Bad Evidence Case Study

Serial: Final Essay Adnan Syed is not guilty due to the lack of evidence provided to prove that Syed is linked to the murder of eighteen-year-old Hae Min Lee. The evidence provided to prove Syed’s guilty goes as follows, Syed does not remember clearly where he was at the time of the murder. Jay Wilds, a casual acquaintance of Adnan Syed, reported Syed to the authorities after he helped bury Hae Min Lee and ended up not being punished for being an accomplice. Syed’s alleged motive for the murder is not clear. This is called “bad evidence”. As explained in the Serial podcast, a bad evidence is when the authorities do not go in depth with the investigation because it might prove the primary suspect as innocent and would not have anybody else to blame or convict. Syed was …show more content…
No matter what the circumstance, the authorities should have no reason to only prosecute one suspect when the party of two where both involved. Even when Wilds first talked with the police, he was repeatedly lying for a reason unknown to most podcast listeners. This led to think that the police was pushing Wilds to pick a suspect for the murder. In the podcast, the police that was interviewing Wilds was constantly suggesting what to say next and Wilds trying to comply, always agrees to what the police are telling him. But why would Wilds go to the authorities in the first place, if from there, he doesn’t even have his story made up? The only reason he went that day was to tell lies and expected the police to believe him, which they did, understandably. Because they didn’t have a lead.
In the podcast, Koenig refers back to the Justin Wolfe case and how he was wrongly convicted of the crimes that was accused of him. And was later found that the one who gave police the lead, was the one to blame for the crime. This brings me back to Wilds and Syed. What if Wilds is just trying to cover up his crime and framing