Special ‘Serial’ episode drops after Adnan Syed release

Evidence that freed man who spent 20 years in jail for murder had been long available, podcast creator says

• 

  Adnan Syed smiles and waves as he leaves the courthouse after a judge overturned his 2000 murder conviction and ordered a new trial in Baltimore, Maryland. Reuters

• 

  Mr Syed's mother, Shamim Syed, hugs a supporter after her son was released. Reuters

• 

  Erica Suter, director of the Innocence Project Clinic at the University of Baltimore School of Law and Mr Syed's lawyer, speaks outside the courthouse. AFP

• 

  A US judge on September 19 threw out the conviction after Mr Syed served more than 20 years in prison for his ex-girlfriend's murder. Reuters

• 

  State's Attorney for Baltimore Marilyn Mosby is embraced by Ms Syed after a judge overturned the 2000 murder conviction of her son. Reuters

• 

  The case was chronicled in the hit podcast Serial. AP

• 

  Ms Mosby is embraced by a supporter after the judge overturned the murder conviction. Reuters

• 

  Lawyer Chris Flohr embraces podcaster Sarah Koenig. Reuters

• 

  Mr Syed was convicted of the 1999 murder of his ex-girlfriend Hae Min Lee. EPA

• 

  Mr Syed is a free man after serving 20 years in prison. EPA

• 

  Mr Syed always maintained his innocence and said he did not kill Lee. EPA

• 

  Prosecutors told a judge that they had found new information on two other people potentially involved in the murder. Reuters

• 

  Supporters gather outside the Baltimore City Circuit Courthouse. Reuters

• 

  Catina Carter wears a T-shirt reading '#FreeAdnan' outside the courthouse. Reuters

• 

  Mr Syed spent 20 years behind bars for Lee's murder. AP

The creator of a true-crime podcast that helped free a Maryland man jailed for two decades in a murder case said that she feels a mix of emotions over how long it took authorities to act on evidence that has long been available.

In a new episode of the Serial podcast released on Tuesday, a day after Adnan Syed walked out of court following the vacating of his murder conviction, host Sarah Koenig noted that most or all of the evidence cited in the prosecutors’ motion to overturn the conviction was available since 1999.

“Yesterday, there was a lot of talk about fairness, but most of what the state put in that motion to vacate, all the actual evidence, was either known or knowable to cops and prosecutors back in 1999,” Ms Koenig said in concluding the new episode.

“So even on a day when the government publicly recognises its own mistakes, it’s hard to feel cheered about a triumph of fairness. Because we’ve built a system that takes more than 20 years to self-correct. And that’s just this one case.”

She argued that the case against Mr Syed, which was featured on the first season of Serial in 2014, involved “just about every chronic problem” in the system, including unreliable witnesses and evidence that was never shared with Mr Syed’s defence team.

On Monday, Circuit Court Judge Melissa Phinn in Baltimore ordered Mr Syed’s release after overturning his conviction for the 1999 murder of high school student Hae Min Lee, his ex-girlfriend.

Mr Syed was 17 at the time of Lee’s killing and has always maintained his innocence.

At the behest of prosecutors who had uncovered new evidence, Ms Phinn ordered that Mr Syed’s conviction be vacated as she approved the release of the now-41-year-old.

Ms Phinn ruled that the state violated its legal obligation to share evidence that could have bolstered Mr Syed’s defence.

She ordered Mr Syed to be placed on home detention with GPS location monitoring. The judge also said the state must decide whether to seek a new trial date or dismiss the case within 30 days.

The Baltimore prosecutor’s office filed a motion last week to vacate Mr Syed’s conviction, a filing that Ms Koenig described as a “firework” coming from the same office that asked a jury to convict Mr Syed more than two decades ago.

“The prosecutors today are not saying Adnan is innocent. They stopped short of exonerating,” she said.

“Instead they’re saying that ‘back in 1999, we didn’t investigate this case thoroughly enough. We relied on evidence we shouldn’t have and we broke the rules when we prosecuted. This wasn’t an honest conviction.’”