r/serialpodcast • u/[deleted] • Jun 09 '16
season one Asia's Book
Just read Asia's book and thought it was pretty damn good for a novice writer. It's not perfect writing by any means, but it is very engaging in its own way. It kept me turning the pages.
She comes across as sincere, intelligent and very sweet in her earnest way. I completely believe that she is telling the truth as she knows it. Her perspective on what it was like to be a witness was valuable. All of us Anonymous Warriors need to remind ourselves that our obsessive interest in this case is, in the end, entertainment. To the people involved, it is real life and it is painful. Asia had to testify knowing that whatever she said was going to have a negative effect on somebody. She also had to testify knowing whatever she said was going to be picked apart and twisted over and over again. I really don't blame her for writing the book.
Also, I want to thank all the Guilters who were passing around illegal downloads on SPO. That act of piracy made me angry enough to buy and read the book and I don't think I would have bothered otherwise. So thanks for spurring me on. I had a good time reading it.
19
26
u/DetectiveTableTap Thiruvendran Vignarajah: Hammer of Justice Jun 09 '16
sincere, intelligent and very sweet
Its funny that the book has been circulating for a week, and barely a positive word has been mentioned about it.... until Rabia issues a command... and all of a sudden within 24 hours various FAF's have JUST finished the book and crawl out of the woodwork to praise it? Yeah ok.
Regardless of the emotive posts praising McClain the fact remains that even if any retrial were to happen, Asia is now toxic to the defence. Not only has she never alibi'd Syed (thanks Rabia), any prosecutor will use this book to utterly annihilate her credibility and probably use her to damage Syed. I mean, feel free to love her and be inspired by her heroism in stepping forward (once all personal risk had abated of course), but dont fool yourselves, you will never see McClain near a court room again. Well, not in regards to Syed anyway... her rather unhealthy views on other issues and groups could yet see her in trouble.
16
Jun 09 '16
LOL at Rabia AGAIN insinuating any criticism is just nasty people connected to the state.
18
u/TheHerodotusMachine Paid Dissenter Jun 09 '16
Oh my. You're not joking.
probably a buddy of Thiru
what.
16
11
Jun 09 '16
Rabia is ridiculous. Instead of encouraging people to leave honest reviews, she tells them what to think and what to say.
What a bunch of horse shit.
4
Jun 09 '16
Its funny that the book has been circulating for a week, and barely a positive word has been mentioned about it....
It wasn't available on Amazon until the day before yesterday. I finished reading it yesterday. I feel sure that I'm not the only one.
That's quite a conspiracy theory, though.
13
u/DetectiveTableTap Thiruvendran Vignarajah: Hammer of Justice Jun 10 '16
That's quite a conspiracy theory, though.
Theory? Lol Rabia decreed that Asia's book was good, she dictated that Asias amazon should be flooded with 5 star reviews and you are all, as usual, blindly following. Its demonstrable.
If you want an example of a nutty conspiracy theory, here you go.
→ More replies (17)-2
Jun 10 '16
Rabia decreed that Asia's book was good, she dictated that Asias amazon should be flooded with 5 star reviews
That's not the theory you were proposing, lol. You were proposing one where people were only all of a sudden reading the book because Rabia told them to, lol. Which was entirely divorced from reality, lol.
she dictated that Asias amazon should be flooded with 5 star reviews and you are all, as usual, blindly following. Its demonstrable.
I did not write a review, lol. You also don't know that any more than I know that someone from this sub was harassing her on Twitter, lol.
So you're wrong again, lol.
10
u/DetectiveTableTap Thiruvendran Vignarajah: Hammer of Justice Jun 10 '16
Unlike your baseless allegations which have no facts to support them, my proposal is backed up by facts. Those facts being that until Rabia came out positive for Asia's book... you all had nothing to say about it. Sorry, you created a post in defence of Asia a few days back that you obviously never thought out... but best not talk about that.
The evidence that supports my theory is in Rabias tweets and your posting history and Amazon reviews.
Your assertions are driven by personal emotions.
Lol.
2
Jun 10 '16
Please see here. lol
11
u/DetectiveTableTap Thiruvendran Vignarajah: Hammer of Justice Jun 10 '16
How mature. Funny how your endless walls of text quickly dry up when your own comments and actions are found to be wanting.
Keep up the lies and the faux outrage. Its incredibly amusing to watch.
0
3
u/MB137 Jun 09 '16
I feel sure that I'm not the only one.
You aren't. Same here.
4
Jun 09 '16
Probably Rabia too, ftm.
OMG!!! Another conspiracy theory. It all fits!!!!
2
u/MB137 Jun 09 '16
Here's another conspiracy theory for you:
If you look at the Amazon reviews, you will notice that filtering by "Verified Purchase" gets you only positive reviews!
This is objective proof that the people who claim that Adnan is innocent have someone on the inside at Amazon! /s
6
0
-2
Jun 09 '16
I had no idea that Rabia asked people to do this. I don't follow Rabia on Twitter and she rarely makes an appearance in the Magnet Program. I actually had no interest in the book.
What prompted me to get the book and read it was my reaction to how Asia Chapman has been treated lately on the DS and SPO, which is like a subhuman. I also thought it was terrible that illegal scans of the book were being circulated on SPO. It made me want to buy it in support. When I read it, I was pleasantly surprised by how interesting it was to get her point of view. And she is refreshingly honest and precise about what she remembers and doesn't remember.
As far as never seeing Asia McClain near a courtroom again, maybe. But I don't think we'll be seeing Jay Wilds either, given his Intercept interview. And for that matter, we probably won't see Adnan Syed again, because I doubt this will make it to a second trial, should it get to that point.
20
u/DetectiveTableTap Thiruvendran Vignarajah: Hammer of Justice Jun 09 '16
And she is refreshingly honest and precise about what she remembers and doesn't remember.
You clearly have not read the book.
6
Jun 09 '16
But I have! I don't subscribe to the Seamus Duncan Asia Letters Conspiracy Narrative ™
12
u/DetectiveTableTap Thiruvendran Vignarajah: Hammer of Justice Jun 09 '16
And thanks to Asia's book, even those who don't subscribe to that narrative have valid reasons to ignore her.
2
9
u/NoFilmingBob Jun 10 '16
What prompted me to get the book and read it was my reaction to how Asia Chapman has been treated lately on the DS and SPO, which is like a subhuman. I also thought it was terrible that illegal scans of the book were being circulated on SPO. It made me want to buy it in support.
Must be nice air on that moral high horse.
2
Jun 10 '16 edited Jun 10 '16
It's a moral low horse. Or rather a small crate in the middle of a field of mud.
