I am a retired attorney who has long believed that Adnan Syed is not guilty of the murder of Hae Min Lee. But the hyperbole that permeates Miriam Aroni Krinsky and Leigh Goodmark’s recent commentary is wholly unwarranted (“Adnan Syed case: Maryland Supreme Court must allow unconstitutional convictions to be overturned,” Nov. 27).
Contrary to their argument, no one is claiming that Adnan Syed’s conviction should stand if it was obtained by unconstitutional means. All that Young Lee is asserting is that Maryland law allows victims a meaningful opportunity to be heard before a conviction is vacated. Had then-Baltimore State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby supported a one-week postponement of the vacatur hearing so that Young Lee could attend it in person, there would now be no case. Perhaps she was too focused on her own upcoming criminal trial to extend that common courtesy to the Lee family.
I believe a large reason the Appellate Court of Maryland reinstated the conviction to allow for such a hearing was that the court was offended by this simple lack of courtesy on Mosby’s part. Syed need not have been incarcerated during that week. He could have been released on home detention. It is noteworthy that, although the Appellate Court reinstated the conviction so that there could be a new vacatur hearing, neither that court nor the Supreme Court has ordered that Syed be reincarcerated.
To me, that means that the most the Supreme Court will do is affirm the Appellate Court and require a largely symbolic opportunity for the Lee family to personally advise the trial court how it feels. I think the case ultimately will be much ado about very little.
— Sheldon H. Laskin, Pikesville
Add your voice: Respond to this piece or other Sun content by submitting your own letter.
