Breaking News: Baltimore prosecutors dropped charges against Adnan Syed, who spent 23 years in prison fighting a murder conviction on charges that he murdered his former high school girlfriend Hae Min Lee. His case was chronicled on the podcast “Serial.” https://t.co/8C3MRH9nSm
— The New York Times (@nytimes) October 11, 2022
११ ऑक्टोबर, २०२२
Adnan Syed goes free — charges dropped.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
५२ टिप्पण्या:
I would quote Christopher Marlowe here but iy might get me banned.
More social justice leads to less real justice.
The D's in the big cities and Liberal judgess are trying to let Criminals go free, and get rid of cash bail. This is just part of their plan. We've had cases where some murderer, had killed or attempted to kill somebody and got out after 5 or 10 years. So, I suppose if this guy served 23 years, that's fairly long.
How often does "The serial" or NPR do stories about white men unjustly accused of killing non-whites?
Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are. — wrongly attributed to Benjamin Franklin. Doesn't make it untrue.
https://www.truthorfiction.com/justice-will-not-be-served-ben-franklin-quote/
Before everybody went corrupt, the idea for wrongly convicted murderers was that they're taking one for the team. It's better that nine guilty men go free than one is falsely convicted, putting the desired type II error rate at one in ten.
Do the progressive support anyone who isn’t a piece of garbage? All their heroes are absolutely terrible human beings
Not familiar with the story. It would be stupid to read the NYT's article and try to get any accurate information.
Is there a place with a primer that someone likes?
If Marylyn Mosby had anything to do with this, you can bet it was done ineptly or corruptly.
He'll now be suing for compensation for unjust imprisonment.
Forget evidence. It's all violin music and feelings now. Read the trial transcript.
rhhardin said...putting the desired type II error rate at one in ten.
The desired type II error rate is zero. Doesn't apply here, anyway. He was convicted and the government has not articulated a sound reason to overturn the jury verdict.
Achilles, the only place I've heard anything about this is from a YouTube channel called Actual Justice Warrior. He covers these types of things regularly. Up to you if you find him credible.
The primer is simple enough, Achilles. "Murdering scumbag freed by alliance of idiots and spineless cowards."
How did the cops know where to find the body? Why is that not addressed in every story?
How did the cops know where to find the body? Why is that not addressed in every story?
I think he murdered the young Korean woman.
I have some experience in the field and I don't exactly know how prosecutors "drop charges" 20 years after a judge has pronounced sentence.
What I do know is that Soros style prosecutors spend a disproportionate amount of resources seeking to undo convictions obtained by real prosecutors in cases so old that the original evidence is likely unavailable. They make the resources available by ignoring current offenses.
In Soros Leftworld TV drama overrides jury verdicts.
You have to be exceedingly dopey to reflexively side with a corrupt prosecutor (from Baltimore of all places). The man was exonerated by DNA evidence after more than twenty years in prison.
One in eleven RH.
Plausible, but not probable. This allegation should have triggered nationwide insurrections following the social justice model.
Forget it Jake. It's Democratical-Town.
Almost certainly guilty of the crime for which he was convicted, but became a celebrity murderer for whom reasonable doubt is greatly expanded. Were I Ms. Lee's family, he would be a dead man within a month of freedom. And that is what is coming down to- when the justice system begins to fail like this, vigilantism will arise to replace it.
Doubt the police would spend much time investigating his disappearance.
Hae Min Lee remains dead, and I somehow doubt they're going to bother looking for her "real killer".
Baltimore's law enforcement and judiciary does not fill me with confidence that they got this right in any way whatsoever. Not then, not now, and likely, not ever.
Justice at last. I hope he doesn't go all "angry Muslim," though.
Does anyone know if he's actually guilty or not? Is that not a 'thing' anymore?
The man was exonerated by DNA evidence after more than twenty years in prison.
"Exonerated" is not accurate. From the article:
Ms. Mosby said that her office received notice on Friday of the results of DNA testing of items belonging to Ms. Lee, including a skirt, pantyhose, shoes and a jacket. Ms. Mosby said investigators were able to recover DNA only from the shoes.
“The items that we tested had never before been tested,” Ms. Mosby said. “And we used advanced DNA to determine that it was not Adnan Syed.”
