Julius Jones Part II

Part 2

During the last post, which can be viewed here: https://thejusticeaddict.blogspot.com/2019/07/i-feel-there-is-so-much-involved-in.html, I told you that Paul Howell was carjacked and murdered in his driveway, and that Julius Jones was arrested for the crime. He was tried, convicted, and sentenced to death; however, there are so many issues with this case:

Issues with this case

The defense:

Julius Jones’ defense attorneys were inexperienced and no match for the prosecution. They were unprepared with no death penalty case experience. At trial, the defense rested without calling a single witness, including Julius who wanted to tell his side. Further, Julius had very short hair and had a booking photo from a very recent arrest to prove it. His defense never showed the jury this photo so they could see Julius’ hair wasn’t long enough to stick out of a skull cap. Remember that his co-defendant, however, matched the description that the eyewitness gave. Additionally, Day Day King also wore braids but I can’t say for sure how long they were. Either way, the attorney should have presented these photos to the jury to allow for reasonable doubt.

No alibi witnesses were called to testify since the lead defense attorney didn’t believe they were reliable. The police informants and Christopher Jordan testified though, and together with the murder weapon, bandana, video, and co-defendant testimony, the jury found Julius guilty and sentenced him to death.

About the jury:

The jury that convicted Julius was made up of 11 white jurors and one black juror. Other black potential jurors were struck from serving for reasons that white potentials were not. You may remember from previous posts that this is a Batson violation; however, the appeals court dismissed the claim.

Another claim brought forth was that this jury was racially biased, and that declaration was brought to the presiding judge during trial. Before deliberations even began, a juror was heard by another saying, “They should just take that n***** out and shoot him behind the jail.” The motion to dismiss this juror during the trial phase was denied even though it was clear that racial prejudice played a role in at least one juror’s decision making. (Just imagine having your fate placed in this person's hands.)

Earlier this year, the US Supreme Court denied Julius’ petition for judicial review regarding the racial bias claim. Julius’ constitutional rights were violated and he should, at the minimum, get a new and fair trial.

Incentivized witnesses:

An incentivized witness is someone who testifies on behalf of the prosecution against the defendant in exchange for a benefit of some type. This benefit may include favorable treatment in the person’s own criminal case. Chris Jordan was an admitted co-conspirator. He told police that he played a part in this crime. The jury was told that Chris would be serving a 30-year minimum sentence, rather than a death sentence, for his cooperation. Instead, he was released after just 15-years. He was released - not paroled – for a first-degree murder charge that he admitted to taking part in. Chris was an incentivized witness.

Additionally, two inmates housed with Chris Jordan came forward stating that he bragged that he did the shooting, and managed to pin it on Julius. Neither of those inmates were offered anything for this information, but yet they were dismissed as irrelevant and unreliable.

Ladell “Day Day” King was facing a 20-year sentence for check fraud that was dismissed after he testified against Julius. Incentivized.

Kermit Lottie was facing a lengthy prison sentence for drug charges. A detective in Julius’ case wrote a letter to the DA’s office recommending a lenient sentence, which he received, if he testified against Julius. Lottie was also an informant for another wrongful conviction case in Oklahoma. Incentivized.

Physical Evidence:

The red bandana was never tested for DNA until just recently. Once it was tested, the results came back as having a mixture of three or more individuals, all partial matches. One of the partials matched Julius – but none of the DNA was from saliva. The prosecution interprets the DNA results as conclusive evidence that they have the right person in custody; however, there was no saliva on the bandana! That’s not possible if it was worn by the shooter. Furthermore, you can imagine that it’s quite easy to transfer any sort of touch DNA evidence from someone’s bedroom onto a piece of cloth.

Julius’ fingerprints and DNA were not found in the stolen Suburban. Further, his hair didn’t match the description that the eyewitness gave.

The prosecutor:

“Cowboy” Bob Macy was considered one of the top five deadliest prosecutors in the nation. He sent 54 people to death row during his 21-year tenure. Half of those convictions have since been reversed. In addition to prosecutorial misconduct, other reasons cited were false informant testimony and forensic scientists lying about evidence. Bob Macy cheated to win his cases. This alone should be reason enough to allow a new trial! If they’re so confident that Julius did the crime, let them prove it in accordance to the constitution and moral code of ethics!

Death is final:

There is entirely too much reasonable doubt in this case to allow Julius to be put to death. This man deserves a fair trial. Paul Howell and his family deserve justice for his murder. It is so easy to put the wrong man behind bars. Misconduct, corruption, false or mistaken testimony, even human error - but it is so difficult to right that wrong. We cannot unexecute someone! The state of Oklahoma needs to revisit this case before it’s too late.

