Media highlights the mistakes of our justice system by spreading awareness which can rally people together to demand justice.
This is the case for Adnan Syed, who was released from prison after 23 years on Sept.19. He was convicted at 17-years old and sentenced to life in prison for murdering his ex-girlfriend, Hae Min Lee, according to a Sept. 20 New York Times article.
The podcast “Serial,” hosted by Sarah Koenig, dedicated its first season to Syed’s case and his proclaimed innocence.
“Serial” raised questions about the case’s evidence and revealed critical errors in the way the case was handled, which was unscrupulous.
The podcast, while informative, played a crucial part of why Syed was able to receive a second chance.
For instance, the podcast uncovered an alibi that could have testified to prove Syed was somewhere else at the time of the murder. “The witness, Asia McClain, said she had been willing to testify, but Mr. Syed’s lawyer, Maria Cristina Gutierrez, did not contact her…,” according to the same New York Times article.
This witness was never reached out to by the lawyers despite being a key factor that could have prevented Syed from spending 23 years of his life wrongfully imprisoned.
The podcast was able to bring immense awareness to Syed’s situation and the public opinion of courts were swayed in his favor to give him another chance at what would hopefully be a fair trial this time.
“Serial” brought necessary recognition to the fact that our justice system is greatly prejudiced and inspired its audience to fight back against injustice.
The podcast exposed facts that were essential to Syed’s case and release from prison. The jury was then able to fairly assess Syed’s charges and deem him innocent as he should have been all along.
In February 2015, a court in Maryland heard an appeal from Syed. In the following November, he was allowed a new hearing that could introduce new evidence to the case, according to the same New York Times article.
This paved the way for trials and appeals that would lead to Syed’s release from prison, a release that is 23 years too late.
Justice Studies Senior Lecturer Greg Woods offers his insight on how media influences such trials.
“Courts of public opinion have the power to validate, motivate and facilitate action, like in the case of Adnan Syed,” Woods said in an email.
Woods believes that podcasts such as “Serial” draw attention to flaws in the justice system and provide us with an opportunity to direct our attention toward mending them.
I think that if it wasn’t for podcasts and other media bringing constant attention to these issues within our system then people like Syed might never have a second chance at freedom.
“Serial” provided Syed with a support system and gave people like him a voice and reason to stand up for themselves.
“What we see time and again is an inherently flawed justice system where it’s only the demands of the people that bring about the justice that the system by itself perhaps has fallen flat in achieving,” said Woods in a Zoom interview.
We are unable to rely on justice being served in trials and it is often up to us to research and understand the truths about wrongdoings in cases such as Syed’s.
Syed’s trial was heavily influenced by racial stereotypes and bias. Mano Raju, San Francisco public defender and member of the South Asian Bar Association of North America said in an NBC News article from September 22.
“It seemed like what the prosecution did is it made an intentional choice to substitute Islamophobia and racial bias for proof,” Raju said.
The court was able to use racial bias against Syed and influence public opinion to believe he was guilty of murder despite its lack of strong evidence because they knew no one would question it at the time.
The justice system abused its power in order to get away with racially profiling yet another innocent, undeserving person.
“Raju said he thought the prosecution made sure the jury saw Syed as a foreigner whose race and religion made him more disposed to violence,” according to the same NBC article.
In Syed’s original trial, the jury voted to convict him because the court depicted him in stereotypical ways based on his race and religion and used questionable evidence against him.
I continue to see cases such as Adan’s where innocent people lose their lives and futures as a consequence of our broken, racist justice system.
The Netflix series “When They See Us” depicts a similar instance in which five boys of color, who came to be known as the Central Park Five, were wrongfully accused and convicted of attacking a white woman in Central Park in New York.
The boys were unlawfully interrogated without their parents and coerced into confessing to a crime in which they never committed, as seen in the series.
The Central Park Five have since been exonerated but not before each of them suffered between five and 11 years in prison.
It's pathetic that we have a system which would rather imprison an innocent person or group of people whose profile they cannot look past than serve proper and fair justice.
“Serial” exemplified just how unethical our court systems can be and opened my eyes to the injustices around us.
Ultimately, Syed’s trial was clearly unfairly handled and flawed. If it wasn’t for “Serial” shedding a light on its imperfections, it is something that may have gone unnoticed forever.
