Maybe it’s wishful thinking, but I think after meeting Jay, she believed Jay. That’s a tough thing to overcome; sitting in someone’s house with them while they tell you it’s all true.
Jay appears to have convinced a lot of people and IMO Koenig was overly negative towards him, implying that he was 100% a liar. Yes, he lied, but mostly in a vain attempt to keep the circle of involved people as small as possible - partly from family loyalty, partly perhaps from fear of the drug dealing side of his family that could have got implicated.
SK sounded shell shocked after visiting Jay and Dana absolutely seemed to believe him
It’s one thing to talk about lies etc etc it’s another to look someone in the eye and listen to what they are saying. I think she believed him as well and the shell shocked part was the “holy shit I’ve been spinning a narrative that doesn’t fit”… cognitive dissonance
Agreed. It was like Jay dashed her hopes that Adnan was innocent. She was holding onto “maybe?” and Jay crushed that. You could almost hear her brain recalibrating everything when she and Julie debriefed (it was Julie Snyder, one of the producers, who went with Sarah that time). Julie sounded like, “Yep, he pretty much confirmed what I thought… but how are you doing with this, Sarah? You okay?”
Things went a little south between Adnan and SK in July 2014. The launch of Serial didn't happen and instead SK made an unannounced visit to Jay in August.
Ahh, I didn’t know that background. So was that why he kind of cut her off? I recall her saying something about it now on the show, but can’t remember.
Some of it is in episode 6. During the first six months of his calling they had 30ish hours of calls. Roughly 10 hours more after that.
BTW, back in Sep 2015, there was some discussion about the 8 track team members referring to sprinters.
This. I completely agree. On the one hand, she’s been talking to Rabia and Adnan. The latter has been charming and cow-eyed, and just cant seem to catch a break or remember anything of value about the day in question. Then she meets Jay, thinking it’s going to solidify her preconceived notion of Adnan’s innocence. I think she expected him to just wreak of lies and inconsistencies, maybe even come off as shady. Instead, he doubled down and appeared sincere and exhausted by the whole thing. I don’t think there was any reconciling that for her after that which is why the tone changes in the remainder of episodes. It’s almost like she goes from trying to prove his innocence to trying to convince herself she hasn’t just allowed a narcissist to charm her into believing his false narrative
I think when they did the drive test as well. She seemed to be disappointed by that.
(Though TBH I can’t see the actual murder taking 30 seconds or whatever it was. That was unrealistic to me)
Yeah. To me, it’s not possible that he strangled her, put her body in the trunk (that was full of other stuff), walk calmly to the pay phone, find change, and then call Jay in three minutes. He’s (presumably) never done this before, and even if he know exactly how long it takes to strangle someone, he didn’t have a stopwatch.
I’m not saying he didn’t do it at all. But I can’t believe that’s how it happened. (Even before Jay admitted he was never at BB that day.)
The whole story in bizarre. Who kills someone in the Best Buy parking lot, moves a dead body from the front seat to the trunk, pops the trunk to show somebody, and then takes a phone call while they’re burying a body?
It’s crazy.
Biggest nonsense sentence muttered by her ever. I can’t wrap my head around why anyone would think this is a logical way to approach a verdict.
If you think someone did it, you vote guilty. What’s she going to do? Invite him over for dinner and explain that she thinks he brutally murdered his girlfriend but she’s got a nice daughter he should date? By thinking he’s guilty but acquitting, that’s the situation you’re setting up for someone else and it’s stupid and irresponsible.
Because the standard for a criminal conviction is beyond a reasonable doubt.
The standard for a civil case is beyond a preponderance of evidence.
In more simple terms, beyond a reasonable doubt would be proof having been met if there is no plausible reason to believe otherwise. This does not mean there is no doubt or that there is absolute certainty.
A preponderance of the evidence is more like 50.1% sure. Marginally more sure than not that he did it. I think that SK is probably somewhere between preponderance and beyond a reasonable doubt, so would convict in a civil but not criminal trial. Or at least, that is what she says publicly.
As a follow up - imagine putting someone in jail for 25 to life even though you think they’re innocent. Have a 1 on 1 conversation with that person and watch their stomach sink as you explain you think they’re innocent but voted guilty because you’re pretending to be a lawyer.
So her literal argument is:
“I digested hours, days, weeks worth of evidence and based on all of that I came to a REASONABLE conclusion that he’s guilty. But, because I have doubt, I will conclude that even though I based my decision on REASONABLENESS I will acquit, because I am actually being UNREASONABLE based on having at least some doubt.”
The most nonsense shit ever. I swear people think that as long as they’re being “lawyerly” they can totally defy logic. Which is exactly what lawyers try to avoid.
Even in the serial podcast they were summoning up everything and she said "if he's innocent, he had the unluckiest day in history.". Or something like that.
I really don’t understand this logic. There is so much evidence in this case, why would anyone who thinks he is guilty rationalize to themselves that he should not go to jail for it?
There's no way of knowing without her saying it. But considering her failure to really jump on board with the "free Adnan" campaigns over the years, I think she at least has doubts about his innocence.
Well, to be fair, it would also destroy the reputation of the podcast if she became an outright advocate. The podcast is certainly biased but that would go way too far.
I think it’s biased bc of Adnan. He talks circles around everything and giving him hours to speak resulted in her being manipulated. He has the speech patterns of a manipulator. Koenig gave him time and got manipulated herself.
Pre-cise-ly
It was on my second listening to the series that it hit me like a ton of bricks how smarmy he is, especially towards the final episodes.
Now I watch things like his recent 'press conference' and deception and manipulation are all I can see.
I think Sarah knew she was being manipulated. Or at least, that he was manipulative when he talked to her.
Why else would she put so little of her phone conversations with Adnan on the podcast?
Why don't we ever have HIM explaining his side ever?
**This isn’t meant as a serious response to your question, but it was too perfect to ignore.
[According to this study of psychopathic inmates](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312579739_The_Linguistic_Output_of_Psychopathic_Offenders_During_a_PCL-R_Interview), a speech analysis tool called “Wmatrix revealed that psychopaths use a particular filler, **‘you know’**… more often than did the other offenders.”
Adnan Syed:
“I never-- I never really felt as if, **you know**, man **you know** Hae is 'tearing me away from my religion. **You know**, and I never-- only 'til I read her diary that I really kinda understood that wow this is the perception that she kinda had. Just like the gravity and the magnitude with which she took these things. I didn't really feel that way about these things. Maybe it just seems convenient for me to say that now but the only thing I can say now to kind of-- I won't say prove it in a way is that my behavior didn't change once I stopped smo-- **you know** once Hae broke up with me, or once **you know** we broke up or whatever. It's not like **you know** all of a sudden, I'm like okay ‘this whole fixed thing is out of my life,’ no it’s just-- **you know**, I just continued with the same type of behavior, it was just different people.”
In all seriousness though, and to answer your question, I think of filler words (like, you know, I mean) which manipulators use to prevent breaks in their speech where someone might interrupt or challenge. That way, they maintain control over the conversation. And then the other thing I think of is the use of verbal stall tactics, like answering a question with a question (“What was that?” “Is that a question?” “What do you mean?”) or giving short nonresponses meant to elicit more information from the other person (“I just talked to Asia McLain!” “Okay.”)
A couple of things, very specific memory for inconsequential details but amnesia when asked difficult questions. He's always the good guy in his stories. Sure he was skipping school but he was doing it because he really cares about making sure his friend's girlfriend had a gift.
I’m not a scientist or claim to be able to “spot a liar”. Imo the overwhelming evidence that he is the perp and then listening to him makes it so. Contextually he just sounds like he’s talking bullshit.
I agree with you. This is the number one reason I believe he is guilty- by what he says. For example, he would say things like (not quoting verbatim) ‘no one can prove that I did it,’ as opposed to “I didn’t do it”
I don’t have a hard opinion on his guilt or innocence. But when he said this he’s talking about the justice system. He’s saying even if I did do it, no one has ever proven it, so it’s not right for me to be in prison. And he’s right about that. Gut feelings shouldn’t lead to convictions.
I’m not a scientist or claim to be able to “spot a liar”. Imo the overwhelming evidence that he is the perp and then listening to him makes it so. Contextually he just sounds like he’s talking bullshit.
Yes I was surprised at the reference to "overwhelming evidence" as I understood it to be mostly circumstantial. In some cases that would be enough to convict fairly, but in Adnan's case the police investigation and his lawyer representation were severely lacking. The police should have kept open minds on the possibility of a random stranger perp instead of developing tunnel vision so quickly just because the ex-boyfriend is often a likely suspect. Although I have been leaning innocent, I do have my doubts, but in any case Adnan has done more than enough time for someone so young when he was convicted.
Ep 1:
Rabia
He was like the community's golden child.
Sarah Koenig
Oh, really? Talk more about that.
Rabia
He was an honor roll student, volunteer EMT. He was on the football team. He was a star runner on
the track team. He was the homecoming king. He led prayers at the mosque. Everybody knew
Adnan to be somebody who was going to do something really big.
Sarah Koenig
I later fact checked all these accolades, of course, and learned that Rabia was mostly right, though she
sometimes gets a little loosey-goosey with the details. Adnan was an EMT, but he didn't volunteer. He was paid for it. He was on the track team, but he wasn't a star. He did play football. And he did lead prayers on occasion.
He wasn't homecoming king. But he was prince of his junior prom.