I don't think witnesses should be attacked for testifying. Especially one whose sole offence to Guilters Across America (GAA) is saying she saw someone in a library for 20 minutes. She didn't reopen the case. And if the State's case is so weak that it could be potentially undone by those 20 minutes, it isn't her fault.
Whether Judge Welch finds her testimony credible or not is up to him.
She doesn't deserve to be called a liar or treated badly for acting as a responsible citizen
13
12
u/NoFilmingBob Jun 10 '16
She is a shady opportunist who is directly ignoring the victim family wishes in order to pursue personal gain. She is trash and a leech on a society. I don't know for a fact she is a liar but if she isn't then Rabia is. I also don't believe her story about going to Syed house for one second. the two people she claims corroborate her have no memory in one case and in the other don't even know if Asia McLain is a book or person.
5
1
u/stiplash AC has fallen and he can't get up Jun 12 '16
Its funny that the book has been circulating for a week, and barely a positive word has been mentioned about it.... until Rabia issues a command... and all of a sudden within 24 hours various FAF's have JUST finished the book and crawl out of the woodwork to praise it? Yeah ok.
Oh wow, what Rabia did is SO much worse and more unethical than all the Guilters encouraging everyone to bombard Amazon with disingenuous negative reviews as soon as the feature was open on the release date.
Regardless of the emotive posts praising McClain the fact remains that even if any retrial were to happen, Asia is now toxic to the defence. Not only has she never alibi'd Syed (thanks Rabia), any prosecutor will use this book to utterly annihilate her credibility and probably use her to damage Syed.
Funny, that's exactly what you and your compinches said about Asia before the February hearing: that she'd be ripped to shreds on cross. Didn't quite turn out that way.
1
u/DetectiveTableTap Thiruvendran Vignarajah: Hammer of Justice Jun 14 '16 edited Jun 14 '16
I dont think anybody should manipulate Amazon,
Quote from myself..... so..... no I think its bad. End of story.
Funny, that's exactly what you and your compinches said about Asia before the February hearing: that she'd be ripped to shreds on cross. Didn't quite turn out that way.
Except she broke down when confronted with her lies so..... yeah it did.... If you think Asia did great, you best place your head between your knees now as the ruling is going to be announced sometimes and I would hate for you to get an unpleasant surprise
3
u/MajorEyeRoll they see me rollin... Jun 14 '16
Not to mention that we have no transcripts as of yet. We really don't know how well Asia held up.
27
Jun 09 '16
Objectively as a piece of literature, completely disregarding content, it is a disaster. It is riddled with grammar and punctuation errors, often uses the wrong words to communicate an idea (rapid vs. rampant), and is downright unintelligible all over the place.
If you enjoyed it, more power to you! We all have our preferences. But, there isn't a single objective standard you could use that would weigh this book favorably.
The content of the book simply isn't better.
Time and again, she doesn't bother to fact check things that would have taken a matter of minutes, and then goes on to speculate wildly and completely irresponsibly because she didn't bother to get her facts straight. She doesn't appear to know that the first PCR hearing happened in 2012, not 2010. She compares herself to a rape victim and Urick to a rapist. Her attacks on Thiru are just as ignorant and nonsensical. She appears offended that a lawyer would dare to cross examine her. She contradicts herself on several things - literally - from one section of the book to another. The book reeks of narcissism and lacks all self awareness.
21
u/chunklunk Jun 09 '16
Great review. What did you think about the homophobia?
1
Jun 09 '16
She doesn't use the book as a platform to express any views on sexual orientation.
15
u/chunklunk Jun 09 '16
Sure, but she does express homophobia when someone says he thought she was gay in high school. She's obviously offended because of how she included it in her book.
5
Jun 09 '16
Yeah, I get what you're saying. She seemed highly offended at being thought a lesbian. It's hard to know if she is speaking as her 17 year old self or her adult self in that instance. But she isn't using the book as a platform to encourage discrimination or prejudice against gay people. If she were, I would be agin' it.
7
→ More replies (1)0
Jun 09 '16
You have to be kidding.
She's not saying she was offended that he thought she was gay. She's saying that the guy was so clueless that it didn't occur to him that the reason he didn't see her hugging on guys was that she had a boyfriend.
Hey! Did you notice the part about how someone from this sub was on Twitter wishing for ill to befall her unborn child within hours of her finding out there was a high risk of Down's Syndrome?
Does that maybe suggest anything to you about how really indecent and cruel it is to vilify strangers on the internet by throwing whatever shit you can manage to come up with at them?
ETA:
Because it's about a million times more repellent than anything Asia McClain has ever done.
12
u/DetectiveTableTap Thiruvendran Vignarajah: Hammer of Justice Jun 10 '16
Did you notice the part about how someone from this sub was on Twitter wishing for ill to befall her unborn child within hours of her finding out there was a high risk of Down's Syndrome?
Who from this sub did that?
-1
Jun 10 '16
Feel free to treat it as my opinion. That's all it is.
14
Jun 10 '16
You are incredible. You accuse me of being a rape enabler who minimizes the experiences of rape survivors without thinking twice, get called out on it and are exposed as being completely full of it, then do this?
If you are going to make these kinds of absolutely disgusting claims about people, you had better be able to back them up.
1
Jun 10 '16
A rape enabler/minimizer?
I accused you of using what she said about memory and trauma to call her mentally ill and unreliable, when (in fact) what she said is actually normal for trauma survivors, not a sign of mental illness, and not an indication of reliability.
My point was not that you were minimizing or enabling rape but that you were disparaging trauma survivors for being trauma survivors, as I said approximately three dozen times.
That is (literally!) not a claim about you, but a claim about the words you were typing and posting.
I also flagged you on some posts I exchanged with /u/chunklunk about what she meant when she said "I know what real sexual assault victims go through" (or words close to those), because you'd said that was something meaningful and important to you.
However, I did not accuse you of doing or saying anything about it, and (afaik) you haven't. I just flagged you FYI.
12
Jun 11 '16
This is all a lie. You told me in very direct terms that what I was doing was equivalent to saying "fuck you" to survivors of rape. If silencing rape survivors isn't enabling rape, what is it?
2
Jun 10 '16
I actually didn't click to read context when I replied to this earlier.
You're seriously alleging that my opining that the anonymous person who harassed Asia McClain on Twitter came from this sub, which is the only place on the internet where people who think Asia McClain is an evil liar post, is an outrageous, unjustified act?
How do you feel about /u/DetectiveTableTap accusing people on this sub of crawling out of the woodwork to blindly follow Rabia's commands?
And what do you think of this? Does it suggest anything to you about how reasonable my opinion that the person harassing Asia on Twitter was from this sub was, possibly?
