Change of beliefs

[Compassionate Reader]

The shoelace thing always cracks me up. I can say that I have a dog and I never find hairs entwined in my laces.
Here is an example. I looked at my shoes and definitely no hairs. I wear these shoes all day for 12 hours a day. Besides them being dirty from walking on gravel...no hair!
This is my unofficial hair/shoelace test.
As a side note, I believe the hair wasn't entwined, it was laying in the center of the knot.
CR can correct me on that.
View attachment 63577

The supposed "Hobbs hair" was not entwined in the laces. However, it wasn't merely lying on the knot. It was "in the ligature." Interpret that as you will.

 

[missy_g]

What's that suppose to mean then?
Either way, I don't think shoelaces are a good vessel to transfer hair.
Also I don't think I mentioned this in my post, when i took this pic, I only had my dog, and he sheds more than ANY dog I have ever met. I seriously cannot ever leave the house without one (most of the time several) of his hairs stuck to me somewhere. Now I have a cat and the same result, hairs sometimes stuck to my clothes but never in my shoes.
I thought about the "in the ligature" comment...
I was always thinking it was kind of tied up in the knot.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Sorry if I wasn't clear. Some people believe that the hair was actually entwined (stuck) in the fabric of the lace. The report read that it was found "in the ligature" as I stated. As you did, I interpret that to mean within the knot - like it fell off when the knot was being tied. I agree with you that hairs simply don't tend to adhere to shoe laces as easily as some people want to believe. I, too, have cats - three of them. One is the all-time champion for shedding. I've never had cat hairs stick to or become entwined in shoe laces. These hairs are much more apt to stick to my clothing!

 

[CoolJ]

Wow, I have been a long time follower of this case but haven't really looked through the threads here at Websleuths. I am flabbergasted that there are still folks who believe these three men to be guilty. It is almost comical and I have to wonder what the motivations are to want to continue to condemn these men.
I am going to get myself caught up here as to what the narrative has been within the Websleuths community with regards to this case. Right now, I am, as I said FLABBERGASTED so much so that I am actually LMAO.

ETA - would like to add that just because I haven't read through the threads here doesn't mean I haven't followed the cases. I didn't read here because I just didn't think their innocence was still in question. AND I am not basing my thoughts on what I heard in the movies(although, like most, that is where my interest was sparked).

 

[reedus23]

Let me ask you all something.

Would the prosecutor of this case really allow 3 violent child killers out of prison to roam the streets freely?

This prosecutor would fight tooth and nail to keep them behind bars but he did not. He let them out.

Isn't the state now responsible of one of these three violent killers kills again?

Why would the state allow them to walk free?

Why would the state make this deal with them and have part of the deal be that they can't sue the state?

Just asking. I look forward to your replies.

Tricia

You are 100% right in this. There is no way in heck that any prosecuting attorney would allow 3 individuals to go free AFTER they have already been convicted and sentenced. If this were pre-trial and they thought they didn't have sufficient evidence, sure, it happens. But all were convicted and sentenced and there is no way in the world that a prosecuting attorney allows someone like that to go free unless they have good reason to believe that they weren't responsible in the first place. The Alford Plea was just a mechanism that the prosecuting attorney thought would help them to save some face.

 

[reedus23]

Well, if those of you who claim to have followed the case from the start have ever looked at the evidence, then there is something wrong with your judgement faculties. DE has a psych profile of over 500 pages. Have you read his journals? How he and his girlfriend at the time of the murders planned to sacrifice their own baby after it was born. JMB and TH may look like good suspects, but as I pointed out before, doubtful if any single suspect could control three boys at once. JM confessed in under 2 hours, not the 12 hours stated in the mockumentaries. What about the boots of JM? On Callahan's it shows a picture of old muddy boots with almost new laces. Maybe because the old ones were used to tie up the victims. What about the lake knife that was owned by DE? it was demonstrated that the "bite mark" could have been made by the butt end of the knife. The x mark in the middle of the " bite mark" was made by the steel pin in the center of the compass in the handle. No one but the judge, the police, and the people at the trials ever saw the real evidence until after the convictions.