Please continue to educate yourselves about this case and spread the word:

There is a lot of information on Twitter – specifically here: https://twitter.com/hiphop_angel77 and here: https://twitter.com/justice4julius

And on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/justice4juliusjones/

Watch The Last Defense: https://www.investigationdiscovery.com/tv-shows/the-last-defense/full-episodes/julius-jones-the-crime

Donate to Julius’ phone call and commissary account: https://www.gofundme.com/julius-jones

Julius Jones Part I

I feel there is so much involved in this case, and I’m afraid that I may not have given it the justice it deserves. I know I’ve left so many important details out. That’s why I ask that you please educate yourself further on this case as well as the others that I highlight. Meet Julius Jones. 

Everyone needs to know this statistic.
“For every nine people executed in the United States (since 1973), one person on death row has been exonerated” (deathpenaltyinfo.org). That means one out of every 10 people on death row is potentially innocent. As of April 1, 2019, there were 2,673 prisoners awaiting execution, totaling a possible 267 innocents on death row!

Today, I call your attention to Oklahoma – the home of 10 such exonerations from death row. Let that sink in. Ten. Since 1981. Seven of those involved official misconduct and six included perjury and/or false accusations. Only three of those were exonerated due to DNA evidence.

Currently there are 48 people incarcerated on death row in Oklahoma. Shall we do the math? Even if we give the state the benefit of the doubt, we’re still talking about four potentially innocent people waiting to die for crimes they didn’t commit. Julius Jones may very well be one of those four innocent prisoners. He was the subject of a recent documentary called, “The Last Defense,” and if you haven’t seen it, you should watch. (There is a link below, if you have access to the Discovery ID channel). Julius may be executed soon, but there is a very high probability that he didn’t commit this crime.

The timeline:
On Wednesday, July 28, 1999, Paul Howell, his two children, and his sister arrived at his parents’ home in Edmond, Oklahoma at approximately 9:30 p.m. They were immediately confronted in the driveway by a man who pointed a gun at Paul, demanding he get out of the vehicle – and then he shot him. That man then drove away in Howell’s Chevy Suburban. Thankfully, his children and sister ran to safety into the house, calling for police. Paul sister’s described the perpetrator as a black male, about 5’6”-5”8”, wearing blue jeans, white tee, skull cap, and a red bandana over his face. She distinctly remembered he had about an inch or 1-½ inches of hair sticking out of the back of the skullcap.

That same evening, Julius Jones, a college sophomore on summer break, was at his parents’ house, about a 20-minute drive away from the crime scene. He had dinner with his family, then played Monopoly with his siblings. His older brother left for work at 9:30 p.m. and knows that Julius was still there with his sister. He stayed at the house, waiting for his friend, Christopher Jordan, to give him a ride to his own apartment near campus. Chris didn’t show up until 11 or 11:30 p.m. When Julius asked what took him so long, he replied he had “gotten into it with someone.”

The next day, Thursday, Julius received a page from an acquaintance, Ladell “Day Day” King, first looking for Chris Jordan, then asking for a favor – to help him move a truck. Julius agreed. Even though he knew the vehicle was probably stolen, he wanted the cash that was being offered for his help. Julius drove King’s vehicle and did not get into the vehicle that King was driving, a Chevy Suburban. Neither his fingerprints nor DNA were never found in or on it. Further, he didn’t even get out of King’s vehicle while at the chop-shop that they drove to. The owner of that shop didn’t want the vehicle since he heard “there was a body associated with it” so they dropped the vehicle off at a local grocery.

That same night, Chris Jordan appeared at Julius’ parents’ house stating he was locked out of his grandmother’s and asked if he could spend the night. Julius said yes, and Chris slept upstairs while Julius slept on the couch.

Police located Howells’ Suburban at that grocery store two days after the crime occurred. They interviewed the owner of the nearby chop-shop, Kermit Lottie, a police informant, who pointed them in the direction of known car thief, “Day Day” King, also an informant. King told them that Christopher Jordan and Julius Jones approached him, and asked if he could be the middle-man to sell the Suburban. He added that Jones was wearing a red bandana and skull cap. Was it a coincidence that King had been with Julius the day before, or was this a purposeful setup? The grocery store’s surveillance camera showed Julius in the store where the vehicle was recovered the day after the crime.