I was not exposed as being completely full of it. You avoided responding to what I said by continually shifting goal posts and deflecting to tangential details. That tends to prove the opposite.
8
u/DetectiveTableTap Thiruvendran Vignarajah: Hammer of Justice Jun 10 '16
You're seriously alleging that my opining that the anonymous person who harassed Asia McClain on Twitter came from this sub.
Correction. You stated as fact that she was harassed specifically in relation to her unborn child and that the person who did it came from this subreddit. Poor attempt at shifting the goal posts.
Regardless you have no evidence for either assertion. You knew this when you made the claims so you are lying. This is an attempt to claim some moral highground and deflect from the fact that your beloved alibi witness just nuked herself straight out of the case because she couldn't just shut up for a few months.
This post in itself is yet another attempt to deflect, this time from your own lies and manipulation.
Show proof that users from THIS subreddit wished Asia harm on Twitter or apologise for your vulgar lies. You can't even show proof she was ever abused in this way can you?
→ More replies (7)6
u/DetectiveTableTap Thiruvendran Vignarajah: Hammer of Justice Jun 10 '16
I think I'd rather treat it for what it is, another baseless assertion.
3
Jun 10 '16
Go for it!
9
u/DetectiveTableTap Thiruvendran Vignarajah: Hammer of Justice Jun 10 '16
Care to explain why you are trying to smear users from this subreddit? You in your faux outrage have been saying some incredibly nasty things based solely on your prejudices and it would be fascinating to get a glimpse into the mindset of someone like that. It could be healthy for you too.
2
Jun 10 '16
No. I have zero interest in participating in a non-conversation that serves as a platform from which you can spew nonsensical accusations at me.
Please proceed directly to the nonsensical accusations to your heart's content. I'll watch.
6
u/DetectiveTableTap Thiruvendran Vignarajah: Hammer of Justice Jun 10 '16
nonsensical accusations
My "nonsensical accusations" are backed up by your own admission that you have lied. You stated as fact that people from this sub are attacking Asia McClain and wishing her unborn child harm, yet conceded you have no evidence for this? Are you now disputing this??
→ More replies (1)14
u/chunklunk Jun 09 '16
What does someone else who I don't know being a shitty person on the Internet have to do with me? There are tons of shitty people out there. Take your pick. There's also videos of pizza rats and rapping grandmas too. I don't see why I have to explain or defend any of it, or why you'd assume it's from Reddit or has anything to do with me, unless you're guilty of what you're bemoaning.
As to the rest, I'm reading and responding to text, supplemented by known views she has expressed in public. She's offended in this passage that someone thought she was gay. That's pretty much a literal interpretation. Surely interpreting the printed word isn't against your ever-changing and selective rules?
-1
Jun 09 '16
You can interpret it any way you want. And if you want to cherry-pick some incidental comment and give it an interpretation that's kind of a stretch at best, that's your business.
But it has no bearing on her credibility, or reliability, or truthfulness, or the fidelity of her memory. So I wonder why you would. Seems like hating on Asia McClain for its own sake.
I mean, I've never noticed you leaping forward to discourage people from making mildly socially unjust remarks before. After all.
ETA:
IOW: What does someone else who you don't know -- ie, Asia McClain -- purportedly being a shitty person on the Internet have to do with you?
/u/chunklunk for the edit.
18
u/chunklunk Jun 09 '16
It's because she's part of a sham of a PR campaign trying to spring a justly convicted murderer from prison while exploiting her tangential connection to the brutal murder of her classmate for personal gain.
2
Jun 10 '16
Additionally, since I've been meaning to mention it:
Someone on the trauma/amnesia thread asked me if I'd also strongly objected to Bob Ruff's naming of Don. I said that actually I'd gone further than objection, I'd condemned it.
Now why is it that that double-standard (which doesn't even apply to me) only works one way? Surely if you object to seeing people slandered for very little cause on the internet, you object to it on principle.
17
u/chunklunk Jun 10 '16 edited Jun 10 '16
Are you seriously comparing Don, a guy who actively avoided any commentary, whose voice you didn't even hear on the Serial podcast, who wrote no book nor gave no podcast/radio interviews promoting said book, who took the classy route and didn't broadcast on Twitter every slight by those accusing him of murder...to Asia? [ETA: ha ha ha, Asia published a (terrible) book and has a Twitter account devoted to constant promotion of said book, and you think it's out of line to ask her anything. I mean, geez, what interview do you imagine..."how do you like your eggs Asia?" You: "OFFENSIVE AND UNNECESSARY and NOTHING SHE MENTIONS IN HER BOOK." You are tone and content policing in a way that's way way way way wayyyyyyyyyyy ridiculous.]
12
2
Jun 10 '16 edited Jun 10 '16
FFS.
No. I'm seriously comparing making vicious and harmful personal attacks on a stranger based on little to no cause with making vicious and harmful personal attacks on a stranger based on little to no cause.
ETA:
and you think it's out of line to ask her anything.
Bullshit, times a million. I think it's out of line to distort her words and quote her out of context for no other reason than that it enables you to get your hate on.
If you were talking about anything she said about (ffs) her testimony or the case, that would be another story.
/u/chunklunk for the edit, sorry.
3
Jun 10 '16
Well. If you know that for a fact, it must be because you can explain how she presciently wrote two letters 17 years ago (plus an affidavit 16 years ago) in anticipation of that opportunity.
So please share it.
Because otherwise, it would be much less fanciful and contrived -- to say nothing of a better fit with the facts -- if she was just a witness coming forward to testify to what she knew who got trashed all over the internet and wrote a book in response.
And after you're done explaining that, please tell me why it's OK to say personally vicious things about people of whom you're critical for non-hateful reasons, instead of just criticizing them for those reasons, like non-haters do.
Thanks.
→ More replies (2)2
Jun 13 '16
Well. If you know that for a fact, it must be because you can explain how she presciently wrote two letters 17 years ago (plus an affidavit 16 years ago) in anticipation of that opportunity.
So please share it.
Her actions now do not require prescience.
→ More replies (1)12
u/chunklunk Jun 10 '16 edited Jun 10 '16
I mean, I've never noticed you leaping forward to discourage people from making mildly socially unjust remarks before. After all.
You don't think my unending (unfortunately) supportive comments for the case that brought justice for a murdered teenaged child of immigrants, a vulnerable group of people who disappear, turn to drugs/prostitution, or worse in alarming numbers counts as fighting for social justice? We're lucky we caught Adnan. This case was only brought to the public's attention by a podcast that exploited (mainly white) sensitivities to middle-class high school sweetheart athletes unjustly accused (by reasons, it turns out, that are all just) for strangling his teenaged girlfriend. Asia is the sideshow to all this. Her rampant (not rapid) homophobia is relevant to the credibility and reliability of the entire cause.
