Serial discussion thread

I'm sure that many of you, like me, are listening to Serial. It seems to be the hottest podcast around right now. I can't go a day on twitter without seeing someone mention it, or Adnan & Jay, or Best Buy and Mail Chimp. It seems that everyone who listens has an opinion of what took place.

For those who haven't listened to it, it's about a 1999 Baltimore murder and whether or not the guy who has served 15 years for it actually did it or not. The host has spent a year interviewing people, going to the various locations of interest, and piecing together the story.

So what do you think? Is Adnan guilty? Did Jay set him up? Did his lawyer throw the case to make more on the appeal? Or is this all an elaborate ad for Best Buy? It's apparently THE place to get high and have sex and shoplift CDs and possibly commit murder.

If Adnan isn't guilty, then who is? But guilty or not, the lawyer kinda fucked him over by not allowing him to speak his mind during the trial. And how is there no record of a pay phone or lack thereof in the infamous Best Buy parking lot.

I would laugh if it's all just an ad for Best Buy.

But, really, I'm starting to think he didn't do it. More of a gut feeling than anything else. Most of the stuff he's said doesn't sound like he did it...or...he really is the best sociopath...

Even though I don't really think Adnan did it, I'm not exactly certain that Jay did either.

Also, Mail Kimp.

I've been coming around to the idea that Adnan did do it, but not at Best Buy. I do think his laywer fucked him on this one though. Not following up on a potential alibi, not being able to discredit Jay to the jury despite his SIX different versions of events, the lack of physical evidence placing him at both the crime scene and the scene of the body, the cops not testing the fibers, booze bottles and rope found by the body, etc. There is an ample amount of reasonable doubt, but she didn't convince the jury. And if he really is the best sociopath then you should have let him testify.

One thing's for sure; Mr. S, the elementary school janitor/serial streaker is the biggest creeper of the case.

I only listened to the first episode that was on This American Life

Sounded like the most unbearable teenage bullshit that also happened to involve a murder.

There was a landmark in Watch Dogs that I just read yesterday that seemed to be the exact same story but it happened 60 years ago; the kid when to jail at 17 and died in there at 77 for a murder he probably didn't commit.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Heirens

I have mixed feelings about Serial. I'm not as into it as most people. For one thing, I think it's kind of disrespectful to make entertainment based on someones death, but since the show is less about the murder and more about the poor workings of the legal system it's really a minor point. To me it feels mostly like speculation though.

Anyway, I think that's it clear that if Adnan didn't do it, the Jay did, right?

I don't know, at first I though Adnan didn't do it, but I'm beginning to suspect he actually did. Why would Jay do it? The case is thin, sure. Maybe Don? The only thing we know about Don is that he had an alibi.

It seems more and more unlikely that we'll get any satisfying ending. Either we'll be convinced Adnan didn't do it, but there won't be enough evidence to overturn the conviction, or it'll continue to walk the middle and end with people arguing whether he did it or not.

I'm kinda surprised to hear that. I see where you're coming from after thinking about it like that, but I've been listening to it like any other news program -- just a way more in-depth program than something like Dateline.

I think the whole speculation thing on Reddit and stuff like that weirds me out more. I don't really like to see people do arm-chair investigating like that when there are already professionals out there working on figuring out what happened.

@catsakimbo: I agree with you, the internet craze over Serial makes me more uncomfortable than the show itself. But still, hearing "Next, on Serial" at the end of each episode really weirds me out. Is this journalism or radio drama? I know it is journalism, but they're really awkward about it.

I'm less into the show now that I've learned a little more about how it works than I was originally. I went from "This has to have some crazy twist ending. If it didn't why would they bother making a podcast?" to "This thing is just going to end without any type of interesting conclusion."

Edit: Mail Kymp!

I am enjoying listening to it. I came to it a bit late and went through the first five episodes before settling in to the weekly ones. I go back and forth on whether Adnan is guilty or not. The only other suspect presented thus far is Jay but I have no idea what his motive would have been. I did wonder at one point if Hae's death was the result of Adnan or Jay's alleged drug dealings but that seems too Hollywood. I will continue to follow weekly though I don't count on there being an actual resolution.

