Serial: the 112 Files - Episode 3

Mr. S: What is his purpose?

The strangeness of this episode, I feel, cannot be understated. It is reasonable to assume that, when a man under strange circumstances reports finding a dead body in a park known for harboring dead bodies, that man will come under suspicion as the killer. The fact that that man, Mr. S, is a man of rather unsavory habits, does not help his case particularly. But here, I feel that conclusions are being jumped to far too readily. Despite all the search going into Mr. S's past to see if he might be the killer, or have some part in this mystery, nothing incriminating is pulled up. 

And so this brings us to question the very need for this episode. Why even talk about Mr. S? It would be a lot easier to spend a couple minutes talking about him, giving a brief intro on his habits, and finish it off by saying that for these reasons he is no longer considered suspect. Yet here, he is given an entire half an hour, a full episode, in investigating into his case. Is it to demonstrate certain quirks? Is it to make sure that all ends are fully covered? Or is it simply a way to build suspense for the next episode?

This once again brings back the ethics question of doing this entire podcast. It is of course an incredibly delicate affair to broadcast on a nationwide scale the events that 15 years later are still traumatic for all involved. Yet now, more outsiders such as Mr. S, people who would rather be left alone, are also being brought into play. Now, if this was relevant in furthering the plot in the form of a lead or some other mechanism, it might be allowed. But it seems as if these continued details add no furtherance to the story, no continuing leads or conclusions pertinent to the trial as a whole. Perhaps it is a set up for later episodes, or perhaps these serve some higher purpose. But it seems as if the Mr. S chapter, read and broadcasted thoroughly from cover to cover, has been closed with no intent of opening it again, simply because it had nothing useful to offer to the case at hand.

Episode 3: "Beyond question he did it..."

What struck me about this episode wasn't the suspicion surrounding Mr. S as a suspect because by the end it seems pretty clear that although strange, his story is plausible, but Det. Ritz and Det. Macgillivary’s certainty that Adnan had done it. Sarah explains how she called the detectives and despite speaking to both of them about an interview for the podcast they both declined, asking “what good would it do?” Det. Macgillivary even goes on to declare, “Beyond question [Adnan] did it.” How could these two men be so certain in their assertions, when the case is still shrouded in so much mystery? 

I am taking a class in persuasion this semester, and we just read about the concept of consistency. Essentially, people have the tendency to stick to their decisions, especially if those decisions were disclosed publically. Robert B. Cialdini, a prominent psychologist, even claims that it doesn't matter if the decision that people make is wrong, they add their own new reasons and justifications to support the decisions they've already made. This point made me think of the two detectives working Adnan’s case. How were they so certain, yet so unwilling to comment on their findings for the serial podcast? I am not saying that they think they are wrong, but it is strange that they wouldn't want to elaborate on their statement that Adnan was guilty. 

In addition, although Mr. S’s story is important, as he was the one to discover the body, it doesn't exactly further the story along. It highlights how circumstantial all of the evidence they have found it but doesn't really open up any new avenues of suspicion. Therefore, it seems as though this episode is more focused on highlighting the oddity of this case, rather than introducing a possible new suspect. 

More on the Ethics

So after hearing this podcast (to quote a quote I’ll call it a “bizarre” one), I immediately thought of the question of the ethics of the thing.

This episode, as we all know, focuses on Mr. S, a streaking man who purportedly happens to stumble upon Hae’s body. However, as Casey mentioned, we are left with no resolution and really aren't all that much further in our search for the truth than we were at the start of the episode. Even Koenig doesn't seem to have any tangible sneaking suspicions concerning Mr. S. So then, what exactly is the purpose of the episode? The entirety of it is spent looking into the circumstances under which Hae’s body was found. Though this is an issue that should be mentioned in order to ensure that all the bases are covered, I don’t think that it’s necessary for an entire episode to be devoted to it. This is especially true when you consider the fact that the episodes were initially serialized and that only one was released per week. This episode seems to do nothing toward actually gaining new knowledge about the case but instead simply appears to be building suspense for the next episode.

Furthermore, the question of ethics must now be extended to Mr. S, a man who clearly doesn't desire the attention that he now has and who even asked Koenig to “leave him alone.” While Koenig conveys in the podcast that she’ll just use the pseudonym “Mr. S” to respect the privacy of the man, 2 minutes of searching on the internet brought me to this (http://www.reddit.com/r/serialpodcast/comments/2jq96a/spoiler_baltimore_county_court_records/) reddit thread. Press Ctrl+F and type in “Mr. S” and you’ll find a user saying that there is another thread revealing Mr. S’ full last name which happens to also start with an S; way to go with that privacy, Koenig. It doesn't seem right for a man who clearly doesn't want to be bothered and who at this point really doesn't seem to be the subject of any suspicion to be put into the national spotlight in such a humiliating manner, and I am again back to questioning the ethics of the entire podcast.  The podcast just seems to be too dramatized and makes the stories of those involved nothing more than fuel for the next entertaining episode. So guys, what do you think?

