Justin Wolfe's case - SK states how Adnan had mentioned the Wolfe case to her and how it was similar to his case. SK recounts various similarities - a good kid accused of murder (although Wolfe sold drugs), all the people are young, the use of cell phone records, unreliable witness testimony from a witness with a sweetheart deal, a defense attorney who was disbarred, etc. She makes a sarcastic remark about how the cases are very similar... except, from a legal perspective, they are not.
I mean they are in the sense both convictions were based on witness testimony -- but a lot of cases do. In Wolfe's case, he was accused of a murder-for-hire scheme to kill his drug supplier, to whom he allegedly owed a large amount of money. The shooter testified that Wolfe had hired him to do it. As part of the corroborating evidence, the prosecution used cell phone logs that showed Wolfe calling the shooter before and after the murder, and the prosecution interpreted those calls as Wolfe talking to the shooter before and after the deed was done, "cabining" the timeframe of the murder.
SK states that Adnan gives her the story as a case that relied on cell phone records where the conviction was vacated. But after reading the opinions, the cell phone records were barely mentioned and the relief was not granted based on any so-called unreliability of the cell phone evidence. Rather, the two main reasons were (1) the shooter recanted and submitted an affidavit stating Wolfe had nothing to do with it and he lied to avoid a death sentence for himself and (2) the prosecution suppressed evidence that could have exonerated Wolfe. So two compelling reasons for vacating the conviction, but not related to unreliability of cell phone data. (The original 4th Circuit decision vacated the district court's rejection of habeas relief is here. The district court's grant of habeas relief on remand is here.)
So from a storytelling perspective, SK may have felt that the stories were similar. But unless Jay was going to submit an affidavit stating that he lied about Adnan's involvement, or there is indication that the prosecution withheld evidence, Wolfe's case really doesn't apply.
It's curious that Adnan fed SK this story and focused on the cell phone records. I guess it's unclear what information he had access to, and the vague news stories note Wolfe was convicted on witnesses' testimony and cell records. But any little digging would have made it apparent that the relief was not granted on cell records. Or maybe this isn't that obvious if you aren't an attorney used to reading long court opinions.
The other coincidence is that Wolfe's attorney is Deirdre Enright, who is with the Innocence Project. And Rabia Chaudry notes in her blog how they tried to go to the Innocence Project twice and were refused. So I wonder if this was fed to SK (by Adnan and/or Rabia) as a shot and having SK contact Enright to discuss the case. Maybe he's not expecting the Innocence Project to take the case, but get it on the radar. And with an NPR investigator devoting a full series to it, it seems to be a much higher profile case, which could make it more appealing.
Nothing concrete to support this, but just a thought I had while listening to the chain of events and digging into the Wolfe case. It seems odd that the Innocence Project would review the case now after rejecting it twice before. There is no DNA evidence. There is no indication (yet) that the prosecution suppressed evidence. And attacking the credibility of a witness who the jury decided was credible is not going to work. Given the scantness of the evidence and the passage of time, it is going to be nigh impossible to determine the real killer. So why take the case now?
Discussion with Enright and Group
SK recounts her initial discussion with Enright. Enright is surprised how thin the prosecution's case is. She flagged Jay's deal as a warning sign; found motive to be a huge black hole; wondered whether racial profiling had worked against him. These are all thoughts I (and probably everyone listening to the podcast) as had. The lack of substance in the prosecution's case was what initially drew me to the story, so I can understand.
After Enright agrees to have her team review the case, SK stops by a few weeks later and meets the group. SK is surprised that the whole team thinks Adnan is not guilty (note: I believe they meant "not guilty" in the legal sense -- that there was reasonable doubt to be unable to find him guilty at trial). I think there is general consensus on that and I was puzzled at SK's surprise by this. Or maybe she thought they meant they though Adnan was innocent. (Of course, this could be what some of the group meant, but a couple of them make clarifying statements like "there's not much there" or "mountains of reasonable doubt" which makes me think SK and the group were not completely aligned here.)
By comparison, by Episode 4 I was 100% sure that Adnan should not have been convicted and the jury hosed him. I still doubt that Adnan is fully innocent. While the case that Jay acted without Adnan is becoming more compelling, there isn't enough to conclude Adnan is innocent. And if we exclude the possibility of this being a random killing, Adnan is the most likely person to do it from the cast of characters we have.
The most substantive material of the episode comes from the group's discussion of the lack of forensic reports. They note a few things:
- Report states brandy bottle was retailed for possible future analysis, but it was never tested for DNA.
- Sketchy fiber analysis. A reddish fiber was found near Hae's head and a fluorescent blue one was found under her body in the soil. The samples were not tested against enough materials (for example, the rope found nera her body). They conducted a few tests, no matches, and then they were ignored.
- The rope was not tested at all. Enright notes that this happens sometimes. The police will ignore anything outside their suspect as not being part of the crime scene.
- Swabs taken from Hae's body from PERK kit. Report simply stated they were negative for sperm. This was odd because you would always submit them for DNA testing after you collect the samples.
At this point, it seems the team has something actionable to work with. If there are indications the police/prosecution suppressed reports that could exonerate Adnan, there are claims for habeas relief, akin to Wolfe. But it took the team a few weeks of analysis to find something that they could actually work with.
The Charming Sociopath
The last segment is SK having a discussion with Enright about her fears of just being played by a charming sociopath. Enright makes the observation that sociopaths are rare and it is extremely unlikely that SK would have one fall into her lap, and that no one would have detected Adnan's sociopathic tendencies.
Enright speaks from experience and it seems reasonable that true sociopaths are rare. But why does Adnan have to be a sociopath? My initial thought was perhaps he would need to be one to go through this whole public airing of the story and his maintenance of innocence throughout. But then I think there is a middle ground: he doesn't have to be a true innocent person or a guilty sociopath. He could be guilty and protecting his parents from the truth.
I don't know the precise circumstances, but it feels like Rabia (and I assume with Adnan's family) has been pushing for this public process. Rabia contacts SK. Rabia contacts the Innocence Project. There are times when SK speaks with Adnan that it sounds like he's just going through the motions (maybe he's just worn down by 15 years of prison). I just don't get the sense that he's the driving force behind this process.
But if he is the good son, I could see him going along with it to protect his parents. I think it would kill his parents if they found out Adnan was truly guilty. I think Adnan would go to lengths to protect his parents from this knowledge -- even go along with this process.
Again, this is pure conjecture and I don't think things necessarily went down like this. I don't know if Adnan is truly innocent or guilty. But I think there is a middle ground here and that Adnan being a sociopath is not a pre-requisite for finding that he is guilty.
No comments:
Post a Comment