Undue Credibility And Injustice: The Adnan Syed Case

Charlotte Lester

English 12

Ms. Knezevich

May, 8, 2023

Undue Credibility and Injustice The modern court of law is incomplete without the inconsistencies of eyewitness accounts, the complexity of plea bargains, and the internal bias that every member of the police, jury, and even the judge holds. In the case of Adnan Syed, the potential killer of ex-girlfriend Hae Min Lee, it was confirmation bias that put him behind bars for twenty-three years of his life. Due to the impending pressure to give justice to Lee and her family, the state investigation led the case with evidence formulated to fit their favourite story. Where naturally, convictions should be based on evidence, Syed’s case was the complete opposite. “Bad evidence” was abundant and

One of the biggest reigning issues in the Adnan Syed case is how most of the state storyline was confirmed by the accounts of Jay Wilds, who took a plea bargain in order to receive reduced charges for his alleged participation in the crime. When overlooking Wilds’ accounts two things can be noticed, Wilds’ recollections of what happened on January 13th, 1999 always differ depending on whom he told, and when he told them. As well, Wilds’ accounts also seem to follow exactly what the state investigation wanted in order for their story to make sense. Adnan was sentenced to life in prison on June 6th, 2000, whereas Hae’s body was found on February 9th, 1999 (Piccotti). Because of the inconsistency in evidence and inability to form a coherent timeline, the investigation was a long one. This excerpt shows very well how the public generally looks at a homicide investigation; taking into account that the victim’s parent’s reactions would be much stronger than the average bystander. “The public’s acknowledgment of the seriousness of murder reinforces the importance of the investigator's role and the need to

An example of this is one of the pieces of evidence used in the trial to claim Syed had been in Lee’s car the night of her disappearance. As prior mentioned, the piece of the map that had been ripped out was the piece that showed Leakin park, where Lee’s body was found. This was presented as highly damning evidence in the trial. What was not presented was that the map showed their entire neighborhood, such as their highschool, the mall they frequented and other popular hangout spots. Leakin park just happened to be within range on the map (Koenig, Ep.6). The disregard for the truth and use of the only part of the evidence that worked with their story is a classic case of “bad evidence.” Though it is easy to understand why closing a case for the sake of closure is done, it is also alarming how many real murderers may escape conviction because investigators choose to willingly block out the big picture. All together the only viable pieces of evidence that genuinely work against Syed without question are events, not objects. The cell towers proved to be unreliable, Jay’s testimony is riddled with lies and alterations, and all of the physical evidence proves inconclusive. There were other pieces of physical evidence at the scene of the crime, such as rope and a bottle, both of which were never tested. One of the biggest instances of