Page 31 of 64 FirstFirst ... 22293031323340 ... LastLast
Results 1,501 to 1,550 of 3171

Thread: West Memphis Murders

  1. #1501
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,548
    Arkansas Governor: Pardon not likely for WM3

    http://www.kait8.com/story/15317015/...likely-for-wm3

  2. #1502
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,242
    To SRVFan:

    Well, that's good. Hopefully their notoriety will make it more difficult for them to re-offend.

  3. #1503
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Garland, Texas
    Posts
    868
    Quote Originally Posted by SRVFan View Post
    The 'big ask'

    An insider's view of the legal maneuvers that freed the West Memphis Three.

    http://www.arktimes.com/gyrobase/the...wFullText=true
    Thank you for posting this. Very interesting!

  4. #1504
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    The Centennial State
    Posts
    1,316
    Quote Originally Posted by SRVFan View Post
    Arkansas Governor: Pardon not likely for WM3

    http://www.kait8.com/story/15317015/...likely-for-wm3
    Events between the time the bailiff said, "All rise," and the judge said, "Court dismissed," unfolded quickly. The "paperwork" was outlined for the judge in the agreed-upon sequence. The defendants uttered short, rehearsed responses.


    The judge said he was satisfied that the defendants would prevail if they faced new trials, and so he ordered those trials. State's attorneys said they believed that they could win at those trials, because of testimony that all had confessed. The judge accepted that contention, as is required in an Alford plea. Echols, Baldwin and Misskelley stood and individually pleaded guilty but said they were innocent.


    Attorneys on all sides said what they'd agreed to about reducing the men's sentences to the time they'd already served. Laser warned Echols, Baldwin and Misskelley that they faced serious consequences if they got arrested again for anything within the next ten years. And with that, it was pretty much done. The judge sent the defendants and their lawyers back to the room from which they'd come to complete some out-processing paperwork for the prison system.


    "It's hard to wrap your head around," Benca reflected. "But that's it. It just boils down to [the fact] that there were risks. There was uncertainty all around. We thought about it. We prayed about. We felt we could fight this better with them out of prison than in."
    Wow. It all seemed pretty fast on the outside, but I guess it was fast to the people involved, too!

  5. #1505
    I will never understand why they were released. If this was in Ireland where I live there would be uproar and the 3 child killers would have to flee the country, just like a notorious rapist who served 16 years and was released earlier this year, he is in Amsterdam now I think for his own safety.
    To die will be an awfully big adventure."
    — J.M. Barrie

  6. #1506
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Johnny Cashville
    Posts
    22,611
    Quote Originally Posted by Serph View Post
    I will never understand why they were released. If this was in Ireland where I live there would be uproar and the 3 child killers would have to flee the country, just like a notorious rapist who served 16 years and was released earlier this year, he is in Amsterdam now I think for his own safety.
    At least they didn't get new identities

    You don't mess with friggin Dave Coulier click here to mess

  7. #1507
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    82
    I stumbled across Paradise Lost last night on HBO. I wasn't expecting the footage of the bodies to be the first thing shown. I have to say I cried. I cannot believe these guys were just let go. Blows my mind.

  8. #1508
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    4,280
    Quote Originally Posted by buglover View Post
    I stumbled across Paradise Lost last night on HBO. I wasn't expecting the footage of the bodies to be the first thing shown. I have to say I cried. I cannot believe these guys were just let go. Blows my mind.
    Do you not believe in DNA because the DNA matched one of the boys' step father's and the father's friend?

  9. #1509
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    742
    That DNA match, matched 7% of the population of WM too.

  10. #1510
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    4,280
    Quote Originally Posted by BelleRain View Post
    That DNA match, matched 7% of the population of WM too.
    But none of the three convicted though, right?

  11. #1511
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Posts
    5,862
    Quote Originally Posted by McCourt View Post
    But none of the three convicted though, right?
    Right.
    The time you enjoy wasting is not wasted time.

  12. #1512
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,548
    Quote Originally Posted by McCourt View Post
    But none of the three convicted though, right?
    There was blood found on a necklace pendant which matched little Stevie. The necklace was shared by Jason Baldwin and Damien Echols.

  13. #1513
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    4,280
    Quote Originally Posted by DonnaMc View Post
    Right.
    Quote Originally Posted by SRVFan View Post
    There was blood found on a necklace pendant which matched little Stevie. The necklace was shared by Jason Baldwin and Damien Echols.
    Thanks. These cases get so convoluted after so many years.

