New Evidence

[Compassionate Reader]

I have a question about the hair that is supposed to belong to Terry Hobbs. There was no root, correct? So, the evidence is MtDNA as opposed to nuclear DNA. Is it true that MtDNA is not as conclusive as the nuclear DNA?

Also, regarding the predatory damage (from cats, canines and snapping turtles) - I wonder how those animals got to the bodies (?). The bodies were found lying face down in the water - so, I'm not understanding how the animals got to the underside of the bodies to do all of that damage. Additionally, the bodies weren't in the water, really, for a very long time - what, maybe 15 hours or so before they were found? What drew the animals to the bodies? If the blood was all in the water - would the canines and felines have been able to smell it? I mean - what made them come around and attack so savagely?

As to the hair, yes, you are correct that mtDNA is not as conclusive as nuclear DNA. However, the hair in question is linked to only 1.5% of the population, and Terry Hobbs is in that 1.5%. Just about everyone else involved in this case, including Damien, Jason and Jessie have been excluded as the source of that particular hair. So, whoever the donor is must have been in West Memphis to deposit the hair and they must share a maternal ancestor with Terry Hobbs. Maybe it's not a "slam dunk," but it's much more physical evidence than anything that exists for anyone else.

Add to that the Jacoby hair. This hair was found on a tree stump beside the ditch in which the bodies were found. It "matches" only 7% of the population, which includes David Jacoby but, again, excludes Damien, Jason and Jessie. Both Terry Hobbs and David Jacoby admit to having been together the evening of May 5th. In his declaration in the Pasdar suit, Jacoby says that he and Terry were playing guitars. (In West of Memphis, he even mentions the song they were playing, "Pretty Woman" by Roy Orbison.) So, it is not a leap in logic at all to conclude that Terry Hobbs could have picked up that hair while at Jacoby's. Again, this is IMO very strong circumstantial evidence against TH.

As to the animal predation, I subscribe to "The Manhole Theory" that purports that the killer moved the bodies from a manhole which was either the murder scene or the first place where the bodies were hidden. The particular manhole suspected is in a part of the sewer system that can be entered by mammals, including dogs and cats, fairly easily. The theory is that the predation occurred after the boys were dead but before the killer moved the bodies into the ditch. In fact, some people believe that, when he returned and saw the predation, he knew that he couldn't pass off the deaths as having occurred when the boys all fell down into the manhole, as some have assumed was possibly the original plan.

One last thing. Recently it has been disclosed that further fiber testing of garments collected from the homes of Damien and Jason were, in fact, not the source of the fibers found on the bodies. This is yet another hole in the original case. The fibers found on the bodies have not, AFAIK, been conclusively linked to anyone as of yet. The important thing is that the tenuous link to the falsely convicted men has now been broken.

Sorry to rant on.

 

[news247]

oh no - i like your 'rants' even tho i respectfully disagree with you much of the time . i appreciate you sharing your views.

ok - more questions, lol. about the MtDNA - is it true that the percentages can provide a skewed view because the database is so much smaller than that of the nuclear DNA? I keep thinking that I've read that the MtDNA does not have legal case standing (I mean, it hasn't been tested and upheld in any state supreme courts)?

and, is it correct that the blood evidence on Damien's necklace could only be processed (or whatever it's called, lol) by MtDNA and not nuclear because the amount was so small? because i remember reading that some of it could be traced to Jason (but also to one of the little boys). do you know why that necklace was never entered by the prosecution? i thought i read that the testing came back too late for the trial (or something like that).

i'm asking because if that's correct (and that's a big 'IF' because i could certainly be not remembering correctly) - but if it's true - then, wouldn't that be something that the prosecution would surely introduce in the event of a new trial?

 

[news247]

oh, and about the hobbs and jacoby hairs - wonder why jacoby isn't considered a viable suspect as well as Hobbs?

it seems to me that if people are willing to believe the Jacoby hair is just transfer from Hobbs being at his house - then, why not believe the opposite - that it's transfer from the other way around?

and with the necklace, i know i read that the blood, if it was Jason's, is probably just transfer from Jason borrowing the necklace and got on there from a shaving cut or whatever.

also the fibers - they were supposedly 'transfers' from Jason and Damien's house to the little boys?

to me - it doesn't seem logical to believe in one 'transfer' and not the other, if i am making sense, lol.