So they didn't find his DNA (except on her shoes) 20 years later, and that somehow "exonerates"him? That's a pretty big logical leap. What other evidence was the basis of his conviction? Who are these "alternative suspects"? I'll wager we will never know.
Earnest Prole said...You have to be exceedingly dopey to reflexively side with a corrupt prosecutor (from Baltimore of all places).
You're not going to get a lot of people to feel bad about siding with the jury system, however self-servingly you describe it.
Temujin said...Does anyone know if he's actually guilty or not? Is that not a 'thing' anymore?
Two people know for sure, but one of them is dead.
Some, Select PoY (People of Yellow) Lives Matter
"Is there a place with a primer that someone likes?"
How about right here;
He's guilty as Hell.
rhhardin: Before everybody went corrupt, the idea for wrongly convicted murderers was that they're taking one for the team. It's better that nine guilty men go free than one is falsely convicted, putting the desired type II error rate at one in ten.
That phrase puts the acceptable error rate at no more than one in ten.
Earnest Prole: The man was exonerated by DNA evidence after more than twenty years in prison.
You can't be exonerated by DNA - absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Not finding his DNA at the scene doesn't prove he wasn't there, or that he didn't do it. Even finding someone else's DNA at the scene can do no more than prove someone else was there.
It's odd that no one here besides Prole bothered to find out what led to the decision to exonerate Syed.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/madelinehalpert/2022/10/11/dna-cleared-adnan-syed-lawyer-says-serial-subject-served-more-than-20-years-in-prison/?sh=6ba4467f7d1e
***************
DLNE said...
"How did the cops know where to find the body? Why is that not addressed in every story?"
****************
It's not the duty of every newspaper and on-line news source to satisfy YOUR notion of the essentials.
But here's a story that did:
https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/crime/bs-md-ci-cr-adnan-syed-charges-dropped-20221011-r43q45csdnhi3abqygnhimqouq-story.html
"Lee, 18, was strangled to death and buried in a clandestine grave in Leakin Park. A man discovered her body about three weeks after she was last seen at the high school."
****************
Jeff Vader said...
"Do the progressive support anyone who isn’t a piece of garbage? All their heroes are absolutely terrible human beings."
*********************
What is your evidence that Sayed is a piece of garbage? Is it because he's a muslim?
********
Temujin said...
"Does anyone know if he's actually guilty or not? Is that not a 'thing' anymore?"
************
FER CHRSSAKE! The entire article is about how there was no physical evidence to link him to the woman's death, and how two other possible perps, one in jail for numerous sex crimes, are suspects.
****************
Lars Porsena said...
"If Marylyn Mosby had anything to do with this, you can bet it was done ineptly or corruptly."
*******************
She didn't hold office when he was convicted. She's dealt only with the appeals filed in state court. If you think she's been inept or corrupt here, please offer evidence.
Not sure if this the same or affiliated group, but:
https://innocenceproject.org/all-cases/
Whites and blacks.
*********************
tim maguire said...
rhhardin said...putting the desired type II error rate at one in ten.
"The desired type II error rate is zero. Doesn't apply here, anyway. He was convicted and the government has not articulated a sound reason to overturn the jury verdict."
*****************
Yes, it has: read the freakin' article. If you disagree, why not "articulate" your position with facts and supporting reasons? And since when is a jury verdict final and irrevocable?
*************
hombre said...
"I have some experience in the field and I don't exactly know how prosecutors "drop charges" 20 years after a judge has pronounced sentence."
***************
Here ya go....
https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles/dnaevid.pdf
Convicted by Juries, Exonerated by Science: Case Studies in the Use of DNA Evidence to
Establish Innocence After Trial
****************
Yancey Ward said...
"Almost certainly guilty of the crime for which he was convicted, but became a celebrity murderer for whom reasonable doubt is greatly expanded."
Oh really? If he cannot be placed at the scene of the crime by physical or forensic evidence, what's the basis for convicting him "beyond a reasonable doubt"?
*********
tim maguire said...
Temujin said...Does anyone know if he's actually guilty or not? Is that not a 'thing' anymore?
Two people know for sure, but one of them is dead
*************
You assume that the other person is Syed.
FAIL
I wonder of they considered Mailer and Abbott? I wouldn't want to repeat that.
"You can't be exonerated by DNA - absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
************
Bullshit. see the article I posted above. A former US AG approved it.