Chris was picked up for questioning. They had evidence that Chris had been involved in a carjacking the previous week, and told him that if he cooperated (and implicated Julius Jones), they would be lenient on him. He complied and said he drove Jones to the scene of the crime with the intent to steal the car. However, his statements were all over the place – he said he never heard gunshots then said he did; he didn’t see anything but then saw the body fall; he never touched the gun but then he may have left a fingerprint or two. Chris’ attorney told the documentarians that he had to wait hours to speak to Chris. It’s probable that police were crafting the statements to match the story they wanted told.

Police drove to the Jones’ residence with Chris is in the backseat. Chris directed them to the murder weapon that was wrapped in a red bandana in a crawl space. Now might be a good time to tell you that Chris Jordan wore short braids that stuck out about an inch or two from the bottom of his hairline. Julius on the other hand, had short hair.

 

               

And do you remember that Chris slept at this house the night after the crime? Guess which room they found this evidence in? Hint – it was the one that Chris slept in!

Julius Jones and Christopher Jordan were both charged with first degree murder. The DA in this case, Bob Macy, conducted a press conference telling everyone he would seek the death penalty, thus tainting the jury pool. A prosecutor would never push for death if they didn’t know the person was guilty, right? *(Insert hard eye roll here!)

You may have already noticed, but there are some issues with this case. Please tune in to the next post to read about them.

Watch The Last Defense: https://www.investigationdiscovery.com/tv-shows/the-last-defense/full-episodes/julius-jones-the-crime

Donate to Julius’ phone call and commissary account: https://www.gofundme.com/julius-jones

Gregory Lott and his many dates with death

There are too many people on death row right now with questionable convictions. I personally think the death penalty should be abolished but until that happens, no one should ever be executed if there is even a slight chance they didn’t commit the crime for which they are accused. Kirk Bloodsworth, the first person to be exonerated from death row due to DNA evidence, once said, “We cannot un-execute someone.” Truer words have never been spoken. 

This crime is heinous and upsetting. In July 1986, someone broke into 82-year-old John McGrath’s East Cleveland residence. They beat him, tied him up, then set him on fire, and left him to die. Mr. McGrath clung to life for eight days and during that time, he described his attacker to police as a black male with a very light complexion. He said the suspect was about 6 feet tall, medium build, and had long, straight hair. He also stated he recognized the perpetrator since they went to the same barbershop.  

Right now, Gregory Lott is sitting on Ohio’s death row for this crime although he is claiming his innocence. Lott is approximately 5’10”, with a stocky build and has always had short hair. He has medium to dark brown skin; not at all light-skinned as described by McGrath. While cross-racial identification can be difficult, in this case, McGrath lived around African Americans for many years, and would presumably be able to determine the difference between light-skinned or dark, and long hair and short.  

When McGrath was shown a sketch of a Lott, he told police Lott was not the perpetrator of this crime. The district attorney’s office went so far as to suggest to McGrath that the suspect may have worn skin lightening make-up or bleaching cream, and that Lott could have been wearing a doo-rag, which he mistook for long hair. Did Gregory Lott kill John McGrath? I don’t know – but the victim didn’t think so. He definitely described someone else before he died.   

Lott was an admitted neighborhood burglar that had broken into McGrath’s house at least two other times, leaving his fingerprints everywhere. He broke into other houses in the neighborhood too – he was no saint, but was he a murderer? Not according to this victim. Truthfully, we may never know if he committed this crime but what if he didn’t? I would rest a bit easier each night knowing a person is in prison rather than a grave on the day his exoneration evidence is brought forth.  

Police didn’t consider Mr. McGrath to be a reliable witness, nor did they bother to visit the barbershop where he told them the suspect frequented. The description that the victim gave wasn’t turned over to the defense, and even when his lawyers did see those documents in 1991, they didn’t present that evidence to an appeals court. Lott had also allegedly confessed to police that he burglarized the McGrath home the day of the crime but no statement was signed; no Miranda warnings were given; and the only evidence of his confession was the word of the officer who heard it. 

The Prosecutor in this case had previously been reprimanded numerous times by the courts for improper behavior, and was even accused by a panel-judge in this case for “legal gymnastics.” He continually offered theories that couldn’t be proven but were damaging to Lott’s case. The three-judge panel ultimately found Lott guilty and sentenced him to death. 

Lott’s first execution date was set in 2002, but the courts wanted further testing to determine if he was intellectually disabled. Experts determined his IQ was a few points over the criteria so they signed a new death warrant for 2004. That date was stayed because of the victim’s testimony evidence being withheld, but another date was set for 2014. Because Ohio’s execution protocol has been called into question, Lott had two different postponements in 2014 with a new date set for this August 2019.  

