Serial - The End

Well, of course it was unsatisfying. What do we now know that we didn't after the first episode? Basically, trivia.

(Total side note: went to a Seinfeld trivia night the other night and was reminded why I dislike trivia nights so much -- people know way too much useless crap. I find it depressing. Whereas home games of Trivial Pursuit can occasionally be fun, these public trivia-wonk folks creep me out. Look, I know way too much about Seinfeld and felt like an ignoramus around these trivia people. What is wrong with them? How can anyone spend so much time memorizing pointless crap?)

Which brings me back to Serial. I guess I don't have any profound thoughts that haven't been aired elsewhere. I find the storytelling to be round about and often based upon premises I fundamentally disagree with. I don't think we got the information presented in the podcast the same way the detectives, judge, and jury got the information. I find it relevant the detectives were 100% convinced they got the right guy, the jury only deliberated for 2 hours, and the judge seemed mighty convinced as well. I feel like the entire podcast was sort of like an extensive NFL replay. And Sarah K was, like a desperate, pathetic football fan, always looking for any type of evidence to poke a hole in the prosecutions case (and overturn the call her way). She SO BADLY wanted the conviction to be wrong, but she couldn't find it. In the end, the only thing she could fall back upon was that if she was in the jury (which she wasn't, nor was she presented the evidence in the way the jury was presented the evidence), she would've voted to acquit. And look, maybe I would've too, because by no means am I 100% (based upon only listening to the podcast) that he is guilty.

But I still think he did it.

And that is the question that interests me coming out of the podcast. I do not come away with a sickening feeling about our justice system. I come away with one feeling: I really want to know what happened. And to me, the angle she never explored but which I think would provide answers, is an analysis into Adnan's family. I want to know about the father. And I want to know about the mother. I want to know why there is one brother who does not talk to the rest of the family. I want to know if there was abuse in the house. I want to know if the father ever assaulted anyone. I want to know why the father has fallen into a weird, deep funk and never talks. I want to know if Adnan ever got suspended from school as a youngster for violence.

I realize none of these things are relevant to the court case, but I still want to know. Because I suspect the answer to the question of why this seemingly good kid probably murdered a girl in cold blood lies therein.

OTHER MAJOR SIDE NOTE: Why I think he did it. 1) No reason not to buy the basic timeline, thus making the serial killer angle seem far fetched. 2) Jay was involved because he knew about the car 3) It seems more likely to me that Jay's basic story is correct than the alternative, which is that Jay successfully framed Adnan for some unmotivated murder and managed to fool detectives, judge, and jury, AND Adnan simultaneously had no alibi or recollection of the day it happened. 4) Adnan comes across to me a schmoozer and liar. I know that is not grounds to convict a person...however, Koenig and others use the exact opposite-logic to suggest his innocence. They believe he is a good, decent person. Adnan, to me, seems like a vain, arrogant, nincompoop, who talks around issues rather than facing them head on. I became convinced of this when he tried to exonerate himself by explaining how it was impossible for him to drive to Best Buy by a certain time. Koenig cites the fact that Adnan has been a model prisoner since the incident. Well, Jay hasn't been convicted of other crimes, I don't think. If he were the murderer, or somehow involved more, doesn't it seem likely he would've displayed more such insane behavior since this incident? Furthermore, it's not like OJ killed anyone else anyhow. Adnan's model behavior, in other words, proves nothing to me.