Implicit Bias in the Conviction of Adnan, Essay Example

Introduction

Implicit bias is an unconscious belief, association, belief, or stereotype towards a person, a group of people due to their specific characteristics (Payne, Keith, and Hannay 927). Implicit bias influences people to misunderstand others or attribute them with various qualities and characteristics used to define them. The phenomenon can be easily understood as stereotyping. Implicit bias always operates in the unconscious state of mind, while explicit biases operate in the minds’ subconscious and conscious states. Explicit biases are intentional and can be controllable because the individualism is aware of what he is doing and how it will affect the individual. Sometimes, implicit bias can be an adverse effect of explicit bias in that the conscious prejudices extend to other unconscious stereotypes against the subject person or group. Explicit bias can limit self-sensory, leading to holding negative and positive stereotypes based on race, religion, gender, personal characteristics, and sexuality, among other definitive features (Payne et al. 931).

The paper will discuss how implicit biases affect people’s subconscious actions against others in society. Similarly, the paper will refer to the conviction case of Adnan and illustrate how implicit bias influences the conviction of Adnan.

People believe they are not vulnerable to implicit and explicit biases and stereotypes. Still, the reality is that many people are victims of the situation, whether in their knowledge or not (Payne et al. 11695). Consequently, it cannot mean that people are inclined to discriminate against others. Still, it translates to the idea that the brain system works to make associations and generalizations. Additionally, stereotypes are influenced by the environment that people are born and grow in, and therefore it is impossible to separate them from the effect of the environment. The environment influences the people’s behavior, and stereotypes associated with the environment will be associated with the people of such an environment.

The events and occasions in the Adnan cases have caused several debates in social circles, jurisprudence, and scholarly sectors (Koening Season 1). Sarah Koenig, an interviewer, has posted a serial podcast that shows the intricacies of the case. Adnan was accused and convicted of a murder case involving her ex-girlfriend named Hae Min Lee. In the event of critical analysis of the evidence, records of the interrogations and the trial process of the case portrayed that the jury who pursued the case had severe implicit and explicit biases against the suspect.

Analysis of the case shows that the jury involved feelings and stereotypes in the determination of the case (Koenig Season 1, 2). For example, Adnan was a Pakistan American. His girlfriend was a Korean American, which triggered biases in the justice system since they suspected the Muslim faith even though they were both American citizens. In addition, this was when Americans had experienced terrorist attacks connected Muslims of the Islamic states.

Evidence from the serial podcasts found that Adnan was not judged according to the evidence of the case by the religious stereotypes, and his Pakistani origin influenced the final judgment. Even though the constitution of the United States guarantees the citizen equal treatment before the law and protection against biased judgments, Adnan was victimized as a result of his origin and religion. The Americans had experienced brutal terrorist activities from an Islam-oriented group which increased negative stereotypes against members of the religion in the American land.

Globally, Islamic countries experience a lot of political instability formed based on the Islam faith, and therefore Muslims are perceived to be violent and chaotic. Such a belief and misconception against the significant Islam religion leads to an implicit bias against individuals of the faith. Similarly, the same misconceptions and beliefs that Muslims are violent and intolerant were used in the judicial process in the case of Adnan.

The 10thn episode of the serial podcast raises the issue and the question of Muslim prejudice that is visible in the course of the justice system (Friedersdorf et al. n.p). The interviewer feels that Muslim prejudice was used against Adnan, and he spent most of his life in prison. According to the suspect’s mother, Adnan was convicted and imprisoned for discrimination against the Muslims since the judgment did not derive from evidence but personal perceptions and biases. Adnan’s mother said that his son was innocent and was arrested based on the negative misconceptions against the Muslim believers. She further believes that the action was demeaning the whole religion, and every Islamic believer was discriminated against in the act of arresting and jailing Adnan without proving his guilt before the court of justice. In an interview in the 10^th episode of the serial podcast, the mother argues that her son was arrested and quickly convicted out of his innocence only because he was a child. Therefore, he could not withstand the pressure from the detectives and the prosecutor.