  14. #1514
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    1,359
    This is a brilliant read for those of us who're wondering if they should've gone ahead to a re-trial. I love good writing, it's hard to find anymore. But I found some here. Regardless of whether you believe they're guilty or not, it's pretty insightful.

    I feel kind of stunned knowing they're out. I have no idea why, but I didn't see it coming like this, so fast. I think Arkansas just wanted to get them the hell out of there, folks were starting to catch on. So they let them go, and they think their hands are clean? Really? See, I'm not getting that. Those kids spent 18 years of their lives for something I don't believe they could have possibly done. The interrogations were a disgrace, and the evidence just wasn't there. And it should have been. You'd have to be near genius level to pull this off at their ages without a single trace of evidence.

    I will never believe they did this. And if I'm right, there's a monster loose in West Memphis. Just sayin'.

    http://www.arktimes.com/arkansas/jas...nt?oid=1888400

    I am the master of my fate:
    I am the captain of my soul! (Invictus)
    (And Timothy McVeigh's last words...)

  15. #1515
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    243
    I've always believed They were Guilty.

  16. #1516
    Quote Originally Posted by RaRaRamona View Post
    At least they didn't get new identities
    Good point. As for the same old DNA talk I think people are watching too much CSI. If you watch a proper real life tv show like The First 48 where the cameras follow detectives right from the start of a murder until the end you will always notice a pattern. There is rarely any DNA left at the crime scene so they rely on circumstantial evidence. But the one thing they want is a confession and they usually get it. The Robin Hood Hills crime scene showed signs of a clean up and when the Luminol was sprayed around the area it lit up like a Christmas tree.

    One thing i never understood was what happened to Damien's leather trenchcoat? The one he never took off even on really hot days.
    To die will be an awfully big adventure."
    — J.M. Barrie

  17. #1517
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Johnny Cashville
    Posts
    22,611
    Quote Originally Posted by TaupinJohn View Post
    You'd have to be near genius level to pull this off at their ages without a single trace of evidence.
    I don't agree at all. There are tons of cases with no DNA evidence. They did link fibers to them. But the rest, as other have said, is from movies & tv. We think it should be so easy to find trace evidence but it's just not.

    You don't mess with friggin Dave Coulier click here to mess

  18. #1518
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,548
    Quote Originally Posted by Serph View Post
    Good point. As for the same old DNA talk I think people are watching too much CSI. If you watch a proper real life tv show like The First 48 where the cameras follow detectives right from the start of a murder until the end you will always notice a pattern. There is rarely any DNA left at the crime scene so they rely on circumstantial evidence. But the one thing they want is a confession and they usually get it. The Robin Hood Hills crime scene showed signs of a clean up and when the Luminol was sprayed around the area it lit up like a Christmas tree.

    One thing i never understood was what happened to Damien's leather trenchcoat? The one he never took off even on really hot days.
    Also on the note of watching a show like The First 48, what is one thing they do when they are questioning someone?

    SHOW THEM PHOTOS OF THE DECEASED.

    People have always bashed the WMPD for showing photos of the boys while questioning the boys. This is something cops have done for years and are still doing.

  19. #1519
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,242
    To TaupinJohn:

    Well, if you're wrong, there's THREE monsters running loose.

  20. #1520
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,548
    Quote Originally Posted by RaRaRamona View Post
    I don't agree at all. There are tons of cases with no DNA evidence. They did link fibers to them. But the rest, as other have said, is from movies & tv. We think it should be so easy to find trace evidence but it's just not.
    That and when the place was gone over with Lumnol, it lit up like a Christmas tree. Blood everywhere. Then there was the blood of little Stevie found on the pendant necklace that Echols and Baldwin shared...Funny how NONE of the WM3 supporters want to talk about that necklace....

  21. #1521
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,334
    In regards to the existence of "new," exonerating evidence...

    The majority of items tested in this case were hairs. The DNA in question was mitochondrial-based (known as mtDNA). Mitochondrial-based DNA is passed down from the female "line" and remains unchanged over generations. This simply means if mitochondrial DNA testing was performed on an individual, and then compared to an individuals suspected great-great-great-great-great grandmother, the hairs would be identical if they were indeed related.

    Difference between mitochondrial DNA and nuclear DNA: Unlike nuclear DNA, whose genes are rearranged in the process of recombination, there is usually no change in mtDNA from parent to offspring. Because of this, and the fact that the mutation rate of mtDNA is higher than that of nuclear DNA and is easily measured, mtDNA is a powerful tool for tracking matrilineage. Human mtDNA can also be used to identify individuals. Details are provided here.

