How a Podcast and Docuseries Helped to Release a 14 Year Prisoner

Adnan Syed, was released from prison on September 19, after being behind bars for 23 years. Syed was convicted in 1999 for the murder of his high school girlfriend, Hae Min Lee, despite steadfastly defending his innocence. After a mistrial in 1999, Syed was found guilty of murder in 2000 and sentenced to life in prison. After 14 years of his sentence had passed, Syed’s case gained widespread attention after it was featured on the Serial podcast. On the episode, host Sarah Koenig, questioned the credibility of the evidence used to incriminate Syed and the inconsistencies among the prosecution\u27s witnesses. The podcast further relayed that Syed had an incompetent lawyer throughout the trial, who was eventually disbarred. All of these components contributed to his unfair conviction. The podcast’s release was a phenomenon hailing over a hundred million downloads in its first year. Following Serial’s success, Syed’s story re-emerged and gained wide-spread media attention. About a year later, a Maryland court agreed to hear Syed’s appeal and soon granted him a hearing to introduce new evidence. Syed’s defense team pointed to the defendant’s previously negligent attorney, who did not call on certain witnesses who could have supported Syed’s alibi nor question the reliability of the prosecution’s evidence. This post was originally published on the Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights and Social Justice website on October 10, 2022. The original post can be accessed via the Archived Link button above

In Defense of the Constitution\u27s Judicial Impeachment Standard

This Note explores the traditional interpretation of the Constitution\u27s impeachment provisions in light of the demands of Judges Claiborne\u27s, Nixon\u27s, and Hastings\u27 cases. Part I describes the signals indicating analytical shortcomings, and thus the need for reexamination of the provisions as currently construed. It shows that the troubling results of the recent standard allowing criminal prosecution before impeachment are apparent to both the courts and the Congress. Part II analyzes the meaning and purpose of the constitutional language, and the recent policy challenges to it. This part shows that, in fact, the impeachment provisions were carefully chosen by the Constitution\u27s drafters, who recognized the conflict between preservation of an independent judiciary and the need to expeditiously remove miscreants. The impeachment provisions were designed to be cumbersome, in order to protect judicial decisionmaking autonomy. To the Framers, mandating an intricate process for the removal of federal judges seemed a small price to pay to ensure the American populace an independent judiciary. Part III juxtaposes the recent treatment of judges against Part H\u27s constitutional analysis. It reveals that the current prosecution-before impeachment practice disregards goals of the judicial independence that spawned the constitutional impeachment provisions. This Note shows that, even in the context of today\u27s large complex judiciary, the values protected by the impeachment standard are too important to be sacrificed as they are when the standard is neglected. That is to say, moves to amend the Constitution or alternatively the Senate impeachment procedures are overbroad. In the haste to bring an occasional bad judge to trial more efficiently, reformers have forgotten to ask whether the incremental benefits of effectively dismantling the impeachment protections are worth the damage caused to the entire judicial system

Freedom of Speech

A Review of Freedom of Speech by Eric Barend

How a Podcast and Docuseries Helped to Release a 14 Year Prisoner

Adnan Syed, was released from prison on September 19, after being behind bars for 23 years. Syed was convicted in 1999 for the murder of his high school girlfriend, Hae Min Lee, despite steadfastly defending his innocence. After a mistrial in 1999, Syed was found guilty of murder in 2000 and sentenced to life in prison. After 14 years of his sentence had passed, Syed’s case gained widespread attention after it was featured on the Serial podcast. On the episode, host Sarah Koenig, questioned the credibility of the evidence used to incriminate Syed and the inconsistencies among the prosecution\u27s witnesses. The podcast further relayed that Syed had an incompetent lawyer throughout the trial, who was eventually disbarred. All of these components contributed to his unfair conviction. The podcast’s release was a phenomenon hailing over a hundred million downloads in its first year. Following Serial’s success, Syed’s story re-emerged and gained wide-spread media attention. About a year later, a Maryland court agreed to hear Syed’s appeal and soon granted him a hearing to introduce new evidence. Syed’s defense team pointed to the defendant’s previously negligent attorney, who did not call on certain witnesses who could have supported Syed’s alibi nor question the reliability of the prosecution’s evidence. This post was originally published on the Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights and Social Justice website on October 10, 2022. The original post can be accessed via the Archived Link button above

Accompanying Document to a Trainers Manual: A Comprehensive Guide to Pre-Service Agriculture Extension Training for Peace Corps Lesotho

This is a Product Thesis. The product thesis is comprised of two parts: an accompanying document, and the product itself. The accompanying document provides the background of, demonstrates the need for, and situates the Peace Corps training manual within the context of other relevant agriculture extension and training materials. The product, titled A Trainers Manual: A Comprehensive Guide to Pre-Service Agriculture Extension Training for Peace Corps Lesotho, is an experiential-learning based agriculture extension training manual developed for Peace Corps Lesotho