Case Study: Serial By Adnan Syed

Evidence could make or break the case, that’s why when it’s collected. The people collecting it are supposed very careful and professional and follow all procedures. In the Amanda Knox case, the evidence was collected poorly (TheLipTV). Not all of the evidence was collected on the first day, 46 days after the murder, a bra clasp was collected (Docuworld, 2014). This piece of evidence was incredibly crucial because of the DNA found on it (Docuworld, 2014). In the US this evidence would have gotten thrown out immediately because so many days had past since the first time the investigators were at the scene. The defense would say that this piece of evidence could have been placed or moved after the murder. Also, the prosecution said that Amanda Knox’s DNA was mixed together with her roommates in the bathroom sink (TheLipTV, 2014). In the US the defense would have argued that the two women lived together so their DNA would have gotten mixed together. Another piece of evidence that was collected was a knife, but the DNA on it was so low, that in the US it would’ve been tossed out as the murder weapon. It was also proven that this knife couldn’t have made any on the stab wounds on the victim except one, that being the cut across her throat, which could have been done by any knife (TheLipTV,

On February 9, 1999, Lee's body was found by a passerby in Leakin Park. On February 1, 1999, the Baltimore County Police received an anonymous phone call suggesting that Lee's ex-boyfriend, Adnan Masud Syed, was responsible for her murder, and that Syed had threatened to kill Lee On February 3, Baltimore Police received call records for a cell phone belonging to Syed. They noticed a number of calls on the day of Lee's disappearance to a woman named Jen Pusateri. When questioned, Pusateri told police that a friend of hers, Jay Wilds, who had known Syed from high school, told her that Syed had killed Lee. The police questioned Wilds, who told them that he had helped Syed bury Lee's body and dispose of her car. Syed was arrested on February 28, 1999, and charged with first degree murder. Officers also interviewed the man that discovered the victim's

If you are going to understand who the killer is and have evidence of why it is, you first have to know what they

Circumstantial evidence does not contain enough information to prove the guilt of a suspect (Carlson). “The crushing dullness of the evidence” allowed Lizzie Borden her acquittal (King). However, in the time period of the murders, the technology to obtain and preserve any physical evidence to prove Lizzie’s guilt did not exist. Equipment to identify fingerprints, video cameras, and other technology commonly used to provide evidence would not exist until several decades after Lizzie’s trial had ended. Also, despite the compelling evidence that the prosecution did provide, the jury refused to recognize any because of the stereotypical views that many men

Chapter 10 is called escape is a short little six page chapter, and starts with Katie talking about Mark and updates in the case. One interesting update was them finding out Mark had pursued other girls---and boys----- and he had even slept with some of them. He also had pornography of a young girl involved in intercourse in his home. She then goes on a rant about pornography and ends it with, "If your twenty-five or married and you really need it (pornography), theres's something wrong. And if you really need pictures of little kids, then you are definitely sick." Soon after this court actually started. Katie even listened to a tape recording of the arraignment. Katie said Mark sounded like he believed he was innocent. Mark would originally start by claiming that he was innocent, and during this time Katie began to start calling him Francis.

The story follows Freytag’s pyramid dramatic structure which consists of 5 main stages but through a contemporary nonfiction story. Understanding plot structure of tragedies like Serial is a vital skill for readers to learn so they can interpret the author's purpose. During a murder case motifs and themes are predominant from cross referencing interviews of multiple witnesses and those who are close to the defence and prosecution. Allegations are made and the vilitaty of them are assessed by the court which allows readers to interpret the significance and relevance of information due to Adnan’s multiple court cases. The podcasts plot provides back story and character development which listeners become invested in, which can help students understand the power of plot development. This is crucial in court cases because the opposition and the defense paint different pictures of the one in question. These are all basic ideas that any English classes want students to learn, but Serial is a superior alternative than