    Contrary to supporter assertions, the DNA results do not conclusively eliminate Echols, Baldwin or Misskelley as the perpetrators. In fact, there are numerous items of evidence the defense did not submit for testing. Two of these items were Jessie Misskelley's t-shirt and a necklace owned by Damien Echols (which Damien Echols and Jason Baldwin were known to share). These items were discovered during the initial investigation and were found to contain blood, which may have belonged to Michael Moore and Steve Branch. The initial results were inconclusive because Jessie Misskelley and Jason Baldwin shared the same HLA-DQ Alpha genotype with Michael Moore and Steve Branch.

    I won't go into the details of HLA-DQ, but it will suffice to say that DQ is an αβ heterodimer of the major histocompatibility complex (MHC). If you wish to read more about the HLA-DQ Alpha genotype, please read the information presented here.

    For some reason (yet to be disclosed), the defense (and supporters) don't believe that eliminating the victims as the source of the blood on one or both of these items would be exculpatory. Of the items in evidence that were tested, some yielded no DNA; others yielded incomplete results (only one allele or two alleles).

    An allele is one of two (or more) forms of a gene. Different alleles can result in different traits, such as color. Details are provided here.

    Finding mitochondrial DNA that matches Terry Hobbs does not have the same weight as finding nuclear DNA from Terry Hobbs. The defense experts pointed this out during the press conference, but Echols' attorneys and supporters continue to ignore their own experts' opinions regarding this. Likewise, finding mitochondrial DNA that matches David Jacoby is also not the same as finding nuclear DNA from David Jacoby. Finding David Jacoby's DNA at the crime scene does not implicate Terry Hobbs in the murders, despite the claims and assertions made by supporters, especially in light of the fact that the hair from which the DNA was extracted was not collected from the crime scene until June 3, 1993.

    Finally, there is no "new forensic evidence" proving that the majority of the injuries to the bodies were the result of postmortem animal predation. What the defense has presented are the opinions of numerous highly-paid experts who have looked at the photographs of the injuries and expressed their "opinions" regarding the origin of those injuries.

    The difference between the interpretations of the new evidence by supporters, and the majority of the honest legal community, is that to supporters, the new evidence is compelling, while to the honest legal community, it is not, especially when examined in conjunction with all of the evidence. Additionally, while supporters seem to believe that jurors second-guessing their original decisions, and witnesses coming forward many years after the fact is great evidence; it isn't. Additionally, none of the "new evidence," supposedly submitted by the defense, qualifies as "new scientific evidence" under current DNA statutes.

    Please note I am not singling supporters out and saying they are all dishonest.
    Last edited by joS3ph; 08-25-2011 at 09:03 AM.

  22. #1522
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Garland, Texas
    Posts
    868
    Quote Originally Posted by Serph View Post
    Good point. As for the same old DNA talk I think people are watching too much CSI. If you watch a proper real life tv show like The First 48 where the cameras follow detectives right from the start of a murder until the end you will always notice a pattern. There is rarely any DNA left at the crime scene so they rely on circumstantial evidence. But the one thing they want is a confession and they usually get it. The Robin Hood Hills crime scene showed signs of a clean up and when the Luminol was sprayed around the area it lit up like a Christmas tree.

    One thing i never understood was what happened to Damien's leather trenchcoat? The one he never took off even on really hot days.
    99% of the murders on The First 48 are gang related gun violence. Totally different kind of murder with much less chance of leaving DNA. Plus, why send something in for DNA analysis when it happened on the street in full view of the entire neighborhood. The pattern that I'm noticing on this board is people confusing DNA analysis and blood typing.

  23. #1523
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Garland, Texas
    Posts
    868
    Quote Originally Posted by SRVFan View Post
    That and when the place was gone over with Lumnol, it lit up like a Christmas tree. Blood everywhere. Then there was the blood of little Stevie found on the pendant necklace that Echols and Baldwin shared...Funny how NONE of the WM3 supporters want to talk about that necklace....
    Why do you keep saying that Stevie Branch's blood was found on the necklace as if there was a conclusive DNA match to him?

  24. #1524
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,548
    Quote Originally Posted by Lout_Rampage View Post
    Why do you keep saying that Stevie Branch's blood was found on the necklace as if there was a conclusive DNA match to him?
    Go back and read through this thread starting at page 11. Joseph, who has studied this case extensively, shared this tidbit with us.

    In fact, here you go: http://www.findadeath.com/forum/show...postcount=1433
    Last edited by SRVFan; 08-25-2011 at 09:15 AM.

