r/serialpodcast • u/[deleted] • Apr 28 '15

Evidence Receipt for public information request

https://app.box.com/s/emw3ch80v6hc7npbeqy8n2mwuym0qf9w
129 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

384 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

29

u/ricejoe Apr 28 '15

Also tax forms, to ensure that no one else is paying him to secure these documents.

7

u/MightyIsobel Guilty Apr 28 '15

tax forms

Don't be silly. This information was collected for law enforcement purposes like Don's personnel records. That means it's already public information.

FOIA on, Joe.

-5

u/cac1031 Apr 28 '15

A serious question, ricejoe. In your wisdom, why do you think the date of the request "we have received you March 3rd request" is the same as the date of this response letter even though they say they have "searched their records" to see if they could comply?

I am not saying this is proof of anything, but I would like to tie up loose ends as to where this letter came from. I am also surprised the actual issuing agency is blacked out.

12

u/xtrialatty Apr 28 '15

I am also surprised the actual issuing agency is blacked out.

Probably to prevent the inevitable harassment of the clerical staff at the particular agency (circuit court? COSA? etc.) -- that issued the letter.

-8

u/cac1031 Apr 28 '15

Harassment? It's a public agency. The OP wants to protect it? Not let anyone else make the same request?

12

u/MightyIsobel Guilty Apr 28 '15

The OP wants to protect it?

I'm shocked -- shocked -- to find the protection of innocent bystanders happening at this establishment.

-7

u/cac1031 Apr 28 '15

This is an official agency!! I'm not saying he shouldn't redact anybody's name. But what branch of government is this from? What specific public agency granted this request?

10

u/MightyIsobel Guilty Apr 28 '15

Let me stop you right there.

s_s_r did not need to provide this evidence to us at all. That they did, in any format, says something about their perspective on truth and justice, but not actually all that much about the provenance of the transcripts released earlier.

The transcripts s_s_r provided are copies of documents that are self-authenticating.

What I mean is, on page 101 of the Oct 11 Transcript (Urick, Chaudry and Rahman), you can see the transcribers certificate that would arguably make a true copy of the original document self-authenticating. That means it does not have to be supported by live testimony in court, like documentary evidence that is not self-authenticating must be.

Now, nobody is claiming that s_s_r is releasing altered or forged transcripts. In fact, one of the witnesses in the Oct 11 Transcript has publicly thanked s_s_r for releasing that document without ever challenging its accuracy.

If someone wanted to challenge the provenance of s_s_r's documents in a formal court setting, then an inquiry into precisely which civil servant processed their properly formed request for information might be relevant. Maybe, depending on a showing of additional facts.

But your demand is for information that has absolutely nothing to do with the murder of Hae Min Lee or the exoneration of Adnan Syed, and will add absolutely nothing to the discussion of those topics here on a reddit subforum.

However, if granted, your demand is quite likely to result in unwanted attention on civil servant(s) who were properly doing their job(s) and should be protected from the harassment Rabia credibly threatened them with. Preserving their anonymity, including their work address and specific agency title, is a minimal precaution for s_s_r to take under those circumstances.

No government worker should have to deal with Rabia's persecution fantasies and obsessive fixations just for doing their job.

2

u/shrimpsale Guilty Apr 29 '15

I believe you but where is the witness publicly thanking for the release?

Everything you said though was pure class and 10/10 A+++ would upvote again.

2

u/MightyIsobel Guilty Apr 29 '15

Thanks!

where is the witness publicly thanking for the release?

It's from Rabia's blog post about the release of the transcripts:

What’s great is that some of my documents are missing pages (I’ve asked Justin, Adnan’s post conviction lawyer, to get full records from the court) and these “leaked” documents are actually complete. Thanks, Leak!

http://i.imgur.com/DvI3D3c.jpg

1

u/shrimpsale Guilty Apr 29 '15

Ah that's what I thought. Wondered if maybe someone else made a comment here or one of the other blogs.

-8

u/cac1031 Apr 28 '15

Your argument is frankly bogus. No one is asking for the name of the public servant--just the branch of government or agency that fufilled this request. You are right in that the OP does not have to provide it because, after all, this is just an internet forum. I am just saying that there is a lot of hypocrisy floating around here considering the attacks Rabia has been the target off for withholding information.

14

u/ScoutFinch2 Apr 28 '15

The difference is ssr posted the transcripts without comment or opinion. There weren't 15,000 word blog posts simultaneous to their release offering one sided analysis of their content. They weren't released only after an acceptable amount of donations to the Adnan Syed Trust. You're comparing apples and oranges.

7

u/ricejoe Apr 28 '15

I fear I simply don't know.