Series One Review
☆
☆
☆
☆
☆
“I thought this was an excellent analysis and exploration of a specific case and it’s implications on the gulf between what the justice system aspires to be and what it actually is.
It’s very disappointing that after supposedly listening to this podcast reviewers comment with the same venom toward the defendant that you’d expect from the uninformed and ignorant. The take home message isn’t a conclusive proof of guilt or innocence, it’s that there is so much reasonable doubt this shouldn’t have gotten near prosecution, but is an excellent example of how people get convicted despite this. The sad fact is juries rarely grant the defendant a presumption of innocence or the right to innocence in the presence of reasonable doubt, and this fascinating case is a perfect example. Even on the occasion I thought the defendant was guilty I played devils advocate in the jury room to make sure people have to think through and argue their opinions. 2 hours of deliberation for a 1st def. murder verdict is insulting to the process and the defendant.
For those who want an update, he won his appeal, and then defeated the states appeal against that win at the higher court. As a last ditch attempt to keep him in jail the State appealed to an en blank hearing at the very highest state level and managed to keep him in jail by a 4:3 majority verdict. When you consider since the Law was changed after the Oklahoma bombing to make appeals even more difficult than they already were in that Judges can’t just disagree with the conviction they must find a gross mistake has been made (I can’t remember the exact wording) which 3 out of 4 apparently did - I find it disturbing that a Majority of one under these circumstances have condemned him to life in jail (short the near impossibility of the Supreme Court first taking his case and then siding with him).
The system which should be looking dispassionately for the person responsible is clearly far too rigid once they think they have the right person - perhaps this is inevitable in an adversarial system but I can’t help but think that’s not helpful for justice - and especially after a conviction if that conviction appears to be weak. Clearly a not insignificant percentage of convictions are going to be incorrect but once convicted it becomes almost impossible to reverse and irrespective of evidence (I’m actually thinking of much more clear cut examples here) the state will still oppose conviction relief with upmost vigour even when it’s obvious they have the wrong person and how does that serve justice.”
XBagpuss via Apple Podcasts ·
Great Britain ·
05/30/19
More reviews of Serial
☆
☆
☆
☆
☆
“Of my seat!! I am very engaged in the current story and can't wait til the next installment!! Great storytelling- looking forward to more!”Read full review »
BayButterfly via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
10/04/14
☆
☆
☆
☆
☆
“I’ve been listening to This American Life as long as I can remember, and this is a powerful extension of what I’ve come to expect from them. After only two episodes I’m thinking hard about the case and the different viewpoints. The pacing is great, the story is laid out logically, and no stone is...”Read full review »
paintperson via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
10/05/14
☆
☆
☆
☆
☆
“Just listened to the preview and it sounds great!”
Amir Adan via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
10/01/14
Do you host a podcast?
Track your ranks and reviews from Spotify, Apple Podcasts and more.
See hourly chart positions and more than 30 days of history.
Get Chartable Analytics »
See hourly chart positions and more than 30 days of history.
Listen now
Links
Genres
Artwork or description wrong?
Request an update »
Updates may take a few minutes.
Do you host a podcast?
Track your ranks and reviews from Spotify, Apple Podcasts and more.
See hourly chart positions and more than 30 days of history.
Get Chartable Analytics »
See hourly chart positions and more than 30 days of history.