  25. #1525
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Lout_Rampage View Post
    Why do you keep saying that Stevie Branch's blood was found on the necklace as if there was a conclusive DNA match to him?
    The defense does not want to submit the necklace for further testing, as the defense does not believe the evidence would support their claims of innocence. In order to receive the answer to the question you are asking, you would have to ask the defense why they chose not to submit this piece of evidence for further testing. This is one piece of evidence that the defense wishes would just disappear.

  26. #1526
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,334
    On the issue of jury misconduct...

    One of the mistakes that were made by a lot of supporters is that they were looking at this supposed "new evidence" as raising reasonable doubt. That's not the standard in the United States court system. What the defense really has to do is to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the West Memphis Three are actually innocent.

    "Due diligence" comes into play when the court looks at some of the evidence and the issues being raised. Echols and Baldwin have already failed this test, because each had the opportunity to discover and present the issues prior to their plea. Counsel for both were on notice that (a) Miskelley's confession was public knowledge, and the fact that the jury had been exposed to it, and (b) there had been a threat communicated to some of the jurors that might have affected their deliberations. While the defense raised the threat and the ex parte communications with jurors by the judge, they failed to interview the jurors afterwards to discover any other "problems" that might have occurred. Frankly, I don't think that in 1994, any of the jurors would have provided "helpful" information, since I'm thoroughly convinced that the three jurors, who have since provided sworn affidavits/declarations to the defense, have done so because they have fallen for the defense hype and believe they convicted innocent men, even though they didn't.

    Like the alleged human bite marks (some suggest the "marks" were created by an object instead of an animal) raised in Echols' Rule 37 petition, the alleged animal predation would have failed the test as well, since the photographs used by the defense's experts to "discover" the animal predation were available at the time of trial, the alleged animal predation could have been discovered at the time of trial. It's also important to point out that the theory of animal predation was not proven, since none of the opinions expressed by the experts has been tested during testimony in open court under cross-examination. It also doesn't help at all that the sole proof of the presence of animals in the woods comes from the then 13-year old brother of one of the victims.

    As for the DNA, the two hairs could be incidental and, therefore, not related to the murders. As I understand from reading the case files themselves, there are some inconclusive DNA results that do not exclude the three killers. Those two things would have been insufficient to undermine the fiber evidence and the eyewitness evidence presented at Echols and Baldwin's trials, and which serve as the foundation of their convictions. It's certainly not sufficient to undermine Miskelley's confession, which was corroborated by the fiber evidence and eyewitness testimony (not to mention Miskelley's multiple, post-conviction confessions).
    Last edited by joS3ph; 08-25-2011 at 09:43 AM.

  27. #1527
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,548
    Quote Originally Posted by joS3ph View Post
    The defense does not want to submit the necklace for further testing, as the defense does not believe the evidence would support their claims of innocence. In order to receive the answer to the question you are asking, you would have to ask the defense why they chose not to submit this piece of evidence for further testing. This is one piece of evidence that the defense wishes would just disappear.
    You know, it just kills me that people refuse to open their eyes and see the documentaries which formed most supporters opinions was a bogus show full of one-sided lies and agenda.

    There were the parts with Echols family saying he couldn't hurt so much as a kitten and they wondered where the accusations of him being a devil worshiper came from. All you have to do is pull his records and you can see where he tried to attack his own parents, even went as far as admitting he was in a satanic cult and was wanting to "graduate to a human sacrifice".

    They try to say the crime scene was a dump site, even though Lumnol testing lit the forest up upon testing.

    They don't want to talk about the MULTIPLE eye witnesses which saw Echols and his girlfriend walking near the crime scene with mud all over them.

    They don't want to talk about the bloody shirts and necklace pendant which belonged to Echols and Baldwin.

    They don't want to talk about Echols blowing kisses and flicking his tongue at the families while in the court room.

    They want to blast the WMPD for showing photos of the deceased to the three, when this is a common practice. Just watch the First 48 and see how many times they show victim photos to the person being interrogated.

    They want to blast WMPD for the Misskelly interrogations saying he wasn't given a lawyer and he had mental issues. 1: They don't have to give a lawyer if one is not requested. 2: You can't always tell by looking at someone that they have mental issues.

    They don't want to talk about the multiple fibers found in Echols and Baldwins home which matched fibers at the crime scene.

    And last but not least, my personal favorite. They want to convict Terry Hobbs on circumstantial evidence of a single hair being found at the scene, but say the WM3 should not have been convicted on circumstantial evidence such as the fibers, eye witness accounts, etc.

  28. #1528
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    The Otherside of the Mirror~
    Posts
    1,707
    Quote Originally Posted by srvfan View Post
    you know, it just kills me that people refuse to open their eyes and see the documentaries which formed most supporters opinions was a bogus show full of one-sided lies and agenda.

