CONVICTION OVERTURNED MD - Hae Min Lee, 17, Baltimore, 13 Jan 1999

[arizona]

Back to the facts of the case...

I still do not understand what time of day or night Jay Wilds helped bury the body. Can someone defending the verdict answer that for me?

 

[MzOpinion8d]

Back to the facts of the case...

I still do not understand what time of day or night Jay Wilds helped bury the body. Can someone defending the verdict answer that for me?

Anyone defending the verdict is likely to say it doesn't matter, because ultimately when she was buried doesn't change the main facts that Jay is consistent with: "Hae was murdered and Adnan did it." As long as Jay keeps saying Adnan did it, no one who thinks Adnan is guilty cares that Jay is a liar.

 

[MzOpinion8d]

Which version? It's no secret that Jay's story has changed, he's still a whole lot more credible than Adnan.

Can you please explain to me how Adnan, who has consistently maintained his innocence and told the same version of events repeatedly, even admitting to drug use and stealing petty cash, is more credible than Jay, who has literally told six versions of events, NONE of which line up with the cell phone evidence that the state clings to?

I can accept if you find neither of them credible, even though I wouldn't agree. But I can't handle the opinion that Jay is more credible.

 

[MzOpinion8d]

Meanwhile poor Cristina Gutierrez gets dragged through the mud now that she's not here to defend herself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lucky for her, because if she defended herself as well as she defended Adnan her reputation would most definitely be muddied.

 

[arizona]

Anyone defending the verdict is likely to say it doesn't matter, because ultimately when she was buried doesn't change the main facts that Jay is consistent with: "Hae was murdered and Adnan did it." As long as Jay keeps saying Adnan did it, no one who thinks Adnan is guilty cares that Jay is a liar.

Why can't you answer the question, if you believe the verdict was correct? It is amazing how difficult it is to elicit the most basic facts from anyone who thinks he is guilty. And it's difficult for a reason: the only evidence against him is the word of a single person, and that word is a house of cards.

Again. When was she buried?

 

[circe221]

There is an abundance of case law from appellate courts making it clear that a defense attorney's failure to contact an alibi witness constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel under the 6th Amendment. The "law" you are looking for, to be specific, is the 6th Amendment, as that amendment is interpreted by courts.

An attorney is not required to contact "anyone related to a case." An alibi witness who can potentially fatally pierce the government's timeline of events, however, is a witness the courts state must be contacted if the attorney has even a minimal amount of competence.

As far as the speculation on why Gutierrez did not contact her is concerned for some reason other than incompetence: you must keep in mind that at the same time she was handling Adnan's case, she was in the midst of a mental and financial breakdown in her personal life. She was convicted of defrauding a total of 28 different clients from the same time period as when she had this case, and she had been recently diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. She was disbarred, for conduct occurring at the same time as his case. The argument that she was a brilliant criminal defense lawyer on top of her game during this case is easily disproven.

So just out of curiosity, why do you think she never contacted Asia?
As a defense attorney, wouldn't she have an obligation to her client to NOT subpoena someone who might actually harm the case for her client?
I don't think she was "brilliant", but I don't think that she deliberately "threw" the case or didn't give it her best effort.

 

[mrssunshine]

The problem I have with people using, "Jay did it! He helped the police frame Adnan!" Is how can anyone think the Baltimore police would chose to pin a murder on a middle class young Muslim man with a stable loving family, who had the means to provide him with a premier defense attorney VS a poor young black man who dealt drugs and had a family with some shady family members? They wouldn't. If the cops thought Jay killed Hae, they would have charged him.
Yes Jay certainly isn't an ideal witness but he isn't a murderer. And the podcast, while great listening, paints Adnan in an innocent light.

 

[mrssunshine]

Back to the facts of the case...

I still do not understand what time of day or night Jay Wilds helped bury the body. Can someone defending the verdict answer that for me?

I think Hae was buried after Adnan got the call from the police on his cell phone, while he and Jay were at Cathy's house as per her testimony.
She testifies about his freak out. And the 2 of them leaving. This was like 6:30-7pm?

Then you have Adnans cell pinging near the burial site during the 7:00 hour.

Then you have the testimony of Jen to corroborate this as she was calling the cell and then picked up Jay who was dropped off by Adnan at a store. This was 8:45-9:00 ish?
Her statement to the police was Jay told her then in her car about Hae and they retrieved the shovels.

So she was buried after Cathy's but before the Jen pick up. That is what I think.

 

[arizona]

So just out of curiosity, why do you think she never contacted Asia?