Episode 3: The Stangeness of Mr. S... And Everything Else

This episode makes me wonder if the point of the podcast is not so much to solve this puzzle, to figure out what really happened, but more so to simply point out what is so strange about this case. Isn't this episode just very strange? Sure, we get a little insight into how the police that worked on the case functioned, and we get a little more context for why so many people think Adnan is innocent, but the events surrounding Mr. S are just odd. And, in the end, they seem pretty irrelevant to the actual case. So why mention it at all? Maybe it's a little more entertaining to know the quirks in the case,which certainly brings up the question of ethics again, or maybe it's a sinister way of bolstering the objective image. Or, perhaps Koenig isn't digging all this up for entertainment purposes only and there are stranger things to come. 

Already the case has seen some strange aspects. Jay is a weird character. He remembers oddly specific details about what he claims Adnan did. But he gets big things mixed up. And the idea that such a nice, normal teenager would be able to hide murderous rage from his entire community both before and after Hae's murder seems a little off. Even Hae's friend, who isn't exactly Adnan's biggest fan, didn't call him harmful, only annoying. I understand the police perspective that he could be a suspect, but the idea that he could be convicted based on one witness and no physical evidence seems funny. 

What seems strangest to me, however, is that not a single episode has had any resolution. It seems like Koenig is just reiterating the strangeness from the original investigation, which calls to question the ethics of this podcast yet again. If there's no resolution at all, be it in the validity of the facts or the case as a whole, what's the point in digging up this tragedy, instilling false hope in a potentially wrongfully-convicted man and repeating the pain for Hae's family?

Episode 2 The 112 Files

Episode 2: Colored Memories and Reliable Sources?

I think one of the most significant details about Episode 2 of the Serial podcast is that the interviewed friends and family all seem to bring up the point that your memories can become altered, influenced, or colored by events that come later.  It is particularly difficult for witnesses and friends to remember details naturally, and this proves to be especially critical for Adnan when he tries to prove why he is innocent. When Koenig asks Adnan about whether his breakups were calm, mutual, and not upsetting, Adnan starts his response by bringing up the point that he is describing a relationship that he had with a girl over 15 years prior, and that just as he can hardly remember the exact details of everything that happened, we should also take into consideration that anything anyone else could be influenced by the events that have occurred ever since the incident. 

Additionally, I find it so suspicious that although most of Adnan’s friends claim he was a normal teenager with normal teenager hobbies and characteristics, the state twisted many of the arguments toward the favor of prosecuting Adnan. Every piece of evidence in this case is not only slightly unreliable (since bias seems to be such a heavy hand in determining the validity of someone’s statement against or for Adnan), but also extremely prone to being interpreted in numerous ways. By being an EMT, he was a nice, responsible, sweet kid who was working to gain money for his future. But on the other hand, he was also a possibly very morbid individual who wrote dark poetry and had the capability to strangle someone. I find what Koenig says about these “spins” of the truth or information to be very interesting: "The trouble with spin is that you can’t totally disregard it. Some tendril of it is true.”

What is really interesting is how much Hae truly loved Adnan it seems. When she got into a car accident, she called Adnan to help her, despite dating Don at the time. That either sounds like major friend-zoning, or more like Hae trusts Adnan still and can’t get him off her mind.

When it comes to keeping a diary, I find that most people never truly record everything they are thinking into their diary either because they don’t have time or they forget. In this case, though Hae’s diary provides a glimpse into how she was feeling with Adnan and her adventures with him, the additional fact that their relationship was a secret could have prevented her from putting even more revealing details in her diary entries that could lead to different conclusions about the murder. How reliable is her diary? In and out of context?

Is it ethical for the mom to be listening in on her son’s phone calls? For her to not take the advice of her family in terms of how to guide her son? Was Adnan sacrificing his values while being with Hae, or was he putting more importance on Hae rather than his religion, or splitting up his commitment to both?

(On a different note, check out this Serial parody that some USC people made called Cereal Podcast!)