    There were the parts with echols family saying he couldn't hurt so much as a kitten and they wondered where the accusations of him being a devil worshiper came from. All you have to do is pull his records and you can see where he tried to attack his own parents, even went as far as admitting he was in a satanic cult and was wanting to "graduate to a human sacrifice".

    They try to say the crime scene was a dump site, even though lumnol testing lit the forest up upon testing.

    They don't want to talk about the multiple eye witnesses which saw echols and his girlfriend walking near the crime scene with mud all over them.

    They don't want to talk about the bloody shirts and necklace pendant which belonged to echols and baldwin.

    They don't want to talk about echols blowing kisses and flicking his tongue at the families while in the court room.

    They want to blast the wmpd for showing photos of the deceased to the three, when this is a common practice. Just watch the first 48 and see how many times they show victim photos to the person being interrogated.

    They want to blast wmpd for the misskelly interrogations saying he wasn't given a lawyer and he had mental issues. 1: They don't have to give a lawyer if one is not requested. 2: You can't always tell by looking at someone that they have mental issues.

    They don't want to talk about the multiple fibers found in echols and baldwins home which matched fibers at the crime scene.

    And last but not least, my personal favorite. They want to convict terry hobbs on circumstantial evidence of a single hair being found at the scene, but say the wm3 should not have been convicted on circumstantial evidence such as the fibers, eye witness accounts, etc.
    bingo~

  29. #1529
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    742
    Your right that hair did not match the 3 convicted. But it also didnt match terry Hobbs and his friend conclusively when in fact it also matched almost 10,000 people from the population of West Memphis.

  30. #1530
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    The Otherside of the Mirror~
    Posts
    1,707
    here's what i don't get~ no the hair wasn't a 100% match to terry hobbs~ tho i will admit to it being similar~ but... even if it was a 100% match, it's still no red herring for me~ terry was stevie's stepfather & lived in the home~ it is not unfathomable that a hair from one of the homes of the 3 boys was found at the scene or even on one of the other children~

    i run a home daycare & have long hair that i always have tied back during working hours~ still i am forever pulling my hair off the kids, my kid, the dog, you name it~ i have even had parents chuckle that they had found one of my long blond hairs on a piece of furniture at their homes that must have traveled from me to their child to their home~ i am OCD about cleanliness (seriously the DR diagnosed it) & i vacuum multiple times a day & swiffer, clean etc...but i still transfer my hair & find it in the oddest of places all the time~

    so this hair the WM3 keep yammering on about is really nothing if you get down to it~

  31. #1531
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,334
    Coincidence List (Updated)

    Coincidence No. 1:

    Misskelley and Echols are only acquaintances, but in spite of that, Misskelley, when questioned by police, initially names Echols as “capable” of committing the murders. In his allegedly coerced confession, he names Echols as not only a participant in the crime, but the “ringleader.” In Paradise Lost, one of Misskelley's relatives makes a comment about Echols that suggests Echols and Misskelley were more than acquaintances;

    Coincidence No. 2:

    On the night of May 5, 1993, Narlene Hollingsworth, Tabetha Hollingsworth and Anthony Hollingsworth see a male wearing all black clothing, with black hair that looks like Echols, walking on the Service Road near Robin Hood Hills, with an individual who is the same height as Domini Teer, the same build as Domini Teer, has long hair similar to Domini Teer's and who looks like Domini Teer;

    Coincidence No. 3:

    Three Caucasian hairs are found on two of the victim's bodies, several Caucasian hairs are found on the victims' bodies and under the bindings, and one negroid hair found on the sheet used to wrap Christopher Byers' body for transport to the morgue. The three Caucasian hairs found on two victims' bodies are compared to hair from numerous suspects and members of the victims' families. The three hairs are found to be similar to Echols and one of the hairs is an exclusive similarity;

    Coincidence No. 4:

    Green polyester and green cotton fibers found on Michael Moore's clothing are compared to garments and items from the victims' homes, other suspect's clothing, and garments and items from the Baldwin, Echols, Teer, and Misskelley homes and are found to be similar only to a single cotton polyester blend "Geranimals" shirt that belonged to Echols' half-brother, Tim Hutchison. The Baldwins, Teers, Misskelleys, victims, and other suspects are not found to possess a similar shirt, nor are secondary fiber transfers similar to the questioned fibers found on the garments or items examined from the victims' homes, the other suspects' clothing or the Baldwin, Teer and Miskelley homes;

    Coincidence No. 5:

    Baldwin is named as a participant in the murders by Misskelley in his allegedly coerced confession;

