This is KPBS Midday Edition I'm Maureen Cavanaugh. The name Adnan Syed became familiar to Americans when the podcast serial went viral. He was convicted for the murder of his ex-girlfriend Serial in Baltimore in the year 2000. Not everyone believed he was guilty. A family friend Rabia Chaudry brought his story to this producer who created the podcast. Now she is out with a book that she says paints a fuller picture of his case. The book is called this search for truth and justice after serial.. Rabia Chaudry joins me now welcome to the show. The big news is that his condition -- conviction was vacated and he was granted a new trial. That almost never happens for convicted murderers especially after appeals have been exhausted. Were you surprised by the decision. It was a shock because we have been working for so many years and to have finally achieved it takes some time to sink in. I was not surprised in a sense, I know how low the propensity is for this to happen. It's very rare for this to happen but at the same time it was the just thing to happen so we felt like those issues were strong and we really did think it's not now at some point he would be granted a new trial. To think that the trial would of come out with out the podcast. Absolutely not serial the seminal. I'm convinced even if we had presented the exact same evidence that without that public interest in the case I don't know if we would have gotten the same result go Any reminders on what grounds the conviction was overturned. One was an alibi witness who was never contacted by counsel and the other one was a fax cover sheet that came with cellphone records back in 1999 and those fax cover sheet indicated that incoming calls cannot be used to locate where the phone was but that's exactly where the state did they used incoming calls to map where he was and make their case that he was burying her in the park but that was not a document anybody had never seen. The state's own expert witness and never seen it. When he testified he said nobody showed this to me. The court reversed the conviction based on that that the attorney did not effectively cross-examine the witness because she did not show him that document to go The state is appealing the ruling. They are trying to maintain the original conviction. What are some of the possible scenarios. They have already filed an application for appeal but it's an upright -- a request for permission to appeal. It could be denied because many of these are then the judge's ruling stands in the state as to decide if they go to trial. The state could still lose on appeal we will have a very strong rolling that will be upheld but eventually I think what will happen is we will -- the state will drag it out and drag it out. We can say we will take this to trial and we would be fine with that. Once the exhaust the mechanisms they will probably have to make the decision of we either go to trial again or we offer him a plea deal like an Alford plea which is like a time served type of plea or the drop all charges. That is really a long shot because states don't do that. Your book Adnan's Story dives deeper into the case from the serial podcast. But they do is lay out a timeline of the investigation which was not necessarily done by serial to show how they decided that he was going to be there suspects first and then they began adding evidenced to make their case stick. They began pulling records even before they were in contact with Jay and these are deeply troubling investigative tactics. You don't decide on a suspect first but also things like the autopsy report and medical. I don't think they touch that at all they look at -- they did not consider other seriously. Serial did not look at the patterns of misconduct by the same detectives are investigating his and other cases. You mentioned that does -- just -- defense attorneys testimony was put into question. We learned that a high school student who says she saw him in a library at the time of the murder now two former classmate of hers have come forward to say that she told them she was going to make up the story. How big of a blow is that to the defense? I don't know what to make of it. Basically what the state is alleging is based on with his classmates have to say is that at a point in time after the arrest and when nobody knows when she was actually killed because they did not know until the first trial which was in December of that year many months later that for me to say that I was with them between 220 and 240 would come. There's no way for her to know that. There has been another popular trees frame -- true crimes serial making a murderer which has had an effect on the court system. The federal judge has overturned the conviction of one of the men convicted of murder in that case. What to think about the kind of impact these documentaries are having on the criminal justice system as a whole. I think the impact is clear. It's obvious that they are making a difference in these cases otherwise we would not see the results we are seeing. I think lawyers and courts and the judiciary have to -- why this has to happen outside the system. Why it's not happening affectively inside and why it is leading to so many issues in our system. I hope it continues. When was the last time you spoke with him. It's been about two weeks but rather for this call as I was getting ready to speak with you guys I got four missed calls because -- but I did not take them because I knew I was going to be on this call. He will probably call back this evening. How is he doing since finding out he may get a new trial? I'm getting a call from him right now. I went ahead and shut it down. After the conviction was vacated there was an incredible sense of elation. I heard it in his voice and his family and for all of us but now we look forward. It's clear that Maryland will do everything they can to keep them in prison until he dies. I will let you go so we can -- so you can take the calls. Her book is called Adnan's Story the truth -- the search for truth and justice after serial. You can find my cool -- full interview online at K PBS.org.
The name Adnan Syed became familiar to millions in 2014 when the hit podcast "Serial" told his story.
In 2000, Syed was convicted and sentenced to life in prison for the murder of his ex-girlfriend Hae Min Lee in Baltimore.
But not everyone believed Syed was guilty.