If you have read all of the evidence (and yes, I have), please point to me to what evidence there is that directly ties any of the 3 to these murders. A fraudulent confession that isn't worth the paper it's written on? A jailhouse confession that has been recanted? Please enlighten me so that I can fix my judgment faculties. Also, please point me to callahans where it was established that the knife retrieved was, in fact, DE's. Your talk about shoe laces is pure speculation. Please point to me where anyone conclusively established that any of the shoe laces used to bind the kids were, in fact, JM's?

I don't mean to get testy, but if you want to start calling into question other's judgment faculties, you better get a better grasp of the evidence, what happened and just as importantly, what did not happen. Until then I will just assume you are trolling others about their faculties.

 

[reedus23]

Well, if those of you who claim to have followed the case from the start have ever looked at the evidence, then there is something wrong with your judgement faculties. DE has a psych profile of over 500 pages. Have you read his journals? How he and his girlfriend at the time of the murders planned to sacrifice their own baby after it was born. JMB and TH may look like good suspects, but as I pointed out before, doubtful if any single suspect could control three boys at once. JM confessed in under 2 hours, not the 12 hours stated in the mockumentaries. What about the boots of JM? On Callahan's it shows a picture of old muddy boots with almost new laces. Maybe because the old ones were used to tie up the victims. What about the lake knife that was owned by DE? it was demonstrated that the "bite mark" could have been made by the butt end of the knife. The x mark in the middle of the " bite mark" was made by the steel pin in the center of the compass in the handle. No one but the judge, the police, and the people at the trials ever saw the real evidence until after the convictions.

If you have read all of the evidence (and yes, I have), please point to me to what evidence there is that directly ties any of the 3 to these murders. A fraudulent confession that isn't worth the paper it's written on? A jailhouse confession that has been recanted? Please enlighten me so that I can fix my judgment faculties. Also, please point me to callahans where it was established that the knife retrieved was, in fact, DE's. Your talk about shoe laces is pure speculation. Please point to me where anyone conclusively established that any of the shoe laces used to bind the kids were, in fact, JM's?

I don't mean to get testy, but if you want to start calling into question other's judgment faculties, you better get a better grasp of the evidence, what happened and just as importantly, what did not happen. Until then I will just assume you are trolling others about their faculties.

 

[CoolJ]

If you have read all of the evidence (and yes, I have), please point to me to what evidence there is that directly ties any of the 3 to these murders. A fraudulent confession that isn't worth the paper it's written on? A jailhouse confession that has been recanted? Please enlighten me so that I can fix my judgment faculties. Also, please point me to callahans where it was established that the knife retrieved was, in fact, DE's. Your talk about shoe laces is pure speculation. Please point to me where anyone conclusively established that any of the shoe laces used to bind the kids were, in fact, JM's?

I don't mean to get testy, but if you want to start calling into question other's judgment faculties, you better get a better grasp of the evidence, what happened and just as importantly, what did not happen. Until then I will just assume you are trolling others about their faculties.

I would also just like to point out, that the poster who is questioning others "judgement faculties" I believe created this thread with the title "change of beliefs" which must have coincided with a remarkable improvement of their own "judgement faculties"

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I would also just like to point out, that the poster who is questioning others "judgement faculties" I believe created this thread with the title "change of beliefs" which must have coincided with a remarkable improvement of their own "judgement faculties"

I beg to differ. IMO, the original poster's "judgement faculties" have deteriorated if he/she now believes the WM3 to be guilty when he/she originally believed them to be innocent.

 

[Cappuccino]

The colossal mistake every one is making is that one person could have committed this crime by himself. No way. I have a son near this age, and have chased him around the playground to get him headed for home. That was tough enough to do. I wasn't trying to rape and kill him, just take him home. It would be physically impossible for one man to do this crime alone. Since there doesn't seem to be any known group of pedophiles in West Memphis, maybe the court had it right the first time.What can I expect when most people in this country believe that a jet liner with a plastic nose, and constructed of aluminum, managed to punch through a steel and glass skyscraper. But I saw it on TV, so it must be true!

Oh dear. That is all.

 

[MzOpinion8d]

The colossal mistake every one is making is that one person could have committed this crime by himself. No way. I have a son near this age, and have chased him around the playground to get him headed for home. That was tough enough to do. I wasn't trying to rape and kill him, just take him home. It would be physically impossible for one man to do this crime alone. Since there doesn't seem to be any known group of pedophiles in West Memphis, maybe the court had it right the first time.What can I expect when most people in this country believe that a jet liner with a plastic nose, and constructed of aluminum, managed to punch through a steel and glass skyscraper. But I saw it on TV, so it must be true!