    Coincidence No. 6:

    One red rayon fiber found on Christopher Byers' shirt are compared with garments and items from the victim's homes, other suspect's clothing and garments and items from the Baldwin, Echols, Teer and Misskelley homes and are found to be similar only to a single red rayon robe that belonged to Gail Grinnell, Baldwin's mother. The Echols, Teers, Misskelleys, victims and other suspects are not found to possess a similar robe, nor are secondary fiber transfers similar to the questioned fibers found on the garments or items examined from the victim's homes, the other suspect's clothing or the Echols, Teer and Misskelley homes;

    Coincidence No. 7:

    A spot of blood on a tee-shirt belonging to Misskelley is found to be similar to Michael Moore's blood by HLA-DQ Alpha profile.

    Coincidence No. 8:

    The blood on the tee-shirt is also similar to Misskelley's profile. An explanation for the presence of the blood is not official given by Misskelley's defense, although years later, supporters claim that Misskelley had a nose bleed that left only a small drop of blood on the tee-shirt;

    Coincidence No. 9:

    A survival knife, similar to one that Echols was known to possess, and one he often carried on his person, is found sticking blade down in the lake 30+ feet directly behind Baldwin's home in the Lakeshore Trailer Park;

    Coincidence No. 10:

    A spot of blood, discovered on a necklace seized from Echols at the time of his arrest, is similar to Steve Branch's blood by HLA-DQ Alpha profile.

    Coincidence No. 11:

    The blood on the necklace is also similar to Baldwin's profile and Echols claims that Baldwin frequently wore the necklace. Supporters allege that his zits bled on the necklace while he was wearing it. Echols claims that a police photograph documents Baldwin wearing the necklace, but no such photograph ever appears and Echols was wearing the necklace on the night of his arrest;

    Coincidence No. 12:

    Who confessed to the murders on at least six different occasions (three unofficial and three official) and were also named as participants by Misskelley? Echols and Baldwin.

    Although not widely accepted as voluntary, how many suspects were named in Misskelley's confession? Echols and Baldwin.

    Although not conclusive, how many suspects were found to have hair similar to all three of the Caucasian hairs found on two of the victim's bodies and were named in Misskelley's confession? Echols.

    Although not conclusive, how many suspects were found to possess a garment similar to the green polyester and green cotton fibers found on Michael Moore's clothing, were the only suspect to be found to have hair similar to all three of the Caucasian hairs found on two of the victims' bodies, and were named in Misskelley's confession? Echols.

    Although not widely accepted as credible, how many suspects were named by Narlene, Tabetha, and Anthony Hollingsworth as being on the Service Road near Robin Hood Hills on the night of May 5, were found to possess a garment similar to the green cotton and green polyester fibers found on Michael's clothing, were found to have hair similar to all three of the Caucasian hairs found on two of the victims' bodies, and were named in Misskelley's confession? Echols.

    Although not widely accepted as conclusive, how many suspects were named as having once owned a knife similar to the "Lake" Knife and were also named as having routinely carried a knife like it, were identified on the Service Road near Robin Hood Hills by Narlene, Tabetha and Anthony Hollingsworth on the night of May 5, were found to possess a garment similar to the green polyester and green cotton fibers found on Michael's clothing, were found to have hair similar to all three hairs found on two of the victims' bodies, and were named in Misskelley's confession? Echols.

    Although not widely accepted as conclusive, how many suspects were arrested wearing a necklace with blood similar to Steve Branch's, were named as owning a knife similar to the "Lake" Knife and were also named as having routinely carried a knife like it, were identified on the Service Road near Robin Hood Hills by Narlene, Tabetha and Anthony Hollingsworth on the night of May 5, were found to possess a garment similar to the green polyester and green cotton fibers found on Michael's clothing, were found to have hair similar to all three Caucasian hairs found on two of the victims' bodies, and were named in Misskelley's confession? Echols.

    Although not conclusive, how many suspects were found to possess a robe similar to the red rayon fibers found on Christopher's shirt and were named in Misskelley's confession? Baldwin.

    Although not widely accepted as conclusive, how many suspects had a knife found sticking blade down in the mud in a lake 30+ feet directly behind their home in Lakeshore Trailer Park, were found to possess a robe similar to the red rayon fibers found on Christopher's shirt, and were named in Misskelley's confession? Baldwin.

    Although not widely accepted as voluntary, how many suspects confessed to the murders, and told police the names of his accomplices, the injuries to Christopher Byers, the injuries to Steve Branch's face, and without being prompted that he chased Michael Moore down? Misskelley.