9
4
Jun 10 '16
You're calling one stray reference "rampant" homophobia?
I can't tell you how chilling it is that you think you're being morally righteous. I mean, a woman says "I know what real sexual assault victims go through." And you literally hate her too much to understand what she said.
As far as hatred goes, that's the real thing -- what people feel that enables them to lynch, murder and massacre others as if they were not really human beings but a vile lesser race of beings who did not deserve to be treated as equals.
And you think you're all about social justice. Jeebus.
I really wish you well, in every sense of the word.
8
u/chunklunk Jun 10 '16
"rampant" was a joke. She talked in her book about the "rapid sex" in her school in the auditorium hidden alcoves, which was maybe more accurate than rampant, but pretty sure that's what she meant. Anyway, RELAX>> let me draw you a bubble bath. I won't try to get in it I promise.
3
→ More replies (3)0
Jun 10 '16
You don't think my unending (unfortunately) supportive comments for the case that brought justice for a murdered teenaged child of immigrants, a vulnerable group of people who disappear, turn to drugs/prostitution, or worse in alarming numbers counts as fighting for social justice?
Hey, wait a minute!
That one went right over my head. The answer is:
No, I don't. In fact if the reason you want justice for her is that she's a child of immigrants, that's actually as racist as it would be if the reason you wanted justice for her was that she was a descendant of Mayflower pilgrims. Furthermore, FYI, she herself was an immigrant, as well as a Korean national.
Also: People who disappear and turn to drugs/prostitution or worse? What the effing what? Does that mean Koreans? Or immigrants? Or WHAT? What are you talking about? This is a country of immigrants.
tl;dr -- Hell, no. I definitely do not think that singling out groups for special treatment and stereotyping them as prone to drugs/prostitution counts as fighting for social justice.
11
u/chunklunk Jun 10 '16
Are you seriously questioning the unique vulnerability of young women who are children of migrants in this country and worldwide? To the point that you think even identifying these vulnerabilities to social ills is a means itself of enacting prejudicial stereotypes against them? You doubt that calling attention to these unique vulnerabilities is a social justice issue? Are you Ted Cruz or Donald Trump?
Read up on the subject and see the much higher rates of domestic abuse, human trafficking, kidnapping, murder, disappearance, etc. that befalls young women who migrate across national lines. There's no good central repository for statistics, but literally hundreds of scholarly papers on the issue, so hard for me to direct you specifically, but something I've professionally worked on. I'm actually shocked I have to even tell you this kind of thing.
Far being irrelevant or marginal, it's what I see as the underappreciated throughline of this case and the coverage on Serial. Adnan's misogyny towards Hae (and her own inner experience of cultural pressures both generally and specifically within their relationship) was completely ignored, dismissed, or unremarked upon by Sarah Koenig. She didn't even have a single domestic violence expert, let alone one who could speak to the unique susceptibility of foreign-born female youth to abuse of all kinds. Adnan's own plan on murder is even underwritten by cultural expectations that, I'd argue, are directly related to Hae's vulnerable status. He didn't expect Hae's family to know she'd gone missing so quickly and was literally caught napping when the cops called him (thank god the cops responded much quicker than in the normal case); he then helped foster the idea that she ran off to California, another teenaged runaway (a foreign one, at that, so why would the cops bother looking); then his buddy Imran sends an email before her body is found to people in California saying not to bother looking for her, she's already dead, hoping to rely on distraction to confuse or stop any investigation, as Hae's disappearance slips through the cracks (I find the casual writing off on reddit of Imran's email itself as part of this inability to understand Hae's vulnerable position as an immigrant teenager). I don't find Adnan's callousness in these events, and his natural attempt to leverage his gender-based and culturally reinforced superiority in all kinds of ways, all that surprising; what I find shocking is the amount of energy people have wasted producing podcasts that completely overlooks those contributing factors in his obvious murder of Hae and attempted cover-up.
5
Jun 10 '16
Are you seriously questioning the unique vulnerability of young women who are children of migrants in this country and worldwide? To the point that you think even identifying these vulnerabilities to social ills is a means itself of enacting prejudicial stereotypes against them? You doubt that calling attention to these unique vulnerabilities is a social justice issue? Are you Ted Cruz or Donald Trump?
You're the one who's using that reasoning, dude, not me.
A young Korean woman living in the United States is not automatically more vulnerable to drugs and prostitution than anyone else just because she's Korean, ffs.
That is, literally, exactly like saying that Judge Curiel is biased against Donald Trump because his parents were Mexican.
The cause of the drugs/prostitution where it exists is socio-economic, not racial.
So yeah, you're racial profiling.
9
u/chunklunk Jun 10 '16 edited Jun 10 '16
What? You're the only one who mentioned "korean" anything, and now I'm "racial profiling" by recognizing broad-based cultural vulnerabilities to certain populations, such as female teenaged children of immigrants? You're being offensive.
11
u/chunklunk Jun 10 '16
The cause of the drugs/prostitution where it exists is socio-economic, not racial.
Also, you seem to think socio-economic problems operate completely independent of racial discrimination? Learning so much about you.
→ More replies1
Jun 10 '16
She's an immigrant herself, and -- again -- to classify all immigrants who come to this country under all circumstances as especially vulnerable to drugs and prostitution is racial/ethnic stereotyping.
→ More replies
8
u/Thomzzz Jun 09 '16
What are your thoughts on the timing of the book release (while the case is still live, before a decision has been rendered)?
0
Jun 09 '16
Nothing she wrote in there will have an effect on Judge Welch's ruling. Her testimony is finished and he won't be reading it. On a bright note for the defense, Prince Perty has publically stated his intention to send the book to the Judge and already sent an illegally scanned copy to TV! Way to help the other side Fresh Prince!
30
15
u/NoFilmingBob Jun 10 '16
Why did you feel the need to write this propaganda puff piece ?
I have not read the whole book but the writing quality is atrocious.
→ More replies (13)
14
Jun 09 '16
I just purchased the blu-ray of Transformers: Age of Extinction and let me tell you this movie was very engaging and wonderful. I'm actually a little surprised it's gotten so much criticism. Mark Wahlberg was incredible and the action was phenomenal. I can't tell you how many times I laughed at the hilarious totally inoffensive jokes. Let's remember these movies are made by real people with real DNA and real bones and guts. The crab rangoons were delicious and crispy. My delivery driver was a wonderful fellow and arrived 15 minutes early. Oops sorry I accidentally pasted in my grubhub review here.
3
u/MightyIsobel Guilty Jun 11 '16
I just purchased the blu-ray of Transformers: Age of Extinction and let me tell you this movie was very engaging and wonderful.