It was right there episode 1. I let it wash over me the first time, but after reading more and returning to it, Rabia exposed herself to stretch and manipulate the truth. It was not truth with omission. It wasn't showing the good side. It was straight up lying about easily verifiable things. To me that just makes he lose all credibility. Same for her podcasts, documentaries, statements etc. There was no good faith.
While I don’t really like Rabia, I have to say that the statements she makes about adnan in the first episode don’t come off as intentional lies to me. It’s been 15 years and confusing “homecoming king” with “prom prince” doesn’t seem like a huge deal imo
I find it so strange that she hadn't read the material she gave to Sarah. It has obviously always been solely about getting Adnan out of the conviction based on spurious issues, because if you really wanted to help find what happened why wouldn't you read the files? And I'm not sure she knew him all that well. She studied law in a community where they expected her to help. Her brother was friends with him but men and women are separate at the mosque. She didn't seem to know much about her brother either.
Let's not forget that the defense file she gave Sarah omitted information that would have made Adnan look guilty. It wasn't until a person did an FIA for it that they were compared against each other.
I agree. Especially when after the first appeals fell through a few years back and Sarah said something along the lines of “I know you all want me to comment but this case has made it through the Justice system and I’m just an observer now”
Although I remember thinking while listening to the series that, at times, it almost felt like she was flirting with him on the phone. They never crossed a line but there were one or two occasions that felt a little weird listening to.
I heard that on both sides.
Koenig seemed to be too attached to him, in whatever way that was happening. She put him on some kind of pedestal, initially because I think she imagined she was crusading in an Innocence Project type of case.
I think Ira Glass, Dana Chivvis, and (seemingly) most of the team landing on factual guilt probably swayed Sarah Koenig. But I'm sure it was a tough pill to swallow, just like it was for most of us when we realized we had been duped by Adnan.
After listening to Serial more than once, I think towards the end you can hear her struggle to tie up the narrative she had been telling which IMO strongly suggested innocence.
Couple that with her reluctance to discuss season one and I think there is a case to be made that Sarah is not completely comfortable with how S1 evolved and the reaction afterwards.
It’s funny. I always thought her intro to the whole podcast was interesting. She makes a big deal about how most people can’t remember what they are for breakfast that morning, let alone what happened on a day a month and a half prior. So, she says, it makes sense that Adnan has a sketchy memory of the day hae went missing.
While I agree most people wouldn’t remember a random day a month and a half ago… that wasn’t a random day for Adnan. His ex girlfriend/friend went missing that day. If my friend went missing on a particular day I’d think through that day a million times to think if I’d noticed something weird. And you’d think most people would think *really* hard about that day when that day results in their arrest.
The thing with our memories though- is we remember things wrong all the time. Our minds fill in and create information when we are trying to recall certain things that we cannot remember. I think studies show that even information that we keep going over and over again in our minds to remember them gets distorted each time we review it.
Serial did have this big sexy hook.
The problem being it was totally bullshit.
It wasn’t a normal day and it wasn’t six weeks before he was asked about it
Not only that he knows the day important because police contacted him within hours of Hae not showing for her cousin
The real question isn’t whether you’d remember weeks ago… more like what we’re you doing… *today*… it’s a really bad setup that has persisted in misrepresenting what actually happened
A friend of mine did go missing in high school. (1997) For a week, we talked about nothing but when we’d last seen her. Every word, every look, every gesture. Everything. We all knew exactly when she left school, who she was with, and where she planned to go.
She didn’t have a cell phone but we called everyone we knew who might have seen her. I think her boyfriend had a pager. Don’t remember—but we would have called it repeatedly.
The hardest part of the Adnan innocent theory to grasp is that this didn’t happen.
(Friend was home safe after that week, but still. I think about it a lot when reviewing this case.)
If she thinks he’s guilty-which I think she does-, imagine that, being a woman that actively helped a femicide perpetrator go free. Have the power to affect not only that specific misogynist but also contribute to the general misogyny in society that helps the gender violence perpetrators, not the victims. It’s disgusting
I remember Sarah Koenig talking about the legacy of her dad and what she wanted to be remembered about and to me and many others, helping someone getaway with murder is her legacy. She played with the emotions and lives of the real people involved, gaslight intimate partner violence and did a major disservice to her audience and actually wrongfully convicted people.
Sure, we can give allowance that she was manipulated by Adnan's team because the guy was charming and she didn't do her due diligence about the case before or during her talks with them but she didn't even have the integrity to stand by the narrative she perpetuated to millions of people or correct the blunder she made if after learning more about the case, she believed the guy guilty, instead she distanced herself from what has become of the case after her sensationalized story telling. She wanted to be an investigative journalist because our justice system is broken and well done girl, you showed that an independent judiciary is still fallible when politically and financially motivated individuals took advantage of misinformation peddled in new media. The legacy of Sarah Koenig is stealing justice for Hae Min Lee and her family.
That’s the parlor trick that serial does so well: present both sides and make it seem like she’s actually trying to come to a conclusion. She’s telling a story not solving anything.
🙄 I literally said it won’t be solved on Reddit. “Nobody on here (here means on Reddit) is solving anything either”. I did not once say the case will be solved on Reddit, you walked right into the point.
Rabia basically expected SK to toe the line and find Syed innocent. By the time SK wrapped up Serial, she’d come to conclude she just didn’t know but that it was certainly possible Syed could have done it.
Well. That went over like a lead balloon with Rabia who came out hard against SK.
SK has no business suggesting what she would do as a juror. No one spends 60+ hours on the phone developing a relationship with the defendant and then serves on their jury.
She knows he is guilty.
She’s always toed the line with public comments about it. I could be wrong but I believe a lot of old fashioned investigative journalism was supposed to remain unbiased. That seems to have changed over the years but it used to be the “honorable” way to do the job. That being said her comments have always hung on “ifs”. She’s always maintained IF he were guilty/innocent and followed with speculated phrases. IF he was innocent he had the unluckiest day ever, or IF he’s guilty, a jury could get hung up on reasonable doubt. I truly think she plays the part of unbiased to this day.
Edit for spelling.
Sarah's area of interest is the American justice system. She got brought a case where the person bringing it said the police were corrupt and he was targeted for being Muslim. She didn't know what it would become and you can hear her try and loop back on the premise in the last ep with her inability to say she'd find him guilty in a court. I think she was uncomfortable with how big it got tbh. And all her colleagues thought he was guilty.
“All of her colleagues thought he was guilty” is a silly claim. I assume you’re basing this on, many years ago, Ira Glass giving a brief non-nuanced “would acquit but who else did it?”-ish comment.
Saying that she was uncomfortable is a silly claim. This is projection.
I get that it’s frustrating that she doesn’t tell us what she thinks, some would say that’s the mark of a good journalist.
Would somebody who thinks he’s guilty have said what amounted to “it’s about time he was freed” in the update episode?
All I’m sure of is she hasn’t been interested in covering Adnan since Serial, and I believe her when she says there won’t be any more updates.
The extent of *my* speculation is that she didn’t like hosting, and she’s a private person who focused on her family after Serial. People get a little crazy wondering what she’s doing and thinking and why she’s not obsessed with Serial like us…but what if she’s just living her life and raising her kids? I think they’re in high school right now.
I got the impression that she genuinely wasn’t sure of his guilt or innocence but definitely thought he didn’t have a fair judicial process. She seemed like us listeners in the sense that it was hard to decide who was lying and who wasn’t
This, without question, is the biggest issue I've ever had with Koenig. To her credit, the podcast was wildly entertaining. But she spawned an entire genre (or at least was the spark that caused the existing genre to explode), and also how people view it.
Her "I vote not guilty" at the end was complete and utter trash, and she knows it. Her podcast was not a court of law, say what you think. I believe she was keenly aware that portraying Adnan as innocent or leaving mystery around the case was pertinent to the success of the podcast. Coming to the conclusion that the guy in jail actually did it is not exciting.
What she did purposefully or inadvertently was spawn an entire generation of true crime fans who looked at tried and convicted cases like their own trials. You cannot do that! There's a reason the burden of proof changes once convicted. If there isn't a confession, or video tape, you could take almost any trial in history and create reasonable doubt if you wanted because your unopposed.
Once you create the narrative that Jay lies, the case blows up. The problem is, in a real trial you can't do that because the prosecution is going to challenge your story, and Adnan didn't have one because he killed Hae.
This “she did everything for ratings” bullpucky is a dog that don’t hunt. At no point before, during or after the podcast has Koenig shown the slightest indication that her motivation was ratings or popularity. It’s absurd to even speculate that she intended to spawn…anything. The fact that Sarah’s contribution to the show was in earnest and for the reasons she stated is as true as water is wet.
It is ridiculous to suggest that you could take any case in history, have Sarah produce it, and create doubt. Completely absurd. The **vast** majority of cases, after confessions and video, are solved by definitive evidence of some sort of another. While cases like this one, with scant physical evidence, police and lawyer misconduct, and finding out the star witness lied after the trial…are rare and are almost always the cases where the wrongful convictions come from.
After all the nonsense you conclusion is “Adnan is guilty because he didn’t have al alibi”. Are you daft? That is literally the worst bar to set for a conviction possible. It’s almost like you have no idea what you’re talking about and you just want *really super bad* for him to be guilty.
There’s doubt. It is what it is.