    Although not conclusive, how many suspects named by Misskelley were found to each possess a single garment in their homes similar to the red rayon fibers found on Christopher's clothing, and the green polyester and green cotton fibers found on Michael's clothing? Echols and Baldwin.

    Although not widely accepted as conclusive, how many suspects were found to possess a shirt with a small drop of blood similar to Michael Moore's, whose co-defendants were included as suspects by the trace evidence, and who confessed to committing the murders? Misskelley.

    The medieval philosopher William of Occan formulated the principle known as Occan's Razor: If two hypotheses purport to explain the same data, then, all other things being equal, the simpler hypotheses is to be preferred.

    I could not help but think about the West Memphis Three case, and the often opposing explanations/views from supporters and non-supporters alike. An example would be: Was the Robin Hood Hills area the crime scene or merely a dump site? I tend to believe it is highly unlikely that the boys, who were last seen alive close to Robin Hood Hills, were abducted from that area, murdered, and then BROUGHT BACK to the same area - an area that was being searched.

    I think I´ll have to go with Occan on that one (the simpler hypotheses): The boys were most likely murdered in Robin Hood Hills. Some things never change...

  32. #1532
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Garland, Texas
    Posts
    868
    It's Occam's Razor. William of Occam.

    Occam's razor suggests that if your shirt has a drop of blood on it that is similar to your blood, then it's your blood. Not that you participated in a horribly bloody crime, and got a single drop of the victim's blood on you.

    Also, are you suggesting that someone swam down 30+ feet and jammed the knife into the lake bottom?

  33. #1533
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Posts
    5,862
    You keep claiming "How many suspects were found to.........."

    My question is how many other suspects were there? None. If they had tested more than the three - it would make a difference.
    The time you enjoy wasting is not wasted time.

  34. #1534
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Connecticut, You know home of ESPN
    Posts
    9,046
    The only thing I am sure about in this case is that there must have been multiple murderers.


    "I will be buried in a spring loaded casket filled with confetti, and a future archaeologist will have one awesome day at work."

  35. #1535
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Garland, Texas
    Posts
    868
    Quote Originally Posted by Miho View Post
    The only thing I am sure about in this case is that there must have been multiple murderers.

    I definitely agree with you there. At least two if not three.

  36. #1536
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,334
    Quote Originally Posted by DonnaMc View Post
    You keep claiming "How many suspects were found to.........."

    My question is how many other suspects were there? None. If they had tested more than the three - it would make a difference.
    There is no reason to question anyone else in this case, as the three have been tried and convicted and finally accepted responsibility.

  37. #1537
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Posts
    5,862
    Quote Originally Posted by joS3ph View Post
    There is no reason to question anyone else in this case, as the three have been tried and convicted and finally accepted responsibility.
    Our opinions differ and...that's okay.
    The time you enjoy wasting is not wasted time.

  38. #1538
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    San Diego CA
    Posts
    2,712
    I know I said I was going to walk away but I have one more thing, Yes they said they were guilty they did it so they could get out and Damien could get off death row, as I said I don't see why the state would let three men go if they said they were guilty of killing three boys, not only that, but why would the State make one of the stipulations that the three could not sue the State? The State knew they screwed up there wasn't enough evidence to prove them guilty or innocent, the only ones that know what happened that day are the killers, and God and the poor boys who were murdered, let's remember them now instead of going around in circles with all this. Everyone has their thoughts and their opinions and calling us supporters stupid or only basing it on the docus and books isn't going to make us change our minds at at all. Now I am done.
    "I am the Master of my fate, I am the captain of my soul"




  39. #1539
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Lout_Rampage View Post
    It's Occam's Razor. William of Occam.

    Occam's razor suggests that if your shirt has a drop of blood on it that is similar to your blood, then it's your blood. Not that you participated in a horribly bloody crime, and got a single drop of the victim's blood on you.

    Also, are you suggesting that someone swam down 30+ feet and jammed the knife into the lake bottom?
    I made a mistake. You are absolutely correct in that the "n" should be replaced by an "m." It's a wonder I don't make that mistake more often, considering the close proximity of the "n" and "m" on a computer keyboard. I'm sure, as I am only human, that I will make even more mistakes when typing.

    Please point me to your source in regards to "blood" and "Occam's Razor." When I Google "blood"+"Occam's Razor," the only results I receive are related to an episode of "House" (season one to be exact). But hey, I corrected my spelling!

    When did I ever suggest anyone swam down 30 feet and jammed a knife in the lake bottom? Please elaborate...

