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

Serial Experiments

The Alibi

In an effort to avoid summary I want to focus on three issues that really jumped out at me during Episode 1 of Serial: the fallacy of human memory, the extreme limit placed on impartiality by previous knowledge and the the role of morality in professions that work with the vulnerable

The opening passage of the episode discussed the problems that arise when one is asked to recall an event 6 weeks ago. After hearing her talk to some example teenagers I stopped the podcast and actually tried to think about where I was six weeks ago. I had to open my calendar to even find the day - Monday, December 8. Similar to one of the teenagers Sarah Koenig interviewed I remembered part of the day because it was important - it was the night of the UCLA/USC Athlete invite, but beyond the event I remember nothing of that day because in my mind it was highly normal. I know I had swim practice but I couldn't tell you what we did. However, if I went back in my texts I could probably deduce the layout of the rest of the day. But in 1999 that wasn't an option - and other potential verifiers - like the library computer or camera were unusable as they weren't logged... I'd always wondered before this episode why alibis were so highly contested but actually stopping and trying to recall a completely average day made me realize just how fallible human memory actually is! [I don't know if questions can be put in blog posts but... did anyone else try to recall what happened exactly 6 weeks ago? if so could you?]

Another aspect of Episode One I found very interesting is that it showed just how much preconceived knowledge impacts ones ability to form opinions. In this case, given the lack of evidence it completely comes down to people's assessments of Adnan's character and how his personality is portrayed. For example, the woman who is the attorney and is good family friends with Adnan's family [I can't spell her name] is convinced that he is completely innocent based off of her interactions with him, however the court was able to use Adnan's personality, almost exclusively, to convince the jury that Adnan was capable of murder. Hence, within the case one sees how preconceived ideas lead to different conclusions being drawn, one also however approaches this podcast with ones own previous knowledge. I did not have any knowledge about this particular case, however, I had a friend in high school who came from a very similar family, from the sounds of it, to Adnan's as her parents were Pakistani immigrant who were firmly against dating, alcohol, drug and were incredibly strict. But, she like Adnan dated in secret, drank and smoked like any normal teenager. Hence, the fact that the prosecutors used this as evidence to prove that Adnan was a liar and capable of murder seems preposterous to me as I know someone who was in a very similar situation.

Finally, I think this episode also raises the very interesting question of morality in professions that work with the vulnerable - in this case lawyers. While as a society we like to think that people like doctors, lawyers, social workers etc... are motivated by altruism and genuinely want what is best for the people they are working with and helping this case points out just how much they can be motivated by personal gain and the holes in the system that allow for professionals to take advantage of their clients. In Adnan's case the defense lawyer was later convicted of fraud hence, people who believe Adnan is innocent claim that she "threw the case" in order to make more money for her own personal appeal. However, this is far from an isolated instance, there are many more that one sees on a daily basis - even in the basic fiscal model of lawyers as they are frequently paid by the hour - hence their aims and the clients are opposite for the client wants the work done as quickly as possible while the lawyer, presuming they want to maximize income, have a vested interest in dragging it out.

Lindsay Lauder

Episode 1 Blog Post: Why are We so Mesmerized?

Michael Cassutt

Why are We so Mesmerized?

            From the moment the catchy theme song begins on the Serial podcast, the listener becomes utterly engrossed in the subject matter. Sarah Koenig’s melodious voice draws in the audience from the outset as she launches into her investigation of a non-fiction whodunit crime case. The premise is simple enough: Koenig seeks to research the facts behind the 1999 murder of Hae Min Lee, resulting in the prosecution and imprisonment of her ex-boyfriend Adnan Syed. Koenig explains her reasoning behind creating the show, stating that she became “fascinated” with the case after getting directly contacted by Rabia Chaudry, a friend of Syed’s family who is now an attorney.

            Although it may only be episode 1, it is not hard to see the appeal in the captivating podcast that would go on to become more popular than any in history. After the first episode, I began to consider the exact elements that went into generating this global phenomenon. In other words, what made this highly successful machine operate so lucratively?

            As she makes clear from the podcast’s commencement, Koenig is “not a detective, private investigator, or crime reporter”. She is simply a normal human being who appreciates a good mystery and wishes to uncover the truth. In my opinion, that right there is the primary reason why Serial became so popular. We all appreciate a good detective story. Is there any surprise behind the fact that Guinness lists Sherlock Holmes as the “most portrayed movie character of all time”?

            And yet, the appeal doesn’t just lie in the story, but in Koenig herself. In trying to make sense of things, piece by piece, she is just like any one of us. She calls herself an “idiot” and frequently admits to being “confused”. In many ways, our amateur sleuth host is a modern-day Nancy Drew. We are irresistibly drawn to the show because we can see ourselves in Koenig. As she launches upon her 12-episode journey, we feel like we are riding shotgun, sympathizing with her emotional rollercoaster of frustration and curiosity. While she is unquestionably biased during her investigation at times, (“Could someone who looks like that really strangle his girlfriend?”) the compelling nature of her quest is undeniable.

            After analyzing the podcast’s popularity from a cultural and personal perspective, it is interesting to note that several studios are currently engaged in a bidding war to turn it into a TV show or movie. This brings up several intriguing questions regarding the show itself and the nature of adaptation. Will taking the show out of its original audio form result in it losing its magic? Would the adaptation have to include Koenig to maintain its appeal? What kind of bias might Hollywood present on the story? 

Some Reflections on Episode 1 of Serial: Medeeha Khan

The fact that this case relied upon the testimony of a single individual, Jay, who seems to also have a spotty recollection of the events is a troubling reflection of the judicial system. That a man could be sent to jail solely on one account, supported by no evidence whatsoever, is very disconcerting. 

Now, another point to be made is that Adnaan may happen to be guilty and thus rightfully in prison. The main contentions for his innocence in this episode seem to stem from his positive disposition. Rabia and her younger brother, Adnan’s good friend, support his character and consistency. Yet there is clear potential for bias. 

Asia is a pivotal character in this case, not only because her witnessing Adnaan occurred during the time window but also because she notes his calm attitude towards Hae, his ex-girlfriend. However, these marks of amiability are seen often in cases with psychopaths, noted by the narrator. It is somewhat plausible that Adnaan lost his senses after the break-up with Hae, that he is concealing some twisted inner personality invisible to others. 

Initially, when Asia claimed that she was pressured by the family to support Adnan with an alibi, I thought that she had been threatened by the actual culprit of the murder. However, through the phone call recording, it seems that that may have not been the case. Asia comes across as a rather honest, upfront individual, albeit quite belatedly. Some other thoughts I have are that Adnan comes across as extremely intelligent and charismatic. He acknowledges the doubt that he presumes the narrator may be having, he doesn’t exhibit the rage, resentment or desperation that might be expected from someone possibly robbed of fifteen years of his life. “The case lived and died in those 21 minutes,” Adnan says resignedly. Although he admits that not remembering that day seems convenient, to him that day was just another day out of many. And as the narrator expostulates in the beginning of the episode, memory is all but reliable.