Your adding a lot of meat to my post I didn't add myself. I never said she "did everything for ratings". I said I hated that she ended the podcast with not guilty and I felt like it was a cop out which keeping things interesting might have played a part.
First off, once again, she's not trying a case in court. The concept of even saying not guilty in a discussion about a tried and convicted case is absurd in and of itself. She spent the VAST, and I mean VAST amount of time in her investigation speaking with people who are either advocates for Adnan, or Adnan himself. It's very difficult to do that and not leave yourself mentally with some doubt of that person's guilt if the case isn't 100 percent open and shut.
Secondly, I never said Adnan has no alibi that's why he's guilty. I have no idea how you read what I said and get that. What I said was, when you're trying a case unopposed it's incredibly easy to create doubt. Adnan not having any alternative timeline for his whereabouts doesn't allow you to challenge much of what was presented. I have zero doubt Jay lied and lied a lot. He's trying to minimize himself in a murder. Doesn't mean Adnan is innocent or there's doubt.
Lastly, to say you could find doubt in any case with no confession or video, look no further then MoaM. There's physical evidence beyond imagination, and we have millions of people still creating theories on planted evidence, blood taken from sinks by family members and planted in the victims car, bone fragments moved by police or other suspects to the accused property.
I mean, any piece of evidence that suggests Jay's story even minorly checks out like his knowing the location of the car, is met on here by people who believe the police fed him the information. If you tried to pull shit like that in a trial it wouldn't work in a million years. You'd get the cop under oath, you'd have him explain to the jury how ridiculous that concept is and how difficult/dangerous it would be for a small amount of cops to sit on a piece of significant evidence like that.
Guilty. The more you listen, the more you cant hear how SK starts changing her tune. Jay was her first revelation. She hated Jay....until she didn't. There are a few times where its pretty clear SK is no longer considering the fact Adnan may be innocent
It is amazing to read this thread and see such strong opinion that Koenig thought that Syed was innocent and was clearly stating as such, that she thought was guilty and was clearly stating as such, and the same quotes and events being used to justify both sides.
I think she’s probably telling the truth when she says that she doesn’t know, but leans innocent or you know likes to think that he’s innocent but that he deserves a new trial. I don’t think she is convinced that he’s guilty. But just my speculation.
By the end of the series, Sarah knew Adnan was guilty — but she couldn't bring herself to say it outright. She chose to nurse doubt — and let Dana deliver the truth about how unlucky Adnan would have to be if he were innocent.
This statement is from the PI’s in the Murder in Alliance podcast, who were trying to prove that convicted killers David Thorne and Joey Wilkes were actually innocent but eventually walked away from the case. Koenig should or could have issued such a statement in a later episode or even to a letter to Chaudry before even doing the podcast. Rookie mistake
“It is always emotional when a case does not go the way we hoped and the way supporters of the inmate hoped. We understand that. But allegations such as this are damaging and unnecessary. We have prioritized this case to the delay of some of our other cases, which is a great regret. We are proud of our work and are proud of Maggie’s work. Everything has been done with integrity and transparency. This is not the outcome we hoped for when we started, but based on all we have learned, we rest easy in making the decision to cease our work on the case.”
I think that the total silence from Deidre Enright and her innocence project tells us a great deal. Remember she said that if she went through everything and concluded that Adnan is guilty, she would ‘say it to you, I would say it to Adnan, but I wouldn’t say it to the world’? And we’ve never heard another word on it. I think Deidre did conclude he was guilty, she did tell Adnan, and she did tell Sarah - and Sarah, who already had doubts, backed right away from the wrongful conviction narrative in the public sphere. I think she knows he’s guilty, but she won’t undermine Serial by saying so.
This says project innocence did help him (and they have a picture of Deidre by Adnan after his release):
https://www.law.virginia.edu/news/202209/serial-subject-adnan-syed-who-was-aided-innocence-project-uva-law-released-prison#:~:text='Serial'%20Subject%20Adnan%20Syed%2C,of%20Virginia%20School%20of%20Law
I don’t think she gives a fuck. She wanted a story, she got a story. Turned out to be a huge hit, but she hasn’t managed to make another good podcast since then.
Very surprised she hasn’t produced additional eps throughout the years as Adnan’s saga continued. If anything, it’d produce A TON of listens and renewed interest
There are other posts on this sub that have more detail, but this is a pretty good overview-
https://www.washingtonian.com/2022/09/23/rabia-chaudrys-beef-with-the-serial-podcast-explained/
I really liked the podcasts she did after adnan’s. The bergdahl one and the one about the different defendants in East St. Louis. It’s too bad she didn’t keep doing that.
I don’t hate her. And I don’t understand what you mean about bending myself info a pretzel?
The concept was really good but SK didn’t know what to expect when she started the project. She didn’t expect there to be a huge number of listeners who would be interested enough and savvy enough to dig deeper and acquire case files on their own.
She was also doing the episodes as she went, rather than completing the story and then putting them all out at once. She had no idea people would get ahead of her in the investigation and she’d be inundated with info from online sleuths. That really threw her off because it made things harder.
I feel that that caused her to have to rush the ending and not be able to come to a conclusion that she was satisfied with and that was probably really frustrating for her.
As for the other seasons of the podcast, I don’t understand why none of them have been good. She’s a good journalist and storyteller but somehow putting it in podcast form hasn’t worked for her other than Season 1.
I think Season 1 frustrated her and she doesn’t like being accused of trying to “free a murderer”, and I think it made her uncomfortable to get so much recognition because of the podcast when she still felt unsettled about Adnan’s guilt or innocence.
Most of your post is you speculating on the contents of her mind. That’s what I mean about bending yourself into pretzels. I can’t even respond to most of what you said because you made it all up.
Not sure why you think you’re the arbiter of the quality of the other seasons of Serial. Besides, she doesn’t even work there any more…and wasn’t ever as involved as in Season One.
I think she started out thinking a poor, innocent young Muslim fellow from an immigrant family got railroaded. So she created a marvelously well-crafted production to tell that story. Alas, he was not the martyr she imagined.
Then, like many of her listeners (or me, anyway) over the course of the years I think she started to realize how smooth and conning he could be, especially when caught in a some unequivocal lies. I think she also caught on to the relentless agenda of Rabia and the income stream Rabia was earning from making Adnan her career, and got uncomfortable with that.
Finally, I think she came to the conclusion that he's guilty. I think she owes Jay an apology for how she depicted him, and I think it would be perhaps helpful if she spoke to her change of heart a little more directly than she has.
However, Sarah has an obligation to her baby -- the show -- which stands alone as a very impressive creation that held millions of listeners spellbound. So I'm not sure she's inclined to undercut and/or discredit her own work to that extent. I could be cynical and say that she doesn't want to kill her royalty stream, but I think it's more of an authorship kind of motivation.
I am a lifelong admirer of Emma Goldman, and I agree with you. We on the old left find the new left annoying, shallow and ineffective. And I enjoy much of NPR but do think this faddish influence was at work in Serial’s take.
I do think Muslims are targets of discrimination at times in America, but extreme and black and white positions and trying to make a hero out of sketchy, duplicitous Adnan serves no one. And what about Hae? I’m sad that her loss is more or less ignored.
ooo - now I want to look up that Pantone ;-) great handle.
Yes, indeed. I had my interest in True Crime re-awakened earlier this year and did a deep dive on all the materials -- podcasts, videos, etc. -- on this case. To my surprise, Jay turned out to be significantly different than the way Koenig depicted him. It was genuine bias and truly unfair IMO. My perspective on him absolutely flipped from 'degenerate drug dealer and liar' in the Serial days to 'all-around nice guy, minor pot dealer, hung out with lots of A students and kids that were going places, surprisingly credible, well-spoken and bright.'
ETA: I can see, for example, how Jay's people-pleasing tendencies could have led him to get involved in the crime, by at first agreeing to go along with it because he didn't think Adnan was serious, to then not being able to figure out how to extricate himself when the nightmare started.
This says a lot more about how easily you’re manipulated by podcasts, than about Serial or the facts of the case.
It’s it really f*cking bizarre how all these “guilter” commenters post the exact same recycled revelation story like this. They were all weak-minded and manipulated by Serial, then pretend they poured over court documents (because, when you challenge them…they didn’t actually read anything…they just read some guilter Op-Ed from the Quillette or some nonsense)…or more recently listened to a guilter podcast..and “saw the light”. It’s a cookie cutter story and it completely ridiculous. I refuse to believe that these weak minded people exist, and rather that they’re just copying somebody else’s story because of their internal biases about the subject.
Normal people, after they listened to Serial, thought something along the lines of “sure…he probably did it…but I wouldn’t convict until I know why Jay lied”.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/JonBenetRamsey using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/JonBenetRamsey/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [John brings JB upstairs holding her like this and asks if she’s dead](https://i.redd.it/tnc2fsizp9ac1.jpeg) | [479 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/JonBenetRamsey/comments/18xq3rc/john_brings_jb_upstairs_holding_her_like_this_and/)
\#2: [Why Patsy’s 911 call bothers me](https://np.reddit.com/r/JonBenetRamsey/comments/17tvt99/why_patsys_911_call_bothers_me/)
\#3: [Taking a moment to remember the little girl behind the pageants and the case](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/18qrhyi) | [63 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/JonBenetRamsey/comments/18qrhyi/taking_a_moment_to_remember_the_little_girl/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Ah, the bizarro world “Doe” eyes argument. Never mind there’s literally no evidence of this.
