48 Hours and Paradise Lost; West Memphis Three

[reedus23]

Bellinger in hot water over the accuracy of one of his other 'documentaries' .. Well you know what they say, 'The truth is in the outtakes' .. Wouldn't y'all just love to see the outtakes from PL1? I know I would, I wonder what story they would tell?

Judge Kaplan’s 28-page ruling is here. He makes three points:

First, the outtakes contain substantial evidence of misconduct in and relating to the Ecuadorian litigation.

Second, as this Court previously has noted, Berlinger was invited by the Lago Agrio plaintiffs to make of the film and the outtakes.

Third, Berlinger and his counsel, in the proceedings that led to production of the outtakes, made representations about the contents of the outtakes that proved inaccurate.

and ..

Berlinger’s suppression of the “Crude” outtakes tells you that despite all his claims about trying to make a fair movie, he was perfectly happy with being manipulated by Donziger and in turn with manipulating the audience, just as long as he had a compelling storyline. Didn’t matter if it was true or not.

- See more at: http://www.shopfloor.org/2010/09/ju...is-in-the-outtakes/14167#sthash.KPRdkbLi.dpuf

Well I just wasted 30 minutes of my life reading up on this stuff.

First, to be clear, the bolded section, best I could tell, was just some writers opinion, not the opinion of the Court.

Bottom line: Ecuador plaintiffs sue Chevron in Ecuador. Plaintiffs invite Berlinger or whoever to do a film on the lawsuit. Film is made. Chevron files petition to obtain discovery in the United States in order to get the "outtakes". Berlinger (as I'm sure most media would) fights Chevron's request. Court orders the "outtakes" be produced. "Outtakes" show corruption in the Ecuadorian judicial system (shocker). I would hardly say Berlinger is in "hot water". Heck, he's not even the subject of a lawsuit or criminal investigation. Chevron simply sought discovery. Berlinger and others fought the discovery. Chevron won the motion to produce the discovery. That stuff happens probably tens of thousands of times a day in U.S. courts.

Having said that, and even though I think there were liberties taken in describing what was going on simply to sling mud against anything that might be seen as pro-WM3, I will agree that I would like to see the outtakes. The more information I can review the better. Likewise....would you like to see all of the evidence released since the case is supposedly closed?

 

[kyleb]

For anyone who might actually care about the facts of this case, here's a notable excerpt from the court ruling:

Third, Berlinger and his counsel, in the proceedings that led to production of the outtakes, made representations about the contents of the outtakes that proved inaccurate. For example, their assertion that there was nothing relevant in the outtakes because anything of significance wound up in Crude is belied by the fact that over 85 percent of all of the outtakes came within the Second Circuit’s order and now, belatedly, have been produced. Likewise, only last week, Berlinger’s counsel confessed that their assertions, made to the Second Circuit during oral argument, that the outtakes contained nothing relating to criminal proceedings in Ecuador were “overstatements.” These and similar instances are worrisome in considering their present claims.

In all the circumstances, it is exceptionally likely that Berlinger and his associates have information that is highly relevant and that does not appear either in Crude or in the outtakes. Chevron’s quest for discovery is no fishing expedition.

 

[reedus23]

For anyone who might actually care about the facts of this case, here's a notable excerpt from the court ruling:

Ok...and???? The Court found the "outtakes" have or can have discoverable information and the Court therefore ordered them to be produced. I wasn't arguing any of that is inaccurate. My question is so what? It's a motion to compel discovery. One side says it's not relevant and discoverable. The other side says it is. The Judge agreed that it is. Not sure what point that proves.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

I believe there was an attempt in the past to get the out takes from Paradise Lost 1 (based on some online discussions I've seen) but cannot find anything official, does anyone else remember or know anything about that?

 

[UdbCrzy2]

I believe there was an attempt in the past to get the out takes from Paradise Lost 1 (based on some online discussions I've seen) but cannot find anything official, does anyone else remember or know anything about that?

Maybe some day they will have yet another mocumentary with nothing except for the outtakes. Once they've ran out of victims/parents to accuse then they can use that.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Maybe some day they will have yet another mocumentary with nothing except for the outtakes. Once they've ran out of victims/parents to accuse then they can use that.

Oh yes like a 'bloopers' version!

He is threatening to produce a PL4 about their lives after release. I'm sure it will be more accusations against uncooperative parents. It really has turned into quite the franchise for him.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

Oh yes like a 'bloopers' version!

He is threatening to produce a PL4 about their lives after release. I'm sure it will be more accusations against uncooperative parents. It really has turned into quite the franchise for him.

I consider this disgraceful and it's bullying. The survivors have already gone through so much and to have this going on for what? To 'pretend' that 3 convicted child murders are innocent because they are making money exploiting it.

I guess Echols is the new OJ.

Life isn't over yet and it's bound to turn around for them.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

I consider this disgraceful and it's bullying. The survivors have already gone through so much and to have this going on for what? To 'pretend' that 3 convicted child murders are innocent because they are making money exploiting it.

I guess Echols is the new OJ.

Life isn't over yet and it's bound to turn around for them.

I know I fully agree, the pretence of innocence is wearing thin, they must know as time goes on that more and more people will dig deeper, also I noticed they have a few other names to throw into the ring as possible suspects now, including Buddy Lucas.

http://wreg.com/2013/03/27/hearing-held-today-about-west-memphis-3-evidence/

http://trenchreynolds.me/2013/03/27...suspects-with-pot-smoking-gay-tryst-scenario/

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2013/mar/27/hearing-set-west-memphis-public-records-case/

This is really where any chance of taking them seriously falls apart, the constant accusations against people connected to the case. This is what will be their downfall too, they are simply destroying what little credibility they have.

If it wasn't so damned unfunny it would be amusing.

 

[gheckso]

I know I fully agree, the pretence of innocence is wearing thin, they must know as time goes on that more and more people will dig deeper, also I noticed they have a few other names to throw into the ring as possible suspects now, including Buddy Lucas.

http://wreg.com/2013/03/27/hearing-held-today-about-west-memphis-3-evidence/

http://trenchreynolds.me/2013/03/27...suspects-with-pot-smoking-gay-tryst-scenario/

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2013/mar/27/hearing-set-west-memphis-public-records-case/

This is really where any chance of taking them seriously falls apart, the constant accusations against people connected to the case. This is what will be their downfall too, they are simply destroying what little credibility they have.

If it wasn't so damned unfunny it would be amusing.

Family members from the other side are also making accusations, I think its fair to highlight this also.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Family members from the other side are also making accusations, I think its fair to highlight this also.

What, do you mean family members from the victims accusing the convicted killers of being guilty? Or do you mean individuals like JMB who should really know better?

 

[gheckso]

What, do you mean family members from the victims accusing the convicted killers of being guilty? Or do you mean individuals like JMB who should really know better?

Family members who I have always thought believed the three to be guilty accusing another person. Might have just been out of anger but its still an accusation.

My point being this is happening on both sides of the fence.

 

[Cappuccino]

Nons are by no means immune from making false accusations either. There has long been a faction among the nons which accuses Domini Teer of involvement in the crimes, and more recently we've seen some awful nonsense spoken about JMB on facebook.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Family members who I have always thought believed the three to be guilty accusing another person. Might have just been out of anger but its still an accusation.

My point being this is happening on both sides of the fence.

Well I agree JMB should really know better than to try to accuse TH when he knows what it's like to be falsely accused of murder.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

Well I agree JMB should really know better than to try to accuse TH when he knows what it's like to be falsely accused of murder.

He really seemed to be participating with the film makers before he became a producer that is. That's the impression I got when I saw the movies.

I know that he was very angry with Mara Leveritt with the falsehoods she included in her book about him.

Once I saw this Youtube clip (posted on here, but it's gone now) of her trying to get his autograph in a book and he wouldn't sign it until she admitted she lied about him in her book, so she did and when she asked him again to sign her book and he said, 'Noooo way'.

 

[gheckso]

Well I agree JMB should really know better than to try to accuse TH when he knows what it's like to be falsely accused of murder.

I believe the point still stands regardless of this attempt to deflect it.

 

[kyleb]

He really seemed to be participating with the film makers before he became a producer that is.

Here's what Todd and Diane Moore wrote about that in their letter to the Documentary Branch of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences back when PL3 was up for an Oscar:

Consider what happened to John Mark Byers. He was Christopher Byers’ adoptive father. Confrontations between Mr. Byers and Echols’ supporters at hearings were staged. Of course, Berlinger and Sinofsky were there to film these episodes. Berlinger and Sinofsky would transport Mr. Byers to the hearings and wire him for sound beforehand. Furthermore, Berlinger and Sinofsky maneuvered Mr. Byers and Echols’ supporters in order to film the anticipated confrontations. Later, after the cameras were packed away, Mr. Byers acted like a different person. Instead of being belligerent, he was affable. When asked about his change in demeanor, Mr. Byers stated that he was supposed to act that way when the cameras were present. Mr. Byers was quoted as saying he received $500 per hour for “exclusive interviews.”

These contrived “confrontations” and other distortions caused many viewers to believe Mark was the “real killer.” It had a terrible impact on his life. We brought this to the attention of HBO. Our complaint was ignored because these falsehoods proved lucrative.

Also, at the end of the letter they mention HBO's other production in defense of child predators, Capturing the Friedmans which was also nominated for an Oscar. That movie is a romanticized story which paints a father and son duo of confessed child rapists as innocent victims of a moral panic, but which a recent judicial review proved otherwise beyond any reasonable doubt.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Sadly I believe JMB will take any stance which he thinks will earn him a quid, I think his thinking is 'if anyone should be getting any money out of this tragedy it should be the real victims' ie the parents. I have issue with him allowing TH to go through what he himself has and believe he is doing the wrong thing, but *advertiser censored* it, the man went through hell.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

Here's what Todd and Diane Moore wrote about that in their letter to the Documentary Branch of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences back when PL3 was up for an Oscar:


Also, at the end of the letter they mention HBO's other production in defense of child predators, Capturing the Friedmans which was also nominated for an Oscar. That movie is a romanticized story which paints a father and son duo of confessed child rapists as innocent victims of a moral panic, but which a recent judicial review proved otherwise beyond any reasonable doubt.

I knew they were paying him and yes I do believe it was very lucrative for them to continue a lie.

I never heard of the other case or 'movie' and I appreciate you mentioning it. I also noticed that it was an HBO deal too. Kind of makes you go hmmmm.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

Sadly I believe JMB will take any stance which he thinks will earn him a quid, I think his thinking is 'if anyone should be getting any money out of this tragedy it should be the real victims' ie the parents. I have issue with him allowing TH to go through what he himself has and believe he is doing the wrong thing, but *advertiser censored* it, the man went through hell.

BBM

I guess it did backfire on him by acting like that. He kind of made his own little karma. But, what gets me is why he is going after Hobbs when he knows better. The other parents are not doing that, even Pam Hobbs/Hicks.

 

[kyleb]

I never heard of the other case or 'movie' and I appreciate you mentioning it. I also noticed that it was an HBO deal too. Kind of makes you go hmmmm.

Yeah, I highly recommend watching Capturing the Friedmans. As long as one can past the attempts to portray the pedophiles as innocent victims of a moral panic, it provides notable insight into the nature of ritual abuse and dissociative disorder. It's far from just HBO that defends child predators though, and another notable example is Fox Searchlight Pictures which produced Kinsey, glorifying as a saint of the sexual revolution the man who wrote this in his Sexual Behavior in the Human Male:

A fretful babe quiets down under the initial sexual stimulation, is distracted from other activities, begins rhythmic pelvic thrusts, becomes tense as climax approaches, is thrown into convulsive action, often with violent arm and leg movements, sometimes with weeping at the moment of climax. After climax the child loses erection quickly and subsides into the calm and peace that typically follows adult orgasm. It may be some time before erection can be induced again after such an experience. There are observations of 16 males up to 11 months of age, with such typical orgasm reached in 7 cases. In 5 cases of young pre-adolescents, observations were continued over periods of months or years, until the individuals were old enough to make certain that true orgasm was involved; and in all of these cases the later reactions were so similar to the earlier behavior that there could be no doubt of the orgiastic nature of the first experience.

And went on to write this in his Sexual Behavior in the Human Female:

The adult contacts are a source of pleasure to some children, and sometimes may arouse the child erotically (5 per cent) and bring it to orgasm (1 per cent). The contacts had often involved considerable affections and some of the older females in the same felt that their pre-adolescent experience had contributed favorably to their ater socio-sexual development.

On the other hand, some 80 per cent of the children had be emotionally upset of frightened by their contacts with adults. A small portion had been seriously disturbed; but in most instances the reported fright was nearer the level that children will show when they see insects, spiders, or other object against which they have been adversely conditioned. If a child were not culturally condition, it is doubtful if it would be disturbed by sexual approach of the sort which had usually been involved in this histories, It is difficult to understand why a child, except for its cultural conditioning, should be disturbed at having its genitalia touched, or disturbed at seeing the genitalia of other persons, or disturbed at more specific sexual contacts.

Anyway, the movie Kinsey doesn't even pretend to be a documentary and completely glosses over Kinsey's encouragement, defense, and protection of pedophiles, so I don't recommend bothering with that. However, this old British Chanel 4 documentary on the topic is well worth watching, Secret History: Kinsey's Pedophiles:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVC-1d5ib50"]Secret History: Kinsey's Paedophiles - YouTube[/ame]