There is a podcast run by the AV Club about Serial called The Serial Serial (heh) if y'all are interested.

http://www.avclub.com/article/second-episode-serial-serial-now-212194

I'm not certain about whether Adnan is guilty, but I feel strongly that he isn't guilty beyond reasonable doubt. I really wonder how it came off in that courtroom, because those jurors had ZERO second thoughts.

You know, here's a better question: What will Season 2 be? Another murder mystery? Something else crime-related? A 10-part story about some guy that likes collecting hats?

I think that Serial is very compelling, though I'd have to agree that sometimes the real-life-ness of the show can be fairly off-putting. It still seems strange that Koenig didn't change the names of all those involved to conceal some form of privacy. I'd say that it's weirdly both a radio drama and a piece of journalism in the same way that This American Life shows often are.

That being said, both Jay and Don seem pretttttty suspicious to me. An older guy dating a high-schooler? That has creeper written all over it.

It has me pretty hooked. In all of this, I can't really say much on Adnan at all, I mean it feels like he didn't do it, but no proof yet. My gut tells me that Jay either did it, or knows the person who did and is trying to keep it concealed. Will we ever find out if that's true? Honestly, I don't think we ever will, otherwise Jay would have quite a target on his head socially, unless a podcast ends up leading to an arrest.

LOL MAIL KIMP OMFG I LOVE YOU

Episode 8: The Deal With Jay has some answers for you. But yes, his lawyer does seem terrible.

I'm fascinated with Serial much in the same way I was for A&E's Investigative Report series. Or any true crime docu-drama out there.

As far as the Adnan case itself goes, there's always the outside chance that this is a dude who is working people in hopes of getting out of prison, but with the facts presented so far I don't think he did it. There are too many holes in the story. Not enough things synch up to make it plausible. There's no motive for one, and the prosecution's timeline is full of inaccuracies for another. I guess if Adnan didn't do it, who did? I suppose the most surprising thing about the show for me is that none of the detectives of the prosecution took a real hard look at Jay or the murder victim's boyfriend Don. From the way the show is going, it sounds like they went straight for Adnan with the blinders on. Weird.

For those who haven't read it, yet, here's an interesting analysis of the methodology behind 'Serial' & its implications for journalistic ethics:

The Complicated Ethics of 'Serial'

I'm enjoying the podcast for what it is - a well-produced, compelling narrative of real life human drama - but the misgivings I have about using the 'This American Life' storytelling format for this particular case were pretty much confirmed in the Think Progress piece I linked.

Also, for those who wonder whether the series will have anything resembling a conclusion, the Think Progress article implies that there's a good chance the answer is no. 'Serial' is being produced on-the-fly, meaning Sarah Koenig and the attorneys involved haven't finished their investigations. When we hear Koenig speculating about motivations or who's telling the truth & who isn't, she is actually speculating and hasn't yet reached any conclusions.

i thought you have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt to convict? based on everything revealed so far, locking someone up for life is criminal. i mean he is the prime suspect but there just isn't enough evidence

I think it's worth noting, since many here have expressed doubt about Adnan's guilt, that we're not presented with the evidence in Serial, but rather with Koenig's interpretation of the evidence, and sometime even her interpretation of other peoples interpretation of the evidence.

That's a great analysis. Thank you for sharing.

@almostswedish:

It's funny, as much as I'm enjoying the podcast, I think I'm more interested in analyses of it than the thing itself. Possibly because it's reassuring to learn that I'm not the only one who feels a bit queasy about how it's being produced.

Have you read this piece? What 'Serial' Gets Wrong

I found myself agreeing with most of what the author points out, especially the way that race/ethnicity are elided in Koenig's reporting.

Just bumping because the new episode is out.

I feel that way about most things these days, video games included. But yeah, it's nice to know someone else find problems with it.
I havn't read that piece. I'll save the link since have an exam tomorrow, but I'll make sure to read it. Thanks!

The newest episode is roughly half about race and ethnicity, with the other half being about Adnan's lawyer's deteriorating health impacting her work. Maybe it should have been brought up earlier, but I recognize that some things need to be saved for later episodes.

@mosespippy:

I listened to the latest episode last night, but it was quite late & I want to listen again to be certain I didn't mis-hear.