However, in March of this year, Ohio Governor Michael DeWine once again rescheduled Lott’s execution - this time for March 12, 2020. This last postponement is because the state is searching for new methods of lethal injection. DeWine has imposed an unofficial moratorium on executions because of problems with their drugs and the potential they could cause cruel and unusual punishment. 

This scheduling and rescheduling of death-dates has got to be agonizing for the victim’s family, as well as supporters of Lott’s. A solution would be to commute his sentence to life. If his innocence can be proven after that, at least he’ll be alive to walk out the door. If he is guilty, then he will be spending his life incarcerated and punished. 

Why is this country so determined to kill our citizens as punishment? It’s not less expensive than life in prison. It’s inhumane treatment of our own people. And believe it or not, it can leave the victim’s family with less satisfaction since the perpetrator is not suffering in prison.  

As a wise man that spent time on death row once said, 

“You can’t un-execute someone.” 

Amnesty International Home. (2002, August 7). Retrieved from https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/AMR511282002ENGLISH.pdf 

Execution of Ohio Inmate Gregory Lott Rescheduled. (2019, June 4). Retrieved from https://www.theforgivenessfoundation.org/index.php/40-news/general/2867-execution-of-ohio-inmate-gregory-lott-rescheduled-for-april-20-2016 

The Six Trials of Curtis Flowers

We’ve all heard the expression, “seventh time’s the charm,” right? Wait – you haven’t? Okay – neither have I, but apparently it’s a motto that a Mississippi District Attorney lives by.

On the morning of July 16, 1996 in Winona, Mississippi, Tardy Furniture employees Robert Golden and Carmen Rigby, as well as the owner, Bertha Tardy, were found in the middle of the store’s showroom, fatally shot execution style. Another employee, Derrick “Bo Bo” Stewart died approximately 6 days later from the same type of injury. The crime scene was discovered by a fellow employee who had been called in to work just a short time earlier.

While police did an adequate job at keeping the public from entering the scene, there were various uninvolved officials that came and went, including the mayor and animal control officer. Investigators collected bullets, bullet fragments, and .380 caliber shell casings. They also dusted for prints, interviewed potential witnesses, and questioned possible suspects. They even made sketches of a bloody footprint found at the scene and it was determined the print came from a size 10.5 Fila brand sneaker. It didn’t seem to match any of the police officer’s shoes but no one could be sure since so many people went through the scene. $287 had been taken out of the register, and the safe was unlocked but the contents, untouched.

Shortly after police arrived on the murder scene, other officers responded to a complaint of a theft from a vehicle nearby. The caller stated a .380 caliber pistol had been stolen from his unlocked vehicle. A witness claimed Curtis Flowers was seen near the vehicle so police interviewed him that afternoon. Curtis had also worked for Tardy Furniture for a short amount of time and had been fired approximately 2-weeks prior to the murder.

Flowers told investigators he had been babysitting his girlfriend’s children at the time of the murders and consented to a gunshot residue test. It was determined that he had one particle of gun powder on his right thumb. He wore the same size shoe as the footprint left at the scene, and police found $255 as well an empty Fila shoebox at the home of his girlfriend. After he was arrested, jailhouse informants told investigators that Flowers confessed to the murders but then, each recanted.

To be honest, I’m not sure if Curtis Flowers committed this crime. There is some pretty strong circumstantial evidence pointing toward his guilt but there is also plenty of compelling indicators that he didn’t do it. One problem, as discussed below, is that the district attorney violated Curtis’ constitutional rights and went above and beyond to win this case. That is injustice. It’s injustice to the victim’s families, to Curtis and his family, as well as the Winona community. If he can prove guilt, he should do so legally and within the rights of the defendant. 

First, even though there were at least two alternate suspects, the DA did not divulge that information to defense attorneys. As a matter of fact, one of those suspects was actually arrested and just happened to be wearing Fila sneakers when he was booked. This is called a Brady violation. The Brady doctrine requires that the prosecution turn over all exculpatory evidence to the defendant. Additionally, in 2001, a rusty .380 gun was located under a house 700 feet from Tardy Furniture. The weapon was turned over to police but it was never logged into evidence and officers denied ever seeing the gun. I highly doubt this was an oversight and could be considered police misconduct.

Therefore, technically, the murder weapon was never found so ballistics experts couldn’t conduct their analysis in a controlled environment. They believe the weapon stolen from the vehicle was the one used in the shootings but they can’t be 100% sure. Either way, it also can’t be proven that it was Curtis who stole the gun in the first place.