“By rushing to dismiss the criminal charges, the state’s attorney’s office sought to silence Hae Min Lee’s family and to prevent the family and the public from understanding why the state so abruptly changed its position of more than 20 years,” Mr. Kelly said. “All this family ever wanted was answers and a voice. Today’s actions robbed them of both.”
Ms. Mosby said at the news conference that her office had notified the family’s lawyer on Tuesday morning but that they had not heard back from him.“
Mosley was a real asshole in this case, why didn’t she contact the family? Did she really contact the lawyer in a timely manner? Did they not find any dna or did they find someone else’s dna? If they found none then no one killed her? There is no precise info in the article. They found his dna on the shoes how did that get there? The family seems to think that they received no explanation.
When O. J. finds Nicole's killer, maybe he can investigate Adnan. No one else will.
Josephbleau said...
"Mosley was a real asshole in this case, why didn’t she contact the family? Did she really contact the lawyer in a timely manner? Did they not find any dna or did they find someone else’s dna? If they found none then no one killed her? There is no precise info in the article. They found his dna on the shoes how did that get there? The family seems to think that they received no explanation."
**************
Victims' relatives do not get to decide the legal issues. They are obviously NOT disinterested parties.
And Syed's DNA was NOT found on Lee's shoes:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/state-attorney-drops-case-adnan-syed-connection-1999-murder-hae-min-le-rcna51649
"Officials tested a skirt, pantyhose, shoes and a jacket belonging to Lee, and the same "DNA mixture of multiple contributors" was found on both her shoes."
"Testing did not find Syed's DNA on that evidence, Mosby said."
"She explained that touch DNA, which analyzes skin cells left at crime scenes, has been used since 2003. The case was originally prosecuted in 1999, and advances in DNA technology allowed for new testing."
Josephbleau said...
"Mosley was a real asshole in this case, why didn’t she contact the family? Did she really contact the lawyer in a timely manner? Did they not find any dna or did they find someone else’s dna? If they found none then no one killed her? There is no precise info in the article. They found his dna on the shoes how did that get there? The family seems to think that they received no explanation."
**************
Victims' relatives do not get to decide the legal issues. They are obviously NOT disinterested parties.
And Syed's DNA was NOT found on Lee's shoes:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/state-attorney-drops-case-adnan-syed-connection-1999-murder-hae-min-le-rcna51649
"Officials tested a skirt, pantyhose, shoes and a jacket belonging to Lee, and the same "DNA mixture of multiple contributors" was found on both her shoes."
"Testing did not find Syed's DNA on that evidence, Mosby said."
"She explained that touch DNA, which analyzes skin cells left at crime scenes, has been used since 2003. The case was originally prosecuted in 1999, and advances in DNA technology allowed for new testing."
"You can't be exonerated by DNA - absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
That's right, the presence or absence of DNA evidence is at best circumstantial evidence.
"You can't be exonerated by DNA - absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
True, but a criminal defendant isn't required to prove his/her innocence. The prosecution must prove him/her guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. If the new DNA evidence means that Syed's guilt wasn't established beyond a reasonable doubt (and the admittedly flawed news reports suggest that this is the case), that would be enough to set aside the conviction. Then the passage of time since the crime could argue against a re-trial.
I feel sympathy for the victim's family, but the criminal justice system is a human construct, and therefore imperfect.
n.n said...
"You can't be exonerated by DNA - absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
That's right, the presence or absence of DNA evidence is at best circumstantial evidence.
*****************
If there's no direct evidence, and no circumstantial evidence, what exactly IS the evidence sufficient to convict based on it being "beyond a reasonable doubt".
And I will post AGAIN a scholarly legal paper on this topic:
https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles/dnaevid.pdf
Convicted by Juries, Exonerated by Science: Case Studies in the Use of DNA Evidence to
Establish Innocence After Trial
When I listened to the podcast back in the day I remember thinking it was pretty likely he did it, but not beyond a reasonable doubt.
n.n said...
"You can't be exonerated by DNA - absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
That's right, the presence or absence of DNA evidence is at best circumstantial evidence.
***********
To make the rubble bounce: the presence or absence of DNA itself isn't determinative.
Let's try some hypotheticals:
A woman is found dead, obviously a victim of a sexual assault---signs of violent struggle, clothes ripped off, traces of penetration, semen etc. "Death by strangling", the coroner concludes.
