So Marilyn Mosby will railroad six innocent police officers but will not retry the case of a Pakistani who strangled a teenage girl to death

[laughing dog]

On what basis do you dispute the " additional DNA testing excluded Syed as a suspect in the strangulation of Lee," (from your story)

Because that statement shows lack of understanding of what DNA can and cannot prove. Some DNA found on Hae's shoes is not inconsistent with Adnan having strangled her. DNA could have been deposited on the shoes at time points other than the murder and be unrelated to it. Or maybe it's Jay's and it's consistent with him helping dispose of her body in Leakin Park.
Also, why is Mosby being so vague about this alleged evidence and about these alleged "suspects"?

The point is that the DNA evidence is a possible basis for reasonable doubt. As to the silence of about other suspects, I think that it makes perfect sense to keep that under wraps until they are arrested and charged.

and that "unreliable cellphone data had been used to convict Syed. "?

DNA cell tower data was a minor point in the trial at best. It corroborated Jay's testimony, but the case did not stand and fall based on cell tower data.

No one said it did. It just another piece of evidence that points to reasonable doubt.

Adnan has served 20 years already. Apparently the DA believes this evidence (plus whatever else they are not revealing) is more damaging to the case against Adnan and the prosecution.

 

[Toni]

I don't actually know much about this case beyond the article you posted but, have you considered that ...

Maybe you should inform yourself, but, to answer your question, yes, yes I have.

... It isn't really about what a state's attorney says, it's about what the EVIDENCE says.

The state attorney makes the decision whether or not to retry. Thus to some extent it is what the state attorney says.
Of course, EVIDENCE should matter. But statements about evidence can be misleading.

And it sounds like some DNA evidence points away from this Adnan Syed person.

I do not think so. I think Mosby either does not understand how DNA works, or she has been very misleading when she said DNA excludes Syed. It may exclude him from being the contributor to the DNA found on Hae's shoes, but that does not mean Syed can be excluded from having strangled her. He could have strangled her AND Hae could have gotten somebody else's DNA on her shoes at some point.

I'm reading between the lines here, because the article isn't clear, but I wouldn't be surprised if the DNA evidence that points away from Syed actually matches one (or maybe both) of the two other suspects the article mentions.

Ah yes, the mystery suspects that Mosby is very cagy on. I doubt she will charge any of these mystery suspects. I even doubt she will disclose their identities or any details of this supposed evidence. That is because I think Syed is guilty, and furthermore I think Mosby thins so as well.

It is true that it is possible that Syed strangled her. But now, there is no evidence tying him to the actual crime. Evidence is important and the key bit of evidence has been invalidated.

You may, perhaps, take comfort in the fact that he has spent 23 years in prison for a crime which he may or may not have committed. That's not an insignificant amount of time. In fact, it's as much and more time than some people convicted of murder serve.

 

[ZiprHead]

But statements about evidence can be misleading.

Irony.

 

[blastula]

So Marilyn Mosby will railroad six innocent police officers but will not retry the case of a Pakistani who strangled a teenage girl to death

False, he's a fucking American, as if nationality matters regarding his guilt, to anybody but fucking racists.

Prosecutors drop charges against Adnan Syed in ‘Serial’ case

I have read a lot about this case, and there is no way Adnan Syed did not do it, no matter what corrupt Marylin Mosby says now.

What a load of shit. Syed could be guilty, but the evidence against him is very sketchy. The cell phone tower evidence they gave is now known to be worthless, and Wilds's testimony was always weak given his inconsistencies.

You are right the DNA doesn't "exclude" him, but obviously they haven't made all the details public, as they wouldn't if they are preparing an indictment against someone else. We'll have to wait and see and not be stupid by jumping to conclusions.

It's so funny (not) how your standards of evidence shift depending on the racial or police identity of the accused.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Another thing...

The State’s Attorney’s Office asked to vacate Syed’s conviction last month, citing evidence of the alternative suspects and other flaws in the original evidence. One of the alternative suspects reportedly said he would kill Lee and had a motive to harm her, prosecutors said, but that evidence was never turned over to the defense.

I will reiterate that I still think it is possible that Syed was involved somehow. It is possible that this other person was an associate of Syed's. It's also possible that Syed orchestrated the murder, some other friend did it, and then took credit for it once he arrived with the body to Jay Wilds. That doesn't neatly explain why Jay Wilds's story is so inconsistent and changing, though, which seems instead to indicate Jay's greater involvement than he states. Another possibility is that Jay Wilds and a 3rd person were the actual culprits and that he blamed it on Adnan to divert the police. He seems to have some anger and resentment. Enough to kill? Doubt it. Could he have been afraid Hae was going to tell the police about his operation for some reason or the third person was another drug dealer? Maybe.

It is very, very difficult to come up with a narrative without knowing the identity of the people who threatened the victim and the identity of the people whose DNA were on the victim's shoes.

 

[Derec]

Look, I believe Adnan did it but remove Jay's testimony and they have nothing. Jay (IMO) is not reliable enough for "beyond all doubt". That's just me.

I agree that Jay's testimony is key evidence here. I disagree that it is not enough for a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt when you consider motive etc.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Look, I believe Adnan did it but remove Jay's testimony and they have nothing. Jay (IMO) is not reliable enough for "beyond all doubt". That's just me.

I agree that Jay's testimony is key evidence here. I disagree that it is not enough for a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt when you consider motive etc.

Unfortunately, a common tactic to get yourself a lighter sentence is to rat on someone else--what's conveniently not mentioned is that all too often they "rat" on someone who isn't guilty.

 

[Derec]

Adnan Syed's sentence reinstated.
A Maryland court reinstates Adnan Syed's conviction and orders a new hearing
Good. Hopefully the new hearing goes the right way and he goes back to prison, where he belongs. He should never have been let out to begin with.

Note that Marilyn Mosby's talk about "another possible suspect" turned out to be just empty nonsense, as neither she nor her successor ever pursued anybody else. They too know that Adnan Syed did it. And yet they didn't want to retry him. Why?

 

[laughing dog]

This ruling mandates another hearing on vacating the conviction because the DA did not give the family of the victim sufficient notice.

It seems this reversal is based on a procedural error, so I don’t see why one would expect a different outcome.