Further, some theorize that the crime had to have been carried out by more than one perpetrator since it was an execution type killing. Normally, victims will attempt to flee if there aren’t additional people to control them. There were similar crimes with execution style killings in Alabama in 1996 and one of those perpetrators wore Fila brand sneakers. One man convicted of the Alabama crimes stated that two of his accomplices were in Mississippi at the time of the Tardy Furniture murders.

Curtis Flowers has already been tried SIX times for this same crime. Six times. All by the same DA, Doug Evans. The first trial was solely for the murder of Bertha Tardy and the second, for only Derrick Stewart. Curtis Flowers was convicted at both trials and sentenced to death for both. It was later determined that the court improperly allowed evidence regarding crimes not on trial to be admitted. In other words, the DA mentioned the other three murders at each of his first and second trials, which is not allowed. Something to be noted: Trial one consisted of an all-white jury while trial two had 11 white jurors and one black juror.

Both of these convictions were overturned, and he was tried a third time - this time for all four murders together. Again, the jury consisted of a ratio of 11 white jurors to one black juror. Curtis was again found guilty and sentenced to death but this time, the Mississippi Supreme Court overturned the conviction due to Prosecutor Evans striking potential jurors strictly because of race. Each attorney has the opportunity to “strike” jurors without giving a reason, however that reason cannot be due to race. In this case, each of the 15 jurors struck by the prosecution were black. In fact, Doug Evan’s has used his strikes 4.5 times more often on black citizens than on white.

Trial four ended in a mistrial due to hung jury. The make-up of jurors was more equal but out of the 11 strikes used by the prosecution, all 11 were black. The seven white jurors voted guilty while five black members voted for acquittal. The fifth trial was made up of a 9-3 ratio but the statistics for juror strikes are not available.  They voted 11 to one to convict. The lone holdout refused to change his vote resulting in another hung jury and the judge ordered his arrest for a perjury charge that was later dismissed.

The sixth, and most recent trial also ended in a conviction and a death sentence. The jury was again 11 white members and one seated black juror. During voir dire (the questioning of jurors by counsel or a judge), the district attorney asked black potential jurors an average of 29 questions while he asked white potential jurors an average of one each. In all, the district attorney struck five of the six black potential jurors for this sixth trial.

So, where is the justice in this? This case has been going on for 23 years. Each time, the victim’s families have to relive the loss of their loved ones. Curtis Flowers and his family have been riding a roller coaster of injustice as well. People who think Flowers is guilty are disgusted that he continues to appeal. Those who believe in his innocence are enraged that the state continues to try him. Honestly, I’m not sure which side I fall on, but I do know that the man is not receiving fair and impartial trials.

I hadn’t planned on writing about this case quite yet but on June 21, 2019, the US Supreme Court once again overturned Curtis Flowers’ conviction in a 7-2 decision that the state violated the Constitution. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote the majority opinion stating the prosecutor “displayed a pattern of racial bias,” using a total of 41 out of 42 total peremptory strikes throughout this process to block African American potential jurors, including five out of six in just the last trial. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the dissent.

All citizens have the right to a fair and impartial trial; to be judged by our peers. Fair and impartial means no cheating allowed. Our judicial system is an adversarial one. One side against the other. Many times, the prosecution will get tunnel vision and fight to prove the guilt of the defendant rather than trying to convict the right defendant. Curtis Flowers maintains his innocence. If the prosecution “knows” he’s guilty, then why can’t they prove it without breaking the rules and violating the defendant’s constitutional rights?

Now, it’s up to District Attorney Doug Evans to decide if he will try Curtis Flowers a seventh time. Seventh time’s the charm, right? But when should a district attorney step away? When does the fight become so personal that someone else comes in and says enough?

To learn more about this case, please check out these additional resources:

The latest US Supreme Court decision: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/17-9572_k536.pdf

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ms-supreme-court/1878694.html

About the found gun: https://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/2018/08/02/curtis-flowers-innocent-pathologist-thinks-multiple-killers-behind-quadruple-murder/813262002/

Please listen to In The Dark Podcast, Season 2: https://www.apmreports.org/in-the-dark/season-two

Adnan Syed Part II

During the last post, I told you that Hae Min Lee was murdered and Adnan Syed was arrested for the crime. It seemed like an open and shut case since his acquaintance, Jay Wilds, claimed he helped Adnan bury her body. However, there are so many issues with this case:

Issue #1: Since January 13 was a pretty ordinary day, Adnan couldn’t remember every detail of his whereabouts; however, a classmate by the name of Asia McClain clearly remembers seeing Adnan in the library on that day, during the time the state claimed Hae was killed. Adnan asked his attorney to contact Asia but she never did. Asia just assumed she wasn’t needed and went on with her life, not realizing how important this was until she heard about it again during the Serial podcast 15 years later. His track coach also remembered Adnan being at practice that day since Adnan had been fasting for Ramadan and therefore, didn’t partake in the usual workout. 