Implicit bias leads to unconscious or even sub-conscious racism against certain groups of people (Payne et al. 11697). For example, American society is discriminatory to the populations of American and Asian origin because of their skin color. Other factors such as social class, physical appearances, and stereotypes create solid bases for the racist actions against the minority in the land. According to Sarah Koenig, the teenage girl’s death could raise concerns to investigate the ex-boyfriend. Therefore, the ex-boyfriend could be among the suspects, if not the first suspect, because he had an affair with the girl. However, the investigation process should have obeyed the federal constitution under the fourth amendment. The justice system should have treated Adnan as innocent until proven guilty by the jury of the Justice court.

Additionally, personal feelings and biases against the Muslims should have influenced neither the detectives nor the jury to discriminate against the suspect. Therefore, the players needed to play a neutral position despite their misconception of the Islamic believers. That could be fair because the judgment could be deduced from the evidence collected.

Sarah Koenig advocated for anti-Muslim prejudice, and with her evidence, she portrayed several discriminatory instances that played different roles in the murder case involving Adnan (Friedersdorf et al. n.p). For example, in the team of the judges, one jury confessed that he could not act fair to a Muslim suspect because one of his Muslim friends had been mistreating his wife. Such an argument indicated that the jury selection could not offer a fair judgment when one of the members had a biased perception.

The juror’s experience with Muslims in their relationship had formed a negative perception toward the members of the religion (Koening Season 5). Being a Muslim believer was a disadvantage to the suspect when the implicitly biased jury was involved in the case. It was unfair to proceed with the case when one of the judges had decided against the suspect even before the evidence was brought and examined in the court. At this point, Adnan’s case could not guarantee fairness from the justice system, and his lawyer needed to advise him otherwise.

Similarly, implicit bias is also seen when the prosecutor refers to Adnan as a Pakistani when he was an American citizen. The prosecutor also related Adnan’s case with other scenes where Pakistanis killed their lovers and fled to their country before their arrest. Such statements aimed to influence the judges to make judgments informed with previous occasions where Pakistanis were believed to commit a crime and flee to their land. In other words, the prosecutor was projecting that Adnan was to serve as an example to other Pakistanis who have escaped the justice process. Therefore, being a Pakistan was another disadvantage to the suspect according to the implicit biases seen in the case. In this case, Adnan was perceived as a violent and brutal Pakistan, irrespective of him being an American citizen. Treating a legal citizen as a foreigner was an illegal act against the American constitution, but Adnan had no one to question the transparency and fairness in the justice system.

From the perception placed on the Muslims in the previous episodes of the podcast, whether or not Adnan was guilty, it was not easy for him to access and experience a fair trial if the justice system was biased to the extent portrayed by Sarah Koenig. It is also clear that Adnan could have gotten a fair trial if he was not of the Muslim faith. Although his case started before the US experienced September 11 terrorism events which led to the anti-Muslim intolerance and increased hate crimes in the country, the later terrorism occurrence influenced the process negatively (Friedersdorf et al. n.p). The hate against Muslims increased in the United States when other religions treated all Muslim believers as terrorists.

The negative generalization of the Islamic religion was a big blow in the case involving a racially discriminated American of Pakistan origin and, at the same time, a Muslim believer. Adnan struggled with two natural conditions influenced by the environment where he was born and raised and hard to change. Additionally, a murder case was a serious one despite being a Pakistani and a Muslim, and failure to pursue the case with one mind could lead an innocent suspect to spend the rest of his life in jail. In this case, Adnan had to regret being a Muslim, a Pakistani, and relating to the deceased teenage girlfriend. The discrimination made him feel that he was a lesser human in the United States.

