What Is The Validity Of Sarah Koenig's Podcast Serial

The American criminal justice system, although normally adept, still has its flaws. In Sarah Koenig’s podcast Serial, she examines a case from 1999 in which a teenage boy, Adnan Syed, was charged with murdering his ex-girlfriend, Hae Min Lee. The podcast, which brought attention to the flaws within the case presented, caused many listeners to question the validity of the verdict. There has been speculation across a wide variety of sources, and many feel as though Adnan Syed deserves an appeal. However, because there was enough evidence to convict Syed during the original case, there are those who believe the verdict should stand. Although Jay Wilds’ testimony incriminates Adnan, Adnan’s lawyer Christina Gutierrez’s role as inept counsel, the

In this testimony, Jay incriminates Adnan by saying he was shown Hae’s body and made to help Adnan bury her. Cell phone records and other testimonies corroborated Jay’s version. However, during the multiple retellings of his testimony, Jay’s story had several inconsistencies. During the trial and his interviews, Jay’s testimonies have wildly different versions of where he was shown the body, whether Adnan planned the murder ahead of time, where the murder took place, as well as many others details. Jay was also told by the detectives that, if he failed to incriminate Adnan, he would be the primary suspect in the case. His statements may have been given out of fear and, because of that and the many inconsistencies, Jay’s testimony should not be considered credible evidence, therefore providing Adnan grounds for an

According to these records, Adnan received two calls which placed him in Leakin Park. The prosecution used this evidence to place Adnan by the body and further incriminate him in the eyes of the court. However, what the defence failed to point out was the fact that due to a glitch within the AT&T system, incoming calls pinged the tower near the person making the call rather than the receiver. Those incoming calls should not have been considered as credible evidence because they falsely placed Adnan near the burial site. This false evidence presented during the original trial was misleading to the court, and as such, provides grounds for an