Issue #2: Adnan’s attorney, Cristina Gutierrez, was supposed to be top-notched; however, she did not do an adequate job at investigating this crime. Not only did Gutierrez fail to contact Asia McClain, she also didn’t hire any of the experts for which the family paid her. She was disbarred (by consent) in 2001 due to financial improprieties. Her voluntary disbarment was agreed upon because of her failing health due to multiple sclerosis. She died in 2004. 

Issue #3: Jay’s story – correction Jay’s stories, plural. Each time Jay spoke with investigators, his story was different. He actually gives at least seven versions of what happened: four interviews with police, two at trial, and a news interview – all differing from each other. There are, however, two points that Jay is consistent about: Hae was in the trunk of her own car, and Adnan called him at approximately 3:40 to come pick him up. Adnan says this call never took place and he was on campus until after track practice ended. Jay also told police he helped bury Hae’s body, but he received no jail time because of his cooperation. In fact, one of the investigators called in a personal favor from an attorney friend of his to represent Jay pro-bono. (This is NOT common practice). I would also like to point out that Jay and Adnan are acquaintances, not good friends. It’s hardly believable that Adnan would have told Jay that he committed a murder.  

Issue #4: The physical evidence doesn’t match Jay’s story. The lividity evidence showed that Hae was lying face down, prone, rather than curled up in the trunk of a small car. It also showed that she was most likely deceased for 8 to 12 hours before she was buried, not only 4 to 6 as Jay stated. In addition, Adnan’s DNA was not on Hae’s body at all. 

Jay led police to Hae’s vehicle parked in a grassy lot at an apartment complex. Her vehicle was never processed at the scene and was instead towed to headquarters for evidence collection. It was released to the family soon after, in March. Defense investigators don’t believe her car was in the lot for an extended period of time. Instead, they believe it was moved there just prior to Jay’s interview. A woman living near that lot was interviewed for the HBO documentary and stated there is no way it would have been there that long without someone, including her, calling the police. Additionally, neither Hae’s nor Adnan’s trunks appeared to have evidence of carrying a deceased body.

Issue #5: The tunnel vision by investigators was actually misconduct since they appeared to coach Jay on his stories to make sure they matched up with the state’s theory. I realize this is a pretty bold accusation but unfortunately, it’s true. Jay’s stories still don’t match the evidence. During the Undisclosed podcast, Susan Simpson played audio from Jay’s taped interviews. During those recordings, she pointed out there are very long pauses between questions and answers. In addition, each time Jay erred in a telling of the story, one of the investigators tapped on the table to refresh his memory, as if maybe pointing out places on a map. The following are only a few excerpts of the interviews taken from Undisclosed Podcast Season 1, episode 3 to show the tapping indications by investigators. You have to listen to this complete episode! Coaching a “witness” is misconduct!

https://undisclosed-podcast.com/episodes/season-1/episode-3-jays-day.html

[33:22] Detective MacGillivary: Okay, um, what happens then?  

Jay Wilds: We leave there, um, I believe… Can you bear with me for a minute? I… [tap tap] …um, okay, we left there… Ah, I take him, I took him back to school, and, and I dropped him off. (Jay’s Second Interview, pg. 19.)

[35:48] Jay Wilds: … and so I get in the car and I follow him, and we end up at the 70 Park and Ride off of, uh… um, what is that? Uh… [tap tap] Sh… Cooks Lane. (Jay’s First Interview, pg. 8.) 

[41:34] Detective MacGillivary: And both cars are parked back in the parking spot?  

Jay Wilds: No, just his car. Her car had been moved to the… [sound of paper, tap] …uh, spot around the corner prior to us digging the hole. (Jay’s Second Interview, pg. 33.) 

Susan Simpson pointed out the investigators seemed to be getting annoyed at Jay since he can’t remember what he is supposed to say. She also reminded us that they supposedly have two vehicles so how are they having a conversation? It’s ALMOST laughable.

[42:56] Detective MacGillivary: What do you do then?  

Jay Wilds: Um… hmm, we drive to Westview… um, I told him take me home. And on the way going home we pass by Westview, and he says, “I better get rid of this stuff.”  

Detective MacGillivary: [sigh] You’ve got two cars.  

Jay Wilds: Oh, I’m sorry. I apologize. Um, I’m missing… (Jay’s Second Interview, pg. 35.) 

