Hae Min Lee Essay
Based on the 11 episodes heard, I don’t think Adnan should had been convicted for the death of Hae Min Lee. Since there isn’t enough information to prove Adnan’s guilt, he shouldn’t be convicted in the first place. There are various reasons why I think Adnan is innocent.
First off, the evidences used and provided. Throughout the podcast there are many information provide but not all of them were used during court. The Asia letters were the first piece of evidence which was not used in court. Asia said she say Adnan at the school library when classes were over. That was around the time where Hae was about to be killed. It wasn’t just Asia, her friends also saw him there. They didn’t even do a DNA test to prove Adnan was at Leakin Park …show more content…
Adnan was acting normally around his friends and all his friends didn’t say he was acting oddly during the days after Hae went missing. At that time Jay acted frightened as he was scared to be caught helping someone murder Hae. It doesn’t make sense on how if Adnan had murdered Hae, he would be acting more caution compared to how he is normally while Jay who just helped bury the body is acting all paranoid and was being wary of his surroundings. If Adnan was the murderer, why wasn’t he in Jay’s kind of predicament acting all wary and paranoid. Why would Jay try to remove and hide all evidence of his involvement while Adnan isn’t? It is probably because Adnan wasn’t murderer and it was either Jay or one of Jay’s friends.
These are the reasons why I believe Adnan shouldn’t had been convicted. There wasn’t enough evidence to prove Adnan’s guilt as not every piece of proof was used and most of it can’t make Adnan guilty. Jay’s testimony has many inconsistency from the first to fourth one with misleading information that backfires on him. The actions Adnan didn’t make to hide all evidence of himself from being at the scene. Due to the fact that there wasn’t enough information to prove Adnan’s guilt of murdering Hae Min Lee, he shouldn’t had be convicted in the first
First off, the evidences used and provided. Throughout the podcast there are many information provide but not all of them were used during court. The Asia letters were the first piece of evidence which was not used in court. Asia said she say Adnan at the school library when classes were over. That was around the time where Hae was about to be killed. It wasn’t just Asia, her friends also saw him there. They didn’t even do a DNA test to prove Adnan was at Leakin Park …show more content…
Adnan was acting normally around his friends and all his friends didn’t say he was acting oddly during the days after Hae went missing. At that time Jay acted frightened as he was scared to be caught helping someone murder Hae. It doesn’t make sense on how if Adnan had murdered Hae, he would be acting more caution compared to how he is normally while Jay who just helped bury the body is acting all paranoid and was being wary of his surroundings. If Adnan was the murderer, why wasn’t he in Jay’s kind of predicament acting all wary and paranoid. Why would Jay try to remove and hide all evidence of his involvement while Adnan isn’t? It is probably because Adnan wasn’t murderer and it was either Jay or one of Jay’s friends.
These are the reasons why I believe Adnan shouldn’t had been convicted. There wasn’t enough evidence to prove Adnan’s guilt as not every piece of proof was used and most of it can’t make Adnan guilty. Jay’s testimony has many inconsistency from the first to fourth one with misleading information that backfires on him. The actions Adnan didn’t make to hide all evidence of himself from being at the scene. Due to the fact that there wasn’t enough information to prove Adnan’s guilt of murdering Hae Min Lee, he shouldn’t had be convicted in the first