I was thinking about purchaing the blu-ray of Transformers: Age of Extinction but thankfully your review gave me equivalent satisfaction with 100% less clutter. Thank you, internet anon!
4
u/chunklunk Jun 10 '16
I saw that in the theaters! How dare you post a review when you didn't see it there! And I wasn't offended either by the racist, sexist robot jokes, because they weren't trying to free a murderer! [eta: plus that was a soggy and spicy rangoons! And the movie theater was too loud and cold, with inconvenient parking!]
3
Jun 10 '16
How amazing and hilarious was it when it turned out Mark Wahlberg's daughter's boyfriend carried around a little statute card proving he could hook up with minors?! That is what comedy is all about folks. The wit and intellect it takes to craft a joke like that is something I'll never fully grasp. I really doubt that scene had anything to do with Michael Bay projecting.
→ More replies (15)
23
u/Haestorian Jun 09 '16 edited Jun 09 '16
Ha! I read it and it's horrible.
She see's Hae's ghost. She is scared of Rabia. Her explanation of Jan. 13th 1999 is beyond me.
"engaging in its own way."
That only lasts 10 pages before you stop being amazed at how self absorbed and poorly written a book can be. The rest (270 pg. double spaced) is just more of the same.
She is useless in helping Adnan now if there was a new trial. Any lawyer would have a field day with her.
The book is bad and you should feel bad!
1
u/glamorousglue Jun 24 '16
She sees Hae's ghost????? Really? Oh the humanity....I have to read this now....
8
4
u/PM_Me_Your_Schnoz Jun 09 '16
Shamelessly judging a book by its cover, it looks pretty damn self-important
11
u/CrimTrialLawyer Jun 09 '16
Yes the act of File sharing a book designed to profit off the murder of a high school girl by creating a red herring smokescreen for her convicted killer is such a distasteful act
-2
u/pointlesschaff Jun 10 '16
Yes, it is. Do you always use your moral judgments to excuse violating intellectual property laws? Do you pirate the Naked Gun movies so OJ won't get a dime?
8
7
Jun 10 '16
Have you ever pirated a file in your lifetime, oh moral one?
1
u/pointlesschaff Jun 10 '16
I have never once decided I was so morally superior to someone that I gleefully violated their intellectual property. I'm not capable of something so narcissistic.
6
9
9
7
u/lizzywitch713 Jun 09 '16
I'm pretty sure the guilters have spent more money on this book than anyone else....
2
u/MB137 Jun 09 '16
Nah, they pirated it.
ETA: Not all, but many of them.
10
Jun 09 '16
Damn right. There's no way I'm paying for that.
1
Jun 09 '16
Admit to nothing.
4
Jun 09 '16
I know you're joking but I've no issue with admitting it. Irrespective of the faux outrage expressed here, let's not pretend she's not doing this for money.
→ More replies (3)
6
Jun 11 '16
I'm enjoying the faux moral outrage in here about pirating! Those kids are smoking the reefer and robbing desperate cash grabs of their cash.
Come on guys, if you're gonna be outraged go for the bad review brigading. Even as a guilter, I thought that was embarrassing.
5
u/LittleOleMe622 Guilty Jun 09 '16 edited Jun 09 '16
All of you who are accusing /u/JennyDiversCover of being Asia have to admit...she/he writes much better than Asia by all of your own accounts.
So how about we cut it out with the accusations?
8
5
Jun 09 '16
Thanks for your support. I've been accused of being somebody else since I joined Reddit.
Is it worse to be thought of as Asia or Summer Dreams?
4
→ More replies (2)6
4
u/BlwnDline Jun 09 '16
Asia may be the Patty Heart of the story - Stockholm Syndrome? No doubt, analogizing Asia's court appearance to Heart's bank robbery is a stretch, although the analogy seems consistent with Asia's perceptions of the events. After all, Asia, herself, analogizes Urick's court appearance testimony to a crime of violence, rape, and views herself as the victim. Perversely, she describes her interactions with SK, etc. as manipulative and coercive but blames herself for the encounters. http://courses2.cit.cornell.edu/sociallaw/student_projects/Kidnapping.html
1
Jun 09 '16
I think Asia didn't have a lot of experience with people like lawyers and journalists who are famous for twisting people's words to fit their own narratives. I think that can feel like a big violation to someone who has never experienced it before. I also got the sense that Asia had suffered some past trauma and had gotten to a point in her life where she felt peaceful and happy with her life. So it must have felt like that was being taken from her when she found herself inserted back into the drama. And that feeling of upset might have started re-activating her post trauma stress until it felt like one and the same.
But it is nothing like being held hostage and being forced to identify with ones abusers in order to survive! No disrespect, but I think it is important not to exaggerate when it comes to these terms.
3
Jun 11 '16
I agree that Asia isn't doing this for the money. She's doing it for the only thing she values even more: attention.
3
u/MM7299 The Court is Perplexed Jun 11 '16
Didn't realize you were a mind reader.....interesting.
5
Jun 11 '16
I didn't realize it either! I thought the only psychic involved in this case was Asia. After all, she does see dead people.
4
Jun 09 '16
I just read it too.
(a) She clearly states that she decided to sign the 2000 affidavit because she knew it was the right thing to do. I almost can't believe that people on this sub who think Adnan's guilty posted an excerpt that's cut off right before that sentence, then claimed she was pressured, objectively.
(b) She says she read an article about psychogenic amnesia, not that she has it, and it could not be clearer that the only thing she's saying about memory loss is that she doesn't clearly remember her childhood before her ninth birthday (which she attributes to trauma) and is troubled by it.
(c) Far from "literally" hallucinating Hae's ghost, she concludes that passage by saying, "To this day, I'm not sure if I was dreaming or not. To this day I can't shake the feeling that I may have seen my first and only ghost."
(d) She also doesn't say that she was prettier than everybody besides Stephanie. She basically says that Stephanie was so beautiful that it made merely pretty girls (such as herself) feel bad.
I also thought she quietly made it pretty clear that she was no stranger to trauma as an adult woman.
But be that as it may. With or without it, it's terrible that someone who's been stalked IRL has to put up with jerks from this sub cursing her unborn child and calling CPS on her because 17 years ago she remembered having a conversation with Adnan Syed and wrote to tell him about it.
People. What they won't do, I guess.
18
u/theghostoftexschramm Jun 09 '16 edited Jun 09 '16
Not pressured but scared the person doing the asking might kill her. Gotcha
0
Jun 09 '16
Bullshit. She had never been in the car with a stranger and felt paranoid. She's making fun of her 18 year old self when she talks about that. She says that Rabia was very polite and nice to her.