(Chaudry, Miller, & Simpson, "Undisclosed Podcast", 2015)

Issue #6: The cell phone pings used as evidence against Adnan were not reliable for incoming calls. At trial, a cell phone expert testified that calls that pinged off towers in the Leakin Park area would confirm the phone was in that vicinity. However, Susan Simpson stumbled across the fax cover sheet that explicitly states, “Outgoing calls only are reliable for location status. Any incoming calls will NOT be considered reliable information for location.” Adnan’s attorney never brought this up at trial and the expert that testified has since stated he would have testified differently had he known about this fax cover sheet.

Issue #7 Alternative suspects. I’ve already mentioned Mr. Sellers, who stumbled upon Hae’s body, although he was cleared as a suspect. Jay has also been cleared and I’m not suggesting he did the crime, only that he is lying about Adnan doing so. But what about Hae’s boyfriend, Don? I’m not accusing him of murder since I have no proof and these kinds of accusations ruin lives. I do feel as though the police didn’t follow up on him, as they should have because he had an alibi. Do you know what his alibi was? He was working at Lens Crafters and has a time sheet to prove it. The time sheet, however, was created after the date in question AND the managers of the two stores he worked at were his mother and his stepmother. Further, an employee was interviewed for the HBO documentary and stated there would have been no reason for Don to be called in the day in question since they were fully staffed that day.

Adnan’s trials: 

His first was declared a mistrial since jurors overheard the judge call Cristina Gutierrez a liar. Jurors polled afterward stated he most likely would have been acquitted. In 2000, the jury at his second trial found him guilty and he was sentenced to life plus 30 years. His 2002-2003 appeals are all denied.  

In 2010, Justin Brown was hired as his new attorney who filed for post-conviction relief on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel. After much back and forth, the petition for post-conviction relief was denied by Judge Martin Welch. 

Serial Podcast aired in 2014 and became a phenomenon that no one expected. Suddenly, Adnan is known by everyone. In 2015, he was granted an application for leave to appeal and his attorney opened a new post-conviction relief petition. Adnan was granted a new hearing. Of course, this opened new wounds for Hae Min Lee’s family but there was finally hope a real killer could be apprehended. Asia McClain’s alibi testimony as well as the unreliable cell phone ping information was heard. Almost five long months later, Adnan Syed’s conviction was overturned by Judge Welch, meaning he could get a new trial if the state didn’t drop the charges.

However, Adnan remained incarcerated and the State of Maryland appealed the ruling, which was not surprising to Adnan’s defense team. Another seven months later, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals upheld Welch’s ruling and the state’s Court of Appeals agreed to hear the case. In November of 2018, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals heard arguments from both sides. I listened to these oral arguments and thought Adnan’s people delivered a much more compelling case than the prosecution; however, March 8, 2019 – literally two days before the HBO documentary about this case aired, the Court voted 4-3, denying him a new trial.  

Documentary spoiler alert: The state offered him a plea deal and Adnan did not accept. They offered him to serve four MORE years if he pleads guilty. He refused saying he couldn’t say he did something that he didn’t do. So the next step appears to be a petition to the US Supreme Court. Unfortunately, they only agree to hear approximately 2% of the 7000 to 8000 cases filed annually.

No matter what you believe about his guilt or innocence, Adnan did not receive a fair trial. If the state is so confident in his guilt, why not just try him again and prove it. Hae Min Lee and her family deserve more than allowing her real killer to remain free.

Please visit the following links to learn more about this case:

All things related to this case: https://www.adnansyedwiki.com/

Undisclosed Podcast: https://undisclosed-podcast.com/episodes/season-1/

The HBO documentary: https://www.hbo.com/the-case-against-adnan-syed

Serial Podcast: https://serialpodcast.org/season-one

Susan Simpson’s extensive blog posts about this case: https://viewfromll2.com/category/serial-blogging-about-a-podcast/

Colin Miller’s extensive blog posts about this case. This is a later post that has links to entries 1-20: 

https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/evidenceprof/2014/12/ive-done-eighteen-posts-herehereherehereherehereherehereherehere-hereherehereherehereherehereherehere-an.html

Please consider donating to the Adnan Syed Trust to assist with legal fees.

https://www.launchgood.com/campaign/help_freeadnan#!/

Ordering merchandise using this link also benefits Adnan's legal fund:

https://www.zazzle.com/s/undisclosed?q=undisclosed&sgsc=undisclosed

Chaudry, R., Miller, C., & Simpson, S. (2015, May 12). Undisclosed Podcast

[Audio blog post]. Retrieved from https://undisclosed-podcast.com/

Adnan Syed Part I

As I prepare to post this, Adnan Syed has spent 7416 days incarcerated for a crime that I truly do not believe he committed. That’s also 7416 days without justice for the victim, Hae Min Lee. Adnan was arrested for the murder of Hae when he was 17-years old; he turned 38 in May of this year. He has spent more time in prison that he has outside those walls.  