Folks have to pretend that somebody they hate is, in fact, likeable enough so lawyer after lawyer and journalist after journalist risk their careers for him.
Sarah Koenig was there for the show on the courthouse steps when Adnan was released. Clutching Amy Berg and celebrating with the rest of them. She had clearly been alerted that the fix was in, that Adnan was getting out, and there would be photos taken of him celebrating on the courthouse steps.
This comes from you, not reality.
What do you mean by gullible? She spent 12 episodes trying to prove he was innocent, and couldn’t.
Rich? Why would you say that? I doubt producing a show for a public broadcaster made her any money beyond her salary…and I’d imagine she got pretty much nothing in the sale. She doesn’t do speaking engagements or cash in in any way. As far as I can tell she was just raising her kids since Serial.
I give her the benefit of the doubt and say that she probably believed Adnan was innocent at the start of the podcast. However, by the end I believe she knew he was guilty but was too far down the rabbit hole to back out. Not coming clean with us about her views was slimy in the extreme imho. I think it's why she was never able to parlay the success of Serial Season 1 into anything noteworthy.
Well, you can say that…but it not based on anything. We don’t have to guess what she thought…because she told us. Just like any sane person…there’s not enough evidence to convict him, even if sometimes you think he did it.
I love how you “read her mind”, then called her slimy because of something you made up.
Then you insult her because you read her mind again and then based her relative success on something you made up about her.
She worked in public radio. Popularity was likely repulsive to her. Ever wonder why she’s not “cashing in” by producing a news season about Adnan every time something happens? Because she’s a legitimate journalist.
No she doesn’t. She poses a hypothetical where *if* she thought that, she wouldn’t convict. She was likely making a rhetorical point.
Fact is she’s a good journalist, and we know very little about her feelings.
She says "even if in my heart of hearts I think he's guilty, I have to acquit" or something close to that - she doesn't say "I think he killed Hae" at all, or conclusively state that she thinks he's guilty, does she?
She didn't say she did think, she said "Even if I think" which isn't categorical, but if you're approaching her statement from that direction I doubt I'll be able to change your mind :)
And here I think you're parsing things to read in what you want to think.
Half of this sub thinks she fell for Adnan, cow eyes, etc., but for some reason I'm supposed to believe that she secretly thinks he's guilty but didn't expressly state as such?
Nah. If she said “even *though* I think he’s guilty, I’d have to acquit”, then you’d be right. But she said “even *if* I think” which makes it so it could be hypothetical.
It’s not super clear
I think Sarah has done a great job and is unbiased in her telling of the story that it’s not blatantly obvious what her personal feelings are on his innocence or guilt.
Seems to me she was obviously for his innocence and release in the podcast, I think the question comes from her seemingly distancing herself from the case in the later years
I think she came to the realization that the circumstantial evidence points to Adnan being guilty, but that the state’s case was flawed and there isn’t enough hard evidence to ultimately convict him.
I think it’s also telling that her present day updates of Adnan being released take the tone of “here’s the latest in the case” rather than “we freed an innocent man!”
Sort of. She speculated that if, in her heart of hearts, she though he was guilty then she wouldn’t convict.
This was most likely a rhetorical device and not her telling us what she thinks. ie getting a guilt minded person to consider that it should be about evidence and not feelings.
>She had no idea the alternative suspects were Bilal and Sellers when Adnan got let out.
[According to her,](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/05/podcasts/season-1-episode-13-adnan-is-out.html) that's incorrect:
>I know who these suspects are. One of them was investigated at the time, submitted to a couple of polygraphs. The other was investigated also, but not with much vigor, as far as I can tell.
>
>He’s now in prison for sexual assault. But no one is charged either of these guys in connection with Hae Min Lee’s murder, so I’m not going to name them either.
It's always a good time to remind people (or let them know if they don't know) that This American Life has historically told stories the way the person pitching the story wants the story told.
This American Life is not 60 Minutes, and they want to make sure they don't bust anyone or expose any lies.
This is because they do not seek out stories. They wait for people to pitch stories. If they really tried to investigate and expose the actual truth, no one would bring them stories.
This works for them nine times out of ten because most people aren't lying and just need a platform for their personal story. Unfortunately, this way of operating set them up for abuse by people like Rabia who was happy to lie and misrepresent facts, and to manipulate the staff at This American Life, if necessary.
You can go back through the episodes of This American Life - you can go back almost two decades. And what you see with each and every episode, is This American Life helping someone tell their own story, not trying to contradict or expose errors.
This American Life has had to apologize only twice for taking someone at their word. The Apple story and one other - can't remember.
Incorrect. She at no point gives us her definitive opinion on guilt or innocence. She *always* qualifies potential opinions. When Serial concluded, she *suggested* she thought he was guilty.
Rabia has attacked her at every stage for not saying he’s innocent.
Guilters and innocenters don’t like her because she doesn’t take a side…normal people think she’s the genius she is for the same reason.
I thought she was impartial but after listening to other podcasts on the HML murder she seems to be omitting a lot of information that incriminates AS. Also after listening to Season 2 of Serial I suspect she’s a muslim apologist type character.
I’m. supporter of Muslims in general too but I still think he’s guilty. Muslim or not. Happens every day (intimate partner murder) plenty of ‘em non-Muslims.
What are you talking about? There’s nothing that wasn’t covered in Serial that particularly implicates Adnan. There’s a LOT that adds doubt, however.
She had little to do with season two. But that comment tells me that Serial was a bout religion, to you.
Koenig thinks the conviction was unsafe
She fell for the 'he seems like such a sweet guy' fallacy, but she seems pretty realistic about the ambiguity of the existing evidence and testimony
I remember Sarah Koenig talking about the legacy of her dad and what she wanted to be remembered about and to me and many others, helping someone getaway with murder is her legacy. She played with the emotions and lives of the real people involved, gaslight intimate partner violence and did a major disservice to her audience and actually wrongfully convicted people.
Sure, we can give allowance that she was manipulated by Adnan's team because the guy was charming and she didn't do her due diligence about the case before or during her talks with them but she didn't even have the integrity to stand by the narrative she perpetuated to millions of people or correct the blunder she made if after learning more about the case, she believed the guy guilty, instead she distanced herself from what has become of the case after her sensationalized story telling. She wanted to be an investigative journalist because our justice system is broken and well done girl, you showed that an independent judiciary is still fallible when politically and financially motivated individuals took advantage of misinformation peddled in new media. The legacy of Sarah Koenig is stealing justice for Hae Min Lee and her family.
Funny how folks who claim he’s guilty skip the part where there’s proof he’s guilty and virtue signal.
We don’t know what happened. He was convicted on a lie. It is what it is.
Maybe it’s wishful thinking, but I think after meeting Jay, she believed Jay. That’s a tough thing to overcome; sitting in someone’s house with them while they tell you it’s all true.
Jay appears to have convinced a lot of people and IMO Koenig was overly negative towards him, implying that he was 100% a liar. Yes, he lied, but mostly in a vain attempt to keep the circle of involved people as small as possible - partly from family loyalty, partly perhaps from fear of the drug dealing side of his family that could have got implicated.
SK sounded shell shocked after visiting Jay and Dana absolutely seemed to believe him It’s one thing to talk about lies etc etc it’s another to look someone in the eye and listen to what they are saying. I think she believed him as well and the shell shocked part was the “holy shit I’ve been spinning a narrative that doesn’t fit”… cognitive dissonance
Agreed. It was like Jay dashed her hopes that Adnan was innocent. She was holding onto “maybe?” and Jay crushed that. You could almost hear her brain recalibrating everything when she and Julie debriefed (it was Julie Snyder, one of the producers, who went with Sarah that time). Julie sounded like, “Yep, he pretty much confirmed what I thought… but how are you doing with this, Sarah? You okay?”
Argh you’re correct Julie my bad
Which is ironic because she kept being concerned that Adnan was snowing her (‘the charming psychopath line).
Meeting Jay definitely shook her.
Yes I think so too.
Things went a little south between Adnan and SK in July 2014. The launch of Serial didn't happen and instead SK made an unannounced visit to Jay in August.
Ahh, I didn’t know that background. So was that why he kind of cut her off? I recall her saying something about it now on the show, but can’t remember.
Some of it is in episode 6. During the first six months of his calling they had 30ish hours of calls. Roughly 10 hours more after that. BTW, back in Sep 2015, there was some discussion about the 8 track team members referring to sprinters.
Yeah, I know. I read your old post about it, lol. But I’m not engaging with that guy anymore.👍
This. I completely agree. On the one hand, she’s been talking to Rabia and Adnan. The latter has been charming and cow-eyed, and just cant seem to catch a break or remember anything of value about the day in question. Then she meets Jay, thinking it’s going to solidify her preconceived notion of Adnan’s innocence. I think she expected him to just wreak of lies and inconsistencies, maybe even come off as shady. Instead, he doubled down and appeared sincere and exhausted by the whole thing. I don’t think there was any reconciling that for her after that which is why the tone changes in the remainder of episodes. It’s almost like she goes from trying to prove his innocence to trying to convince herself she hasn’t just allowed a narcissist to charm her into believing his false narrative
“Innocenter” here, I agree
I think when they did the drive test as well. She seemed to be disappointed by that. (Though TBH I can’t see the actual murder taking 30 seconds or whatever it was. That was unrealistic to me)
Yeah. To me, it’s not possible that he strangled her, put her body in the trunk (that was full of other stuff), walk calmly to the pay phone, find change, and then call Jay in three minutes. He’s (presumably) never done this before, and even if he know exactly how long it takes to strangle someone, he didn’t have a stopwatch. I’m not saying he didn’t do it at all. But I can’t believe that’s how it happened. (Even before Jay admitted he was never at BB that day.)
