New evidence from convicted killer Adnan Syed’s alibi in Serial podcast case

Adnan Syed as a young footballer. She said McClain was “very sure of herself” and recapped what she had told Koenig in the podcast, that she was positive she saw Syed in the library on January 13, 1999 shortly after 2:15 p.m. McClain stated in an affidavit that an assistant state’s attorney discouraged her from attending Syed’s post-conviction hearings.

“We believe justice was done when Adnan was convicted in 2000, and we look forward to bringing this chapter to an end so we can celebrate the memory of Hae instead of celebrating the man who killed her”, they said. But McClain was never contacted by Syed’s attorney to testify at his trial. Like “Serial“, Netflix’s documentary series “Making a Murderer” has fueled speculation about its subject.

The podcast raised doubts about Syed’s conviction and has been downloaded tens of millions of times.

The court returned the case to Baltimore City Circuit Court for post-conviction proceedings.

Chapman told the court Wednesday that years after Syed was convicted, Syed’s new attorney, who was working on an appeal, visited her at her home and left a business card.

Dozens of people stood outside a Baltimore court house yesterday morning, in anticipation for the arrival of Adnan Syed’s arrival where a hearing will take place. His attorneys have argued that he received ineffective counsel.

Leakin Park crime scene, 1999. On Wednesday, Syed made his first appearance in court in 16 years, at the first day of a three-day hearing.

McClain is in Baltimore and could be called to testify, Brown said. Gutierrez died in 2004.

Get ready for even more old-school Serial. “I came to find out, as Sarah said, maybe it is important”. Fans of the podcast have delved into the case in excruciating detail, looking for inconsistencies and other problems. “The last time we were there, our hearts dropped”. Long before I got interested in this case.

It is not known whether retired Judge Martin P. Welch will issue his ruling at the conclusion of the hearing or at a later date.

After learning of Urick’s testimony Chapman said she requested her phone records and verified that her conversation with Urick lasted 34 minutes. According to Koenig, this case’s “main focus” is the fact that Syed’s former lawyer was financially and physically “declining” during the initial trial and thus failed to give appropriate attention to a potentially crucial witness. She added that she did not want to speculate on whether he is guilty or innocent.

“There was just like a lot of drama in the room when she was testifying”, she says. “I can only tell you what it is I know”.