The infuriating thing about Adnan, and so many just like him, is that the fight to get a new and fair trial is an uphill battle. It’s much easier to get a wrongful conviction than it is to win a new trial, much less freedom. There is so much to this case, and as much as I love to tell people about it, I just cannot relay all of the information. In fact, I had to break this case into two posts since I didn’t want to overwhelm you. It’s my hope that you’ll become interested enough after reading this that you will dig deeper and begin to champion for Adnan’s innocence and justice for Hae. So, please listen to the “Undisclosed Podcast” with Rabia Chaundry, Susan Simpson, and Colin Miller. When you’re done bingeing that, please watch the HBO series, “The Case Against Adnan.” I don’t think you’ll be disappointed with either, and instead will walk away asking, “What the…?”

Adnan Syed and Hae Min Lee dated for approximately nine months while they attended Woodlawn High in Baltimore, Maryland. Neither of their parents knew about their relationship and eventually Hae tired of the secrecy, breaking it off in December 1998. They remained friends, hung around the same people, and each moved on to other love interests. They spoke often and remained friends. 

January 13, 1999 began as any other day for Adnan. It was his friend Stephanie’s birthday and he offered her boyfriend, Jay, the use of his car so he could go to the mall and get her a gift. The gist of the Jay-Adnan friendship was that they were acquaintances that smoked pot together. Since Jay was dating Adnan’s good friend, Adnan tolerated him more than many others did. Jay accepted his vehicle offer and Adnan’s life changed forever.

Adnan had bumped into Hae early in the school day, and asked her for a ride to track practice. Hae said she would, however, later in the day she told him she had somewhere she had to be and couldn’t give him a ride. It was common knowledge that Hae always picked up her cousin at 3:15 but she made it seem as though she had other plans as well. Adnan went to the library to check his email and then went to track practice. Hae never made it to pick up her cousin or to her Lens Crafter shift that evening. 

School was cancelled on January 14^th and 15^th due to inclement weather. The evening of the 15^th was their friend Krista’s 18^th birthday party, and when Hae didn’t appear for that, her friends started to get concerned but guessed that she was wrapped up in her two-week old relationship with her new boyfriend, Don. The following Monday was MLK day. This meant that many of Hae’s friends didn’t realize she was missing or at least they didn’t think very much of it. That Tuesday was Eid al-Fitr, a Muslim holiday that marks the end of Ramadan so Adnan wasn’t in school that day either. Once the police began interviewing Hae’s friends over the phone, they soon realized this was serious and that their friend was really missing.  

On February 9, 1999, Hae’s deceased body was found in Leakin Park in Baltimore, Maryland by Alonzo Sellers. Sellers had stopped on the side of the road to go to the bathroom, crossed the road, and then went pretty far into the woods, finally happening upon her body. He was never truly considered a suspect although it was determined the burial spot wasn’t obvious so some speculate he knew about it ahead of time. It was also later discovered that Sellers’ house was within walking distance of Woodlawn High where Hae was last seen. He is not considered a suspect and I am not suggesting he should be. 

Here is where the case goes awry.  The police seem to immediately focus on Adnan. They ran his driving records and vehicle details before her body was found. They developed tunnel vision and never really looked elsewhere. Three days after Hae’s body was found, an anonymous call to the police pointed them to Adnan and they began collecting his cell phone records – for a phone that was in the vehicle he lent to his acquaintance, Jay. Adnan had gotten a new phone the day before Hae’s disappearance but since he couldn’t bring it to school, he left it in the glove compartment, giving Jay permission to use it.  

Those phone records led police to Jenn Pusateri since she was called most frequently that day. Jenn was a close friend of Jays and they spent a lot of time together. During her interview, she informed police that Jay told her Adnan killed Hae. In Jay’s police interview, he told investigators that Adnan called him at approximately 3:35 and asked him to come pick him up. He also stated that Adnan showed him Hae’s body in the trunk of her own car and that helped to bury her body in Leakin Park. Jay then led them to Hae’s car and Adnan was arrested on February 28, 1999 for her murder.

Tragically, when Adnan was arrested, his charging documents listed his birth year incorrectly, therefore listing him as 18-years old. He was denied bail since this would have been a capital case, if he were actually 18. He’s been behind bars ever since. 

Tune in to the next post to read some of the numerous issues with this case!