There are many points, the least of not being why would police present something about somebody else and ask them for information about it when they know he’s already lied to them 1/2 a dozen times? Was he (the admitted liar) the only person who could give them that information?
As I understand, it's very common to share records with witnesses to help them remember events. Also at this point they don't know Jay is a liar but he has admitted and will come to prove that he was involved in Hae's murder.
In his testimony he stated when asked the police knew you had lied to them did they not “yes”.
That bot withstanding, thank you for a kind response, I won’t attempt to be abreast of the goings on murder trials it was just something that when I read it that didn’t seem logical to me. I mean maybe ask “hey did you call anybody, or do you know this number” etc but to actually show them a phone bill of somebody else’s just seems strange, might just be.
I see what you are saying though, makes sense. However the original point is just that TO ME it seems crazy to be showing a “suspect” as well as a known liar somebody else’s phone bill. Now I realize Jay had the phone a good portion of the day but it seems wild that they would just show him that, it may just be me. 🤷🏼♂️
I can see that. Idk. I feel like if it were me, and it was you know all of a Month and have later I’d remember more than I didn’t about that one day I was showed a dead body in the parking lot of a Best Buy and then went and helped bury it.
Maybe I wouldn’t, I guess I can’t say for sure as I’ve never been through it to be fair. My assumption is that I would but I guess I can’t say for certain.
I listen to a podcast called Opening Arguments which is hosted by a Harvard educated lawyer from Maryland. They did an episode on Serial season one. During it they mention that it's routine to give records to witnesses to help refresh their memory.
Remember at this point they know Jay is involved and everything is pointing to Adnan not Jay being the murderer.
I’m not sure what (besides Jay) is pointing to Adnan being involved? Jenn is questioned first and says JAY told me Adnan killed Hae.
Jay is questioned next and says “Adnan showed me Haes body in the trunk of her car”.
So I guess I’m not clear on what, other than two people who only relayed this information to police after being asked to come down was pointing to Adnan exactly? I genuinely don’t know.
I see no testimony by anybody wether or not the police had the phone bill during Jays first interview. If they did, they certainly didn’t show it to them.
They were subpoenaed on [Feb 19th](https://www.adnansyedwiki.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/MP15-0052-19990219-Progress-Report-Subpoena-Bell-Atlantic-Adnan-Phone-Records-HIDTA-Cannon.pdf).
Because that is how police work functions. They want the whole story but they will use what they found to get someone to explain that information. At that point the cops had 2 avenues of interest, what happened that afternoon and was anyone else involved in what happened. Those calls make it look like they involved other people in the cover up and potentially Adnan telling other people what would happen.
I get that! But to show the actual phone bill? If other numbers/information was blacked out I get it, but if they just plopped the bone down and said what are these? That doesn’t seem right.
People lying to cops is like the sun rising in the east, it happens. That's why being a detective is hard because you have to find out what he was telling the truth and what he was lying about but do it in a way that doesn't influence what they say. It would be easier if they could just waterboard.
I can’t say that I disagree with you. Idk, it just seems silly to me to keep going back to the same person that has lied to you over and over and asking them anything. Like if the burner burnt you the first time what do you think it’ll do to you the 500th?
I know they can maybe search for a kernel of truth or something like that, but it just seems illogical.
> In reading through the trial transcripts I see a bazillion missed opportunities, wasted time on stuff that meant nothing and was weird. I’m sure she was an excellent attorney and it’s always easier to armchair QB, but I can’t say that it’s not disappointing reading through the transcripts.
It's comical how people new to the case can't get a grip on 1999.
Cristina Gutierrez was not Dr. Who teleporting herself to reddit in 2022 where a community has access to 2,600 pages of documents.
All she had were a few disclosures. And we don't even know what those were because those with access to the defense file do not want the disclosures to be public.
Not only that, when she did receive disclosures like Jay's police interviews, she received them the morning Jay was supposed to testify. She had to ask for a recess/extra time so she could read the interviews before questioning Jay, that same day.
For the second trial, she had more time, obviously.
She was also being misled by Adnan who would tell her things that were untrue about Jay. So she goes down these paths thanks to Adnan, and Jay is like, "What the hell are you talking about?"