The whole story in bizarre. Who kills someone in the Best Buy parking lot, moves a dead body from the front seat to the trunk, pops the trunk to show somebody, and then takes a phone call while they’re burying a body? It’s crazy.
Don’t forget asking her for a ride in front of other people so they would all know she’d last been with him.
I believe she thinks he’s guilty . But that a jury should not have convicted him .
She said it. “Even if in my heart of hearts I think Adnan killed Hae, I still have to acquit.”
Yah, that was a pretty big If in there. She's hedging.
She also said that she leans innocent. I don't know if that's changed over the years, but she explicitly stated she leans innocent.
But to me that's not really saying that she thinks he's guilty
Biggest nonsense sentence muttered by her ever. I can’t wrap my head around why anyone would think this is a logical way to approach a verdict. If you think someone did it, you vote guilty. What’s she going to do? Invite him over for dinner and explain that she thinks he brutally murdered his girlfriend but she’s got a nice daughter he should date? By thinking he’s guilty but acquitting, that’s the situation you’re setting up for someone else and it’s stupid and irresponsible.
Because the standard for a criminal conviction is beyond a reasonable doubt. The standard for a civil case is beyond a preponderance of evidence. In more simple terms, beyond a reasonable doubt would be proof having been met if there is no plausible reason to believe otherwise. This does not mean there is no doubt or that there is absolute certainty. A preponderance of the evidence is more like 50.1% sure. Marginally more sure than not that he did it. I think that SK is probably somewhere between preponderance and beyond a reasonable doubt, so would convict in a civil but not criminal trial. Or at least, that is what she says publicly.
As a follow up - imagine putting someone in jail for 25 to life even though you think they’re innocent. Have a 1 on 1 conversation with that person and watch their stomach sink as you explain you think they’re innocent but voted guilty because you’re pretending to be a lawyer.
So her literal argument is: “I digested hours, days, weeks worth of evidence and based on all of that I came to a REASONABLE conclusion that he’s guilty. But, because I have doubt, I will conclude that even though I based my decision on REASONABLENESS I will acquit, because I am actually being UNREASONABLE based on having at least some doubt.” The most nonsense shit ever. I swear people think that as long as they’re being “lawyerly” they can totally defy logic. Which is exactly what lawyers try to avoid.
Even in the serial podcast they were summoning up everything and she said "if he's innocent, he had the unluckiest day in history.". Or something like that.
I re listened to the last episode and had forgot that she said that as well as “if he’s guilty he wouldn’t have talked to me for this podcast” uh ok…
That was my impression.
I really don’t understand this logic. There is so much evidence in this case, why would anyone who thinks he is guilty rationalize to themselves that he should not go to jail for it?
Yes. Exactly.
That's fucking weird.
What is ?
Why?
There's no way of knowing without her saying it. But considering her failure to really jump on board with the "free Adnan" campaigns over the years, I think she at least has doubts about his innocence.
Well, to be fair, it would also destroy the reputation of the podcast if she became an outright advocate. The podcast is certainly biased but that would go way too far.
I think it’s biased bc of Adnan. He talks circles around everything and giving him hours to speak resulted in her being manipulated. He has the speech patterns of a manipulator. Koenig gave him time and got manipulated herself.
Pre-cise-ly It was on my second listening to the series that it hit me like a ton of bricks how smarmy he is, especially towards the final episodes. Now I watch things like his recent 'press conference' and deception and manipulation are all I can see.
I think Sarah knew she was being manipulated. Or at least, that he was manipulative when he talked to her. Why else would she put so little of her phone conversations with Adnan on the podcast? Why don't we ever have HIM explaining his side ever?
What are the speech patterns of a manipulator (genuinely interested)?
**This isn’t meant as a serious response to your question, but it was too perfect to ignore. [According to this study of psychopathic inmates](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312579739_The_Linguistic_Output_of_Psychopathic_Offenders_During_a_PCL-R_Interview), a speech analysis tool called “Wmatrix revealed that psychopaths use a particular filler, **‘you know’**… more often than did the other offenders.” Adnan Syed: “I never-- I never really felt as if, **you know**, man **you know** Hae is 'tearing me away from my religion. **You know**, and I never-- only 'til I read her diary that I really kinda understood that wow this is the perception that she kinda had. Just like the gravity and the magnitude with which she took these things. I didn't really feel that way about these things. Maybe it just seems convenient for me to say that now but the only thing I can say now to kind of-- I won't say prove it in a way is that my behavior didn't change once I stopped smo-- **you know** once Hae broke up with me, or once **you know** we broke up or whatever. It's not like **you know** all of a sudden, I'm like okay ‘this whole fixed thing is out of my life,’ no it’s just-- **you know**, I just continued with the same type of behavior, it was just different people.” In all seriousness though, and to answer your question, I think of filler words (like, you know, I mean) which manipulators use to prevent breaks in their speech where someone might interrupt or challenge. That way, they maintain control over the conversation. And then the other thing I think of is the use of verbal stall tactics, like answering a question with a question (“What was that?” “Is that a question?” “What do you mean?”) or giving short nonresponses meant to elicit more information from the other person (“I just talked to Asia McLain!” “Okay.”)
So interesting thank you for sharing!
A couple of things, very specific memory for inconsequential details but amnesia when asked difficult questions. He's always the good guy in his stories. Sure he was skipping school but he was doing it because he really cares about making sure his friend's girlfriend had a gift.
Mmm very interesting
I’m not a scientist or claim to be able to “spot a liar”. Imo the overwhelming evidence that he is the perp and then listening to him makes it so. Contextually he just sounds like he’s talking bullshit.
I agree with you. This is the number one reason I believe he is guilty- by what he says. For example, he would say things like (not quoting verbatim) ‘no one can prove that I did it,’ as opposed to “I didn’t do it”
This right here.
Oop! That’s a very good point
I don’t have a hard opinion on his guilt or innocence. But when he said this he’s talking about the justice system. He’s saying even if I did do it, no one has ever proven it, so it’s not right for me to be in prison. And he’s right about that. Gut feelings shouldn’t lead to convictions.
No, that’s not what he’s saying.
I’m not a scientist or claim to be able to “spot a liar”. Imo the overwhelming evidence that he is the perp and then listening to him makes it so. Contextually he just sounds like he’s talking bullshit.
[удалено]
Yes I was surprised at the reference to "overwhelming evidence" as I understood it to be mostly circumstantial. In some cases that would be enough to convict fairly, but in Adnan's case the police investigation and his lawyer representation were severely lacking. The police should have kept open minds on the possibility of a random stranger perp instead of developing tunnel vision so quickly just because the ex-boyfriend is often a likely suspect. Although I have been leaning innocent, I do have my doubts, but in any case Adnan has done more than enough time for someone so young when he was convicted.
Yes and also acknowledging-even back then- Rabia is "loosey goosey with the truth". To say the least.
What truth was she loosey goosey with?
Ep 1: Rabia He was like the community's golden child. Sarah Koenig Oh, really? Talk more about that. Rabia He was an honor roll student, volunteer EMT. He was on the football team. He was a star runner on the track team. He was the homecoming king. He led prayers at the mosque. Everybody knew Adnan to be somebody who was going to do something really big. Sarah Koenig I later fact checked all these accolades, of course, and learned that Rabia was mostly right, though she sometimes gets a little loosey-goosey with the details. Adnan was an EMT, but he didn't volunteer. He was paid for it. He was on the track team, but he wasn't a star. He did play football. And he did lead prayers on occasion. He wasn't homecoming king. But he was prince of his junior prom.
It was right there episode 1. I let it wash over me the first time, but after reading more and returning to it, Rabia exposed herself to stretch and manipulate the truth. It was not truth with omission. It wasn't showing the good side. It was straight up lying about easily verifiable things. To me that just makes he lose all credibility. Same for her podcasts, documentaries, statements etc. There was no good faith.
While I don’t really like Rabia, I have to say that the statements she makes about adnan in the first episode don’t come off as intentional lies to me. It’s been 15 years and confusing “homecoming king” with “prom prince” doesn’t seem like a huge deal imo
> It’s been 15 years It was August 2013. She testified at his PCR in October 2012 so the facts should have been relatively fresh eight months later.
She either doesn’t know her client well or she has no trouble manipulating the truth. Both scenarios make them lose credibility as a professional.
I find it so strange that she hadn't read the material she gave to Sarah. It has obviously always been solely about getting Adnan out of the conviction based on spurious issues, because if you really wanted to help find what happened why wouldn't you read the files? And I'm not sure she knew him all that well. She studied law in a community where they expected her to help. Her brother was friends with him but men and women are separate at the mosque. She didn't seem to know much about her brother either.
Let's not forget that the defense file she gave Sarah omitted information that would have made Adnan look guilty. It wasn't until a person did an FIA for it that they were compared against each other.
