I’ve been listening to “Serial” on podcast and it certainly reminds me of Burns and Rafay or, really, any wrongful conviction case. What I am seeing is that nothing is ever as simple as it seems. Adnan and Jay and their friends were serious stoners; I’m not surprised that memories are fuzzy. Drugs do add another element to the case that Ms Koenig never deals with. Also, outsiders to Adnan’s case who took a look at it, e.g. the University of Virginia team, felt, like Sarah Koenig, that there was not enough in the case to convict. The same problem exists with Sebastian and Atif. People jump to closure without considering all the elements. The prosecution provides a motive: Adnan was jealous and Atif and Sebastian were greedy; all else must follow. But look at the details. It is more likely (yet by no means certain either) that Adnan would have used strangulation to kill Hae. It’s the easiest way to kill someone with physical force. Think then of two eighteen year old boys from West Vancouver. Would bludgeoning be the method of choice? Could Sebastian have done such a thing or did he give details of the killing to satisfy the RCMP gangsters?
I’ve said this before but it bears repeating. If Sebastian had killed the Rafay family in that way then he had to be a psychopath. I would ask any neutral psychologist/psychiatrist if Sebastian Burns had the ‘ability’ to annihilate three people in that way. I don’t think a Canadian soldier in Iraq could do such a thing, even though they are trained to kill. Kill three innocent people, a man, a woman, a child with blunt force and blood spatter? But then the fanatics can kill in this way because their leaders make them believe they are meting out justice according to God’s will. Look at the instruments of torture used by the Spanish Inquisition. Consider the drownings of the supposed witches of Salem. Look at the beheadings, stonings, burnings that still occur around the world. Look at all the facts in any murder and see if the supposed killer fits the crime.
The ‘confession’ tapes manufactured by the RCMP are a highly edited attempt to cast Burns and Rafay in the most negative light. The final product ignores five months of denials.
Another important point of comparison is that neither Adnan nor Atif testified on his own behalf. While juries are told to ignore this, it never goes down well. They think that the person has something to hide. But, almost always, it’s not the decision of the defendant but his or her attorney. They might feel that the case is so hollow, that the greatest risk is for their client to make some error that might give the jury cause to believe their guilt. The jurors were negatively influenced by the defendant exercising a right. They might also feel that the defendant is his own worst enemy.
When Rafay was questioned by the police in the early stages of the investigation, he admitted to feeling revulsion for his own sister. (See Veronica Freitas’ opening remarks in the trial, attached below.) Would someone who just participated in the murder of his own family and supposedly did everything in his power to cover up this participation admit to having such negative feelings toward his sister? Or was Rafay trying to be scrupulously honest because he knew he had nothing to do with the crime? People talk to the police without a lawyer because they think the truth will protect them. The right to have a lawyer during questioning is there for the very reason that the truth does NOT protect the individual. The police are simply trying to construct a narrative and when they stumble upon such honesty, they take advantage of it.
Glen Sebastian Burns and Atif Rafay are obviously innocent when the case is studied by an impartial, intelligent investigator. The points that come to my mind in this travesty of injustice:
*detectives doing such a poor job (so bad that they should be fired for it; their early tunnel vision based on their intuition rather than physical evidence, the continued tunnel vision due to ego rather than accumulating evidence as the case moves on, inadequate oversight by supervisors in the system for poor detective work)
*the rest of the legal system(prosecutors, judges) thirsting so much toward conviction rather than acquittal do not serve the public, much less the citizens whose lives are at stake. Prosecutors should not be penalized for “losing” a case – they should be promoted based upon a passion for truth for the public they supposedly serve. Their intransigence when confronted with obvious flaws in the case needs accountability … and there is none. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
*the mainstream media like the legal system seems to froth at the mouth for convictions … and does not do their duty in fair, unbiased, investigative journalism. The outright lies, just so narratives, and half truths that come out are a major part of wrongful convictions. The public at large does not study the case in detail and see how evidence is misrepresented in the media … and that is very damning to the defense. The partial, manipulated, and HIGHLY EDITED CONFESSIONS are one example as people have repeatedly pointed out. Multiple details in this case were placed in the media that simply were not true.
*as you point out here the murder was one of passion … of hate … of extreme emotion. That did not even fit the prosecutions scenario as Burns would have been a calculating, nonemotional killer in their profile. The actual killing was from pent up extreme hate (abused spouse, child, etc.) or a fanatic religious zealot (the likely killers in this triple homicide). If they would have brought in an FBI profiler instead of chasing these two “boys” right away – the profiler would have almost certainly said they just didn’t fit the profile considering the actual killing situation.