Episode 2: Thoughts on Viewpoint and Bias

What I thought was most interesting about Ep. 2 of Serial was the theme of viewpoint: over and over Koenig describes how key facts in the case could be used, both for the prosecution and the defense, to either paint Adnan as a vindictive ex-boyfriend or the archetype of a normal, heartbroken teen. Just to name 2 examples:

 

FACT: Adnan and Hae dated in secrecy, with Adnan's Muslim heritage a point of difference in their relationship

PROSECUTION: The fact that Adnan had to disappoint his parents and choose between a girl and his religion racked him with guilt and caused him to go over the edge when Hae broke his heart

WHAT KOENIG FOUND: Through Koenig's interviews with Adnan and Adnan's friends, it appears that it honestly wasn't that big of a deal - Adnan did drugs, partied, had sex with girls - clearly he wasn't that religious. Apparently, Hae also never made any of her concerns clear to Adnan - her diary was the first time he realized how distraught she was over "causing his sin"

 

FACT: One of Adnan's high school teachers stated, "Adnan had a dark side that showed through his poetry"

PROSECUTION: This is just one of many examples that confirms Adnan's malicious nature and shows he is capable of carrying out a murder

WHAT KOENIG FOUND: After interviewing the teacher, Koenig clarifies that it was not as if Adnan showed red flags of abnormal or violent tendencies - like every other angsty teenager she taught, he vented about his problems through poetry

 

The drastic contrast between what the state painted Adnan as and what Koenig discovered through talking to Adnan and other witnesses is disturbing. Did anyone else find themselves over and over easily swayed by evidence the prosecution presented purely because Adnan was the suspect of murder, only to realize subsequently through Koenig's personal investigation that the real picture just wasn't that malicious? This happened to me throughout the podcast and rattled me because I realized just how gullible I am (despite the fact that throughout listening to this podcast I have actively tried to be as unbiased as possible).

 

What is most frustrating about this is how, as of right now, it seems so unconvincing that the prosecution came to the conclusion of definitively convicting Adnan. After all, our justice system is based on innocent until proven guilty, right? To me all the evidence presented thus far is not the least bit conclusive. The facts we currently know are riddled with inconsistencies and conflicting testimonies and for now I have to cling on to a bleak hope that, in order to maintain my faith in the justice system, as Serial continues, more conclusive evidence is revealed to affirm that Adnan was indeed proven guilty.

 

One last thing - while taking notes, I found myself scatterbrained and confused with the sheer amount of details of the case. I have a hard time, even after poring through my notes, of piecing the evidence together and forming an actual opinion about who is guilty and who isn't. I can only imagine how the detectives, the attorneys, the judge, and the jury must have felt. I guess the main questions that I have after Episode 2 are: given the fact that the facts of the case can so easily be twisted for one argument or the other, how valid does that make them for use in court? Is there any way around this? Can we ever really determine the truth with just he-said she-said?

Episode 2: What's in a Motive?

The components I found most compelling in this episode were the interrelationships in Adnaan’s life.  I found it very interesting how Koenig broke down the relationships between Adnaan’s religion, his parents, and his girlfriends.  Each of these elements individually played a large role in Adnaan’s life but it was the clashing of two or more that led to speculation and suspicion about Adnaan’s possible motives for committing murder.  I also think it’s interesting that the prosecution’s case for what would drive Adnaan to murder was not based on his actions, but on those of his parents.  The prosecution stated that the Homecoming episode where his parents confronted him at and took him home from the dance led to the break-up that led to Adnaan’s feelings of rage.  It seems, in fact, like most of the motives don’t rely on the actions of Adnaan himself at all, but those of the people he surrounded himself with.  Adnaan’s parents disproved of his relationship with Hae, and promoted a strict faith that did not allow him to get involved with girlfriends and yet Adnaan was the one painted with the strict ideology and possessing the conflict between Hae and his religion, when this was never indicated by his own actions.  It seems almost like Adnaan was judged based on the people around him and their actions. 

            I also thought it was interesting how the prosecution stated that when Adnaan was allegedly killing Hae, he saw his parents and his religion and all the reasons they couldn’t be together.  This seems to me like a strange approach.  In the snippet they played of the prosecution saying this, they didn’t say he was killing Hae because she kept them from being together, but that his parents did.  I have to wonder after listening to the rest of this episode where Koenig could not find evidence of Adnaan being angry or enraged by the break-up if this was strategic, a way to explain away the lack of rage that Adnaan seemed to have toward Hae.     

NY times article

Here's an interesting NYTimes article arguing that Adnan Syed should have pleased guilty.

-AK