True crime! | Page 3 | The Popjustice Forum

True crime!

Discussion in 'TV + Film' started by Big Bang, Aug 20, 2018.

  1. I think we can dispense with the idea that Jay knew where the car was. It blatantly wasn't left in that parking lot for 6 weeks.

    There is literally no credible evidence of Adnan's guilt and the prosecution know that, which is why they are fighting so hard to avoid one.

    There would be no witnesses for the prosecution, no cell tower evidence, no dna basically no case at all.
     
    stopthestatic, Salami and Baby Clyde like this.
  2. Still obsessed with true crime shows.

    I think the Madeleine McCann documentary is the best of the bunch so far this year, 8 hours was a bit much but it was interesting for the most part. I didn't know the extent of just how crazy it all was. Not cadaver dogs stealing the show like that, iconic!

    The Ted Bundy one was alright.

    As for Adnan Syed....it was really well produced, but I don't think it added much to the podcast? Completely one sided too, made me appreciate the podcast even more actually.

    And I wasn't convinced of his innocence despite how hard the documentary tried to convince me that he didn't do it (turf science!??)
     
    LPT likes this.
  3. If you're not convinced of his innocence what exactly leads you to believe he may be guilty?
     
    Judy Jetson Hooker and Big Bang like this.
  4. I think he may be guilty because of all the circumstantial evidence pointing towards him doing this.

    [​IMG]

    Don't want to turn this into a Reddit forum though!
     
    Ashling92 likes this.
  5. I've been watching The Act (the Hulu series based on this) and it's quite good. Chilling stuff.
     
    Andrew.L likes this.
  6. Nothing short of finding the actual killer can prove his innocence but that shouldn't be the standard.

    I don't know how anyone can be content to see someone in prison in these circumstances. Even if he did it the prosecution case is absolute twaddle.

    I can't even think of one bit of circumstancial evidence that holds up to scrutiny.

    The timeline is nuts
    The day is wrong
    'Witnesses' at best inconsistent
    The body wasn't buried that day
    No proper investigation (her boyfriend wasn't interviewed for 3 weeks !!)
    No cell tower evidence
    No motive
    No DNA or other forensics

    There's literally nothing there

    I'd say the whole thing was crazy but unfortunately it's quite common.
     
  7. No motive? Are you actually joking?

    He was her EX. Women are killed by jealous exes LITERALLY ALL THE TIME. And as a woman I’m genuinely insulted you’re dismissing something like that.
     
    Big Bang likes this.
  8. Oh and also, there was clear DNA evidence in her car. Yes, you could say that’s a given becaus they spent time together. But to say there was no DNA evidence is literally making up stuff and makes the rest of your arguments look ridiculous tbh.
     
    Big Bang likes this.
  9. The ex boyfriend had no motive?!?!?!?!?!?!
    [​IMG]
     
    Ashling92 likes this.
  10. I really hope you're never on a jury.

    Good grief.
     
  11. Sorry, I missed the part where I said he was 100% guilty? Or where I said how I’d vote on a jury?

    I was simply stating that to say that an ex boyfriend of a murdered woman has no motive to kill her...is genuinely delusional. If you are dismissing the fact that women are regularly killed by partners or exes, you are dismissing facts. I’m not taking about Adnan, I’m talking about straight facts about murder.

    Re the DNA evidence, I once again did not specifically say Adnan was 100% guilty. The previous poster said there ‘was no DNA evidence’ which is again, simply false.

    I’m all for reasonable debate but let’s not make things up please.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2019
    Big Bang likes this.
  12. The Jigsaw Man by Paul Britton is such a good true crime book. I'd highly recommend.
     
  13. I’ve been embroiled in the Kenneka Jenkins case by watching various YouTube videos. The whole thing is just perplexing.
     
  14. I might binge it at some point (is it weekly?) but I'll always have a hard time going from documentary to scripted. Other way around and I'm all in, but once I have the real story I don't really have time for reenactments.

    My nose was all the way turned up at the Dirty John scripted series, too. I had to turn it off midway in the first episode and I haven't gone back.
     
  15. Is this a joke ? Are you suggesting that the mere fact of being someone's ex boyfriend is in itself a motive ?

    An ex that your still friends with ? one that you have never had any kind if altercation with ? Someone who is so comfortable in your company that she offers you a lift home ?

    Woman or not you have a fundemantal misunderstanding of this subject.
     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2019
  16. Keep up

    There certainly is DNA evidence, that has only just been tested after 20 years !! But none of it implicates Adnan

    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/31/arts/television/case-against-adnan-syed-dna-hbo-finale.html

    If you really want to make an argument I suggest you do some basic research first
     
    Baby Clyde likes this.
  17. Whether he did or not is not the issue. The police and prosecutors have NO case in this at all and the documentary and Serial showed it. They could've pinned it on anyone remotely 'close' to Hae and they chose Adnan.

    The documentary was kinda crap and one-sided. Adnan's Mom - i feel for her, same goes for Hae's parents.

    Don is definitely shady boots.

    I can't with this case - on one hand, I really wanna know who did it, and on the other it's such a mess and nobody remembers anything and they're all lying or etc. So I kinda give up.

    And what about that guy who said he saw Hae's body in the trunk of the car? I was shook that someone other than Jay/Sellers claimed to have seen her body? That seems like news to me, unless this was actually said on Serial but I don't remember it.
     
    OlliMaus, Baby Clyde and mump boy like this.
  18. Yes, I am absolutely saying that being an ex is a motive. I’m saying that because being in love with someone/being jealous of someone is the reason why men murder women literally all the time. He showed in Hae’s diary entry that he was possessive and jealous at times. Just cause they hung out together does not mean he was never jealous or upset with her.

    I’m obviously not saying that being an ex makes him definitely guilty. But it IS a motive and it’s why when any murder happens anywhere, police question the current and ex partners first.

    That is Criminology 101.
     
    Big Bang likes this.
  19. Your posts are incredibly patronising, but I assume that’s what you’re going for.

    I’ve done plenty of research in this case to the point of reading the trial documents. There was DNA evidence in her car that proved Adnan was there. Again that one fact alone does not immediately indicate his guilt, but you stated in your post that there was ‘no DNA evidence’. Not true.
     
    Big Bang likes this.
  20. Being someone’s ex partner is not motive.

    Motive is a reason for doing something. You don’t have motive to murder someone simply because you used to date.

     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.