EXTRA INFORMATION
A great deal of public attention had been brought to the case in 2014, when the podcast Serial launched examining the investigation. Following a sentence appeal, and after 23 years of imprisonment, B was released from prison this year, in September 2022. His conviction was overturned after the court ruled that there had been several major problems with the original investigation. The witness testimony of J had changed multiple times, the cell phone records were proved unreliable, and both police and prosecutors had been accused of misconduct. Two additional suspects were uncovered that had not been properly ruled out at the time and so a reinvestigation was ordered. B’s release was not an admission of his innocence but rather that his trial had been unfair.⚠️ New Questions
- Does True Crime entertainment serve a purpose other than to entertain? Where is the line of education vs entertainment?
- How could it take 23 years to realise a mistake had been made? All of the information that led to B’s release was available at the time of the original trial
- What led to this miscarriage of justice?
➕ Summary
On January 13 1999, an 18-year-old high school student (that we’ll call ‘H’) was reported missing by her family after she failed to collect her young cousin after school. Nearly a month later, a passerby found H’s body buried in a local park. She had been killed by manual strangulation.
A couple of days after this discovery, an anonymous phone call to the police suggested that H’s ex-boyfriend, ‘B’, was responsible for her murder. On Feb 28, B was arrested. The case against him was largely based on the testimony of one witness, his friend, who testified that he had helped B bury H’s body. B denied this story and maintained his innocence throughout his trial. These people cannot both be telling the truth. Let’s hear their testimonies now. Ex-boyfriend’s friend, J: It was my girlfriend’s birthday and B had said he’d help me buy her a gift. He came by my house in his car from school and picked me up to bring us to the shopping centre. On the way he told me he was going to kill H. I didn’t take it seriously but after shopping he gave me his car and mobile phone and got me to drop him back at school. He told me he was going to call me on that phone after he killed her and that I was to come meet him in his car to pick him up again. Later that day he did call and told me where to meet him. I met him in a car park and that’s when he showed me H’s body. He had put her in the boot of her car. We drove around for a while, him driving H’s car, me driving his, and then he abandoned her car. We went cruising for a bit and then he told me to drop him back off at school so that he could be seen at training for an alibi. On the way he was bragging and all proud about how he had killed H. I collected him again after training and then B got a call from H’s family. He got worried about where he had left H’s body with her car so we went back to get it. We got shovels from my house, got H’s car and then headed to the park to bury her. We dug a shallow hole in the woods and left her there around 8pm.” The ex-boyfriend, B: “It didn’t happen, none of this is true at all. I must have had a free period that morning because I know I went to J’s to check if he had bought a gift for S’ birthday, S is my friend and J’s girlfriend. J said he hadn’t gotten S anything so I offered him my car to go pick her up something. I went back to school and then after school finished, I probably went to the library to use the computer before training. I would have had athletics training that day, I always go. But this was 6 weeks ago, it was just a normal day, I don’t remember exactly what I was doing but I didn’t kill H!” B was put on trial for premeditated, first-degree murder. We are going to provide you with access to some of the main material that was presented at the trial. The case was largely based on three things: 1) the witness testimony, 2) mobile phone records which were used to corroborate the whereabouts and 3) the motive proposed by the prosecution. While you have a look over this evidence, we also want you to think about what you did on this day exactly 6 weeks ago: what did you do, where did you go, what was the weather like, who did you talk to? Are you absolutely sure? Can anyone confirm that?
If you can’t watch this here – try watching it on YouTube.
