Adnan Syed as Wrong One Convicted: Argumentative Essay

Wrong One Convicted

Every year, hundreds of people are wrongfully convicted in the justice system. Defendants have been forced to extensive amounts of jail time or even faced their death before proven innocent, due to the errors that the criminal justice system commits (Leo & Gould 2009). Many of these wrongful convictions are powered by the incapacity of defense lawyers that are unable to gather factual information, insufficient DNA evidence, false witnesses, and even racial discrimination. In 1999, being only 17, Adnan Syed’s life came crashing down when he was wrongfully convicted of a murder he did not commit. A High School senior, Hae Min Lee was strangled and found buried in Baltimore’s Leakin Park. The only connection that she had to Syed was that she had dated him. He pleaded not guilty for murder and kidnapping of his ex-girlfriend, Lee, but was sentenced to life in prison plus 30 years. In a year, his conviction was set forth even with minimal evidence that led to him, evidence that targeted him vastly due to the fact that they dated before. His sentencing was negatively influenced by opposing lawyers and was majorly biased because of his race (Lucky 1651). His case, amongst many other cases, are examples of how careless the justice system is towards minorities.

Adnan Syed’s trial was majorly biased in a negative way, making it simple for the criminal justice to unjustly convict him of the murder. In the article, Duncan states:

In the more than thirty years since the definitive ineffective assistance of counsel case Strickland v. Washington prisoners have famously had difficulty proving that their trial counsel provided constitutionally inadequate representation. The success rate of ineffective assistance of counsel claims is well documented as abysmally low. Worse still, the failure rate of ineffective assistance claims does not accurately reflect the frequency with which defendants receive unacceptable legal representation at trial. (Duncan 1653)

By this, the rate of successfulness towards a case that is treated unjustly is low. The article states how poor defense lawyering was the result of having Syed’s Six Amendment rights taken away from him, rushing his trial to only a year, and sentencing him to life in prison due to the lack of an unfair trial. In Webster’s article, it states, “Prosecutors’ role in detecting false convictions can best be understood against the backdrop of the failings of judicial review, for it is partly because of appellate system inadequacy that falsely convicted defendants have taken to prevailing upon prosecutors for relief.” Because of the lack of a fair trial, Syed’s lawyer, Cristina Gutierrez mishandled and carelessly managed his case, failing to cross-examine the prosecution’s cell phone tower expert and failing to check the reliability of the location for the calls, placing him at the scene of the crime. Gutierrez also failed to investigate Syed’s alibi, Asia McClain, who stated that she saw Syed in her school’s library during the time of the murder. Syed asked Gutierrez if she had interrogated McClain about the topic, but she stated that nothing came up. In the podcast, “Serial Podcast Season One, Episode 7: The Opposite of Prosecution,” by Sarah Koenig it states, “Post-conviction work often involves going back and looking at physical evidence in a case. Some innocence projects only work with cases that have DNA evidence, for instance.” The validity of the DNA evidence before the court always depends on how the prosecutors accurately collect it. Its preservation and documentation also helps the court distinguish how reliable the evidence is towards the case (Jangir 16). The prosecutors tested DNA found on Lee’s necklaces, blood samples, fingernail clippings, T-shirt, jacket, rope, a liquor bottle, and even a condom wrapper, but none of them matched Adnan Syed’s DNA, resulting in no form of forensic evidence relating to him. The evidence found is exculpatory but not strong enough for an exoneration. The prosecutors still managed to defend their case by stating that even though Syed’s DNA was not found, it did not prove his innocence. The reason why no DNA found does not prove Adnan’s innocence, is that even though DNA highlights the flaws in the criminal justice system, it does not eliminate them. However since no DNA was traced back to Syed, it really benefited him and has been significantly helpful and important towards his case.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

Adnan Syed had a specific witness that was critical to his case; Jay Wilds. Wilds’ testimony was not only a giant part of Syed’s conviction but his testimony was also filled with falsified information, as every time Wilds talked, he gave out different information about what he witnessed. As stated in the article, Bellin states, “A lawyer cannot sponsor witness testimony that she knows to be untrue”. Just by that fact, his testimony should have been dismissed from the beginning (Bellin, 427). He ‘confessed’ that he helped Syed burry Lee’s body after having originally denied having to do part with the murder. However, because of his testimony, he did not go to prison but was instead given a year on probation. His memory was also altered by marijuana. Wilds was more of an acquaintance to Syed rather than a friend, as they only hung out to smoke marijuana. This brings to the fact that marijuana can produce short-term problems with thinking, working memory, executive function, and psychomotor function, which can alter the way someone thinks. The article, “The Chronic Effects of Cannabis on Memory in Humans: A review,” by Nadia Solow and Robert Barristi states, “age of onset of cannabis use may also be a critical factor, with potentially greater deleterious effects to the brain when cannabis use is commenced during significant periods of neurodevelopment, such as adolescence.” Marijuana has chemicals that attach to brain receptors in regions that are vital for memory formation (Solowij & Battisti 82). Wilds was under the influence of marijuana at the time of Lee’s murder, making it another reason why he was an unreliable witness towards Syed’s case. His memory was majorly affected by the drug, which could have also altered his memory into thinking that Syed was the criminal. If it weren’t for Jay Wilds’ testimony, Syed may have not ended up in jail.

Adnan Syed had a highly influenced and biased trial. Much of the influence was based on his race. In the podcast, Sarah Koenig it states, “In other words that he’s a Pakistani Muslim and--people are saying his dark side, and his-- there was some notation about he was very controlling. I thought, ‘I wonder if he was really very controlling.’ So there’s that.” Lee had moved on from her and Syed’s breakup, which allowed prosecutors to add on to Syed’s case stating that because of his belief structure, it was acceptable for a Muslim man to ‘eliminate’ a woman due to the dishonor she caused towards him (Koeong 154). In the article, Undisclosed: Five Legal Lessons from the Adnan Syed Case, it stated, “They easily could have said this was a case of domestic violence or dating violence. It happens in this country all the time. They didn’t. They said it was an honor killing.” Islamophobia had a big influence on Syed’s prosecution, negatively stereotyping his religion by discriminating against him and Muslims from social and political life. The prosecution had a major focus on the dating laws of Islam, stating that in the Islamic culture, no code violation was committed, but rather stating that Syed had defended his honor and pride. There was no factual evidence that connected Syed’s religion to the trial, but the prosecutors still managed to add his beliefs which influenced a religious bias. (Chaudry 369)

There have been arguments, however, that lead to Syed’s guilt. Many of Syed’s friends described him as an uptight and very angry person when he was broken up by Lee. Many of the times, Syed was described as a person who only wanted to please other people, even if it meant that he had to change his whole personality. This puts in perspective that Syed is not as innocent as everyone thinks he is because he tried to be someone he wasn’t just to make other people happy. Adnan was mad that they were no longer together, which also stated the fact that it was his first loss at something, making it believable that he was not happy with him being broken up by Lee. His emotions made him unable to deal with the loss, developing major hatred towards Lee. His phone also tracked many calls to his friends during the day that Wilds was arrested. Wilds maintained Syed’s guilt by saying that he isn’t involved with whatever makes Syed innocent. Without Wilds’ testimony, it would have been impossible for the state to even bring Syed to trial. Lee’s parents have no doubt that Syed killed their daughter.

In conclusion, Adnan Syed’s unfair conviction has been famously talked about throughout the world. Many cases state his guiltiness, but the majority point out to his obvious innocence. There are many contributors to Syed’s wrongful conviction, including a poor lawyering defense, a racial target, a drug induced witness, and a lack of DNA evidence. Being wrongfully convicted is something no one wants to go through, but what Adnan Syed went through was one of the many cases that people who are wrongfully convicted go through in the justice system. Jay Wilds, Cristina Gutierrez, and many more were contributors to Syed’s conviction, and each had their own part which affected negatively towards his case, whether it was from being under the influence and confessing to something that didn’t happen, or whether it was from being careless about the case and the person being prosecuted. His case was majorly biased in the courtroom, which influenced the fact that his case was not just about him being Lee’s ex-boyfriend, but how he was a Muslim that wanted to defend his own honor. Even if Syed was proven innocent, the evidence that was provided in his trial was not merely enough to have him convicted. If he ever is proven innocent, Adnan Syed’s life will not be recovered because of all the years that he spent in jail.

Works Cited

1. Meredith J. Duncan, “Lucky” Adnan Syed: Comprehensive Changes to Improve Criminal
2. Defense Lawyering and Better Protect Defendants’ Sixth Amendment Rights, 82 Brook. L. Rev. (2017)
3. Smith, Earl, and Angela Hattery. “Race, Wrongful Conviction & Exoneration.” Journal of African
4. American Studies, vol. 15, no. 1, Mar. 2011, pp. 74–94. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1007/s12111-010-9130-5. Accessed 22 October 2019
5. Chaudry, Rabia, “Undisclosed” Five Legal Lessons from the Case of Adnan Syed, Texas Tech `
6. Law Review, 2016, Vol.48(2), pp.363-374, Cenage Learning, Inc.
7. Bellin, Jeffrey, “The Silence Penalty” (March 1, 2017). Iowa Law Review, Vol. 103, p. 395, 2018.
8. Solowij, Nadia, “The Chronic Effects of Cannabis on Memory in Humans: A Review, Battisti,
9. Robert, Current Drug Abuse Reviews, 2008, Vol 1, 81-98
10. Koenig, Sarah, “Serial: Season 1”, Episode 7, This American Life,
11. 2014-2020,https://serialpodcast.org/season-one/7/the-opposite-of-the-prosecution
12. Jangir, Shyam Sundar, The Role of DNA in Criminal Investigation – Admissibility in Indian Legal
13. System and Future Perspectives, (2015),10.13140/RG.2.1.4126.3209.
14. Webster, Elizabeth, “THE PROSECUTOR AS A FINAL SAFEGUARD AGAINST
15. FALSE CONVICTIONS: HOW PROSECUTORS ASSIST WITH EXONERATION.” Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, Vol.110, No.2, Northwestern University (on behalf of the School of Law), Apr. 2020, pp. 245-305, http://search.proquest.com/docview/2387301111/.