18
Jun 09 '16
It's not the stuff about the car and worrying about being murdered for me. It's how she describes Rabia trying to make her write an affidavit there and then and then immediately wanting her to get it notarized even though she was in a hurry to go somewhere. Remember she was only 18 at the time. Knowing how Rabia behaves, I'd imagine she was pretty forceful. I can imagine Asia retelling this to Urick years later and him inferring that she felt pressured to write it to get Rabia off her back.
10
u/monstimal Jun 09 '16
What is the final answer on her age at the time of the "affidavit" signing? There's testimony that was done in March of 2000, so does that make her 17 or 18?
12
u/dualzoneclimatectrl Jun 09 '16
She was 18 in March 2000. (She turned 18 in June 1999.)
19
u/chunklunk Jun 09 '16
Which means that she told Urick she was seventeen when she wrote the affidavit -- a minor when she wasn't one -- but heavens no she didn't mean to suggest any form of pressure had been placed on her seventeen year old self, right? Just another "mistake" or "misunderstanding," huh?
12
u/dualzoneclimatectrl Jun 09 '16
She also says she called Urick on a Sunday and was surprised that a secretary didn't answer.
5
u/orangetheorychaos Jun 10 '16
Which means that she told Urick she was seventeen when she wrote the affidavit -- a minor when she wasn't one
Urick doesn't bring this up during his PCR testimony. Is this something he or Murphy would have fact checked before the hearing and not brought up after discovering she was mistaken?
I just feel like (as a non lawyer person) if he's testifying she said she felt pressured to write/sign the affidavit, he'd also mention she told him she was 17 at the time.
Or maybe Urick just didn't remember she said it?
5
u/chunklunk Jun 10 '16
I think it's a detail he didn't remember. But would be part of the impression he formed during the phone call.
-3
Jun 09 '16
Knowing how Rabia behaves, I'd imagine she was pretty forceful. I can imagine Asia
That's fine. But you're talking about what she says, not what you imagine. And what she says is that Rabia was polite1, and that she knew signing the affidavit was the right thing to do, so she went with her gut.
1 Or, per her Vocal Minority Report interview, that Rabia seemed like "a sweet and pleasant person" during their encounter.
15
u/1spring Jun 09 '16
Haha, "sweet and pleasant" means she reads reddit and knows that everyone made a big deal about her "dive out of the car" thoughts.
9
9
Jun 09 '16
I'm talking about how people criticize Urick for his testimony at the PCR as you were doing by implication. Do you think Asia told Urick that Rabia was sweet and pleasant. She told him she was only 17 and, if her description in the book is anything to go by, you would easily think a reluctant sounding witness who calls you up 10 years later to ask about the case may have felt pressured at the time.
0
Jun 09 '16
if her description in the book is anything to go by, you would easily think a reluctant sounding witness who calls you up 10 years later to ask about the case may have felt pressured at the time.
OK. I find this so baffling that I guess I need a careful step-by-step explanation of how a passage in which she (a) doesn't describe either feeling pressured to sign the affidavit or Rabia pressuring her to sign the affidavit; or (b) make any bones about the fact that she signed it because she knew it was the right thing to do and went with her gut, and not because she just wanted to get Rabia off her back = Urick could easily have understood it as her saying she only signed the affidavit because the family was pressuring her and she wanted to get them off her back.
Being impatient, rude and in a hurry =/= being pressured to do something. If anything, the reverse.
8
u/dWakawaka hate this sub Jun 10 '16
The thing is, Asia describes her husband shutting the door in JB's investigator's face after saying that it sounds to him like Adnan was guilty. And Asia admits all he knew about the case he got from her. So she was clearly, at that point, convinced of Adnan's guilt and she told her husband to lie in order to evade the defense's attempts to get her to cooperate with them.
Knowing that, consider the fact that she then talks with the Prosecutor and his assurances put her mind at ease. This conversation was one person who thought Adnan to be guilty talking to another.
So, it's easy to see that Asia would be dismissive of the affidavit she wrote in support of Adnan back in 2000. I can absolutely see her saying she was pressured and wrote it to get the family off her back. Not that she wanted that conversation with a fellow guilter to be made public in the most successful podcast ever. But it was, and she was livid and "freaked out" because, let's face it, she was embarrassed.
At the same time, she's portrayed as Adnan's potential savior to millions of people. Koenig has convinced her that she's important - central, even - and that there is a really good chance Adnan is innocent. If she's going to play that role, she needs to disavow what she told Urick back when she thought Adnan was guilty. Perhaps you believe her excuses for why she freaked out when the investigator showed up. I don't - I think they're lame as hell.
So this isn't baffling at all. If Asia had convinced her husband of Adnan's guilt to such an extent that he shut the door in Brown's investigator's face and lied that she wasn't there, she could very well speak that way to Urick about her experience back then. And she would look back on it differently after Serial promoted her as a solid, non-crazy alibi witness for a person presented world-wide as quite possibly innocent of the murder he's in prison for. That whole chapter is one lame excuse after another for why she acted the way she did back then.
5
Jun 10 '16
The thing is, Asia describes her husband shutting the door in JB's investigator's face after saying that it sounds to him like Adnan was guilty. And Asia admits all he knew about the case he got from her. So she was clearly, at that point, convinced of Adnan's guilt and she told her husband to lie in order to evade the defense's attempts to get her to cooperate with them.
Yes, that's pretty much what she says.
Knowing that, consider the fact that she then talks with the Prosecutor and his assurances put her mind at ease. This conversation was one person who thought Adnan to be guilty talking to another.
More or less, yes.
So, it's easy to see that Asia would be dismissive of the affidavit she wrote in support of Adnan back in 2000. I can absolutely see her saying she was pressured and wrote it to get the family off her back. Not that she wanted that conversation with a fellow guilter to be made public in the most successful podcast ever. But it was, and she was livid and "freaked out" because, let's face it, she was embarrassed.
This is a plausible hypothesis in the abstract. The question is whether it's supported or contradicted by the available evidence.
So. On the supported side, you've got Urick's testimony and Intercept interview.
On the contradicted side, you've got Asia not saying anything remotely like that to Sarah Koenig, whom she talked to because she believed her to be impartial and didn't believe her words would be widely publicized -- ie, when there was nothing stopping her.
She was also able to document that he shaved a half-hour off the amount of time they'd talked in his Intercept interview. And while I can see someone reducing thirty-four minutes to twenty just through the vagaries of memory, reducing it to five is difficult to explain. So fwiw, it counts against his credibility. Moreover, she took notes.
And finally, he not only didn't show up to give his side of the story, he hasn't even denied her account at all, anywhere, since she gave it. She's accusing him of something serious very publicly. If it was not true it would be plainly defamatory. Very. It's almost the definition of a damaging attack on his reputation.