She forgot. She was too busy. She couldn't be bothered. She assumed her law clerk did it. No one can know now. One thing we do know is that she listed over 80 so-called alibi witnesses, and I believe called a few of them to the stand. The problem with being sloppy and listing huge numbers of witnesses without properly organizing and thinking them through is that the most important one is at risk of falling through the cracks. And guess who gets to suffer the consequences when that happens? The defendant.

As a defense attorney, wouldn't she have an obligation to her client to NOT subpoena someone who might actually harm the case for her client?
I don't think she was "brilliant", but I don't think that she deliberately "threw" the case or didn't give it her best effort.

I don't think she deliberately threw the case either by the way, although there is plenty of evidence of her defrauding numerous clients during that time period. But to answer your question, she didn't have to subpoena anybody. All she had to do was pick up the telephone and talk to Asia McClain. If it turns out that McClain's story is shady, lacks credibility, is factually unsupported, or has other problems, then she'd never talk to her again. But you can't know any of that without picking up the phone.

Gutierrez didn't pick up the phone. And, it turns out, McClain's story is pretty rock solid.

 

[arizona]

The problem I have with people using, "Jay did it! He helped the police frame Adnan!" Is how can anyone think the Baltimore police would chose to pin a murder on a middle class young Muslim man with a stable loving family, who had the means to provide him with a premier defense attorney VS a poor young black man who dealt drugs and had a family with some shady family members? They wouldn't. If the cops thought Jay killed Hae, they would have charged him.
Yes Jay certainly isn't an ideal witness but he isn't a murderer. And the podcast, while great listening, paints Adnan in an innocent light.

First, there is zero evidence that the police "framed" Adnan. I personally do not believe that. I do believe that the police got bamboozled by Jay's Allah-hu-Akbar shtick, and sincerely believed that Adnan committed the murder (despite all character evidence to the contrary, and despite a complete absence of any abusive or malicious behavior toward Hae even after the break-up). It is Jay who did the framing. Whether he did so because he committed the murder, or whether he did it because he's a psychopath (there is plenty of evidence of his criminal behavior before and after the murder), we can't know because the police failed to scrutinize him.

You also keep saying that Jay is not a murderer. This is supposed to be a pro-victim forum. He sure as hell is a murderer, under Maryland law. The conspiracy statute provides that you are guilty of the crime if you have prior knowledge of a plan to commit murder, and then take any affirmative action in furtherance of that plan, which is then implemented. Jay did all that, according to his own statements to the police, and then helped bury the body. He should be serving a life sentence right now.

 

[arizona]

I think Hae was buried after Adnan got the call from the police on his cell phone, while he and Jay were at Cathy's house as per her testimony.
She testifies about his freak out. And the 2 of them leaving. This was like 6:30-7pm?

Then you have Adnans cell pinging near the burial site during the 7:00 hour.

Then you have the testimony of Jen to corroborate this as she was calling the cell and then picked up Jay who was dropped off by Adnan at a store. This was 8:45-9:00 ish?
Her statement to the police was Jay told her then in her car about Hae and they retrieved the shovels.

So she was buried after Cathy's but before the Jen pick up. That is what I think.

I really do appreciate your trying to answer the question.

So, fair enough, you think the body was buried between 6 and 7 pm.

Why, then, does Jay say it was buried at midnight in his recent interview? He'd claimed it was 6-7 pm during his second police interview, and during the 2nd trial.

The drumbeat response to these problems is that "it doesn't matter." It does matter. A man deeply involved in the murder and burial of a teenager, with whom he was personally acquainted (remember that Hae was close friends with Jay's girlfriend at the time), does not blur major facts about such an act together as though he was remembering a trip to the grocery store. Confusing 7pm with midnight is one of a hundred problems that exist with Jay's timeline of events. They cannot be explained away. He is lying.

 

[Concerned Mama]

She forgot. She was too busy. She couldn't be bothered. She assumed her law clerk did it. No one can know now. One thing we do know is that she listed over 80 so-called alibi witnesses, and I believe called a few of them to the stand. The problem with being sloppy and listing huge numbers of witnesses without properly organizing and thinking them through is that the most important one is at risk of falling through the cracks. And guess who gets to suffer the consequences when that happens? The defendant.



I don't think she deliberately threw the case either by the way, although there is plenty of evidence of her defrauding numerous clients during that time period. But to answer your question, she didn't have to subpoena anybody. All she had to do was pick up the telephone and talk to Asia McClain. If it turns out that McClain's story is shady, lacks credibility, is factually unsupported, or has other problems, then she'd never talk to her again. But you can't know any of that without picking up the phone.

Gutierrez didn't pick up the phone. And, it turns out, McClain's story is pretty rock solid.

bbm

Really? Now you've got my curiosity up. It's been about a month since I listened to the podcast, but from what I remember, McClain's story didn't pan out. I thought she talked about remembering the day clearly, since she remembers leaving the library and it started snowing, so she ended up spending the night at her bf's house with school canceled the next day. When the weather and school closing reports were checked, it turned out McClain's clear memory was probably of a day or so later, when it did snow and school ended up being canceled.

