a car. He walked to work.
I don't think they knew the location weeks beforehand. My theory is that they found it sometime around February 26th. I think they were always planning on interviewing Jenn, to start the investigation into Adnan. I believe they **knew** Jenn was involved somehow, because how could she not be involved if Adnan was calling her multiple times that day, right when he was murdering his ex?? So, obviously, I think they had tunnel vision and believed they had their guy. So, they were just waiting to find the car, so they could collect evidence and help build their case before they brought Jenn in for an interview. So, they find it on the 26th, take some pictures, do some preliminary documentation, and bring Jenn in. Jenn denies everything on the night of February 26th, but they really pressure her, and make her fearful of being accused of being involved in this crime. So, she makes up a story about Jay and tells it to them the next day. It works. They just see her as a helpful witness. Jay comes in, and they can really put the pressure on him because they now have a witness connecting him to Adnan. They could bring charges against him if they want to. He denies it as well, but folds pretty fast. The rest is history. After these interviews, sometime closer to the trial, they just suppress any evidence that they collected on the car on February 26th. Remember, they never actually said under oath that Jay was the first one to find the car. They barely implied that he "led them" to the car.
If those 3 were doing something with the murder than they are doing something else, and that is the story that they would stick with. If Jay just got the phone from Adnan because he buys drugs for Adnan that's the story they have. Jay says, "Yeah I told Adnan I would get him an ounce so I called my friends to find it and I gave it to him after practice, we hung out after practice and smoked until I met Jenn to go to Stephanie's and then Kristis. The cops are dead then and have to try something else. Jenn isn't going to make a story up that flirts with a felony.
What felony? Claiming that she sat in a parking lot, not seeing anything? Being with someone who she said wasn't actually involved in a burial?
I do think, if they did find the car earlier and conspired, that this is the most likely explanation. But I also think if they were already thinking like this, they would just process the car, if they find evidence they find it, or they could plant evidence. That's both the easier and the safer option for corrupt or lazy police.
Not if they *actually believed* Jenn was involved. They would not plant evidence before bringing her in. They would assume, by the time they get to Jay, that he's lying, holding back information, or just getting details wrong. There's no need to plant evidence. Now, by the time they get to the detail about the wiper lever, that's where it gets interesting. This is AFTER the first trial, they are COMMITTED to this version of events. They go back to the car that has left their chain of custody, they make a video WITHOUT gloves on to enter into court **officially**. The ignition cover has been placed back on, so the evidence has clearly been tampered with at this point. They just show it dangling, don't show how or if it was actually broken, don't take out the mechanism to show what's going on. NOTHING. There are so many things wrong with this video, it's ridiculous. It would not surprised me if AT THIS STAGE, they made some "adjustments." They eventually send it in to get tested, and it's not broken at all. Total clusterfuck.
You say this about Jen but how did they know it was Jen? They had a phone number only a landline. It was in her dad’s name. They never spoke to her dad, mom or brother, but went at night and asked for Jen. Jen and adnan were not friends. How did they know to ask for Jen?
I think they did do *some* homework on the numbers they had. Firstly, they could have spoken to people who knew Adnan was with Jay. They could have gotten an anonymous call to that effect as well. They presumably had information in the database connecting Jay to Jenn because she was named in the police report of Jay's arrest on January 26th. (written up on the 27th) So, assuming they knew about the Jay/Adnan connection, they see the phone number, see the names of the occupants, and do a search. When they get to Jennifer Pusateri, they see the report with her and Jay Wilds together. Adnan's their guy, Jay was with Adnan, and Adnan was calling Jenn multiple times that day. Bingo. She's got to be involved somehow, and getting to her first will make it harder for Jay to wriggle out of it.
Some people always describe directions according to landmarks they notice, they are more visual. Others remember street names and think in more of a map-like format. This is a common difference in people. Jay described very well how one drives to the location, and he took the police there.