 

[news247]

sorry about so many posts! but i'm going back and reading your responses to formulate my questions based on your answers

the 'manhole' theory. i read that, but sort of discounted it, basically because it was hard (for me) to believe that happened. how would he lift them up and out of there? i mean - how deep is it? i assume the sides would be smooth and/or slick - so how would dogs and cats get down there to chew and then get back out? and it they did, it must have looked like total carnage down there - there would have to be blood spatter and all sorts of gruesome stuff, right?

additionally, two of the little boys drowned (is there deep enough water under that manhole where they could have drowned)? and, one of the little boys bled to death - it had to be just a totally awesome mess down there.

it would also seem that there must have been a bloody trail from the manhole area to the recovery pond - i mean, how could the bodies be transported from one area to another without signs of it?

also - the time. how long was hobbs unaccounted for? it seems as though it would be awfully time consuming to crawl in and out of that hole and transport the bodies.

 

[news247]

haha, last post, i promise

the fibers. i remember from the trial transcripts that fibers can only ever be said (positively) to be "consistent with' or NOT 'consistent with' so, is there some new testing now that can determine otherwise - or is this just a case of one expert saying one thing and another saying something else?

are the new reports posted anywhere that we can read them as concerns the fibers? i didn't see anything at callahans (?)

 

[Cappuccino]

oh no - i like your 'rants' even tho i respectfully disagree with you much of the time . i appreciate you sharing your views.

ok - more questions, lol. about the MtDNA - is it true that the percentages can provide a skewed view because the database is so much smaller than that of the nuclear DNA? I keep thinking that I've read that the MtDNA does not have legal case standing (I mean, it hasn't been tested and upheld in any state supreme courts)?

and, is it correct that the blood evidence on Damien's necklace could only be processed (or whatever it's called, lol) by MtDNA and not nuclear because the amount was so small? because i remember reading that some of it could be traced to Jason (but also to one of the little boys). do you know why that necklace was never entered by the prosecution? i thought i read that the testing came back too late for the trial (or something like that).

i'm asking because if that's correct (and that's a big 'IF' because i could certainly be not remembering correctly) - but if it's true - then, wouldn't that be something that the prosecution would surely introduce in the event of a new trial?

MtDNA can and has been used as evidence in criminal cases. Obviously given that it doesn't narrow the donor down to an individual but merely a family group, it is more open to a challenge from the defense than nuclear DNA. It is admissable as evidence however, and the Cambridge Index, (the database used by the Bode Lab), is plenty large enough for the results to have probative value.

I think you might be confusing mtDNA with the older practice of microscopic comparisons of hairs. If you read the case histories on the Innocence Project's website one phrase will leap out at you with monotonous regularity - "the jury was told that hairs at the crime scene were microscopically indistinguishable from the defendant's." However, there is no database of human hair characteristics in existence which is large enough to give microscopic comparisons any probative value, its purely prejudicial.

The blood specks on Jason's necklace, (it belonged to Jason and Damien borrowed it), were DQ alpha tested. One speck was found to be consistent with Damien's blood, the other was consistent with 11% of the population, from which Jason Baldwin and Stevie Branch could not be excluded. Those tests destroyed the blood present and rendered the necklace useless for any further testing. Theoretically, the prosecution could have entered the original results at any new trial, but it would be a kinda stoopid thing to do. The defense were clearly going to use the Hobbs hair as the basis for a SODDI defense - how could the prosecutor undermine that when the hair is consistent with only 1.5% of the population while simultaneously arguing that 11% of the population is incriminating? Any juror who could count would laugh at them.

 

[Cappuccino]

haha, last post, i promise

the fibers. i remember from the trial transcripts that fibers can only ever be said (positively) to be "consistent with' or NOT 'consistent with' so, is there some new testing now that can determine otherwise - or is this just a case of one expert saying one thing and another saying something else?

are the new reports posted anywhere that we can read them as concerns the fibers? i didn't see anything at callahans (?)

Fibre testing has become more sophisticated over the last 18 years, and the source of fibres can be narrowed down further now than was possible then. However, fibres are not nuclear DNA - they can't ever really be said to "match" even with today's science. Its still a case of "consistent with" or "inconsistent with". According to Jason's defense, the latest fibre tests show the fibres at the crime scene to be inconsistent with anything taken from the defendants homes.