First impressions:

If anything, I think Episode #10 does a good job of illustrating Koenig's blind spots with regard to understanding this case. It was ironic that Koenig listed several examples of how bias crept into the jury by way of the prosecution's insinuations & false assertions, but stated unequivocally that she doesn't think it had anything to do with Sayed's conviction.

A cross-cultural murder case in Baltimore involving the children of Pakistani & Korean immigrants where the defendant is Islamic and the jury have been told a number of half-truths & outright lies by the prosecution about the defendant's family & culture? Discussing institutional bias doesn't mean simply mentioning it then quickly dismissing it it in one episode out of ten. I think these issues deserve a far deeper examination than Koenig seems willing and/or able to make.

@goreyfantod: If I remember correctly the prosecution's lies were told at bail review not at trial, which wouldn't affect the jury. Or at least, the big, he'll escape to Pakistan lie was.

While I agree that the racial/cultural issues should probably be given a bit more attention, I don't know that this series is well suited to a deep dive on that topic.

Koenig has clearly intended for the format of this show to be akin to popular television crime drama (True Detective, The Wire, etc.). In those sorts of shows, the intricacies of the people and culture are typically not revealed through direct exposition or debate, but they instead become evident in the course of the more procedural investigation. Along the same lines, there's a clear focus on trying to slant this show a bit more toward entertainment than similar shows like This American Life - a bit more in the way of TV style "hooks", a bit less in the way of educational/informative content.

Well, yes, that was precisely my point.

@goreyfantod: Fair enough. I guess I had interpreted what you were saying a bit differently.

This podcast makes me think of that Bob Dylan song The Hurricane as well as the Denzel Washington movie. Koenig is informing the public of a possible injustice through storytelling.

Really powerful stuff.

Finally started Episode 5 up and will binge-listen over the weekend.

How the fuck did Jay end up not doing ANY time for being an accomplice to murder? Something stinks.....

I think the show is a good listen, but I'm not really sad about it ending next week.The last couple of weeks have had a lot of solid information, but there's no real "story" anymore. Not that I ever expected the case to magically be solved. Some of the stuff from the last couple weeks like the story surrounding the attorney would have fit much better in between some of the earlier stuff, but then you're treating this criminal case like the plot of a TV show, which to be fair, so are they.

I'm guessing the finale is going to piss a lot of people off (Unless something insane happens like a damning piece of evidence or a confession), but I think this was a good program. I'll be interested to see what they do for season 2. Some of the people "playing along at home" have gone way deeper into it than I think anyone expected, and in the end, I think they might have the most damaging effect on the show.

So, I just finished listening to the final episode and it turns out that they still have no idea who did it!!!

@beachthunder: That's a little disingenuous. There was a major development in the investigation that those free the innocent people were doing. While the host doesn't want to commit to one stance or the other, I think the facts as they were presented did a lot for viewers to draw their own conclusions. I'm interested in following up on this case whenever new developments arise.

Sure, I'm just a little bummed that it didn't seem to really go anywhere (even though I never expected there to be some concrete conclusion). I suppose the main thing to get out of the show is that no matter who did it, Adnan should definitely not be in jail for life.

Also, even if it is a little morbid, I really enjoyed listening to it more or less every week. I think I'd actually like another Project Innocence related thing for the second season, but I suppose some variety would be good too.

@beachthunder: I don't think it's morbid at all. True Crime as a genre is fascinating in and of itself. People often wonder what drives a person to commit a crime and the True Crime genre seeks to answer those questions. I also listened to Serial every week, and I thought it was a well produced show that takes you through the peaks and valleys of an investigation into 15 year old criminal case. There can't be any concrete conclusions because that's not how the case played out; but I think Sarah Kroenig and her staff managed to deliver a satisfying conclusion that was more than a shrug of the shoulders.

As far as season two goes, I don't know what I want from Serial. Whatever it is, I hope it's not a step down. I'm not sure how you go from a murder case to, let's say, the rise and fall of Chick-Fil-A.

My guess is they'll probably stick to the True Crime genre; there's a lot of interesting stuff out there and the Adnan case struck a chord with the general public if the numbers are to be believed.

@beachthunder: Yeah, that's something that's been known for awhile if you started looking around other places like reddit. There really was never going to be a real, definitive conclusion and I think the first episode IIRC also hinted at this.