I don't disagree with regard to the standard used. I'm simply stating that none of us unequivocally "know" anything. Some people are stating that Adnan or Jay "100%" did it, or that it HAD to be either Adnan or Jay, which is, as I said, laughably naive.

I am extending those people the benefit of the doubt on whether they are attempting to state their feeling in a conversation or submitting what they believe to be a fact, I guess. You are right though, if it is more than just the exaggerated way people talk these days.

Listened last night, wrapping up the last episode now.

It's incredibly frustrating to listen to.

"So Adnan initially told police he asked Hae for a ride. Hae's friends heard him ask her. Jay says the plan was to get a ride from her and then murder her. But what does that prove, I mean really? Because later Adnan changed his story and said he didn't ask Hae for a ride that day. So I don't know."

@#$%!

"Jay played lacrosse, for Christ's sake!"

Therefore...?

For those who didn't grow up in an inner city, playing lacross, golf, and other "white rich people sports" is unusual and would make you an outsider. The picture of Jay being an outsider with painted hair, listening to metal, etc is pretty vivid if you take it from that perspective.

It's the same character assassination featured in West Memphis Three.

Of course he should have paged her. Calling her at home would have also been a reasonable expectation. I mean, they were clearly in contact very often, if not daily, between the time they officially "broke up" up to & including the day she disappeared. There is no record of him even attempting to make contact from that point forward. They were, at a minimum, still friends at that point. Why wouldn't you shoot your friend, who has disappeared, a page to see if you can get in touch and make sure she is okay?

It's not something that is going to necessarily sink him in a court of law, but common sense indicates that it is a huge red flag, at least in my mind.

I don't think this is so obvious. We know he was called by the cops the same day Hae disappeared and that he and all her friends knew she was missing. Why is it obvious he would contact her if we assume he knows many other people have tried to do so?

Her new boyfriend didn't try to contact her either. I found it less damning once I heard that. I assumed I would try in that situation but maybe not.

Yeah, I felt the same way. Thought it was a huge red flag until I heard Don didn't try to page her either.

I don't wanna read this whole thread Cuz I'm only about halfway though, but the person who led me to this podcast told me this is true/all real... Is that correct? And also I'm beyond addicted, does anyone know of any similar podcasts for when I finish?

If you liked this you may like This American Life. I do. It is different every week but I like it better than serial the majority of the time. Some of the people itt find it a little pompous in tone which is true sometimes but i don't mind that too much.

Also, not really similar in structure at all but also interesting to me is the freakonomics radio podcast.

And yes the serial podcast is about a real case.

One of the things that gets me about Adnan is his whole "I mean, to me, it was just like any other day, why would I remember anything about what I was doing" viewpoint

Because having the cops call you to tell you your ex girlfriend (who you spoke to last night) is missing is just an every day occurrence in the life of Adnan.

that's not how memory works. One significant event in the day, especially when it only becomes significant weeks later, does not magically make the other mundane things in that day more memorable. Remeber they all thought she just split. THe cops didnt call him and say "did you murder Hae, you better get your alibi worked out"!

Except that the cops did call him that day and told him that his gf that he talked to just a few hours prior is now missing. Every single other person remembers that day just fine, because Hae went missing that day. Adnan very conveniently doesn't remember a thing.

I like how you assert that "that's not how memory works", as if you are some kind of expert on neuroscience or something.

I agree to an extent because as I mentioned I had experiences with my memory not being as clear a year later as I would have expected, except this is different isn't it? I mean if you found out someone you had talked to the day before was missing wouldn't you go through all the events in that day right away? Wouldn't you think through anything that may have been a clue as to what happened to them? Wouldn't that cement that days events in your mind better than most?

****, I remember losing my keys several years ago and retracing my steps to find them. I still remember what I did that day because of this.

There is always the weed factor I suppose. Either way though, if my friend was missing I would be spending some time thinking about anything that I knew to help find her. A lot of time. And it seems inconceivable that all that would disintegrate.

Drawing on your experience as a defense attorney do you get anything from Adnans demeaner? I don't have the relevant experience you do, but I have done hundreds of job interviews and was a sales manager dealing with many accomplished bull****ters, and have some chronic liars in my family and something about him just fits the mold.

For one, the instant disengagment when he is feeling cornered and the return when he has an explanation.

Answer to the title yes I'm addicted. I started this around halfway through a long road trip. I break it down that someone other than adnan and j was teh murderer at like .00001%. I have seen cases where evidence that a witness supposedly knew were fed to them via the police. Sometimes there are motivations that are different then justice in the justice system. I don't think this is the case.

I came to the same conclusion as koenig did. That I'm pretty sure that Adnan is guilty, but I couldn't vote him as guilty. Jay is an awful witness. I wish we could've gotten more forensic evidence and maybe a better background on the prosecution and detectives assigned to the case.

I also think that the defense attorney did a terrible job for the reasons that have been talked about ad nauseam.

Here's a link to googling "podcast like serial." Make sure you click the view all on one page since it's set up for click bate.

http://www.popsugar.com/entertainmen...photo-36141380

I really enjoyed serial serial and slate's spoiler special where they had roughly 6 and 10 eps. They both talk about serial right after they listen. They were very nice for me when I had no one to talk to about serial. I also listened to true crime which was ok and not near as good as serial. The 2 eps I listened to had an interview w/a true crime author that lasted between an hour and 90 mins. My only problem is that the 2 authors that were interviewed pretty much refused to go into detail. If I find something else like it that's better, I'll probably drop it.

In general I agree but I think people are coloring thier expectations by everything we now know. On the day he was called by the cops, according to him AND others, most people thought she had split of her own choice and that maybe her parents sent the cops to looks for her. NOBODY thought there was anything odd going on and certianly not that she was murdered.

The call from the cop would be unusual but not to the degree people are thinking. He had no idea it would become the most important day of his life, unless of course he killed her which is possible.

Had the body been found that day and he was called about that I bet his memory would be a lot better. Ask him what he did the first day he was arrested, for example, and I bet he can tell you in great detail.

I have donkjr on ignore becuase he is a moron but I cant help but comment on his "every single other person remembers that day just fine".

I forgot the part of the podcast where everything is crystal clear to everyone involved excpet adnan and how all the other witness stories perfectly match, including how Jay told one single fully consistant narrative from day one. I like the part where everyone agrees on the timeline, where the Best Buy payphone was, how the coach perfectly remebers when adnan came and left from track.

Other than Adnan the theme of the podcast could have been the infalibility of human memory.

Well said Donkjr.

Good point. I still think if a girl I knew decided to take off without letting me know, exgirlfriend or not, I'd be interested in figuring out the details enough to think about it at length.

I agree with this. If she had access to more people involved it sure would have been more interesting. I don't think you agree with her though. If I'm not mistaken she believes that he is innocent.

I agree. In my opinion Adnan is pretty clearly lying about something that day. Some have suggested he and Jay were up to something that may not have been murder, like drug dealing. Either way his "poor" memory may be partly faked.

at the end she said;

1) she wouldnt convict
2) she thinks he is probably innocent
3) she wouldnt swear it though

I have had thousands of clients at this point. While I can't say that I am expert on detecting lies (unlike Clovis, of course), there are a few themes that come up with the chronically guilty. Something that Adnan does that all guilty but lying people seem to do is attack minute details in the evidence rather than present a side of their own. For example, I might have a client that is accused of selling drugs to an undercover cop. Instead of presenting an alternative explanation of what happened that day, that defendant will tend to say things like the baggies weren't fingerprinted, there was no DNA testing, he isn't on video, he isn't audio recorded, they don't think the times match up exactly, etc. Because not every single contingency is accounted for, in their mind, you can't prove that they did it, and they demand that the case be dropped. This phenomenon is called argumentum ad ignoratim and it is a tell-tale sign of lying. It is the tactic that Adnan employs exclusively throughout the podcast, such as when he insists that he could not have made the drive to Best Buy in 21 minutes, insists that there was no pay phone at the best buy, etc. Instead of coming up with an explanation for where he actually was, which could be very persuasive, he instead resorts to attacking the case and insisting that because there are some holes in the state's case, that he must not have done it.

Not everybody that makes these arguments is necessarily lying. You have to take account of the surrounding facts as well. In a court of law, blowing holes in somebody's case might be enough to get a not guilty, as well. In real life though, in my experience, those types of arguments are most often made by the most guilty people that refuse to acknowledge that there is a strong case against them. The more minute the details that they attack, the more likely they are to be lying.

Funny that Clovis would put the one person in this thread who knows what he's talking about on ignore.

Yes because his point about everyones perfect memory of that day was so well put.