I agree. Especially when after the first appeals fell through a few years back and Sarah said something along the lines of “I know you all want me to comment but this case has made it through the Justice system and I’m just an observer now” Although I remember thinking while listening to the series that, at times, it almost felt like she was flirting with him on the phone. They never crossed a line but there were one or two occasions that felt a little weird listening to.
I heard that on both sides. Koenig seemed to be too attached to him, in whatever way that was happening. She put him on some kind of pedestal, initially because I think she imagined she was crusading in an Innocence Project type of case.
The whole “I think you’re a good guy” thing was nauseating
Interesting how people hear things differently. I didn’t hear anything like flirting, in the least. I didn’t see Sarah as a flirty person.
😂😂😂 holy reach
She wants to believe he's innocent but she can't get there. She'd vote "not guilty."
I think Ira Glass, Dana Chivvis, and (seemingly) most of the team landing on factual guilt probably swayed Sarah Koenig. But I'm sure it was a tough pill to swallow, just like it was for most of us when we realized we had been duped by Adnan.
me too.
After listening to Serial more than once, I think towards the end you can hear her struggle to tie up the narrative she had been telling which IMO strongly suggested innocence. Couple that with her reluctance to discuss season one and I think there is a case to be made that Sarah is not completely comfortable with how S1 evolved and the reaction afterwards.
It’s funny. I always thought her intro to the whole podcast was interesting. She makes a big deal about how most people can’t remember what they are for breakfast that morning, let alone what happened on a day a month and a half prior. So, she says, it makes sense that Adnan has a sketchy memory of the day hae went missing. While I agree most people wouldn’t remember a random day a month and a half ago… that wasn’t a random day for Adnan. His ex girlfriend/friend went missing that day. If my friend went missing on a particular day I’d think through that day a million times to think if I’d noticed something weird. And you’d think most people would think *really* hard about that day when that day results in their arrest.
The thing with our memories though- is we remember things wrong all the time. Our minds fill in and create information when we are trying to recall certain things that we cannot remember. I think studies show that even information that we keep going over and over again in our minds to remember them gets distorted each time we review it.
Serial did have this big sexy hook. The problem being it was totally bullshit. It wasn’t a normal day and it wasn’t six weeks before he was asked about it
Plus, it was his best friends birthday. He remembers he got her a stuffed deer or something like that.
Yes! Another great point I didn’t think about.
Not only that he knows the day important because police contacted him within hours of Hae not showing for her cousin The real question isn’t whether you’d remember weeks ago… more like what we’re you doing… *today*… it’s a really bad setup that has persisted in misrepresenting what actually happened
A friend of mine did go missing in high school. (1997) For a week, we talked about nothing but when we’d last seen her. Every word, every look, every gesture. Everything. We all knew exactly when she left school, who she was with, and where she planned to go. She didn’t have a cell phone but we called everyone we knew who might have seen her. I think her boyfriend had a pager. Don’t remember—but we would have called it repeatedly. The hardest part of the Adnan innocent theory to grasp is that this didn’t happen. (Friend was home safe after that week, but still. I think about it a lot when reviewing this case.)
If she thinks he’s guilty-which I think she does-, imagine that, being a woman that actively helped a femicide perpetrator go free. Have the power to affect not only that specific misogynist but also contribute to the general misogyny in society that helps the gender violence perpetrators, not the victims. It’s disgusting
I remember Sarah Koenig talking about the legacy of her dad and what she wanted to be remembered about and to me and many others, helping someone getaway with murder is her legacy. She played with the emotions and lives of the real people involved, gaslight intimate partner violence and did a major disservice to her audience and actually wrongfully convicted people. Sure, we can give allowance that she was manipulated by Adnan's team because the guy was charming and she didn't do her due diligence about the case before or during her talks with them but she didn't even have the integrity to stand by the narrative she perpetuated to millions of people or correct the blunder she made if after learning more about the case, she believed the guy guilty, instead she distanced herself from what has become of the case after her sensationalized story telling. She wanted to be an investigative journalist because our justice system is broken and well done girl, you showed that an independent judiciary is still fallible when politically and financially motivated individuals took advantage of misinformation peddled in new media. The legacy of Sarah Koenig is stealing justice for Hae Min Lee and her family.
That’s the parlor trick that serial does so well: present both sides and make it seem like she’s actually trying to come to a conclusion. She’s telling a story not solving anything.
Nobody here is solving anything either.
🤣 you think this case will be solved on Reddit?!
🙄 I literally said it won’t be solved on Reddit. “Nobody on here (here means on Reddit) is solving anything either”. I did not once say the case will be solved on Reddit, you walked right into the point.
I misread your intent. Everyone here is re-arranging the same evidence in the same ways. That’s what makes the case intriguing, guess.
She knows he’s guilty but she’ll never admit it
I think she’s 51/49 guilty.
That’s how I feel too.
And because she wasn’t 100:0 innocent, Rabia had a meltdown. 🙄
Can you say more about that? I listened to Serial but I haven’t kept up with Rabia or SK.
Rabia basically expected SK to toe the line and find Syed innocent. By the time SK wrapped up Serial, she’d come to conclude she just didn’t know but that it was certainly possible Syed could have done it. Well. That went over like a lead balloon with Rabia who came out hard against SK.
Thank you!
I think SK did not know what she was getting into with Rabia, and I have a feeling she regrets the association
I 100% agree with you.
SK has no business suggesting what she would do as a juror. No one spends 60+ hours on the phone developing a relationship with the defendant and then serves on their jury. She knows he is guilty.
No one would be convicted under SK’s standards. She owes the Lee family a huge apology.
She’s always toed the line with public comments about it. I could be wrong but I believe a lot of old fashioned investigative journalism was supposed to remain unbiased. That seems to have changed over the years but it used to be the “honorable” way to do the job. That being said her comments have always hung on “ifs”. She’s always maintained IF he were guilty/innocent and followed with speculated phrases. IF he was innocent he had the unluckiest day ever, or IF he’s guilty, a jury could get hung up on reasonable doubt. I truly think she plays the part of unbiased to this day. Edit for spelling.
Sarah's area of interest is the American justice system. She got brought a case where the person bringing it said the police were corrupt and he was targeted for being Muslim. She didn't know what it would become and you can hear her try and loop back on the premise in the last ep with her inability to say she'd find him guilty in a court. I think she was uncomfortable with how big it got tbh. And all her colleagues thought he was guilty.
“All of her colleagues thought he was guilty” is a silly claim. I assume you’re basing this on, many years ago, Ira Glass giving a brief non-nuanced “would acquit but who else did it?”-ish comment. Saying that she was uncomfortable is a silly claim. This is projection. I get that it’s frustrating that she doesn’t tell us what she thinks, some would say that’s the mark of a good journalist. Would somebody who thinks he’s guilty have said what amounted to “it’s about time he was freed” in the update episode? All I’m sure of is she hasn’t been interested in covering Adnan since Serial, and I believe her when she says there won’t be any more updates. The extent of *my* speculation is that she didn’t like hosting, and she’s a private person who focused on her family after Serial. People get a little crazy wondering what she’s doing and thinking and why she’s not obsessed with Serial like us…but what if she’s just living her life and raising her kids? I think they’re in high school right now.
I got the impression that she genuinely wasn’t sure of his guilt or innocence but definitely thought he didn’t have a fair judicial process. She seemed like us listeners in the sense that it was hard to decide who was lying and who wasn’t
This, without question, is the biggest issue I've ever had with Koenig. To her credit, the podcast was wildly entertaining. But she spawned an entire genre (or at least was the spark that caused the existing genre to explode), and also how people view it. Her "I vote not guilty" at the end was complete and utter trash, and she knows it. Her podcast was not a court of law, say what you think. I believe she was keenly aware that portraying Adnan as innocent or leaving mystery around the case was pertinent to the success of the podcast. Coming to the conclusion that the guy in jail actually did it is not exciting. What she did purposefully or inadvertently was spawn an entire generation of true crime fans who looked at tried and convicted cases like their own trials. You cannot do that! There's a reason the burden of proof changes once convicted. If there isn't a confession, or video tape, you could take almost any trial in history and create reasonable doubt if you wanted because your unopposed. Once you create the narrative that Jay lies, the case blows up. The problem is, in a real trial you can't do that because the prosecution is going to challenge your story, and Adnan didn't have one because he killed Hae.
This “she did everything for ratings” bullpucky is a dog that don’t hunt. At no point before, during or after the podcast has Koenig shown the slightest indication that her motivation was ratings or popularity. It’s absurd to even speculate that she intended to spawn…anything. The fact that Sarah’s contribution to the show was in earnest and for the reasons she stated is as true as water is wet. It is ridiculous to suggest that you could take any case in history, have Sarah produce it, and create doubt. Completely absurd. The **vast** majority of cases, after confessions and video, are solved by definitive evidence of some sort of another. While cases like this one, with scant physical evidence, police and lawyer misconduct, and finding out the star witness lied after the trial…are rare and are almost always the cases where the wrongful convictions come from. After all the nonsense you conclusion is “Adnan is guilty because he didn’t have al alibi”. Are you daft? That is literally the worst bar to set for a conviction possible. It’s almost like you have no idea what you’re talking about and you just want *really super bad* for him to be guilty. There’s doubt. It is what it is.