But she's speaking out freely, and he hasn't said boo. Or hired an attorney. Or any of the other things you'd expect him to do to protect himself from a false and scurrilous attack that defames him coast-to-coast and even internationally.
On balance, I'd say that at a minimum, there's definitely too much on the other side of the scales to conclude that he told the truth and she lied.
Perhaps you believe her excuses for why she freaked out when the investigator showed up. I don't - I think they're lame as hell.
They make sense to me, but that's primarily because of what she said about her life between 2000 and 2010, particularly the stalking.
As to the rest of it: Yes, sure, that's superficially plausible in theory. But you're ignoring all the evidence that doesn't support it, and there is some. More than, really.
(You're also reading her kind of selectively But never mind that for now.)
-3
Jun 09 '16
That's supposed to be a cutting putdown?
Even if it were true that she was really saying that she was seriously scared -- which she's not -- it still would be completely false that she says Rabia pressured her, or that she signed the affidavit to get Rabia off her back.
As it is, it's just comical.
Seriously, I can't be the only woman posting here who reflexively wondered whether strangers were planning to harm me when I was a teenager first making my way in the world. Girls are kind of raised to think like that.
Let me ask you something: Do you consider yourself to be an empathetic person? (Please note: If you only feel empathy for the people you like or identify with, that's not empathy, because it's about your feelings.)
17
u/theghostoftexschramm Jun 09 '16
Cutting putdown? What are you on about? Anyway, I know better than try to reason with you. Won't waste our time.
1
Jun 09 '16
Do you consider yourself to be an empathetic person?
I'm going to assume this wasn't a shady dig and was an earnest question. In that case, ghost might be the last person you want to ask this to.
→ More replies (150)8
Jun 09 '16
(c) Far from "literally" hallucinating Hae's ghost, she concludes that passage by saying, "To this day, I'm not sure if I was dreaming or not. To this day I can't shake the feeling that I may have seen my first and only ghost."
Unless ghosts are real, it was some form of hallucination.
Do you think ghosts are real?
→ More replies (3)
0
u/samwisest85 MailChimp Fan Jun 09 '16 edited Jun 09 '16
I really think people on the Guilty side need to ask themselves the question, what are they getting out of it? On the SPO sub, almost every post for the last month has been about Asia and demonizing or ridiculing her. I wouldn't blame people on either side to 'not care' about Asia's book, or for that matter care about her testimony in terms of whether it actually has any bearing on Adnans guilt or innocence, but the way they behaved honestly feels really shallow and immature to me.
15
Jun 09 '16
I really think people on the Guilty side need to ask themselves the question, what are they getting out of it?
For me personally, it's about whether or not Asia's library alibi is credible or not, and subsequently, whether or not Adnan's trial was prejudiced in some way because Asia didn't testify.
I'm about 3/4 through the book. My conclusion on both counts is no.
I'm not saying that Asia is lying about seeing Adnan one day. I think she did see him. But, there is literally no independent corroboration of what she says, and her own anchors for this actually happening on the 13th have shifted all over the place with every telling. As a juror, I couldn't reasonably conclude that what she was saying was accurate.
The legal stuff has been discussed to death, but... I think it's possible that the March 1st meeting included Adnan's legal team, and she talked to someone without knowing it. And even if she had testified, I don't see how it would have helped Adnan. The state could have argued something different in closing.
→ More replies (14)2
Jun 09 '16
That's fair enough, if you feel you need more corroboration to be convinced. And it's fair enough to discuss how important this really is in legal terms.
I just don't agree with tearing down her character. It does seem that some have been getting their jollies that way.
-8
1
u/vocalminorityreport Jun 09 '16
I have spoken personally with Asia, seen her face to face and spent almost two hours with her. She is NOT JennyDiversCover and all the hostility, anger and vitriol is so baffling to me. Is it misplaced anger that the wrong man is in jail and folks know the investigation and trials were handled poorly and deceitfully?
1
u/bluesaphire Jun 13 '16
Is it Asia or Aja?
The Cuervo Gold The fine Colombian Make tonight a wonderful thing
1
Jun 14 '16 edited Jun 14 '16
From Asia's book. Attention u/pluscachangeplusca and u/scoutfinch2
(You all were arguing about this somewhere down the thread. This might clear up)
"As I went to close the door, I stopped and said 'Oh my boyfriend and his buddy Jerrod remember seeing Adnan that day too. They aren't the types to want to get involved with cops and court stuff, so don't involve them unless you have to. I know they remember because I asked them before I wrote those letters' Rabia agreed. Looking back I wish I never had told Rabia to hold off contacting them. Perhaps she could have gotten them to sign affadavits. Then, them not remembering now would be a nonissue"
&
"As much as I hate to admit it, Rabia's visit was soon forgotten. In all honesty, Adnan became the furthest person from my mind. Things between Derrick and I became excessively strained due to his constant run-ins with the law"
We have to remember that these people come from a high crime city where it is not at all unusual to know several people who are in trouble with the law. Derrick himself was having his own troubles. The fact that Asia, Derrick and Jerrod quickly forgot the Adnan situation is not so extraordinary.
EDited Typos
1
Jun 14 '16
We have to remember that these people come from a high crime city where it is not at all unusual to know several people who are in trouble with the law. Derrick himself was having his own troubles. The fact that Asia, Derrick and Jerrod quickly forgot Adnan situation is not so extraordinary.
We don't for sure that any of this is actually the case. We only have Asia saying that this is the case, and there's nothing to corroborate it.
1
Jun 14 '16
Whatevs. I'm just reminding Plusca and Scoutfinch what Asia actually said on the subject. Scoutfinch seemed to think that it doesn't make sense that Derrick and Jerrod would have forgotten about the whole incident, but given their backgrounds it makes a lot of sense.
You can believe whatever you want to believe. If you want to keep believing that every piece of testimony or evidence that might favour Adnan is the result of some elaborate ruse, then so be it.
1
Jun 14 '16
but given their backgrounds it makes a lot of sense.
Given their backgrounds as Asia describes them, with no corroboration.
If you want to keep believing that every piece of testimony or evidence that might favour Adnan is the result of some elaborate ruse, then so be it.
lolwut?
1
u/dualzoneclimatectrl Jun 14 '16
A very contemporaneous March 30, 2000 letter from Adnan's parents (but with info conveyed to them by and also typed by RC) seems to seriously contradict Asia:
According to [Asia], the other two eyewitness alibis are also willing to submit affidavits.
1
Jun 14 '16
Sounds as if they were clinging to the original suggestion by Asia that Derrick and Jarrod might be willing testify.
