I haven’t read the opinion from the Maryland Court of Appeals, but it seems as though no consideration was given to Adnan’s effort to challenge the accuracy of the state’s timeline vis a vis the cell tower records. https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-ci-syed-appeal-20190222-story.html Apparently, because this argument wasn’t raised in the post-conviction petition for relief, the court ruled that it had been waived. I don’t recall exactly when or even who on Adnan’s team figured out that incoming calls could not be used to reliably establish locations. Was that information known prior to the deadline to file the post-conviction petition? Regardless, the state’s case essentially falls apart if the cell phone records (and timeline) are placed in their proper context. It’s a harsh result to say the least, and sure doesn’t seem like justice. Is this argument dead in the water? Or can it be raised in a motion for reconsideration in state court? Or raised in federal court?