DISCLAIMER: If you haven't listened to the Serial podcast none of this will make any sense. If you are planning to listen to it at some point in the future or just started and want to keep an open mind until the very end, don't read this. I've taken a side in the "Did Adnan Do It?" debate. I might be right, I might be wrong. But it's the conclusion that makes the most sense to me after weighing all the possibilities.
Over Christmas break, my sister and I spent a lot of time together in the car driving back and forth from our ancestral home in Western Massachusetts to our Grandmother's house in South Windsor, Connecticut, where we celebrate the Holidays. As always, we argued over what we should listen to during the trip. She wanted Christmas music. I wanted Wilco or The Beatles.
My sister, five years my elder, lives in New York City and loves podcasts. She suggested that we listen to Serial. I had heard a lot about it on social media and was intrigued. I figured I might as well find out what all the fuss is about.
After listening to the first ten minutes or so, I quickly realized that the hype was warranted. It was brilliantly produced and thought-provoking, a verbal roller-coaster ride that seemed to get more interesting with every passing second. Each curve had you on the edge of your seat, wanting to hear more.
The best way I can describe it is an audio hybrid between Breaking Bad and True Detective. It was like Breaking Bad in the sense that it's wildly addictive. You can't just listen to one episode and call it a day. You must immediately flip to the next one.
It was like True Detective in the sense that you, the viewer, (or in this case, the listener) aren't just taking in mindless entertainment. There's work involved. But it's not the tedious, when-does-it-end kind of work. It's the sort of work that doesn't really feel like work at all. It's too exciting to be. You are so enthralled by the mystery you're presented with that you become your own detective, stacking up clues, looking for patterns, trying to solve the case before it's solved for you.
Since the final Serial episode aired, I've heard many perspectives from both sides of the "Did Adnan Do It?" debate. I've been surprised to learn that the breakdown seems to be roughly 50/50, with half of the people thinking Adnan is innocent while the other half think he's guilty.
While the show's narrator, Sarah Koenig, who spent over a year working the case, openly admits that both possibilities exist, I find one argument much more compelling than the other.
If you ask me, Adnan Syed is innocent.
PROBLEMS WITH THE CASE
From the very first episode, I've tried to reserve judgment and just sit back and let the clues of the case take me wherever they may go.
I've tried to view the series through the prism of Adnan being guilty and then Adnan being innocent, seeing if one perspective makes more sense than the other. Along the way, I've had moments where I've felt Adnan is 100% guilty and others where I feel he is 100% innocent. But when you stop focusing on one seemingly conclusive piece of evidence that supports one side or the other and you start focusing on the case in a general, grand-scheme-of-things sense, to me the answer is clear.
Adnan didn't do it.
From the very beginning, Adnan has always maintained his innocence. This cannot be overlooked. He has been consistent about it since Day 1. This may seem unimportant, as killers lie all the time about claiming to be innocent when in fact they are 100% guilty. But to me, if someone serving a life sentence still maintains their innocence after more than 15 years in prison, you can't rule out the possibility that they're actually telling the truth.
Secondly, the state's case against Adnan just doesn't add up. They have no concrete evidence linking Adnan to Hae's murder, no photographs of him with her at the time of her death, no DNA evidence linking him to the crime. All they have is Jay's testimony, which is ridden with lies and inconsistencies. The state's time frame of the events also doesn't make sense, as Koenig points out several times. And how about the fact that Jay spoke to the police for over an hour before taping his testimony. What was said between the two before he went on record? What agreement was made? Also, how in the world can the prosecution secure Jay a lawyer, a red-flag type move that is absolutely unheard among attorneys?
Another aspect of the case I keep coming back to is racial bias. Baltimore is predominantly African American. The majority of the jurors were African American. Jay, whom the jury ended up believing, is African American. Adnan, whom they ended up convicting in less than 2 hours of deliberation, is of Middle Eastern, Pakistani descent. Is it that much of a stretch to say that the jurors were predisposed to believing Jay over Adnan on racial grounds?
In addition, one must also question the competency of the representation Adnan received. Ms. Gutierrez, his lawyer, was on a downward spiral. She missed meetings, she lied about the progress of the case, a lot of her court-room rants were incoherent or jumbled, she demanded lots of money from Adnan's family, one time in all cash. She was obviously unstable when she was defending Adnan. It's not hard to imagine that things might have turned out differently for Adnan had she been on the top of her game during the trial.
SEARCHING FOR ANSWERS
In the end, I keep coming back to Jay. He is the star witness, the only witness. Without his testimony, there is no case against Adnan.
To me, it's clear that Jay isn't telling the whole story. He's reversed himself several times, he's been caught in multiple lies. There is obviously something fishy going on with Jay and the cops, who personally secured him a lawyer. I can't help but think that he's hiding something. After all, he led the police to Hae's car, so that means he has intimate knowledge of the crime scene.
So what exactly happened?
Here's what I think: Ronald Lee Moore, the convicted rapist and felon mentioned in the final episode, killed Hae. The time frame fits perfectly: Moore was released from prison just 10 days before Hae was murdered. He also previously strangled an Asian woman in the Baltimore area. Recently, the University of Virginia Innocence Project officially named his as a suspect in Hae's murder.
After all, what's more believable: that a serial rapist and felon killed Hae? Or that her 17-year-old ex-boyfriend killed her, a kid who everyone claimed was bright, friendly and genuinely good hearted? A kid who has maintained his innocence since Day 1?
I also think the story told by Jay's co-worker, Chris, in the final episode can't be overlooked. He said that Jay admitted to him that he helped bury Hae. And one night while they were working together, Chris saw Jay freak out about a van parked across the street, terrified that it might be someone coming after him, presumably whoever the killer was.
Does it make more sense that Jay would be terrified of Adnan? A friend who he went to school with, partied with and smoked pot with? Or does it make more sense that Jay was terrified of Moore, a rapist/felon on the loose?
My guess is that there is some connection between Moore and Jay. Either they did it together, or Jay saw Moore do it and was blackmailed into blaming it on someone else for fear that Moore would hunt him down if he told the truth. Adnan, the spurned ex-boyfriend, the Pakistani minority in a predominantly black city, was the perfect scapegoat.
THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE
Thanks to the Innocence Project, Moore's DNA will finally be tested to see if it links him to Hae's murder. One way or another, we will know a lot more about the case once the results are in.
Until then, we are left with the ultimate Postmodern conundrum. Is Adnan innocent? Is Adnan guilty? There is no definitive answer either way. It's up to the audience to come to their own conclusions.
In my eyes, Adnan is innocent.
If he did do it, he is the world's greatest, most convincing liar. He would have duped everyone into believing that he is a good, genuine kid, when in reality he was a monster on the inside the entire time, a kind of split-personality psychopath, devoid of empathy for others.
After listening to the entire Serial podcast, this is an argument that I just can't buy.
No comments:
Post a Comment