If you have any interest at all in the American justice system, you need to follow season one of the Serial Podcast.  This program does a phenomenal job telling the story of Adnan Syed’s conviction for the murder of his friend Hae Min Lee.

During a trial both sides do their best to either include or exclude evidence in an effort to persuade a jury to find in their favor.  Often, the media will report on information that might not be allowed as evidence at trial.  It can seem like that “missing” evidence would be decisive.

One of the most informative aspects of the podcast is that it even after looking at all of the evidence, including conducting a more thorough investigation than the prosecution and defense, uncovering additional testimony, and testing evidence– more than was available for or included in the original trial– @serial is not able to reach a conclusion about Mr. Syed’s guilt or innocence.  This, more than anything else, pulls back the curtain on how “justice” is reached in America.

Smoking guns rarely exist.  What may seem like a smoking gun can look like a mirage up against other, truthful information.

This case could easily go either way.

Given our current political, socioeconomic, and social media landscape filled with discussions of bias and racism, etc. it is more important than ever to understand how our system works and what happens with the information when it’s put in front of a jury or a grand jury.

Juries, might not always issue the most popular verdicts, but even in the most clear cases the decision can often go either way.   More often than not, juries do the best they can with the information available.  It may not be the justice we are looking for, but in America it is justice nonetheless.

Since season one of @serial aired, there have been updates in Mr. Syed’s case.  I appreciate @serial’s willingness to return to the progress, even if it still doesn’t lead to any answers.