The full report hasn't been made available yet, and probably won't be until Jason's defense have finished testing. That was only the first round of fibre and hair tests, there are more to come yet. The ASCL is also reviewing the results. Hopefully, the results will all be up on Callahan's soon enough, then we can all see for ourselves what kind of tests were performed. So far, all that's in the public arena is included in the link I posted in the OP.

 

[Cappuccino]

oh, and about the hobbs and jacoby hairs - wonder why jacoby isn't considered a viable suspect as well as Hobbs?

it seems to me that if people are willing to believe the Jacoby hair is just transfer from Hobbs being at his house - then, why not believe the opposite - that it's transfer from the other way around?

There is more against Hobbs than one hair. There is nothing against Jacoby apart from the hair.

and with the necklace, i know i read that the blood, if it was Jason's, is probably just transfer from Jason borrowing the necklace and got on there from a shaving cut or whatever.

also the fibers - they were supposedly 'transfers' from Jason and Damien's house to the little boys?

to me - it doesn't seem logical to believe in one 'transfer' and not the other, if i am making sense, lol.

I don't understand what you mean here.

 

[news247]

Cappucino, thank you so much for your explanations; I appreciate your time.

And, yeah, I probably was confused about the DNA stuff - haha, I may be more confused now than ever tho - I got 'lost' today in the National Institute of Justice website and read for several hours about the different types of dna testing , fiber testing and all sorts of stuff

Oh, but about Jacoby - there was one hair from him and then the hair from Hobbs, was just wondering why he wasn't also thought of as a suspect - that's all.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Jacoby was Hobbs' alibi. That may have played into him not being considered as a suspect. Also, he would have no obvious motive to kill any of the boys, let alone all three. And, the location of the Hobbs hair (under the ligature of Michael Moore) is more "linked to" the bodies than a hair on the bank. So, IMO, that would make TH more of a suspect (motive included) than Jacoby.

Remember, according to Hobbs, to this day he is not considered a suspect by the wmpd. The whole point of the testing now being conducted (and paid for) by the defense team is to get the wmpd to reopen the case and investigate other suspects (primarily Hobbs). Right now, the State of Arkansas considers the case to be closed.

 

[Cappuccino]

Cappucino, thank you so much for your explanations; I appreciate your time.

And, yeah, I probably was confused about the DNA stuff - haha, I may be more confused now than ever tho - I got 'lost' today in the National Institute of Justice website and read for several hours about the different types of dna testing , fiber testing and all sorts of stuff

Oh, but about Jacoby - there was one hair from him and then the hair from Hobbs, was just wondering why he wasn't also thought of as a suspect - that's all.

Some people do think of Jacoby as a suspect.

However, the wm3's defense are experienced in the field of criminal law and therefore they know that one hair at a crime scene is not enough for a SODDI defense. That's why their alternative suspect is Terry Hobbs, rather than David Jacoby. Whether or not you believe Hobbs to be guilty, (and I'm on the fence), the case against him is by no means limited to one hair.

 

[news247]

Jacoby was Hobbs' alibi. That may have played into him not being considered as a suspect. Also, he would have no obvious motive to kill any of the boys, let alone all three. And, the location of the Hobbs hair (under the ligature of Michael Moore) is more "linked to" the bodies than a hair on the bank. So, IMO, that would make TH more of a suspect (motive included) than Jacoby.

Remember, according to Hobbs, to this day he is not considered a suspect by the wmpd. The whole point of the testing now being conducted (and paid for) by the defense team is to get the wmpd to reopen the case and investigate other suspects (primarily Hobbs). Right now, the State of Arkansas considers the case to be closed.

I can't see a motive for Hobbs either tho ... do you have an opinion as to his motive?

Is there anything from the wmpd explaining why Hobbs wasn't included as a suspect? Is it because they were focused on damien, jason and jessie?

 

[news247]

Some people do think of Jacoby as a suspect.

However, the wm3's defense are experienced in the field of criminal law and therefore they know that one hair at a crime scene is not enough for a SODDI defense. That's why their alternative suspect is Terry Hobbs, rather than David Jacoby. Whether or not you believe Hobbs to be guilty, (and I'm on the fence), the case against him is by no means limited to one hair.

I need to read more about Hobbs, I guess to understand that line of thinking better - I discounted all of the parents from the beginning because, to me, what motive could any of them have? Maybe to murder their own child because we see that in a lot of cases (not that it's EVER understandable), but why all three of the little boy, you know?

It's hard to believe that one person could have done all of this - and what about the 3 totally different knots in the shoelaces - who would think to do that?

 

[Cappuccino]

Is there anything from the wmpd explaining why Hobbs wasn't included as a suspect?

I discounted all of the parents from the beginning because, to me, what motive could any of them have? Maybe to murder their own child because we see that in a lot of cases (not that it's EVER understandable), but why all three of the little boy, you know?

I think you may have answered your own question there.

 

[Cappuccino]

and what about the 3 totally different knots in the shoelaces - who would think to do that?

Tell me about the three totally different knots in the shoelaces, lol. I'll be really interested to see if you can match up to Lisa Sakevicius' skill in misrepresenting three minor variations on a half hitch as three totally different knots.

Of course, state experts are always impartial and honest....

 

[news247]

Tell me about the three totally different knots in the shoelaces, lol. I'll be really interested to see if you can match up to Lisa Sakevicius' skill in misrepresenting three minor variations on a half hitch as three totally different knots.

Of course, state experts are always impartial and honest....

BBM:
HAHA! of course they always are - I can't remember ever seeing one who wasn't totally impartial and honest

as to the knots she described, there was a square knot, half hitch knot(s) and double half hitch and triple half hitch - they don't look the same, at least not the images I looked at on google.

also, the half hitch knot(s) are tied around something (like a pipe, or post whatever object you are trying to attach the rope to in this case, it was the little boys legs). and a square knot doesn't do that (loop around an object).

for me, the 'clincher' for lack of a better word - the defense didn't even ask any questions about the knots - went straight to the fibers. so i figured that the knots were something the defense had no way of refuting her testimony.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I can't see a motive for Hobbs either tho ... do you have an opinion as to his motive?

Is there anything from the wmpd explaining why Hobbs wasn't included as a suspect? Is it because they were focused on damien, jason and jessie?

There has been a lot of talk about a motive for TH. There are several possibilities, but the most likely IMO is that he wanted Stevie out of the way. In Hobbs' opinion, Stevie was interfering with his relationship with Pam.

While the jealousy is the most likely motive if the murder were planned, I truly believe that the murder of Stevie was an accident. Stevie had disobeyed TH, and TH went to find him and punish him. The punishment got out of hand, and Stevie was killed. However, there were two witnesses - Michael and Christopher - who had to be eliminated.

As to why TH was never considered a suspect by the wmpd, your guess is as good as mine! One source I read stated that, in about 60% of the murders of children under the age of 12, the perpetrator is either a parent, step parent or family friend. Even Gitchell stated in his deposition in the Pasdar case that all parents/family members should be cleared before other suspects are pursued.

In this case, because Jerry Driver had given the wmpd Damien's name, the police did focus on Damien very early in the case. So, once they had Jessie's pathetic statement, they didn't feel the need to pursue other suspects. Or, it could be much more sinister than that. It could be that TH knows where the proverbial bodies are buried.:what:

 

[Compassionate Reader]

BBM:
as to the knots she described, there was a square knot, half hitch knot(s) and double half hitch and triple half hitch - they don't look the same, at least not the images I looked at on google.

also, the half hitch knot(s) are tied around something (like a pipe, or post whatever object you are trying to attach the rope to in this case, it was the little boys legs). and a square knot doesn't do that (loop around an object).

for me, the 'clincher' for lack of a better word - the defense didn't even ask any questions about the knots - went straight to the fibers. so i figured that the knots were something the defense had no way of refuting her testimony.

A square knot is just two half hitches tied starting with alternating hands. The other knots are simply repeated half hitches. So, IMO, these are not three different knots but variations of the same knot, the most common knot, the half hitch.

The defense, IMO, didn't pursue the knot question simply because they didn't see it as "proof" that the murders were committed by three separate individuals. Also, IIRC, the knots were not tied in a looping fashion except on one side of one victim. The other ligatures were all simply tying the left wrist to the left ankle and right wrist to right ankle without looping the ligature. IMO, Sakevicius was trying to make the knots appear to be "different" in order to help her employer, the State.

 

[Cappuccino]

Given that only two of the wm3 were supposed to have been involved in the tying up, I don't really see the logic of thinking that three different knots are incriminating anyway - if anything, that's yet another inaccuracy in Jessie's confession.

 

[Fishee]

if anything, that's yet another inaccuracy in Jessie's confession.

Poor Jessie.

He didn't get a single fact right did he?