🔎 Evidence
📝 The Transcript
Show full transcript
Presenter in theatre talking to camera
On January 13 1999, an 18-year-old high school student (that we’ll call ‘H’) was reported missing by her family after she failed to collect her young cousin after school. Nearly a month later, a passerby found H’s body buried in a local park. She had been killed by manual strangulation. A couple of days after this discovery, an anonymous phone call to the police suggested that H’s ex-boyfriend, ‘B’, was responsible for her murder. On Feb 28, B was arrested. The case against him was largely based on the testimony of one witness, his friend, who testified that he had helped B bury H’s body. B denied this story and maintained his innocence throughout his trial. These people cannot both be telling the truth. Let’s hear their testimonies now.Listen to two testimonies: ex-boyfriend’s friend and ex-boyfriend
Ex-boyfriend’s friend, J: It was my girlfriend’s birthday and B had said he’d help me buy her a gift. He came by my house in his car from school and picked me up to bring us to the shopping centre. On the way he told me he was going to kill H. I didn’t take it seriously but after shopping he gave me his car and mobile phone and got me to drop him back at school. He told me he was going to call me on that phone after he killed her and that I was to come meet him in his car to pick him up again. Later that day he did call and told me where to meet him. I met him in a car park and that’s when he showed me H’s body. He had put her in the boot of her car. We drove around for a while, him driving H’s car, me driving his, and then he abandoned her car. We went cruising for a bit and then he told me to drop him back off at school so that he could be seen at training for an alibi. On the way he was bragging and all proud about how he had killed H. I collected him again after training and then B got a call from H’s family. He got worried about where he had left H’s body with her car so we went back to get it. We got shovels from my house, got H’s car and then headed to the park to bury her. We dug a shallow hole in the woods and left her there around 8pm. The ex-boyfriend, B: It didn’t happen, none of this is true at all. I must have had a free period that morning because I know I went to J’s to check if he had bought a gift for S’ birthday, S is my friend and J’s girlfriend. J said he hadn’t gotten S anything so I offered him my car to go pick her up something. I went back to school and then after school finished, I probably went to the library to use the computer before training. I would have had athletics training that day, I always go. But this was 6 weeks ago, it was just a normal day, I don’t remember exactly what I was doing but I didn’t kill H!Presenter in theatre talking to camera
B was put on trial for premeditated, first-degree murder. We are going to provide you with access to some of the main material that was presented at the trial. The case was largely based on three things: 1) the witness testimony, 2) mobile phone records which were used to corroborate the whereabouts and 3) the motive proposed by the prosecution. While you have a look over this evidence, we also want you to think about what you did on this day exactly 6 weeks ago: what did you do, where did you go, what was the weather like, who did you talk to? Are you absolutely sure? Can anyone confirm that?Presenter in theatre talking to camera
B’s trial lasted 6 weeks, J was on the stand for 5 days, a mobile phone expert was interviewed for 2 days. In the end the jury took 2 hours to decide on the verdict. B was found guilty and imprisoned. This case was brought into the spotlight in 2014 when a major podcast debuted and launched the true crime genre. During the podcast, the case was intricately reviewed and several weak points in the case were highlighted to the public. Two major weak points were that the main witness’ testimony was unreliable, and that the phone records were misinterpreted. The details of J’s story kept changing, he told three different locations for where B first showed him H’s body. The phone records used to corroborate J’s story were also proven to be unreliable. Three phone record experts agreed that incoming calls can’t determine location and these never should have been used in court for that purpose. In 2021, a turn in the case occurred; a new law was passed which meant people who had served over 20 years in prison for a crime committed while they were under 18 were able to apply for a reduction in their sentence. As part of this process, a review of the original case is carried out and it was during this review that major transgressions in the original investigation of H’s murder were uncovered. A report was submitted to a Judge, and this resulted in B being released from prison in September this year after serving 23 years. The prosecutors did not exonerate B and there has been no admission of innocence, but they did admit that the case had not been properly investigated and rules had been broken when B was convicted. Two handwritten notes from the original prosecutors were discovered which detailed two alternate suspects who had motive and means to murder H but they were overlooked and not turned over to the defense at the time. This is a major violation in court proceedings and should have resulted in a mistrial. Importantly, faith had also been lost in the two biggest points of evidence relied on in the original trial: J’s testimony and the mobile phone records. On top of this, one of the detectives in the case was also accused of misconduct and manipulating evidence. It’s worth noting that none of this information is new and all of it was available at the time of the crime.
- What lead to this miscarriage of justice?
- This case also raises other questions like how can someone be reliably convicted when there is no physical evidence linking them to the crime?
🧠 Thought exercise
What did you do on this day exactly 6 weeks ago: Wednesday the 21st of September 2022? Where did you go, what was the weather like, who did you talk to? Are you absolutely sure? Can anyone confirm that? Is witness testimony reliable? Would you be a reliable witness? Was this evidence sufficient for conviction?
Where should I be?