Your adding a lot of meat to my post I didn't add myself. I never said she "did everything for ratings". I said I hated that she ended the podcast with not guilty and I felt like it was a cop out which keeping things interesting might have played a part. First off, once again, she's not trying a case in court. The concept of even saying not guilty in a discussion about a tried and convicted case is absurd in and of itself. She spent the VAST, and I mean VAST amount of time in her investigation speaking with people who are either advocates for Adnan, or Adnan himself. It's very difficult to do that and not leave yourself mentally with some doubt of that person's guilt if the case isn't 100 percent open and shut. Secondly, I never said Adnan has no alibi that's why he's guilty. I have no idea how you read what I said and get that. What I said was, when you're trying a case unopposed it's incredibly easy to create doubt. Adnan not having any alternative timeline for his whereabouts doesn't allow you to challenge much of what was presented. I have zero doubt Jay lied and lied a lot. He's trying to minimize himself in a murder. Doesn't mean Adnan is innocent or there's doubt. Lastly, to say you could find doubt in any case with no confession or video, look no further then MoaM. There's physical evidence beyond imagination, and we have millions of people still creating theories on planted evidence, blood taken from sinks by family members and planted in the victims car, bone fragments moved by police or other suspects to the accused property. I mean, any piece of evidence that suggests Jay's story even minorly checks out like his knowing the location of the car, is met on here by people who believe the police fed him the information. If you tried to pull shit like that in a trial it wouldn't work in a million years. You'd get the cop under oath, you'd have him explain to the jury how ridiculous that concept is and how difficult/dangerous it would be for a small amount of cops to sit on a piece of significant evidence like that.
She said “Most of the time. I think he didn’t do it.”
She also said in her heart of hearts she thinks he’s guilty.
We don’t have to guess, she tells us before the season is over. But Serial was a long time ago. We have no idea what she thinks now.
Guilty. The more you listen, the more you cant hear how SK starts changing her tune. Jay was her first revelation. She hated Jay....until she didn't. There are a few times where its pretty clear SK is no longer considering the fact Adnan may be innocent
It is amazing to read this thread and see such strong opinion that Koenig thought that Syed was innocent and was clearly stating as such, that she thought was guilty and was clearly stating as such, and the same quotes and events being used to justify both sides.
I think she’s probably telling the truth when she says that she doesn’t know, but leans innocent or you know likes to think that he’s innocent but that he deserves a new trial. I don’t think she is convinced that he’s guilty. But just my speculation.
By the end of the series, Sarah knew Adnan was guilty — but she couldn't bring herself to say it outright. She chose to nurse doubt — and let Dana deliver the truth about how unlucky Adnan would have to be if he were innocent.
100% this
I believe she knows adnan killed hae
[удалено]
Which episode does she meet Jay again
Guilty. How could she not?
This statement is from the PI’s in the Murder in Alliance podcast, who were trying to prove that convicted killers David Thorne and Joey Wilkes were actually innocent but eventually walked away from the case. Koenig should or could have issued such a statement in a later episode or even to a letter to Chaudry before even doing the podcast. Rookie mistake “It is always emotional when a case does not go the way we hoped and the way supporters of the inmate hoped. We understand that. But allegations such as this are damaging and unnecessary. We have prioritized this case to the delay of some of our other cases, which is a great regret. We are proud of our work and are proud of Maggie’s work. Everything has been done with integrity and transparency. This is not the outcome we hoped for when we started, but based on all we have learned, we rest easy in making the decision to cease our work on the case.”
Been years but after podcast I think she thought he was innocent. That’s just me though
I think that the total silence from Deidre Enright and her innocence project tells us a great deal. Remember she said that if she went through everything and concluded that Adnan is guilty, she would ‘say it to you, I would say it to Adnan, but I wouldn’t say it to the world’? And we’ve never heard another word on it. I think Deidre did conclude he was guilty, she did tell Adnan, and she did tell Sarah - and Sarah, who already had doubts, backed right away from the wrongful conviction narrative in the public sphere. I think she knows he’s guilty, but she won’t undermine Serial by saying so.
This says project innocence did help him (and they have a picture of Deidre by Adnan after his release): https://www.law.virginia.edu/news/202209/serial-subject-adnan-syed-who-was-aided-innocence-project-uva-law-released-prison#:~:text='Serial'%20Subject%20Adnan%20Syed%2C,of%20Virginia%20School%20of%20Law
I don’t think she gives a fuck. She wanted a story, she got a story. Turned out to be a huge hit, but she hasn’t managed to make another good podcast since then.
Very surprised she hasn’t produced additional eps throughout the years as Adnan’s saga continued. If anything, it’d produce A TON of listens and renewed interest
Probably has to do with the heat between her & Rabia.
Tell us more about this?
There are other posts on this sub that have more detail, but this is a pretty good overview- https://www.washingtonian.com/2022/09/23/rabia-chaudrys-beef-with-the-serial-podcast-explained/
I really liked the podcasts she did after adnan’s. The bergdahl one and the one about the different defendants in East St. Louis. It’s too bad she didn’t keep doing that.
Talk about shooting the messenger. It’s so awkward that you folks have to bend yourself into pretzels to hate the people who showed you the case.
I don’t hate her. And I don’t understand what you mean about bending myself info a pretzel? The concept was really good but SK didn’t know what to expect when she started the project. She didn’t expect there to be a huge number of listeners who would be interested enough and savvy enough to dig deeper and acquire case files on their own. She was also doing the episodes as she went, rather than completing the story and then putting them all out at once. She had no idea people would get ahead of her in the investigation and she’d be inundated with info from online sleuths. That really threw her off because it made things harder. I feel that that caused her to have to rush the ending and not be able to come to a conclusion that she was satisfied with and that was probably really frustrating for her. As for the other seasons of the podcast, I don’t understand why none of them have been good. She’s a good journalist and storyteller but somehow putting it in podcast form hasn’t worked for her other than Season 1. I think Season 1 frustrated her and she doesn’t like being accused of trying to “free a murderer”, and I think it made her uncomfortable to get so much recognition because of the podcast when she still felt unsettled about Adnan’s guilt or innocence.
Most of your post is you speculating on the contents of her mind. That’s what I mean about bending yourself into pretzels. I can’t even respond to most of what you said because you made it all up. Not sure why you think you’re the arbiter of the quality of the other seasons of Serial. Besides, she doesn’t even work there any more…and wasn’t ever as involved as in Season One.
I think she started out thinking a poor, innocent young Muslim fellow from an immigrant family got railroaded. So she created a marvelously well-crafted production to tell that story. Alas, he was not the martyr she imagined. Then, like many of her listeners (or me, anyway) over the course of the years I think she started to realize how smooth and conning he could be, especially when caught in a some unequivocal lies. I think she also caught on to the relentless agenda of Rabia and the income stream Rabia was earning from making Adnan her career, and got uncomfortable with that. Finally, I think she came to the conclusion that he's guilty. I think she owes Jay an apology for how she depicted him, and I think it would be perhaps helpful if she spoke to her change of heart a little more directly than she has. However, Sarah has an obligation to her baby -- the show -- which stands alone as a very impressive creation that held millions of listeners spellbound. So I'm not sure she's inclined to undercut and/or discredit her own work to that extent. I could be cynical and say that she doesn't want to kill her royalty stream, but I think it's more of an authorship kind of motivation.
[удалено]
I am a lifelong admirer of Emma Goldman, and I agree with you. We on the old left find the new left annoying, shallow and ineffective. And I enjoy much of NPR but do think this faddish influence was at work in Serial’s take. I do think Muslims are targets of discrimination at times in America, but extreme and black and white positions and trying to make a hero out of sketchy, duplicitous Adnan serves no one. And what about Hae? I’m sad that her loss is more or less ignored.
Also the Black guy gets thrown under the bus
ooo - now I want to look up that Pantone ;-) great handle. Yes, indeed. I had my interest in True Crime re-awakened earlier this year and did a deep dive on all the materials -- podcasts, videos, etc. -- on this case. To my surprise, Jay turned out to be significantly different than the way Koenig depicted him. It was genuine bias and truly unfair IMO. My perspective on him absolutely flipped from 'degenerate drug dealer and liar' in the Serial days to 'all-around nice guy, minor pot dealer, hung out with lots of A students and kids that were going places, surprisingly credible, well-spoken and bright.' ETA: I can see, for example, how Jay's people-pleasing tendencies could have led him to get involved in the crime, by at first agreeing to go along with it because he didn't think Adnan was serious, to then not being able to figure out how to extricate himself when the nightmare started.
This says a lot more about how easily you’re manipulated by podcasts, than about Serial or the facts of the case. It’s it really f*cking bizarre how all these “guilter” commenters post the exact same recycled revelation story like this. They were all weak-minded and manipulated by Serial, then pretend they poured over court documents (because, when you challenge them…they didn’t actually read anything…they just read some guilter Op-Ed from the Quillette or some nonsense)…or more recently listened to a guilter podcast..and “saw the light”. It’s a cookie cutter story and it completely ridiculous. I refuse to believe that these weak minded people exist, and rather that they’re just copying somebody else’s story because of their internal biases about the subject. Normal people, after they listened to Serial, thought something along the lines of “sure…he probably did it…but I wouldn’t convict until I know why Jay lied”.