Person A was seen with the victim in a bar a half-hour before the coroner's determination of time-of-death. Investigation determines that was the first time they had met.
DNA taken from abrasions around the victim's neck is linked to Person A.
DNA taken from the rape kit is also linked to Person A.
Probable Cause to charge Person A with sexual assault and murder?
********
Suppose a second hypothetical: Same facts, only this time, no DNA is found around the victim's neck abrasions. The perp may have worn gloves.
Person A's defense: "Yeah, we had sex when we left the bar, but I didn't kill her."
Probable Cause to charge Person A with sexual assault and murder?
************
Another hypothetical:
Same facts, only this time ANOTHER person's DNA is found on the victim's neck abrasions. Person A's DNA is on the rape kit. Person A offers the same defense: we had sex, but when I left her she was fine.
Probable cause to charge Person A with sexual assault and murder?
*************
Still another:
Same facts, except no DNA found on the neck wounds and no identity can be established re the DNA from the rape kit. (the sexual partner has no DNA on file. Maybe he's a recent MS-13 arrival).
Person A denies having sex with the victim. He offers a DNA sample and...it's not his on the victim. There are no fibers, hair samples, skin cells etc on the victim to link him to the victim.
Can you still charge Person A with sexual assault and murder, even though the only factual evidence is that he was seen with the victim before she died?
Isn't that a perfect example of DNA absence exonerating an accused person?
Please try to distinguish those hypotheticals.
If the prosectors don't prosecute Syed's admitted accomplice in disposing of her body, for either Lee's murder and/or for perjury, then Syed is guilty and today's prosecutors know it. I don't give a shit about whether or not his DNA was found or not 23 years after the fact- its absence isn't conclusive, especially in a case like this when the body was buried for a few weeks.
I stick by what I wrote- he committed the crime, but has managed to get himself out of prison with the help of some fools who fall for his act.
.... "Lee, 18, was strangled to death and buried in a clandestine grave in Leakin Park. A man discovered her body about three weeks after she was last seen at the high school."
...."Officials tested a skirt, pantyhose, shoes and a jacket belonging to Lee, and the same "DNA mixture of multiple contributors" was found on both her shoes."
=======
was the buried corpse wearing the shoes that were tested for DNA?
so where did they find the shoes clothes etc?
That's right, the presence or absence of DNA evidence is at best circumstantial evidence.
Like circumstantial evidence is somehow inferior to direct evidence.
Remember, direct evidence is when a guy tells you he saw snow flurries kissing his windshield while driving home from the bar after the 2 AM last call. Circumstantial evidence is when you wake up, look out your window, and see snow blanketing the ground.
Thank you effing a for the link to Forbes
Several commenters said that sayeds DNA was found on her shoes. From the article
Mosby says prosecutors conducted new DNA tests for items from the crime scene that had never been tested before because the technology wasn't available at the time of Syed's trial, and found a "DNA mixture of multiple contributors" on Lee's shoes, but not Syed's DNA.
John stop fascism vote republican Henry
effinayright, I'm not talking about "probable cause to charge".
I'm saying that if there is sufficient evidence to convict without DNA, then the DNA cannot exonerate.
"I have some experience in the field and I don't exactly know how prosecutors "drop charges" 20 years after a judge has pronounced sentence."
Oooh, I know! This was my exact area of focus during my last fifteen years at the Philadelphia DA's office. What happens is, people in prison for long periods of time can file as many appeals as they like, asking for Post-Conviction relief. My job was to investigate and answer those petitions, and for 99+% of them, we would see no merit to their claims of innocence and would oppose them in court---ultimately, once a Post-Conviction petition is filed, it must always be disposed of by a judge. So we fought them, both by writing briefs disputing their claims, and often by also engaging in a new evidentiary hearing where the defendants would have a chance to present "new" witnesses and evidence in their quest for the court to order a new trial.
If the District Attorney chooses not to oppose the granting of a new trial (as Soros-backed DA Larry Krasner often does), it's still up to the judge hearing the appeal as to whether or not to grant relief. In practice, it's hard for a judge to refuse to grant relief when the DA isn't presenting any kind of opposition.
Once the judge grants a new trial, then the ball is back in the DA's court and they have total discretion as to whether or not they will go ahead and re-try the case.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा