My understanding of the Adnan Syed story begins with a high-school love affair. A relationship ends, Adnan is hurt. The girl--Hae Min Lee--is found dead, murdered. It's easy to find Adnan guilty, because of racism and sketchy cell tower "evidence," and so Adnan is sent away for decades.
Legal advocates get angry. There is DNA that hasn't been tested. The man who "found" the body, Alonzo Sellers, later tries to assault a young woman in a car. Also, Hae Min's car was stored suspiciously close to one of Sellers's associates. Sellers shows moments of explosive rage on the stand. Could he be guilty?
Moments in the new HBO documentary seem somewhat unethical. By subtly tarring Sellers--without getting Sellers to talk on-camera--the documentary filmmaker could be almost as questionable as the prosecutor (Vicki Walsh) she is attacking. (There is hand-wringing about a bad polygraph test, but I've heard again and again that polygraph tests shouldn't count for anything. Why are they still in use?) Additionally, Hae Min Lee's brother--who would prolong Adnan's suffering simply because of "ruffled feathers"--comes off as a cardboard villain. A better filmmaker would have worked harder to get the brother to sit down for an interview.
Finally, the film seems weirdly uninterested in the "reacclimation" process. Adnan returns to society after twenty-plus years behind bars. We learn that he takes on a role at Georgetown--helping to reform the criminal justice system. This is inspiring--but what is it like for Adnan to talk to neighbors? To read about himself on Reddit? To contemplate dating? More could have been asked; more could have been reported.
Still, I watched with wide eyes. Such a strange story.
Comments
Post a Comment