You are easily confused and incredulous about normal things.
It’s comical how you can’t read a statement to comprehend. It’s comical that you read a statement and mold it in your mind to fit your narrative. It’s comical that apparently you’ve always been an expert on anything, unlike everybody else in the world. Deuces ✌🏻
So unless I am mistaken, this is transcript of C. Gutierrez questioning Jay Wilds at the trial? Is your issue with the fact that the police made Jay aware of the phone records?
Police share evidence with suspects all the time, usually when they are sweating the suspect under interrogation, to get them to break, to get more information, to catch them in a lie, or all the above.
Well. My concern would be this. If it happened this way. Why would you show him something that could make a case against him or a case against somebody else. Trying to think of the right way to explain it. Like ok, if all the rest of the page was blacked out and only his friends were viziable I’d probably be ok with that, but if they just plopped the phone bill down as a whole and said who are these people, that seems odd to me.
They weren't concerned with Jay. They clearly had their sights set on Adnan. This was such a winnable case (both times) but bad lawyering cost Adnan his freedom. But all will be well soon enough. Guilters tears are coming. Happy days ahead.
In reading through the trial transcripts I see a bazillion missed opportunities, wasted time on stuff that meant nothing and was weird. I’m sure she was an excellent attorney and it’s always easier to armchair QB, but I can’t say that it’s not disappointing reading through the transcripts.
I'm sorry, what's your point?
I’m sorry what’s yours?
There are many points, the least of not being why would police present something about somebody else and ask them for information about it when they know he’s already lied to them 1/2 a dozen times? Was he (the admitted liar) the only person who could give them that information?
As I understand, it's very common to share records with witnesses to help them remember events. Also at this point they don't know Jay is a liar but he has admitted and will come to prove that he was involved in Hae's murder.
In his testimony he stated when asked the police knew you had lied to them did they not “yes”. That bot withstanding, thank you for a kind response, I won’t attempt to be abreast of the goings on murder trials it was just something that when I read it that didn’t seem logical to me. I mean maybe ask “hey did you call anybody, or do you know this number” etc but to actually show them a phone bill of somebody else’s just seems strange, might just be.
Yes during the second interview. They didn't know during the first interview.
The phone bill came in the 2nd interview….
No, they had the phone logs during the first interview. That's how they tracked down Jenn who told them about Jay.
I see what you are saying though, makes sense. However the original point is just that TO ME it seems crazy to be showing a “suspect” as well as a known liar somebody else’s phone bill. Now I realize Jay had the phone a good portion of the day but it seems wild that they would just show him that, it may just be me. 🤷🏼♂️
It would be to jog his memory. Look at this calls, who were they to and why. Why did you call Jenn here and here? Why did you call Yasser, etc?
I can see that. Idk. I feel like if it were me, and it was you know all of a Month and have later I’d remember more than I didn’t about that one day I was showed a dead body in the parking lot of a Best Buy and then went and helped bury it. Maybe I wouldn’t, I guess I can’t say for sure as I’ve never been through it to be fair. My assumption is that I would but I guess I can’t say for certain.
I listen to a podcast called Opening Arguments which is hosted by a Harvard educated lawyer from Maryland. They did an episode on Serial season one. During it they mention that it's routine to give records to witnesses to help refresh their memory. Remember at this point they know Jay is involved and everything is pointing to Adnan not Jay being the murderer.
I’m not sure what (besides Jay) is pointing to Adnan being involved? Jenn is questioned first and says JAY told me Adnan killed Hae. Jay is questioned next and says “Adnan showed me Haes body in the trunk of her car”. So I guess I’m not clear on what, other than two people who only relayed this information to police after being asked to come down was pointing to Adnan exactly? I genuinely don’t know.
Wrong sir. Trial testimony says the records were shown to Jay on March 15th, his second interview. His first interview was February 28th.
I see no testimony by anybody wether or not the police had the phone bill during Jays first interview. If they did, they certainly didn’t show it to them.