As a last resort, a friend of the Syed family, Rabia Chaudry, brought his story to "This American Life" producer Sara Koenig, who created "Serial."
Now Chaudry has written a book, "Adnan's Story: The Search for Truth and Justice after 'Serial'," which she says paints a fuller picture of Syed's case.
Chaudry joined KPBS Midday Edition on Wednesday.
INTERVIEW HIGHLIGHTS
On Syed's new trial 17 years after his conviction
"That is how the law works. When people say what's gonna happen next, we say, 'Well, it might take another two to three years to get anywhere.' People are shocked. But that is exactly how slow our system is."
On "Serial"
"'Serial' was seminal. Sarah and her work and the podcast made all the difference in this case. I'm convinced, even if we presented the exact, same evidence that we eventually did, that it still, without that public interest in the case, I don't know if we would've gotten the same result."
What "Serial" missed
"I think what I do (in "Adnan's Story") is lay out a timeline of the actual investigation, which was not necessarily done by 'Serial,' to show how they decided that Adnan was going to be their suspect first and then they began gathering evidence before their case sticks.
Even before Hae Min Lee's body was found, even before they knew she had been killed, they had began pulling records about him. Even before, as far as we know, they had in contact with Jay, they had decided on Adnan. And these are deeply troubling investigative tactics. You don't decide on a suspect first and then look for evidence. It should be the other way around. But also things like the autopsy report and medical examination of her body, I don't think 'Serial' touched that at all. I don't think 'Serial' looked at her current boyfriend at the time, his whereabouts and considered him seriously as an alternate suspect. 'Serial' did not look at the patterns of misconduct by the same detective who investigated Adnan's case and other cases. There were a lot of things like them.
Having said that, again, without 'Serial' we would be nowhere. To me, I would do it all over again; it doesn't matter. I think Sarah did an amazing job in a way that made people want to know more. And that's really what happened in 'Serial.'
People were like, 'It's not enough. I need to know more.' And that's what (Koenig was) good at. She says in the very first episode, 'I'm not a criminal investigator, I'm not an investigative reporter.' To say that her reporting wasn't a hundred percent, always accurate, she didn't cover every single little thing, I think it's just nitpicking. It wasn't her role to do that."
On approaching a journalist with Syed's story instead of an investigator
"To me, the media is much more effective sometimes, oftentimes, in being able to access information that other people can't. A journalist, their job is to get people to talk. They know how to get people to talk. ... When we wanted to get Asia McClain, the witness at the first hearing, we had a private investigation out there and she was like, 'No, thank you. I'm not interested.'
But when you have a journalist contact people, it's different. And journalists are not bound by certain kinds of ethics and rules that attorneys are bound by, even private investigators who are licensed are bound by. So I really felt strongly, and I've felt like this for years, that a journalistic lens at this case would do much more benefit than any of the legal stuff we were trying..."
On popular culture's impact on criminal justice cases
"I think it's very similar to citizen journalism, where you have social media and all these other factors that play into major international events like the Arab Spring, Black Lives Matter and all these other things. ... It is obvious that they are having, making a difference in these cases, otherwise we wouldn't see the results we're seeing.
So I think lawyers and courts and the judiciary have to think about why this has to happen outside of the system. Why it's not happening effectively inside the criminal justice system, which is leading to so many issues in our system. So I think it's very important. And I hope it continues. I hope that this is a trend that continues until we can fix things inside the system itself."
On changing the system
"I feel really strongly that starts with accountability. You cannot flush people out immediately and just start a new training. But what you'll have is state actors, whether they're police officers, whether they're prosecutors and sometimes even attorney generals, deputy attorney generals who commit misconduct.
A court will find them having, for example, withheld evidence in case after case, and they maintain their jobs. That has to be stopped. And that has to be stopped on a state-by-state level.
So I would encourage people on a local legislative level because that is where the change is going to happen. To encourage their representatives to draft legislation holding people accountable.
In California, just a couple of weeks ago, a state representative has done just that. She's introduced a bill to make withholding evidence by a state prosecutor, when it's willful, a felony. And that's what we need. Because that will prevent that kind of thing happening again.
We also need transparency. In states like Pennsylvania, defendants and their attorneys cannot get access to criminal files. If you have a defendant in post conviction who is maybe facing a death penalty or life in prison, and he needs to reopen his case, guess what, his lawyers cannot get access to the autopsy reports in the criminal file. It's unconscionable.
This will happen through state legislation, that is where the change is going to happen. So we have to elect the kind of people who are reform-minded, who look at criminal justice not as retributive, not as punitive, but as rehabilitation, and think about ways to reduce incarceration rates versus locking people up and being tough on crime. We have to rethink how we encounter crime in our society."