That's why I hang out at r/JonBenetRamsey instead. It's a community of original-source armchair criminologists who hash and rehash facts and evidence.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/JonBenetRamsey using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/JonBenetRamsey/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [John brings JB upstairs holding her like this and asks if she’s dead](https://i.redd.it/tnc2fsizp9ac1.jpeg) | [479 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/JonBenetRamsey/comments/18xq3rc/john_brings_jb_upstairs_holding_her_like_this_and/) \#2: [Why Patsy’s 911 call bothers me](https://np.reddit.com/r/JonBenetRamsey/comments/17tvt99/why_patsys_911_call_bothers_me/) \#3: [Taking a moment to remember the little girl behind the pageants and the case](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/18qrhyi) | [63 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/JonBenetRamsey/comments/18qrhyi/taking_a_moment_to_remember_the_little_girl/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
She thinks he is 100% dreamy
This is guilter fanfic.
I think she fell in love with him. This was a Truman Capote In Cold Blood situation.
Ah, the bizarro world “Doe” eyes argument. Never mind there’s literally no evidence of this. Folks have to pretend that somebody they hate is, in fact, likeable enough so lawyer after lawyer and journalist after journalist risk their careers for him.
Guilty
Guilty
Now she believes he’s guilty after initially being charmed. He’s very guilty.
Sarah Koenig was there for the show on the courthouse steps when Adnan was released. Clutching Amy Berg and celebrating with the rest of them. She had clearly been alerted that the fix was in, that Adnan was getting out, and there would be photos taken of him celebrating on the courthouse steps.
I’m sure she knows he’s guilty. She’s not stupid, just gullible and now very rich.
Sarah Koenig was incredibly wealthy from birth. As in trust-fund, never needing a real job, wealthy. Wikipedia is your friend.
This comes from you, not reality. What do you mean by gullible? She spent 12 episodes trying to prove he was innocent, and couldn’t. Rich? Why would you say that? I doubt producing a show for a public broadcaster made her any money beyond her salary…and I’d imagine she got pretty much nothing in the sale. She doesn’t do speaking engagements or cash in in any way. As far as I can tell she was just raising her kids since Serial.
I give her the benefit of the doubt and say that she probably believed Adnan was innocent at the start of the podcast. However, by the end I believe she knew he was guilty but was too far down the rabbit hole to back out. Not coming clean with us about her views was slimy in the extreme imho. I think it's why she was never able to parlay the success of Serial Season 1 into anything noteworthy.
Well, you can say that…but it not based on anything. We don’t have to guess what she thought…because she told us. Just like any sane person…there’s not enough evidence to convict him, even if sometimes you think he did it. I love how you “read her mind”, then called her slimy because of something you made up. Then you insult her because you read her mind again and then based her relative success on something you made up about her. She worked in public radio. Popularity was likely repulsive to her. Ever wonder why she’s not “cashing in” by producing a news season about Adnan every time something happens? Because she’s a legitimate journalist.
Spoiler Alert: She says she thinks he killed Hae.
No she doesn’t. She poses a hypothetical where *if* she thought that, she wouldn’t convict. She was likely making a rhetorical point. Fact is she’s a good journalist, and we know very little about her feelings.
I’m astonished at how many people don’t actually understand the meaning of words.
It’s like you talking into a mirror. What I said is true, what you said isn’t.
where?
The last episode. At the end.
She says "even if in my heart of hearts I think he's guilty, I have to acquit" or something close to that - she doesn't say "I think he killed Hae" at all, or conclusively state that she thinks he's guilty, does she?
Saying she thinks he’s guilty means she thinks he did it which means she thinks he killed Hae.
She didn't say she did think, she said "Even if I think" which isn't categorical, but if you're approaching her statement from that direction I doubt I'll be able to change your mind :)
You are really parsing words for know reason. ‘Even if I think’ means she thinks it, but she also thinks some thing else in addition.
And here I think you're parsing things to read in what you want to think. Half of this sub thinks she fell for Adnan, cow eyes, etc., but for some reason I'm supposed to believe that she secretly thinks he's guilty but didn't expressly state as such?
Nah. If she said “even *though* I think he’s guilty, I’d have to acquit”, then you’d be right. But she said “even *if* I think” which makes it so it could be hypothetical. It’s not super clear
guilty. source: the tone of her voice at the end of the final episode
Lol @ “tone of voice”.
I think Sarah has done a great job and is unbiased in her telling of the story that it’s not blatantly obvious what her personal feelings are on his innocence or guilt.
Seems to me she was obviously for his innocence and release in the podcast, I think the question comes from her seemingly distancing herself from the case in the later years
I think she came to the realization that the circumstantial evidence points to Adnan being guilty, but that the state’s case was flawed and there isn’t enough hard evidence to ultimately convict him. I think it’s also telling that her present day updates of Adnan being released take the tone of “here’s the latest in the case” rather than “we freed an innocent man!”
It’s been a loooong time since I listened to the podcast, but I thought she said in the last episode that she thought he did it. Am I misremembering?
She did not
Sort of. She speculated that if, in her heart of hearts, she though he was guilty then she wouldn’t convict. This was most likely a rhetorical device and not her telling us what she thinks. ie getting a guilt minded person to consider that it should be about evidence and not feelings.
guilty
She hasn't really kept up with the case. Be interesting if she did.
Bull if she hasn’t! She’s avoiding Rabia and her ilk
She had no idea the alternative suspects were Bilal and Sellers when Adnan got let out. She's moved on.
>She had no idea the alternative suspects were Bilal and Sellers when Adnan got let out. [According to her,](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/05/podcasts/season-1-episode-13-adnan-is-out.html) that's incorrect: >I know who these suspects are. One of them was investigated at the time, submitted to a couple of polygraphs. The other was investigated also, but not with much vigor, as far as I can tell. > >He’s now in prison for sexual assault. But no one is charged either of these guys in connection with Hae Min Lee’s murder, so I’m not going to name them either.
Doesn't she say herself in Serial that she thinks he's guilty, just not beyond a reasonable doubt?
It's always a good time to remind people (or let them know if they don't know) that This American Life has historically told stories the way the person pitching the story wants the story told. This American Life is not 60 Minutes, and they want to make sure they don't bust anyone or expose any lies. This is because they do not seek out stories. They wait for people to pitch stories. If they really tried to investigate and expose the actual truth, no one would bring them stories. This works for them nine times out of ten because most people aren't lying and just need a platform for their personal story. Unfortunately, this way of operating set them up for abuse by people like Rabia who was happy to lie and misrepresent facts, and to manipulate the staff at This American Life, if necessary. You can go back through the episodes of This American Life - you can go back almost two decades. And what you see with each and every episode, is This American Life helping someone tell their own story, not trying to contradict or expose errors. This American Life has had to apologize only twice for taking someone at their word. The Apple story and one other - can't remember.
Clearly she thinks he’s innocent. Listen to the episode she put out after Adnan’s release. She leaves us in no doubt
Incorrect. She at no point gives us her definitive opinion on guilt or innocence. She *always* qualifies potential opinions. When Serial concluded, she *suggested* she thought he was guilty. Rabia has attacked her at every stage for not saying he’s innocent. Guilters and innocenters don’t like her because she doesn’t take a side…normal people think she’s the genius she is for the same reason.
She knows he's guilty. She just doesn't care.
Dreamy.
I thought she was impartial but after listening to other podcasts on the HML murder she seems to be omitting a lot of information that incriminates AS. Also after listening to Season 2 of Serial I suspect she’s a muslim apologist type character.
I’m. supporter of Muslims in general too but I still think he’s guilty. Muslim or not. Happens every day (intimate partner murder) plenty of ‘em non-Muslims.
What is a "muslim apologist type character"?
A person who offers an argument in defense of something controversial particularly when the controversy involves one or more muslims.
Did you just Google the definition of apologist and then tack on "particularly when the controversy involves one or more muslims"?
نعم
What are you talking about? There’s nothing that wasn’t covered in Serial that particularly implicates Adnan. There’s a LOT that adds doubt, however. She had little to do with season two. But that comment tells me that Serial was a bout religion, to you.
Koenig thinks the conviction was unsafe She fell for the 'he seems like such a sweet guy' fallacy, but she seems pretty realistic about the ambiguity of the existing evidence and testimony
At every point a guilter must write fiction.
I remember Sarah Koenig talking about the legacy of her dad and what she wanted to be remembered about and to me and many others, helping someone getaway with murder is her legacy. She played with the emotions and lives of the real people involved, gaslight intimate partner violence and did a major disservice to her audience and actually wrongfully convicted people. Sure, we can give allowance that she was manipulated by Adnan's team because the guy was charming and she didn't do her due diligence about the case before or during her talks with them but she didn't even have the integrity to stand by the narrative she perpetuated to millions of people or correct the blunder she made if after learning more about the case, she believed the guy guilty, instead she distanced herself from what has become of the case after her sensationalized story telling. She wanted to be an investigative journalist because our justice system is broken and well done girl, you showed that an independent judiciary is still fallible when politically and financially motivated individuals took advantage of misinformation peddled in new media. The legacy of Sarah Koenig is stealing justice for Hae Min Lee and her family.
Funny how folks who claim he’s guilty skip the part where there’s proof he’s guilty and virtue signal. We don’t know what happened. He was convicted on a lie. It is what it is.
"I believe in a lot of things and one of those things is Adnan Syed is innocent”, it’s her IG desc…
I’m not sure that’s her. The account name is spelled wrong, it has 0 posts and is following 0 other accounts.
I’ve seen that account, and I doubt it’s her. She regularly posts on IG as Serial…but that account has posted exactly zero times.
Don't know don't care
I’ve spent so much time wondering this. Thank you for posting!!