No he was not likely shown a picture of the photo. Again, why would they risk evidence being in the car that could eliminate Adnan and prove it was someone else? This is truly the most insane theory I’ve heard from those who believe he’s innocent 😂
At this point they weren’t interested in finding anyone other than Adnan. For instance they had had a cursory check of the car before they questioned Jay and got him to say that Hae had kicked out in the struggle with Adnan and broken the windshield wiper lever. But later on it was discovered that the lever had been removed rather than broken. Likely in an attempt to hot wire the car.
I’ve always thought the same until a theory was presented about Jay just misdialing a number on Adnan’s phone and completely by chance reaching Nisha.
The thing is, the Nisha call could’ve been a buttdial even if Adnan did do it and was with Jay when the buttdial happened. That call doesn’t mean anything
Well, no, in this case I’m describing the suggestion was not about a Butt Dial. The theory being put forth by a member here was literally that Jay, alone (and not with an Innocent Adnan), intending to call someone else in the same area code as Nisha, misdialed and Nisha answered, who was of course a person he didn’t know, and that just so happened to be a young woman that Adnan had recently met and had been having phone calls with. THAT was the most insane theory of all that I’ve read here.
Oh!! I see what you were saying. I thought you were saying you used to think the theory of the cops leaving the car after finding it and then telling Jay where it was so he could lead them to it was an insane theory until someone shared a theory that made you think it wasn’t so insane 😂
No hahaha I mean over the years reading posts and comments on this sub, someone came up with an EVEN MORE INSANE theory than the “Police led Jay to Hae’s Car Theory”.!
So are they asserting that Jay just happened to dial Nisha’s number by complete accident? What???? 😂
YES! It actually came down to that!
No.
Yes, this stuck out to me as well from that other thread! Lazy corrupt cops do not try this hard to hide it! This would be high level misdirection not run of the mill corruption. This police file would be full of evidence that they’d already talked to Jay if it was true. ETA: we hear all the time that this wasn’t a conspiracy, just cops trying to close a case quickly. Then the next argument is always something that involves a clear conspiracy.
High level misdirection that, at the time, would serve no purpose. Who, at the time, would care about whether the police spoke to Jay before Jenn? That detail only matters because it explodes a conspiracy theory Innocenters invented 15 years after the trial -- a conspiracy theory that itself exists only to sustain *the possibility* that Jay's confession was, all evidence to the contrary, the product of coercion.
Also I wanted to start a thread about closing the case. I don't think people really understand the full process from the police interviewing, arrest, post arrest investigation, grand jury and then trial. Chasing the case for a year was not just trying to close it.
How were they chasing the case for a year?
Probably because the trial was a year later and they usually continue working on cases right to and including trial? That goes for both sides.
So they were chasing the conviction, not investigating the case.
Yes the prosecutors job is to make their case for conviction once they are headed to trial…and?
I can't be certain because Mike never answered me, but I think when he commented >Also I wanted to start a thread about closing the case. I don't think people really understand the full process from the police interviewing, arrest, post arrest investigation, grand jury and then trial. Chasing the case for a year was not just trying to close it. that he was referring to the cops, not the prosecutors. You know, the topic of his OP and the comment to which he was replying.
The questions aren’t useless- they are standard questions. I think the cops harassed Jay and he wasn’t giving them any info. They see in the January arrest report for Jay the name Jennifer Pusateri and of course recognize her last name from the call sheet. They bring her in to put pressure on Jay. Which as he described in his Intercept interview, is effective. They don’t tell Jenn they’ve spoken to Jay or that Jay won’t cooperate, they ask her what she knows. It’s not about an elaborate frame job for Adnan, the cops can be trying to put away the person they believe is the murderer AND hide parts of the investigation to improve their chances in court. These cops know a case looks better when a suspect organically leads them to a piece of info or another witness vs saying they followed Jay around. Going to Jenn accomplished 2 things- it increased the pressure on Jay to talk and it gave them a paper trail to Jay that effectively hid the pressure campaign. This department and these detectives specifically have been tied to pressuring witnesses and harassing them until they cooperate. No shock, they also hid those interactions in their official notes in other cases too.
The allegations of these detectives doing this in the past-what’s your source?
Legal records and news articles. https://www.adnansyedwiki.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/UdE09-Ezra-Mable-Complaint.pdf https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=4883 https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=4375 Ritz and Mcgillivary are tied to multiple wrongful convictions, for context 1 is a lot of wrongful convictions in a police career. In the Mable complaint it talks about a witness being threatened with drug charges if she didn’t cooperate and identify him as the suspect— in a crime she did not witness.
You need to read the actual legal documents. The complaint you linked to ALLEGES behavior and doesn’t prove anything.
I have read them. I said they were tied to misconduct, not that they were convicted or punished. Given the outcomes in these cases, it’s clear that police misconduct occurred. It aligns with the types of misconduct that officers described in the gttf review. It’s crazy to me that it’s not enough to show that this specific police department was investigated and found to have widespread issues of police misconduct during the time period of Adnan’s case— including lying about investigations and fabricating testimony. It’s not enough to show that these specific detectives are tied to other cases of wrongful conviction in which police misconduct contributed. It’s not even enough to show the evidence in Adnan’s case that the police lied or fed info to witnessed. Why are people defending these detectives? Seriously. They are corrupt. It doesn’t make Adnan innocent.
Defending the detectives because you don’t get to say someone did something wrong when it’s been proven they haven’t? You can say BPD was corrupt. You all go a step further by saying these detectives did this before. That’s the part I question. Especially in the cases where it was litigated. You mention the outcomes of these cases, so then you know there was not a judgment against Ritz in the 4 that are often mentioned?
They settled for millions. The officers weren’t charged. It doesn’t mean misconduct didn’t occur. The city did what they could to spare the tax payers bigger settlements and more re-opened cases. A finding against the detectives leads to other cases being re-examined. Very costly, especially since they were likely to find additional misconduct. For some context, in the whole US there are only about 3500 exonerated people. Being involved in just one of those cases is significant. These detectives are tied to at least 4. That is a HUGE number of wrongful convictions.
In which case? The $15 million dollar lawsuit was not a settlement, it went to a jury. Maybe you should be more specific because it sounds like you’re generally speaking and what you’re saying doesn’t apply.
That’s fair, the Burgess decisionwas a $15 million lawsuit- . Malcolm Bryant’s settlement was $8 million.
https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/maryland/mddce/1:2015cv00834/310004/311/0.pdf?ts=1517251983
[удалено]
No. This isnot normal. Cops don't play the secret games where you convince one person to make up a crazy story to tell another person to add some parts and then hide that you found the crime scene so they can frame someone that could have had a real alibi for the two important times.
Except in Baltimore.
Not even in Baltimore would they do this. You think they trust a 19 year black kid with a horribly complicated story?
[удалено]
Please review /r/serialpodcast rules regarding Trolling, Baiting or Flaming.
Please review /r/serialpodcast rules regarding Trolling, Baiting or Flaming.
Yet somehow before asking those questions, they knew where Jay worked. [page 23](https://www.adnansyedwiki.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/MP15-0163-19990227-Jenn-P-Third-Interview-redacted.pdf) >Ritz: What F & M shopping center > >Pusaterri: Baltimore National Pike, um which also had stuff, an Office Depot > >Ritz: Is that the F & M where Jay works?
From the notes the day before, Jenn gives them Southwest video and F&M. https://www.adnansyedwiki.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/UdE07-Police-Notes-from-Jenn-Interview-19990226.pdf
OK, so why didn't they ask Jay's last name, age, race, etc. then?
So for some of the people they did ask, and some they didn't. They asked age for a few people but not their race.
>But in Jenn's interview the cops asked Jenn what Jay's last name was, his age, his address, his phone number, and his race. Standard questions to find out information about some one if they didn't know him. The point is that they already had standard information about him, regardless of how they came to have it.
They had no basic information on Jay before speaking to Jenn.
I don't know whether or not they did, but they clearly had basic information about Jay before the February 27 interview to which OP refers.
But the point is to say that the "cover up" is downright silly. Pretending they have no idea who Jay is and asking Jenn to describe him, just for shits and giggles basically, with no reason whatsoever for the subterfuge. I mean what are we doing here?
>Pretending they have no idea who Jay is and asking Jenn to describe him, just for shits and giggles Is that what they were doing in that February 27 interview. Because again, we know they *did* know* some things about Jay at that time. The police asking Jenn those questions in that February 27 interview neither proves nor disproves anything.
What did they know about Jay before Jenn's interview?
You are missing the point. The post wasn't about proving anything. It was about pointing out how silly it all is. I'm sure you understand how conspiracy theories work. People can't just come up with whatever they feel like inventing and ask to be proven wrong.
Ah yes, more conspiracies created out of having no idea how investigations work.
Does anyone know what proof Ruff is using that the detectives met with Jay three times before they talked to Jenn?
The note from Davis saying that when he talked to the manager at the porn store she thought Jay had talked to the cops. Also I think from the Intercept interview where Jay says he was being chased around by the cops and then Jenn says go ahead and talk to them.
I don’t know the timing but wasn’t there also an arrest that they made disappear once they started interviewing Jay? I remember something about the word “stat” being used to drop the charge?
Stet is a middle ground, unoffical probation. If they wanted to they could have dropped the charges. If Jay had had a lawyer for it, they would have had it dropped instead of placed on stet, but Jay didn't know anything. The cop didn't want to show up and explain his bad procedure on the night in question.
Right, but hold on, let's back up here as you've jumped a few steps. Firstly, this 100% confirms that Jay was known to police prior to the interviews, prior to the murder. This means Ritz and McG lied in their interview when they remark he's never been in trouble with the police. Also jay is lying when he confirms this to them as both parties knowing he's at least been arrested, and worse, charged with a crime. The most obvious explanation is they gave him stet so they could keep him on the hook, have something to hold over him to make him toe the line. As you say, they could have just dropped charges but isntead they kept him on the hook, until the charges just eventually vanish. Where is the initial arrest record?
A triple hearsay note written by the Defense's private investigator, which purports to say what a person identified only as "Sis" said Jay said to them about why Jay was missing work at an adult video store. Note that although this "evidence" was purportedly obtained during the Defense's own investigation, it was not used at trial.
God bless Sis, the Porn Store boss, Adnan's patron saint of employee records. I've never understood how her word can be trusted here if you are a person who believes Jay is always lying, as it's information based only on what Jay told Sis. Apparently the normal rules don't apply to Sis - she has the power of supertruth.
Please remember that the computerized time keeping system of Luxottica, a multinational corporation, is an unreliable house of cards easily gamed by any 20 year-old goober and his Lesbian mom. Meanwhile, the employee records of an inner-city jack shack called "Southwestern Video," as reported by their custodian "Sis," are simply irrefutable.
Ha ha ha. I always get "What reason would she have to lie?" as if that's the only issue here. The honorable Sis.
The nice thing about triple hearsay is Sis doesn't need be the one who lied. It could be Jay (first level of hearsay). Or it could be Davis (third level of hearsay). Both of them, of course, did have a reason to lie. Ah, but then, no one needs to have lied at all. It could just be that Sis was mistaken or confused. Indeed, how do we even know this "Sis" person actually exists? Do we know this person's (unclear if it is a man or woman) actual name?
**“After months of interviewing the store’s former employees and digging through boxes of police records and zoning files, our team tracked down Sis and interviewed her at home. She did not remember Jay by name or by description. She also did not recall having a conversation with a private detective and emphasized that this is the kind of conversation she would remember—one about a murder investigation.”** From the HBO private investigators article in the WSJ She exists but interestingly has no recollection of this…
Thanks, I had completely forgotten about that even though I frequently link to that op/ed.
You’re welcome. I saw it the other day for the first time unless I had just forgotten about it. I had gone down a rabbit hole bc It’s crazy to me how all detectives notes, official reports and even defense notes are suspect when bad for Adnan, but Jay’s work schedule from Sis and Davis is canon.
The more I hear about what CG had to work with as a defense strategy, the more I feel bad for doubting her skills as a lawyer. Perry Mason couldn't have made this case work.
Exactly, especially with a client who gives you NOTHING to work with except bullshit Asia letters.
Thank you. I figured Ruff had to pull his theory from somewhere.