I could go on and on – and I have never known any of the people involved in this case. Ironically, if anyone wants a serious, well thought out review of the evidence – they should watch youtube for Burns’ excellent summary statements at sentencing when he was allowed to speak (just search on youtube for “Sebastian Burns pre-sentence statement”. It was so skillful, spot on, and correct that the legal system(i.e., the judge) that had just convicted him had to vilify him for only trying to defend himself.
Sebastian and Atif were convicted because they were caught telling the truth. Now they want to get out of jail for telling a lie. That’s not the way the system works. There is over-whelming evidence that they are guilty.
That’s interesting, Caromin. So some people out there have been deluded into thinking that the evidence is anything but overwhelming? With all respect, please believe one thing if you believe nothing else: 1. Innocence projects (and there are three separate ones here) do not pick up cases unless there is reasonable certainty of innocence (hence the name “innocence project”). The damage to credibility and reputations would be irreparable if they were proven wrong. So I would say to you that your statement about “overwhelming evidence” is untrue.
Given a minimum of 35,000 wrongful convictions in the USA at any given time, what do you think the odds are for a person to get the help of three innocence projects? I’d say that’s a good predictor that the convictions in Burns/Rafay are wrongful, based on false confessions and little else.
I would say that even the Innocence Project can be wrong. Burns and Rafay were convicted based on a false confession? They both were brutally honest in those video tapes. And yes, I believe there is over-whelming evidence they are guilty. There is no smoking gun – but the circumstantial evidence proves their guilt. I hope they don’t fool our justice system and are set free.
“Brutally honest.” And you can tell when a person is lying or telling the truth? You have this skill when the best forensic scientists, using state-of-the-art brain scans, have 70% accuracy? I think you might want to hire yourself out.
I just watched The Confession Tapes on Netflix, and I am betting that there is more here than was shown on any Dateline or 48 hours shows. It shows huge conflicts in the confessions from both boys. It is obvious to me that they talked about what they were going to say in front of MR. BIG, but Mr. BIG being undercover knew questions to ask and actually brought out inconsistencies. If roles were reversed, and this was a confession of innocence, it would never be believed due to the inconsistencies. Also, did the other previous shows bring up the tips from the FBI before the murders, tips that they may be in danger?? Did it show the informant that actually described the weapon and the people before the police knew what the weapon was. From what I saw, I found plenty of reasonable doubt, and if I was in their shoes, I would be surprised that the jury didn’t find reasonable doubt as well. I encourage you to watch The Confession Tapes on Netflix, with an open mind, and I bet you change it.
Body language and crime statement analysis. Read about it.
The one statement Burns made on a Dateline show really convinced me of his guilt. He said, “I cannot believe they (the jury) could not find reasonable doubt.” Not, “they couldn’t see that we are innocent.” I think he was stunned he was not able to manipulate the jury.
I guess if the Leopold and Loeb wanna be’s are released, we’ll get to read their book and find out exactly how they did it.
Good luck in your endeavors, whatever they may be. I know you are doing what you believe is right. Just be careful because you are dealing with a master manipulator and a pathological liar. The Innocence Project has done some wonderful things getting innocent people out of jail, but they have been fooled, too. Read about the case of Roger Coleman.
I am curious about this statement you made:
“If Sebastian had killed the Rafay family in that way then he had to be a psychopath. I would ask any neutral psychologist/psychiatrist if Sebastian Burns had the ‘ability’ to annihilate three people in that way. I don’t think a Canadian soldier in Iraq could do such a thing, even though they are trained to kill.”
Are you saying that Sebastian could not have killed the Rafay family because he is Canadian?
Dear ken,
I appreciate your interest in the case as well as your point of view.
This case is absolutely mind boggling and I keep thinking about it till this day even though it’s been about 20 years since it happened.
I guess one could take both sides in the case and both sides could be justified with evidence that are very believable.
You could assume that they are guilty by Jimmy’s testimony(if it’s true) and the confession, THAT IS IT. So the prosecution had nothing really other than these two. But if they really did the crime how come they made such mistakes that could screw them up, leaving the sister alive, Atif showing no emotions and no interest in knowing who killed the family or even helping his sis when she was suffering. I guess if you were to commit a crime of this nature you want to try to be as believable as possible. You know, showing emotions and so on, also what If some of the neighbors saw them entering the house at the time of the murders, I read somewhere that during the mr big Sebastian said they parked the car far from the house and walked there, didn’t they think that they could be seen by a neighbor or somebody!
You could also assume that they are not guilty by the same reasons above. The sister is a big part of the case to me and the fact that she was not killed right away could be because they had nothing to do with these murders.