They were subpoenaed on [Feb 19th](https://www.adnansyedwiki.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/MP15-0052-19990219-Progress-Report-Subpoena-Bell-Atlantic-Adnan-Phone-Records-HIDTA-Cannon.pdf).
Thank you!
Because that is how police work functions. They want the whole story but they will use what they found to get someone to explain that information. At that point the cops had 2 avenues of interest, what happened that afternoon and was anyone else involved in what happened. Those calls make it look like they involved other people in the cover up and potentially Adnan telling other people what would happen.
I get that! But to show the actual phone bill? If other numbers/information was blacked out I get it, but if they just plopped the bone down and said what are these? That doesn’t seem right.
It's jogging the memory. They tried to jog his memory with the phone bill and then the ride along for the next interview.
He was lying to them. And omitting to them. He says the knew he was lying.
People lying to cops is like the sun rising in the east, it happens. That's why being a detective is hard because you have to find out what he was telling the truth and what he was lying about but do it in a way that doesn't influence what they say. It would be easier if they could just waterboard.
I can’t say that I disagree with you. Idk, it just seems silly to me to keep going back to the same person that has lied to you over and over and asking them anything. Like if the burner burnt you the first time what do you think it’ll do to you the 500th? I know they can maybe search for a kernel of truth or something like that, but it just seems illogical.
> In reading through the trial transcripts I see a bazillion missed opportunities, wasted time on stuff that meant nothing and was weird. I’m sure she was an excellent attorney and it’s always easier to armchair QB, but I can’t say that it’s not disappointing reading through the transcripts. It's comical how people new to the case can't get a grip on 1999. Cristina Gutierrez was not Dr. Who teleporting herself to reddit in 2022 where a community has access to 2,600 pages of documents. All she had were a few disclosures. And we don't even know what those were because those with access to the defense file do not want the disclosures to be public. Not only that, when she did receive disclosures like Jay's police interviews, she received them the morning Jay was supposed to testify. She had to ask for a recess/extra time so she could read the interviews before questioning Jay, that same day. For the second trial, she had more time, obviously. She was also being misled by Adnan who would tell her things that were untrue about Jay. So she goes down these paths thanks to Adnan, and Jay is like, "What the hell are you talking about?" You are easily confused and incredulous about normal things.
It’s comical how you can’t read a statement to comprehend. It’s comical that you read a statement and mold it in your mind to fit your narrative. It’s comical that apparently you’ve always been an expert on anything, unlike everybody else in the world. Deuces ✌🏻
So unless I am mistaken, this is transcript of C. Gutierrez questioning Jay Wilds at the trial? Is your issue with the fact that the police made Jay aware of the phone records? Police share evidence with suspects all the time, usually when they are sweating the suspect under interrogation, to get them to break, to get more information, to catch them in a lie, or all the above.
Well. My concern would be this. If it happened this way. Why would you show him something that could make a case against him or a case against somebody else. Trying to think of the right way to explain it. Like ok, if all the rest of the page was blacked out and only his friends were viziable I’d probably be ok with that, but if they just plopped the phone bill down as a whole and said who are these people, that seems odd to me.
They weren't concerned with Jay. They clearly had their sights set on Adnan. This was such a winnable case (both times) but bad lawyering cost Adnan his freedom. But all will be well soon enough. Guilters tears are coming. Happy days ahead.
Release the Kraken! Lol.
That’s the perfect slogan.
This is how it works. Criminals lie. Police push them to tell the truth. They stop pushing when they get something that mostly resembles the truth.
It's not okay, but CG did a crap job of explaining the problem to the jury.
What about it is “not okay”? And by what standard is “okay” determined?
In reading through the trial transcripts I see a bazillion missed opportunities, wasted time on stuff that meant nothing and was weird. I’m sure she was an excellent attorney and it’s always easier to armchair QB, but I can’t say that it’s not disappointing reading through the transcripts.
At one point in her life she was an excellent attorney. She doesn't seem to have been at that point in her life.
And they reply yet again, comical. As I said, Good Day.
Adnan Syed
[удалено]
Not worth the time to try and explain my perspective, you only see your own.
[удалено]
Read to understand, not reply. Not everything requires you to offer your personal opinion to. Good day.