Adnan’s cultural background is also involved in the implicit biases in the murder case. Adnan was treated to possess a potential motive to kill for honor (Friedersdorf, et al. n.p). Islam and particularly the Pakistani culture are associated with xenophobic stereotypes where the men kill women to shame the husband’s family. Therefore, the prosecutor confessed that Adnan was killing Hae in the essence of protecting his family from a bad reputation. Additionally, Hae was not a believer in the Islamic faith. Therefore the prosecutor felt that the suspect killed his lover to avoid family disapproval for engaging in a relationship contradicting the faith and the cultural practices of the Pakistanis.

Ideally, implicit and explicit biases played a significant role in determining Adnan’s murder case. Maybe the players in the case did not understand they were discriminating against the victim directly and indirectly in some instances. Implicit bias tends to block reasoning and interferes with the ability of someone to make an informed decision (Koenig Season 10). And if it came to their awareness, the misconception and past experiences involving Muslims and Pakistanis could not give them a chance to rethink their stereotypes. To some extent, Adnan was an affirmation of what was ideally linked with such a group of people.

A serial listener to the podcasts will understand that Adnan was like any typical American teenager enjoying his daily life (Friedersdorf et al. n.p). He was not discriminatory of color, race, or even religion, and he could relate well will any female of another cultural background. This understanding disqualifies the stereotype that Adnan killed Hae for honor and approval by his family because the suspect had grown and absorbed in the American culture. The Pakistani culture was of no influence in his life. On the other hand, his advocate, Cristina Gutierrez, did not fully defend his client. She could have defined what entails immigration, Pakistan, Adnan as an American citizen, and the distinctions between the three to ensure that Adnan was assured of the fundamental rights as an American citizen.

Implicit biases are also seen in the Gutierrez event where she does not give her client enough attention to help him navigate the case (Friedersdorf et al. n.p). It seems that Adnan was challenging the whole justice system on one side and him on the other side. Gutierrez could have taken a stance before the court of justice and defended Adnan so that his views and defense could be examined. Instead, Adnan was not allowed to share the side of his story in a free and fair judicial environment. The system was essentially discriminatory, limiting the accused from accessing justice in the system. Gutierrez was also influenced by the existed implicit biases. If the system was fair enough, biased judges could have been replaced with neutral ones who could rule the case according to the evidence presented by the prosecutor. These forms of discrimination were influenced by perceived stereotypes and perceptions toward immigrants in the United States, the Islamic religion, and the Pakistanis’ followers.

Sarah Koenig is trying to advocate for the rights of the accused by bringing more light to the case compared to the actual situation that happened during the proceedings. The author feels that the case was determined in favor of one side at the expense of the other, which does not explain the basic function of the justice system. However, Koenig is not arguing that Adnan was innocent. She is not acting as a judge to determine who was right or wrong in the case. She is acting as a champion of human rights because there is firm evidence that someone’s rights were limited. Still, she advocates for equality and fairness in the justice system without discriminating against people based on their culture, religion, or origin, among other specifications. Koenig feels that Adnan’s side of the story needed to be heard and considered in the judgment process despite drawing from misconceptions and generalization of group based on a few behaviors. Implicit and explicit bias has blocked the truth and hinders access to justice if it influences the justice system.

Works Cited

Friedersdorf, et al. Serial Episode 10: Did Racism Help Put Adnan in Prison? (2014).

Koenig, S. Serial Podcast: Season 3.  Season 5 and 6: 2014 – 2022 Serial Productions

Koenig, S. Serial Podcast: Season 3. Season 1 and 2: 2014 – 2022 Serial Productions

Koenig, S. Serial Podcast: Season 3. Season 7 and 8: 2014 – 2022 Serial Productions

Payne, B. Keith, and Jason W. Hannay. “Implicit bias reflects systemic racism.” Trends in cognitive sciences 25.11 (2021): 927-936.

Payne, B. Keith, Heidi A. Vuletich, and Jazmin L. Brown-Iannuzzi. “Historical roots of implicit bias in slavery.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116.24 (2019): 11693-11698.