There is a a reasonable doubt in this case and the key to solving this case is their friend jimmy. If what he said is true, then they are dead guilty but if he was lying( it is very possible since he was pressured by police) then there won’t be any worthy evidence against the boys.
I lean towards the assumption that they are guilty mainly because of Jimmy’s words because he basically confirmed the circumstantial evidence the police had and until it’s proven that his words are honest and all the tips are checked I can not fully judge the boys..
I do believe that police did a horrible job investigating the case. They couldn’t actually be any worse.
Ignoring the informants tips and all that is just wrong even IF they were actually guilty and that the police got the right people, the police conduct in this case is still horrible.
The judge was unfair too, admitting the evidence that supported the prosecution. And not admitting informants, confession export etc..
Even if they are guilty. They had an absolutely unfair trial.
I hope they get a new one.
Regards.
I want to take the time to reply here because you have analyzed this case in the fairest possible way. I think your point about showing emotions is very powerful; would that the defense lawyers made something of this. If two nefarious, greedy killers had done this crime, they would be sure to show up at the funeral and the memorial and weep crocodile tears. In that respect, Atif and Sebastian did a bad job if their intent was to cover up their involvement in the crime. Of course skeptical people say that their behavior confirms their unfeeling and cold-blooded natures. Whatever the case, you cannot know if a person is telling the truth because of the way they act in traumatic circumstances. Witness Amanda Knox.
I have said to anyone who would listen, including the King County prosecutor, that Jimmy Miyoshi did what 99% of all people would have done in his situation. He’s told that Atif and Sebastian already ‘confessed’. He’s told that if he doesn’t confirm what they already know that he will be tried as an accomplice. He’s told that he will be let off if he agrees to be a state witness. I would have done exactly what Jimmy did, ramble on about stuff, trying to bridge the gap between being “a rat” and being a friend. What a horrible position he was in. He is a part of the tragedy.
Yes, the lead detective, because he’d already zeroed in on Atif and Sebastian, was lax about following up other leads.
Finally, though, and I repeat this ad nauseum, Sebastian Burns was incapable of smashing in the heads of three people as if they were Halloween pumpkins. Such an act requires a degree of insanity or fanaticism that neither teen had. To smash in people’s heads for, as Sebastian and Atif said, the insurance money to make a film is counter-intuitive. People can be killed in many ways; the people who killed the Rafays were sending a message. The problem with the Mr. Big sting is that it requires a suspect to give evidence against himself ‘or else’. The smarter the suspect, the more likely he will embellish to make himself believable. Sebastian wove a web to satisfy the police/gangsters, giving them the rope they needed to hang him. But don’t blame them either. They were teenagers at the time and, as Rubin Carter said, “no match for seasoned professional interrogators”.
Thanks for replying Ken,
I forgot to mention that all my analysis was based on what was said about the case on 48 hours, CBC and short parts of the trial, so really the media tends to take the police side so there were not much details mentioned from the boys’ side other than “we did not do it”. As for skipping the funeral, I read on their appeal page that they headed back to BC as they did not expect the bodies to be released so soon in order to be buried on Friday (I am very familiar with their religious background, and to be buried or die on Friday is some sort of a blessing) so I believe that’s why the bodies were released so soon. As for the RCMP operation, well to be frank with you I don’t think it should’ve been admitted at their trial in the first place, not only because of the cops’ criminal attitude and acting, but because they actually believe that the only way to get them to confess is by scaring them, even though Haslett said ” well I did not threaten to kill Sebastian” but why did you act like criminals and killers in the first place! If you’re intention was to get a real confession and find out the truth, you could’ve befriended them and if they trust you they would tell you, just like jimmy.
I would confess to anything if I was put in a room with mobsters and told that they could easily kill anybody and that they had done it before and that I am a threat to them so they basically hate me and won’t hesitate holding a gun to my head in order to protect their organization.
I am not saying their confession is true or not as I haven’t seen the whole thing and I am not an expert but I know that the means to this confession is just wrong.
I really hope they get a new trial and the case to be investigated again. Starting with contacting the FBI informants and jimmy because they are really the key to this.
And the evidence for the boys to be admitted (the neighbors, exports and so on).
Please let me know if there is a video online for the whole undercover operation (or the confession) as well as the trial as I can’t seem to find them.
Thanks again.
Tiffany Burns’s video, Mr. Big, does a good job of exposing the sting operation and its potential dangers. I think she wisely avoids placing the focus entirely on her brother’s case and, in so doing. helps one see the mechanisms as they are employed on a case by case basis. No one is saying that Mr. Big hasn’t had success but a large difference of opinion exists as to whether ‘the game is worth the candle”. Mr. Big available on line but I believe it needs to be purchased.