# data[].attributes.body
First of all, in terms of the timeline, Adnan did not have the time to commit the crime. At the time of Hae Min Lee's murder, Adnan did not have enough time to commit the crime. The fact that his friends can testify that he was not at the scene of the crime, and that his classmate Asia was willing to issue a bond on his behalf, is enough to prove that he was innocent during that time.

# data[].attributes.body
In society, people generally will not defend someone who has been found guilty of murder and let him get away with his crime because it goes against morality and ethics. The media and the police interviewed and questioned many of the key witnesses in the case in an attempt to restore the truth of the case. However, there were repeated changes and inconsistencies in the testimonies of some key witnesses in the case, such as Jay, whose testimony did not prove Adnan's guilt.

# data[].attributes.body
In society, people generally will not defend someone who has been found guilty of murder and let him get away with his crime because it goes against morality and ethics. The media and the police interviewed and questioned many of the key witnesses in the case in an attempt to restore the truth of the case. However, there were repeated changes and inconsistencies in the testimonies of some key witnesses in the case, such as Jay, whose testimony did not prove Adnan's guilt.

# data[].attributes.body
In addition, the police did not find Adnan's fingerprints and DNA during the crime scene investigation and testing of some important exhibits. in the DNA testing of Hae Min Lee's clothes and shoes, only the DNA of four different people was found, which further proves Adnan's innocence.

# data[].attributes.body
Adnan's case was thoroughly reported in one source. The report quoted the attitude and decision of the Baltimore City Prosecutor, who decided to drop the charges against Adnan because of the lack of sufficient evidence to prove that he was the murderer, and apologized to adnan and his family. Also, the prosecutor told Hae Min Lee's family that they will continue to investigate the case until the real murderer is found.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Maryland Supreme Court heard arguments Thursday in the decadeslong legal saga of Adnan Syed over whether the family of Hae Min Lee, whose killing is at the center of the case, was given enough time to participate in the hearing at which a judge vacated his conviction last year.

Syed, 42, served 23 years in prison stemming from charges that he killed Lee, his high school girlfriend. His case got national attention and has been followed by millions after the podcast "Serial" chronicled it in 2014.

At issue Thursday were the reinstatement of Syed's murder conviction in March after a Maryland court said officials failed to provide sufficient notice for Lee's family to attend the hearing, as well as the degree to which victims and their families are able to participate in such proceedings.

Syed's attorneys have said his freedom could be at stake.

"It is Adnan whose liberty is at stake. The death of Hae Min Lee and the loss suffered by her family is unquestionably tragic," his lawyer Erica Suter said in remarks outside the court in Annapolis after the hearing. "So, too, is the incalculable loss that Adnan and his family have suffered when he spent over half his life in prison for a crime he did not commit."

David Sanford, an attorney for Lee's brother, Young Lee, said outside court Thursday that it was an "important day for victims' rights."

"We do not take a position with respect to Adnan Syed's underlying guilt or innocence. This is not what today was about," he said. Instead, the hearing was about Young Lee's right "to have notice, to be present and to be heard in a criminal justice proceeding."

Lee, who lives in California, attended last year's hearing on Zoom. He was notified on a Friday afternoon that it would take place the following Monday, and he has argued that did not give him proper notice to attend.

His attorneys are asking for a new "vacatur" hearing, which would include "reasonable notice, the right to attend in person and the right to be heard on and challenge the evidence."

It is not clear based on the statute whether the notice he was given was adequate or not, said David Jaros, a professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law.

"One thing that is clear about the case is that the statute that gives victims certain rights is written very poorly, and it's not clear exactly how it should apply to this type of hearing, as opposed to, say, a sentencing hearing," Jaros said. "It's not clear what the proper remedy should be. And it's not clear what adequate notice is."

He said the court could in essence push the issue back to the Legislature to revisit the language of the statute.

The court could find that Lee's rights were violated and that the proper remedy would be to hold the hearing that vacated Syed's conviction again, Jaros said.

But prosecutors have indicated that there is evidence pointing to other suspects. Syed was released from prison in October, after then-Baltimore City State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby said DNA evidence supported his innocence.

"We've got no new information coming out. We have no reason to believe that the judge will come out with a different position," said Jaros, who is also the faculty director of the university's Center for Criminal Justice Reform. But he added that, given that there is a new state's attorney for Baltimore this year, "the possibility does exist that the court could come out a different way, in which case Mr. Syed would have to go back to prison."

Justice Brynja Booth asked Thursday whether Young Lee should instead be asking the state General Assembly to expand victims' rights.

"Why isn't this a question for the General Assembly?" she asked. "The right that you're speaking of is not in the plain language of the statute."

Attorney Ari Rubin, who is also representing Young Lee, disagreed with that interpretation of the law, saying that "every right that exists for the victim was deprived, including notice" and "including the right to be heard." He added that Lee was not provided new evidence.

Syed's attorney argued before a panel of seven justices that Lee's rights were satisfied, as "he was notified" and "he was able to attend" the hearing by Zoom.

She also said that if the state and the circuit court "have agreed that a defendant has been wrongfully incarcerated for 23 ½ years, it is appropriate that the court move with urgency."

She concluded that "it is our position that this case is moot," because prosecutors decided not to charge Syed after his conviction was vacated, nor would Lee's presence at the hearing have changed the outcome.

Syed, dressed in a light blue traditional Muslim cap and a light blue dress shirt with a dark striped tie, stood with his arm around his mother's shoulders as he spoke outside the courthouse after the hearing.

"We're hoping that in the end, we'll have a chance to prove justice. Not just for Hae's family, but for our family, as well," Syed said.

"We believe very strongly in trying to find justice for Hae and her family, and we're just hoping also that we're able to find justice for us, too," he said.

The panel of justices will consider Thursday's hearing and announce its ruling in the coming weeks or months.
Daniella Silva reported from New York and Julia Jester from Annapolis, Maryland.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Adnan Syed returns to court as Maryland Supreme Court weighs victims' rights

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
ANNAPOLIS, Md. - The Maryland Supreme Court heard arguments Thursday in the decadeslong legal saga of Adnan Syed over whether the family of Hae Min Lee, whose killing is at the center of this case, was given proper time to participate in the hearing where a judge vacated his conviction last year.