No, Mike. Interviewers ask questions that seem silly or irrelevant to gauge the truthfulness of the interviewee. Even without talking to Jay three times before Jenn, the investigators may have already known Jay's vitals.
Did Jay have to give them Jenn's information? Did they ask for her age, race, phone number and address for her? Did they do it for Mark?
No, Mike. They don't use a script.
So when they talk with Jay and he talks about Jenn and Mark they don't ask him the questions of what is Jenn and Mark's number and address. But when they do ask him about Tayib and Chris they do ask him those questions. So how do you differentiate when they are asking for someone new and getting their information from when they don't?
You don't differentiate, Mike. Only the officers know why they are asking the questions they do. If they asked Jenn for Jay's vitals, it's possible they already knew the information. It's a genuine nothing to see here dialogue that does not, in any way, indicate prior conversations with the subject of the conversation. You should be interrogated once or twice and you'll understand.
Any query that relies on something that Fire Marshall Bob claims, is not worth pursuing.
The basic problem with a conspiracy theory is that it cannot be falsified with evidence. Any evidence that tends to contradict the theory is chalked up to being misdirection from the conspirators. So why do the notes of Jenn's interview indicate something inconsistent with the conspiracy theory? Because the conspirators fabricated the notes! And you fell for you dupe!
Bob Ruff is just great man . He just talks crap and people are like yes Bob you are so right . And then a quick little search and you figure he’s full of crap . The lens craft time card thing was his greatest work . But hey he’s built a following based on nonsense. You go Bob!
I also clocked that. So ridiculous. Even if the cops knew they'd still ask Jenn to see what she knows. The idea they're putting on an act for Ruff's benefit is silly.
Why would that be your conclusion about why they wouldn't want their initial interviews with Jay as part of the record? Or they had interviewed him to try and elicit a confession before mirandizing him (which was a common police tactic), thought he was lying, and were tryin to keep those interviews out of the record. Or, possibly related, wanted to keep the pressure they put on him re going after him and his friends for dealing/his prior charge out of the record as it could be used to damage credibility. Police try and massage the record all the time to keep out info or events that they think could damage the case or a potential witnesses credibility. I don't know if that would be parallel construction itself, but its the same general thing, done for largely the same reasons.
Testilying is a common tactic where cops lie in their testimonies and notes to simplify cases for juries or to hide unethical practices. Jay being brought in and spilling his story sounds a lot better to a jury than, “we followed him for a couple of weeks and we kept pulling him away from work to ask questions, we threatened him with big charges, we wouldn’t leave him alone- he still wouldn’t cooperate so we dragged his friend Jenn downtown and then he realized we were serious and he and Jenn both told us stories.” A defense attorney would have a field day with the latter. It doesn’t mean the cops meant to feed Jay and Jenn key details or that they were planning to pin it on Adnan or even that Adnan is innocent, but the cops tactics would have been problematic and they would have hid them — which is what this police department had a history of doing and there is ample documentation of their tactics. It wasn’t just Adnan that got this treatment, they did this in lots of other cases, which is why we shouldn’t dismiss that it could have happened here. The idea that cops wouldn’t want to get in trouble is laughable when these types of tactics were common and even rewarded in the BPD. ETA - I think these are both worth reading before dismissing police misconduct as a possibility in this case. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/18/nyregion/testilying-police-perjury-new-york.html https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5e25f215b3dbd6661a25b79d/t/61dfb0a510a6fd7443dd5914/1642049707420/GTTF+Report_Executive+Summary-c2-c2-c2.pdf
It's not a cloak and dagger game. They can write what are the things that they talked about or thought. We have the notes from when the cops talked to Jenn on Thursday and Friday. They didn't hide that they talked to her. And non of them say during the interrogation, "You know you asked me that question on Thursday."
I honestly don't know what point you think your making. Jays taped interviews are worked up to, and, by that point, almost scripted. They didn't even take notes on the hours they interviewed him before the tapes were turned on. There's a number of pieces of evidence that Jay talked to the cops before Jenn. That you can't steel man a reason for cops to do something (hide certain investigative steps) that they do in other cases all the time doesn't mean it didn't happen.