The outcome of many criminal law cases will depend upon the strength and admissibility of evidence. Some evidence is “Admissible, Suppressed, Hearsay, and Scientific and Forensic Evidence.” (findlaw) Admissible evidence has to be relate to crime taking place which can either prove or not prove. (findlaw) Suppressed evidence is evidence that has been obtained in a legal way that a judge is to turn down. It can also be when a prosecutor hid the evidence when all of it is needed for the defense. This will violate the 5th amendment.(Hill). Some people may think that the evidence is to much and that it will hurt someone more than help them, but that’s wrong it helps you if you haven’t done anything bad. Hearsay evidence is coming from a 3rd view perspective. (findlaw) An example would be, Me and my neighbor were walking down the street and our friends comes running by us and she tells us that a robbery was taking place. She says that she was held at beyond her will. So after that if the police need us to testify something like that would be said. When your court you just have to simply explain the truth from what you would were told. Through Scientific and forensic it can also form, “Blood Spatter Analysis, Ballistics, Gunshot Residue Analysis, Fingerprints, DNA Analysis.” (Kaman). Theses all come from a crime scene from whatever crime was

can be utilized to investigate the case and bolster any leads or "hunches" that are available by investigators (Leo and Davis, 2010). The uncertainty of this evidence ought to prohibit it from any investigation, as it can lead the investigators in the wrong bearing and may encourage any kind of limited focus issue that is already present. As already specified, the culmination of these factors can prompt to a wrongful conviction.

Every day a rape or a murder crime is committed. The majority of the cases don’t get solved because they don’t have evidence. From a family victim's perspective, it’s frustrating that cases become cold, and never gets an answer. New advancements in technology have guide law enforcements officers towards the responsible person of the crime, and in some cases prevented innocent people of going to jail.

In this paper I will explain the different types of evidence in a criminal trial. It will follow by the effect of each and most compelling evidence to have in a court room. I will also explain the CSI effect weather its real or not. Also in this paper you will read about some cases that used some type of evidence to catch the defendant that killed the victim. Some of the cases include the OJ Simpson case, the brown vs Officer Wilson case, and a case about Joyce Gilchris. DNA is a big part of evidence, DNA stands for Deoxyribonucleic Acid.

Cameron Todd Willingham was sentenced to death after being convicted of killing his three children by arson, although he insisted he was innocent. The evidence brought against him? There was eyewitness testimonies and firefighters found “pouring patterns”, which are used to detect arson. Those methods fall under the category of forensics. Forensics consists of scientific techniques and tests used to investigate a crime. Today, the most commonly used examples of forensics are eyewitness testimonies, DNA matching, polygraphs, and use of fingerprints. In the majority of cases, provided evidence is the deciding factor for whether a defendant is guilty or innocent. There is, however, a problem: forensics can be unreliable at times. The methods used

Take the murder of Krystal Beslanowitch for example, she killed by a heavy blow to her head from a rock and was dumped into the Provo River. Any leads to solve the murder led investigators nowhere and no one was stepping in to help them. Eventually the case was solved when DNA was taken from the rock that was used to kill Krystal. Investigators used a tool called a forensic vacuum which allowed for the DNA to be extracted from the rock and help investigators find the murder. There are many case similar to this, and their are some where enough evidence is present to suggest that the suspect may have something to do with the murder, but not enough to say he actually committed the murder. The suspect could away because of lack of evidence. This would not be the case if the investigators had DNA evidence, because then it would directly say that the suspect was directly involved with the murder of the

In any kind of investigation, the main thing that is needed for solving it is evidence. Evidence is the only thing that the authorities can use to have justification. If there aren’t any eyewitnesses to be able to justify the crime, then the only thing the judge can rely on is forensic evidence. There are many different types of evidence as the author of “Forensic: Evidence, Clues, and Investigation” Andrea Campbell informs the reader, but for the investigation to be based only on the truth, forensic evidence is needed which is why it is the most important evidence to be presented at a trial.

Two British serial murders who killed a generation apart but with the same common goals – they killed to achieve an infamy that had eluded them in everyday life.

In an investigation, true, factual evidence is most needed. If eyewitness accounts are used, witnesses might lie of lean his/her argument to one side of the case or another. Eyewitnesses might forget minor parts of the story or sway the argument because of their feelings toward certain things involved in the case. Because forensic evidence is true, can’t lie, or sway its opinion, and provides tangible, visible evidence, it is most important and most helpful in a trial.