Now I've got to go back and re-listen to the pocasts! I can't recall if I'm remembering clearly or not, and it wasn't that long ago!

 

[arizona]

bbm

Really? Now you've got my curiosity up. It's been about a month since I listened to the podcast, but from what I remember, McClain's story didn't pan out. I thought she talked about remembering the day clearly, since she remembers leaving the library and it started snowing, so she ended up spending the night at her bf's house with school canceled the next day. When the weather and school closing reports were checked, it turned out McClain's clear memory was probably of a day or so later, when it did snow and school ended up being canceled.

Now I've got to go back and re-listen to the pocasts! I can't recall if I'm remembering clearly or not, and it wasn't that long ago!

For all the complaining I hear about Sarah Koenig's supposedly pro-defense bias, I completely disagree with that and this is one example showing why. Koenig tried to poke holes in McClain's belief that she saw him on January 13. But the holes she was trying to poke were pretty flimsy, and she never followed up on those failed attempts later.

McClain remembers that she saw Syed on January 13 because she was snowed in at her boyfriend's house on January 14. Koenig then dug up some vague weather reports to try and challenge this, observing that snow didn't fall on January 14 until later in that morning.

But that's not what McClain said. McClain didn't say "snow fell during the evening of January 13." She just said that she decided she was snowed in so she would crash at her boyfriend's house that night. If there were tv reports and weather forecasts talking about how bad the snow was going to be on January 14, broadcast on January 13, she could have easily made that conclusion even though snow was not on the ground on January 13.

None of this was touched on by Koenig.

 

[circe221]

She forgot. She was too busy. She couldn't be bothered. She assumed her law clerk did it. No one can know now. One thing we do know is that she listed over 80 so-called alibi witnesses, and I believe called a few of them to the stand. The problem with being sloppy and listing huge numbers of witnesses without properly organizing and thinking them through is that the most important one is at risk of falling through the cracks. And guess who gets to suffer the consequences when that happens? The defendant.



I don't think she deliberately threw the case either by the way, although there is plenty of evidence of her defrauding numerous clients during that time period. But to answer your question, she didn't have to subpoena anybody. All she had to do was pick up the telephone and talk to Asia McClain. If it turns out that McClain's story is shady, lacks credibility, is factually unsupported, or has other problems, then she'd never talk to her again. But you can't know any of that without picking up the phone.

Gutierrez didn't pick up the phone. And, it turns out, McClain's story is pretty rock solid.

Have to disagree. I don't think not calling someone who could have been a key part of an alibi would have been accidentally overlooked.
If there is ever an appeal, I wonder if they would try to go after Gutierrez's legal team? Alleging some sort of negligence like this seems pretty serious, and since Gutierrez herself isn't here, maybe they would go after anyone else who was working on the case. Not saying I think that should happen, since I believe there was a method to her "madness", at least in this instance. My hunch is that it is Adnan himself who steered Gutierrez away from Asia, and we may never know why.

 

[circe221]

The problem I have with people using, "Jay did it! He helped the police frame Adnan!" Is how can anyone think the Baltimore police would chose to pin a murder on a middle class young Muslim man with a stable loving family, who had the means to provide him with a premier defense attorney VS a poor young black man who dealt drugs and had a family with some shady family members? They wouldn't. If the cops thought Jay killed Hae, they would have charged him.
Yes Jay certainly isn't an ideal witness but he isn't a murderer. And the podcast, while great listening, paints Adnan in an innocent light.

Totally agree. And Jay's lying does not preclude Adnan from being the guilty party.

I definitely think Jay lied, and should be prosecuted for perjury, but I absolutely do not think he killed Hae.
The killer is sitting in jail, where he belongs, and hopefully no podcast, sycophantic journalist, or fame *advertiser censored* attorney will change that.

 

[kemo]

Everything presented in the podcast leaves the listener with no clear answer to what really happened or who did it. There is no smoking gun and we don't have that "ah ha!" Moment where it all fits together. There are a few things we do know and any resolution starts from there. The following are "Facts" that I have assembled that We can start with to arrive at a conclusion.


1) Jay knew the location of Hae's car. He didn't just make up a story out of thin air. Had was not the victim of some random serial killer. One way or another, Jay's involved. Either Adnan did it and he helped with the burial, Jay did (perhaps with a third party) and he is framing Adnan, or they are both involved but not as Jay has claimed.

2)Hae was killed (or perhaps abducted or held against her will) sometime between 2:15 when school got out and 3:10 when she failed to pick up her cousin.