  40. #1540
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,334
    Quote Originally Posted by pksgigi View Post
    Everyone has their thoughts and their opinions and calling us supporters stupid or only basing it on the docus and books isn't going to make us change our minds at at all.
    Now, now, no reason to get upset. I respect your opinion and that is why I added the statement about dishonesty to my message. I guess I should have also included the word "stupid," but I don't think anyone here is stupid.

    Please note I am not singling supporters out and saying they are all dishonest.
    I will say, from personal experience, that I have been attacked verbally and ridiculed more by West Memphis Three supporters, than any other collective group of individuals. However, I have no ill-feelings towards anyone that participates in this thread, and as always, feel free to disagree with anything I post. That is certainly your right, and a right I can certainly appreciate and respect. None of us will ever agree as to the events that transpired on the night where three children were murdered.

  41. #1541
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,334
    Quote Originally Posted by DonnaMc View Post
    Our opinions differ and...that's okay.
    Yes, our opinions do differ, but the fact of the matter is (and this is not something I am making up for sake of an argument), all three of the West Memphis Three defendants decided to plead guilty to multiple counts of murder.

  42. #1542
    Quote Originally Posted by pksgigi View Post
    I know I said I was going to walk away but I have one more thing, Yes they said they were guilty they did it so they could get out and Damien could get off death row, as I said I don't see why the state would let three men go if they said they were guilty of killing three boys, not only that, but why would the State make one of the stipulations that the three could not sue the State? The State knew they screwed up there wasn't enough evidence to prove them guilty or innocent, the only ones that know what happened that day are the killers, and God and the poor boys who were murdered, let's remember them now instead of going around in circles with all this. Everyone has their thoughts and their opinions and calling us supporters stupid or only basing it on the docus and books isn't going to make us change our minds at at all. Now I am done.
    Why admit guilt after claiming innocence for 18 years?
    Why not wait another year or two for a retrial?
    Why go around a convicted child killer instead of an innocent man?
    Why confess to a murder 6 times if you had nothing to do with it?
    Why is there no alibi for any of the 3?
    Why was Jesse shunned after the Press Conference?
    Why did Damien lie numerous times on the stand?
    Why was Damien's trenchcoat never found?
    Why would so many witnesses lie about what they heard?
    To die will be an awfully big adventure."
    — J.M. Barrie

  43. #1543
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Posts
    5,862
    Quote Originally Posted by joS3ph View Post
    Yes, our opinions do differ, but the fact of the matter is (and this is not something I am making up for sake of an argument), all three of the West Memphis Three defendants decided to plead guilty to multiple counts of murder.
    Have a good day.
    The time you enjoy wasting is not wasted time.

  44. #1544
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,055
    I would also like to mention: I do not think the state should have taken this deal and I say the STATE took the deal because the WM3 defense team is the one who went to the state with this deal. If the WM3 were on the verge of new trials and they knew that there was no evidence (as they have said for YEARS), why propose this deal? This deal that ADMITS the state had enough evidence to put them away again??
    Who loves not a false imagining, an unreal character in us; but looking through all the rubbish of our imperfections, loves in us the divine ideal of our natures - not the man that we are, but the angel that we may be.” ~Tennyson
    "

  45. #1545
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Somewhere over a rainbow/U.K
    Posts
    868
    what would happen if one of them did confess now...either to a family member or broke down and said it publicly...thats it right they have served their time and will remain free??

  46. #1546
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    742
    from what I understand and I could be wrong, but if one of them was to say ya I did it, nothing would happen. they pleaded guilty, the guilty plea was recorded and entered, and they were released with time served, plus 10 years probation. So the state already sees it as being guilty.

  47. #1547
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1
    Hello, I'm new to the site and recently read through the posts on this thread to gain knowledge about this case.

    I registered to specifically thank Jos3ph for all his research.

    Jos3ph, you've done obviously spent a lot of time and energy in analyzing this crime, and I really appreciate your efforts. I'm sure there are a lot of lurkers who visit here and come away more knowledgeable about the case thanks to your work.

  48. #1548
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    794
    To Serph: Jessie wasn't shunned after the press conference. He just wanted to go home with his dad. Or at least that's the way I understand it.

  49. #1549
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,548
    Prosecutor: Lab to study 'West Memphis 3' case DNA

    LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) - Prosecutor Scott Ellington says Arkansas' crime lab is willing to analyze DNA evidence that attorneys for the three men known as the "West Memphis Three" say will exonerate them in the murders of 3 Cub Scouts in 1993.

    http://www.katv.com/story/15336414/p...medium=twitter

  50. #1550
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    17,279
    Why wasn't that done before releasing them? Talk about closing the barn door after the cow gets out!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •