48 Hours and Paradise Lost; West Memphis Three

[Compassionate Reader]

I'm really at a loss as to what you're trying to prove. I think Bruce or Joe, whoever was on the stand, made it clear that the money was offered as a humanitarian gesture, not as a payoff of any kind. West Memphis is a very poor area. What's wrong with lending a helping hand? IMO, if anything, the HBO crew probably made Burnett even more intent on a guilty verdict.

If you're trying to show that the documentary was biased, all documentaries are biased, no matter how hard the filmmaker tries not to be biased. There's nothing wrong with that, either, IMO. However, remember that a lot of the original film was trial footage.

There's a recent interview with Bruce and Joe in which they state that they initially went to film a "Kids Gone Wrong" piece about these terrible murders. During the process, they came to believe in the innocence of the WM3. However, whatever their bias or motive, and no matter how much money changed hands or to whose hand it went, there still is no evidence that the WM3 committed these horrible crimes.

The State, in the person of Ellington, recently admitted that they would not be found guilty if tried again. Oh, he gave some excuses, but the bottom line is that he knew he didn't have a case. So, an injustice has recently been corrected, thanks to the HBO film.

Here's an interesting question: Why are all the televised documentaries and true crime pieces about this case pro-defense? I've seen people complain that, if more filmmakers, etc. did pieces that said they were guilty, then people would believe they're guilty. But all the films, etc. come down on the side of innocence. Could it be that the WM3 are innocent and that 48 Hours and the Paradise Lost films were telling the truth?

 

[UdbCrzy2]

@CR

You said they did not profit from the HBO movie and I showed you documents where testimony says that they did.

You posted this claiming that it was from the same link I posted, but it's not.

So where is your link to the testimony you posted here? It's not from the link I posted.
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7060298&postcount=157"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - 48 Hours and Paradise Lost; West Memphis Three[/ame]

Now, you say that Echols money went toward his son. Where is that link???

You need to let people know what you are saying is just your opinion because you are posting things as facts but cannot back them up and it's good that people are seeing that.

Your opinions are not factual. I know you are a supporter and you should at least let people make up their own minds about this case. You post your opinions as though they are factual, but you cannot back them up. That's where I have a problem with your postings and others should too.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

@CR

You said they did not profit from the HBO movie and I showed you documents where testimony says that they did.

You posted this claiming that it was from the same link I posted, but it's not.

So where is your link to the testimony you posted here? It's not from the link I posted.
Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - 48 Hours and Paradise Lost; West Memphis Three

Now, you say that Echols money went toward his son. Where is that link???

You need to let people know what you are saying is just your opinion because you are posting things as facts but cannot back them up and it's good that people are seeing that.

Your opinions are not factual. I know you are a supporter and you should at least let people make up their own minds about this case. You post your opinions as though they are factual, but you cannot back them up. That's where I have a problem with your postings and others should too.

I said that neither the defendants nor the attorneys received money from HBO. That is factual.

The quote I made I found by following your link. I don't know why you couldn't find it, but I did. Sorry, you'll just have to take my word on that.

I have read and studied this case since 1996. As I've stated before, I don't remember always where I've read or seen things. IIRC, Damien said at one point (maybe in an interview?) that he had set up a trust fund for his son and I believe I recall him stating that he began the fund with money from HBO. I see nothing wrong with that. The child needs help and support, and I, for one, don't see anything wrong with helping him out.

The point here is that the HBO people stated in the link you posted that the money was strictly given as a humanitarian gesture. The area is very poor, and they were trying to help (so that more of your tax dollars wouldn't have to go to help them). Are you criticizing them for that?

You seem to be trying to use this whole money thing to imply that the defendants got rich off of HBO. The reason the attorneys brought up HBO and the cameras, as I stated, and they stated, was because they felt that the cameras might have affected the attorneys' ability to properly represent their client, which goes to one of the primary reasons for a Rule 37 hearing. They even mentioned that Judge Burnett himself might have been influenced by the cameras.

When you originally brought this up, it seemed to me that you were trying to make fun of the attorneys for objecting to the cameras when, on the other hand, you had said that the defense was the ones who pressed for the cameras. HBO pressed for the cameras.

http://www.wm3blackboard.com/forum/index.php?topic=5095.msg77448#msg77448

IMO, HBO offered people compensation for appearing on TV because, IMO, they could have been in legal trouble if they televised someone's image without either getting a release or paying them for its use.

If that wasn't the intent of your initial post, please let me know.

I will not always be able to link to my source because, after so many years and so much information, it all blends together. I am simply discussing this case (with which I happen to be very familiar) and, yes, expressing my opinion about some things. However, after my many years of studying the case, my opinion is pretty informed.

 

[deelytful1]

I have no other place to put this.
I'm re-watching Paradise Lost 2 and the drama that revolves around Mark B and his antics never cease to make me shake my head.
Did they ever determine how Melissa Byers died?
TIA,,,

 

[UdbCrzy2]

Found it and there was more and it says that compensation is being made. All people appearing in the film received compensation and here is the documented proof.

Hearing on May 5, 1998

Page 10
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/rule37/may5.html

6 The Court asked the question: "Did you say there
7 was a written contract?" At the top of page 459.
8 Mr. Ford answers: "There are written documents
9 entered into and signed by the client."
10 The Court: "Was there consideration given for
11 the statement? Was payment made?"
12 Mr. Ford: "No, he has received no financial
13 consideration."

(this where your post stops - now here's the rest)

14 The Court: "What is the consideration in the
15 contract for the giving of the statement? Where is
16 your contract if there is no consideration?"
17 Mr. Ford: "Consideration is not all financial,
18 your Honor."
19 The Court: "What is the consideration?"
20 Mr. Ford: "I don't have the contract with me.
21 The contract does indicate future compensation in the
22 event a film is made."

 

[deelytful1]

Bite mark evidence... how do u just ignore that? Did you see how prominent those bite marks were?
According to the criminal profiler for the defense if the perpetrator finds out there is bite mark evidence, he will immediately attempt to have his teeth removed.
He also said bite mark evidence was as good as a fingerprint. Did they ever try and match the bites to the WM3? Did it match?
MB had his teeth knocked out in a fight he said. Someone made him enraged over the case.
What do they say about the guilty person throwing himself into the middle of an investigation to "help"?
MB made a statement to the guy taking the lie detector test that he got a DWI after his wife was murdered. She was murdered? I thought it was inconclusive?
:waitasec: :waitasec: :waitasec:

 

[UdbCrzy2]

But, but, but didn't the defense expert Baden say that those were from an animal?

 

[Cappuccino]

Baden and six other forensic pathologists said they were due to post mortem animal predation.

Brent Turvey, who is a criminal profiler with no qualifications whatever in forensic pathology, said they were human.

The choice is yours....

 

[deelytful1]

Baden and six other forensic pathologists said they were due to post mortem animal predation.

Brent Turvey, who is a criminal profiler with no qualifications whatever in forensic pathology, said they were human.

The choice is yours....

I'm no pathologist but the pic looked like a human bite on the head of one of the boys....

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Found it and there was more and it says that compensation is being made. All people appearing in the film received compensation and here is the documented proof.

Hearing on May 5, 1998

Page 10
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/rule37/may5.html

6 The Court asked the question: "Did you say there
7 was a written contract?" At the top of page 459.
8 Mr. Ford answers: "There are written documents
9 entered into and signed by the client."
10 The Court: "Was there consideration given for
11 the statement? Was payment made?"
12 Mr. Ford: "No, he has received no financial
13 consideration."

(this where your post stops - now here's the rest)

14 The Court: "What is the consideration in the
15 contract for the giving of the statement? Where is
16 your contract if there is no consideration?"
17 Mr. Ford: "Consideration is not all financial,
18 your Honor."
19 The Court: "What is the consideration?"
20 Mr. Ford: "I don't have the contract with me.
21 The contract does indicate future compensation in the
22 event a film is made."

I said that they didn't receive money. The compensation need not be money. This doesn't prove that they have or will receive money, just compensation. That is all.

 

[Wishbone]

Baden and six other forensic pathologists said they were due to post mortem animal predation.

Brent Turvey, who is a criminal profiler with no qualifications whatever in forensic pathology, said they were human.

The choice is yours....

This case is as frustrating as the casey anthony case where timelines and alibis are not clear, experts and medical examiners have different opinions, witnesses that change their testimony and various leads not followed up on, not to forget dna being present or absent. I so wish there could have been a new trial, but even with that there is no guarantee that the truth could be absolutely proven and the guilty party or parties brought to justice. This whole thing is just too horrendous. The terrible murders of three young boys(and I’m still not really clear if they were sexually assaulted or ritually sacrificed or just plain old violently murdered with animals preying on them after death) and also the torture and mistreatment of three older boys that may not really be guilty. And if they are innocent, what does that say about the WMPD, prosecutor, and the judge as well. I feel like I just don’t have enough discernment to get off the fence. I don’t see that much concrete evidence for conviction but something just keeps nagging at me and it’s hard for me to accept that LE would knowing sacrifice the lives of three teenagers just to close a case. I know it happens but the reality of it just blows me away…….

 

[Cappuccino]

Well, if it helps any, I'm not sure LE were really THAT bad. There may have been some among them who knowingly fitted people up, as I suppose there are in any police force. But I think what happened here wasn't so much a knowing sacrifice, as an inexperienced PD faced with a horrible, horrible crime. Enormous pressure from without to solve it quick, a worrying amount of pressure from within to blame it on Satanism, (this was the Bible belt at the height of Satanic Panic). It was just a recipe for disaster.

Mike Allen apparently still has night sweats about the memory of discovering those childrens' bodies, so I don't think he would have deliberately fitted up the wrong people. He cared too much about those three children to allow the real killer to go free - unfortunately, he also cared too much to keep a cool head and follow the evidence. Everybody panicked, including the police.

 

[Wishbone]

Well, if it helps any, I'm not sure LE were really THAT bad. There may have been some among them who knowingly fitted people up, as I suppose there are in any police force. But I think what happened here wasn't so much a knowing sacrifice, as an inexperienced PD faced with a horrible, horrible crime. Enormous pressure from without to solve it quick, a worrying amount of pressure from within to blame it on Satanism, (this was the Bible belt at the height of Satanic Panic). It was just a recipe for disaster.

Mike Allen apparently still has night sweats about the memory of discovering those childrens' bodies, so I don't think he would have deliberately fitted up the wrong people. He cared too much about those three children to allow the real killer to go free - unfortunately, he also cared too much to keep a cool head and follow the evidence. Everybody panicked, including the police.

Well said. I'm now reading the manhole theory on BB and am amazed how well that particular senario fits the injures on the children. It makes more sense than a crimescene lacking evidence of the violent murders and according to the maps I've seen the distance from the manhole to the ditch is not all that far. Feeling even worse to think they were dropped on their heads into that manhole.....

 

[UdbCrzy2]

I said that they didn't receive money. The compensation need not be money. This doesn't prove that they have or will receive money, just compensation. That is all.

See page 9 of the testimony on this link (I've already posted this before, but you keep denying it exists). 7500.00 was paid on behalf of convicted child murderer Echols.

Mallet is one of Echols attorneys

Page 9

http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/rule37/may5.html

4 MR. MALLETT: We believe that Home Box Office
5 paid money through Creative Entertainment,
6 Incorporated. We know that they paid seventy-five
7 hundred dollars to the trust account of Mr. Davidson
8 on behalf of Mr. Echols.
9 We know from interviewing Mr. Stidham that money
10 was paid to the Misskelley family. We believe money
11 was paid to the Baldwin family. We likewise believe
12 that the families of the victims of these murders also
13 in all probability were paid money in trade for
14 agreeing to surrender their right to personal privacy
15 -- remain silent -- and give interviews.


Page 4 of same link

7 MR. MALLETT: I'm Edward Mallett. I'm appearing
8 with Mr. Echols today with the Court's permission.

 

[deelytful1]

Who CARES if they got paid for the documentaries??? It went to their defense fund. Their lawyers were making squat, they had NO money to hire EXPERT witnesses. It was a disgrace! It IS a disgrace! Sad part is there are so many out there that CAN'T get the help these young men received (I refuse to call them the West Memphis 3 anymore because they are PEOPLE and deserve to be treated as such).
They also received donations towards their fund from people to whom it was SO obvious they were railroaded and not getting a fair trial.
I wish a documentary could be done for every innocent person that is sitting in jail right now and the money from each could go to THEIR defense!!

 

[claudicici]

:goodpost:

I'm just reading the interrogations again.I just can't get over it.I'm more shocked now then ever.These interrogations were being conducted in the 1990"s.Reading them I would swear it's during the middle ages.

 

[the seeker]

Who CARES if they got paid for the documentaries??? It went to their defense fund. Their lawyers were making squat, they had NO money to hire EXPERT witnesses. It was a disgrace! It IS a disgrace! Sad part is there are so many out there that CAN'T get the help these young men received (I refuse to call them the West Memphis 3 anymore because they are PEOPLE and deserve to be treated as such).
They also received donations towards their fund from people to whom it was SO obvious they were railroaded and not getting a fair trial.
I wish a documentary could be done for every innocent person that is sitting in jail right now and the money from each could go to THEIR defense!!

BRAVO!!!! My thoughts exactly. WHO CARES that someone was compensated? There was NO evidence linking D,J, and J to the crimes.PERIOD. Someone had to keep fighting to make this known. There are probably more people than we realize like Damien, sitting on death row, because COMPENSATION cannot be made for certain things. Its a shame, but its true.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

:goodpost:

I'm just reading the interrogations again.I just can't get over it.I'm more shocked now then ever.These interrogations were being conducted in the 1990"s.Reading them I would swear it's during the middle ages.

Sounds kind of like something that you'd expect in the Salem Witch Trials, doesn't it?

 

[askfornina]

i am new to this case since they got out, and i watched both movies yesterday. if i had saw them with no context, i would have thought they were fiction. some of that stuff is completely unreal.

 

[Cazzie]

Joe Berlinger's and Bruce Sinofsky's "Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory," the third of the filmmakers' documentaries about the case of the West Memphis Three, will premiere at the 49th New York Film Festival with a new ending incorporating the recent release of the three from prison.

http://www.wpix.com/entertainment/sns-rt-us-netre77n5oe-20110824,0,1755759,full.story

It's also going to the Toronto Film Festival, whenever that is or was, but I believe it was stated that it was too late to add the new "ending".