3) Adnan and Jay are at. Cathy's house at 6:24 when Adnan receives the call from officer Adcock. They leave together with the phone. Between 7:09 and 7:16 Jenn calls Adan's cell phone and it pings off a tower that covers a small area that includes Leakin Park. (She testified that she spoke to both Jan and Adnan).

4) Adnan called Nisha 4 times the night before and twice the night in question but he denies calling her at 3:32.

5) Hae had a pager but no cell phone. No call was made from Adnan's phone to Hae's pager that day. The only incoming call to Adnan' s phone could possibly have come from Hae was the 2:36 call and it lasted only .05 minutes.

6) Adnan had gone on record as saying that he offered Jay the use of his car and phone that day (Jay did not ask for them) and he had discussed with Hae the possibility that she give him a ride after school. He denies he ever actually got a ride from her that day.

Anyone disagree or have additions, qualifications or comments?

 

[mrssunshine]

All great points Kemo. And I would add to 6) that 2 other witnesses testified that Adnan asked Hae for a ride during school for after school that day. When he was first asked by police he admitted asking for the ride, then later denied doing so. He didn't need a ride anyhow, because Jay would have come for him. He needed a way to be alone with Hae in her car. I also think he realized Hae was really moving on with Don this time, and was not coming back.

The fact that Adnan got a brand new cell phone (his first) about 24 hours before Hae disappeared also seems (IMO) to be a catalyst to help him go forward with confronting and ultimately murdering Hae. That new cellphone just sticks with me.

 

[mrssunshine]

Why, then, does Jay say it was buried at midnight in his recent interview? He'd claimed it was 6-7 pm during his second police interview, and during the 2nd trial.

The drumbeat response to these problems is that "it doesn't matter." It does matter. A man deeply involved in the murder and burial of a teenager, with whom he was personally acquainted (remember that Hae was close friends with Jay's girlfriend at the time), does not blur major facts about such an act together as though he was remembering a trip to the grocery store. Confusing 7pm with midnight is one of a hundred problems that exist with Jay's timeline of events. They cannot be explained away. He is lying.

Well I can't explain Jay. He certainly isn't the best witness. But I do believe him on some key points. It's almost like he is the kind of person who can't say, I don't remember, he just has to fill in all the blanks with whatever he can. But he justifies it by thinking if I'm truthful about the "big" things it won't matter. As opposed to Adnan who remembers nothing since it was a regular day to him.!!
Who knows? The Serial podcast began by making a point about Memory. Remember?

His interview was 15 years later. He has obviously smoked a lot of pot in his day. Left out things to protect others/protect himself in interviews. Maybe he doesn't remember the time? I dont have a good answer, but his 15 years later interview not under oath does not change my mind about Adnan being the murderer of Hae.

 

[MzOpinion8d]

Why can't you answer the question, if you believe the verdict was correct? It is amazing how difficult it is to elicit the most basic facts from anyone who thinks he is guilty. And it's difficult for a reason: the only evidence against him is the word of a single person, and that word is a house of cards.

Again. When was she buried?

I *don't* think the verdict is correct. I'm in agreement with you. Re-read my post...I'm saying that the defenders of the verdict seem to fall back on the "reasoning" that the "most important part" of Jay's story doesn't change, which is that Adnan did it. Which is ridiculous reasoning.

I'm not specifically referring to the posters on WS who believe the verdict...as I've mentioned before, I read a lot of r e d d i t and the intelligence level there seems to be sharply lower than WS

 

[circe221]

Not fact but theory - I thought initially that the fact she was strangled indicated that the murder was in the heat of the moment, and not pre-meditated, even though Adnan allegedly made statements about "killing" her and the "I will kill" written on the note.
However, I wonder if both are possible.
My thinking is this - perhaps Adnan was angry about Hae's budding relationship with Don, but Hae was sort of still stringing him along, and he thought they would get back together. At some point, he made a plea to her and she told him once and for all it was over. Maybe that day, he planned to be alone with her, not to kill her but to make one last attempt to reconcile. It was said (I forget by who) that Adnan and Hae had gone to the Best Buy parking lot to hook up, and it is possible that they had gone to Leakin Park for the same reason. Is it possible that the trip to Best Buy was for them to talk, and she told him something he didn't want to hear (she was in love with Don and there was no chance for Adnan)? Maybe Adnan became angry and agitated and she told him to get out of the car and he became enraged, lashing out at her physically, which resulted in her death.

Just a theory as to how it might have happened.

Side note - has anyone listened to the "Crime Writers Discuss Serial" podcast? I was listening to a few episodes today. Interesting to hear perspectives of people who are true crime and fiction writers on the case.