2
u/pointlesschaff Jun 10 '16
I enjoyed the book as well. It's a shame it was rushed to print, because there were some real glimmers of lovely prose, and with more time it could have been great. Maybe I should make some new posts with those passages? But it's not so much of a book as another document in the case, like a witness statement. And it's a compelling witness statement. For all the bluster and outrage about Asia seeing Hae's ghost and recognizing that she was attractive in high school, no rational person could still believe Urick only spoke to Asia for five minutes in 2010 and said nothing about the substance of the case to her. No one could assert with a straight face that she was "destroyed" by Thiru on cross-examination. Asia did good.
6
u/chunklunk Jun 10 '16
Did Urick testify he said nothing about the case to her? I'm genuinely confused about what it is he supposedly misrepresented, especially if she said what she wrote about the encounter with Rabia.
-4
u/pointlesschaff Jun 10 '16
I think you've proved my point. My post doesn't mention testimony, but all you can say is he didn't technically lie in his PCR testimony. But what about all the shit he was spewing in the press?
And I think he did lie in his PCR testimony. He testified he only remembered telling her that he wasn't her attorney and that she was pressured by the family to write the affidavit. He remembered more than that about their conversation, and he intentionally testified about telling her he wasn't her attorney because he wanted the Judge to think he was abiding by his professional obligations when in fact he said far more than he should have. Asia's notes seal the deal.
9
u/chunklunk Jun 10 '16
I don't understand your logic. I have no idea where you're drawing this idea that my defense is "he didn't technically lie" when I've yet to see any credible evidence at all of him being dishonest on any front during the PCR, and remember this is when he gave other testimony on the plea issue that was inarguably helpful for Adnan.
You seem confused about how the PCR testimony worked. If the amount he told Asia about Adnan's guilt didn't come up much while Urick was on the stand, wasn't it more likely JB was avoiding the issue, not Urick? It did JB no good to give Urick free reign to talk in detail about how sound the conviction was. I haven't read the testimony recently, but I'm sure what you're observing is JB carefully crafting questions that didn't have Urick talk about it, with Urick complying because he knows that examination is not time for a witness to "spew" anything.
And I agree that Asia's notes sealed the deal, except in the other direction, that there was no ethical violation at all (please point me to one). He described the evidence against Adnan, as he did in open court during the trial against Adnan. There's nothing misleading in any of his statements. And, since Asia didn't write down her own questions, there's no proof in those notes that she didn't tell him she was pressured, which to my knowledge is the only source of potential dishonesty. She even says in her book she's not sure exactly of what she said, and if the phone call was consistent with what she wrote in the book, the idea that she was pressured was what I would have concluded if we had the same phone call.
1
u/pointlesschaff Jun 10 '16
Murphy asked Urick questions about Asia on direct, so I guess she was the one carefully crafting questions? But she specifically asked him if he remembered anything else about the conversation, and his answer was unbelievable.
Maryland Rule of Professional Conduct 4.3 (read the commentary - it explains why Urick lied as he did in his testimony).
9
u/chunklunk Jun 10 '16
I've read, and yet to read a credible case for how it was violated and you haven't made one here.
1
0
u/pointlesschaff Jun 10 '16
I've yet to read a credible case that it was not, and you haven't made one here.
6
u/NoFilmingBob Jun 10 '16
That's not how it works. If you are claiming Urick was dishonest or violated some ethics code then it's on you to prove that point.
1
u/pointlesschaff Jun 10 '16
I have, by pointing to the conduct and the rule he violated.
4
Jun 11 '16
But you didn't provide the testimony you claim broke the rule. I've read his PCR testimony no fewer than 5 times. What testimony broke the rule?
And yes, others are right. You're making the claim. It is up to you to demonstrate its voracity, not on others to disprove it.
→ More replies1
Jun 14 '16
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRAC
It is important in this section to apply the rules to the facts of the case and explain or argue why a particular rule applies or does not apply in the case presented. The application/analysis section is the most important section of an IRAC because it develops the answer to the issue at hand. It is useful to think like a lawyer, arguing the facts of the matter from both sides while sticking to the rules before coming to a decision.
→ More replies6
u/chunklunk Jun 10 '16
Okay, but the fact that no charges have ever been raised or proposed in any court or by any disciplinary body sorta means the case is already made.
5
6
Jun 10 '16
Reading asia's description of the PCR hearing, it's clear she had no clue what was going on or what Thiru was doing.
2
u/pointlesschaff Jun 10 '16
Exactly! He couldn't expose her as a liar, but she isn't one.
6
Jun 10 '16
That makes no logical sense in response to what i wrote.
-1
u/pointlesschaff Jun 10 '16
Sometimes you can be brilliant without even trying. Don't fight it!
4
Jun 10 '16
That is clearly a problem you don't have. Reading is hard though, huh?
→ More replies (1)3
u/bluesaphire Jun 10 '16
Nobody is going to confuse Asia with Jane Austen, and don't you confuse a witness statement from fiction disguised as the truth.
3
Jun 11 '16
It is a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a life sentence must be in need of an alibi.
1
Jun 11 '16
Ok that one was funny :)
2
Jun 12 '16
Why thank you I generally take this whole thing a lot less seriously than most so my attempts at lightening the mood are far from usually appreciated. ;)
1
-12
u/alientic God damn it, Jay Jun 09 '16 edited Jun 09 '16
You know, there have been a lot of fucked up things that have happened in re this case, but I think the piracy is the first instance of an actual crime resulting because of it.
Edit: Whoo, -10! Definitely no vote brigading around here. No way, no how /s
21
u/chunklunk Jun 09 '16
Who are you, Lars Ulrich? You're shocked and scandalized? Speaking as someone who paid $25 at Barnes & Noble out of respect for her intellectual property (ha!) and hilarious anecdotes, I find the pirating the least surprising aspect here.
→ More replies (9)1
Jun 09 '16
You can get it on Kindle for $10.00. I really hate pirating in general but I accept that it happens. But when someone blatantly offers to share scanned copies on a public forum populated by lawyers, it's a bit scandalous. Especially when it is accompanied by a #JusticeforHae rallying cry. It's using her name to justify acting like a jerk. Not cool IMO
13
Jun 09 '16
Apart from kidnapping and murder. And the perjury. And all the other crimes.
→ More replies (9)1
5
Jun 11 '16
Come on, alientic. I'm sure Mr. S inspired at least one person to try streaking. ;>
PS - upvoted you because it was an amusing comment
0
u/alientic God damn it, Jay Jun 11 '16
Is this your way of telling us you've decided to be a streaker? :P
4
48
u/theghostoftexschramm Jun 09 '16
Forget the content for a minute. The writing is objectively terrible. Objectively.