If you grab one kid and threaten to kill him if the others move, you can control them all. But...no one has ever said it was only one killer. Could've been 10 for all we know.

 

[Justiceseeker35]

If you grab one kid and threaten to kill him if the others move, you can control them all. But...no one has ever said it was only one killer. Could've been 10 for all we know.

There's a lot you can do to coerce if you are a parent of one of the children, corner them with a knife or gun and force them all to strip down.

 

[Tiger09]

I just don't see 3 teens that are strangers to three 8 yr olds- especially one "weirdo" teen, a metal head teen, and a slow teen. No way. They'd have kicked them in the shins and screamed and ran. That alone says it has to be multiple suspects, with one being someone they knew. At 8 a kid- especially boy scouts- know stranger danger. One would scream and direct the others to run. They teach that at schools. I was born around the same year as these boys, so yeah. By age 8, my school (and family) taught me to scream and run from strangers. Ahhh the 90s.

 

[EntreNous]

The colossal mistake every one is making is that one person could have committed this crime by himself. No way. I have a son near this age, and have chased him around the playground to get him headed for home. That was tough enough to do. I wasn't trying to rape and kill him, just take him home. It would be physically impossible for one man to do this crime alone. Since there doesn't seem to be any known group of pedophiles in West Memphis, maybe the court had it right the first time.What can I expect when most people in this country believe that a jet liner with a plastic nose, and constructed of aluminum, managed to punch through a steel and glass skyscraper. But I saw it on TV, so it must be true!

i'm going to go ahead and guess you've never seen the aftermath of plastic bumpered and fiberglass car driven through a brick house or a drinking straw driven into a tree trunk after a tornado either. am i right?

 

[hello people]

I agree. The three are guilty as charged.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I agree. The three are guilty as charged.

Respectfully, based on what? Guilty verdicts? Satanic worship? There is simply no evidence that definitively proves them guilty. The Alford pleas were a sham, a face-saving straw clutched by the State to accomplish two things, IMO. First, they wanted the case closed and Lori Davis off their backs (and the possibility of wrongful conviction law suits ended). Second, and I just realized this when I recently re-watched West of Memphis, the State didn't want this case to move on to the Federal level, which it would have if the defense argument at the Oral Argument had been denied. The last thing the State of Arkansas wanted was for the same judge who rejected Hobbs' suit against the Dixie Chicks to get his hands on the original case!

 

[justthinkin]

Tricia,


Would the prosecutor of this case really allow 3 violent child killers out of prison to roam the streets freely?

Let me ask you this, knowing what you know about the DA in the JBR case, can you be so sure? What do you think this newly elected DA's thoughts were when he first laid eyes on the stacks of case files in a then, already 17 year old case? What amount of time, funds, and hours of case research and researchers would his prosecution team need not only to make the case, but gain a conviction in a new trial, all the while knowing LE had done an inadequate amount of, evidence gathering, interrogation. At least one witness had lied in the Misskelley trial, a juror had prejudiced other jurors in the trial of DE and JB, and one of that prosecution's professional witnesses was anything but professional. Plus trying to track down old witnesses and have the state pay their expenses to get them to testify? Perhaps the State of Arkansas wasn't willing to spend the funds if they had them.

This prosecutor would fight tooth and nail to keep them behind bars but he did not. He let them out.

Do you think future political aspirations hadn't crossed the DA's mind? I think he saw this case as an albatross, and quickly wanted to be rid of it.

Isn't the state now responsible of one of these three violent killers kills again?

Yes, but how likely is it? I agree with poster, Mrs.G.Norris's assessment that these murders started out as bullying that went too far.

Why would the state allow them to walk free?

Again this case may have gotten in the way of political aspirations. State thought time served was adequate.Prior to this 2 of the WM3 committed petty crimes. The third, JM, definitely had an assaultive nature. but I don't know if he served any time in Juvie for it or if the other two served time in Juvie for theirs. chances are the WM3 could have met these kids any other day, and this likely wouldn't have happened, but mix in alcohol probably drunk to excess...

Why would the state make this deal with them and have part of the deal be that they can't sue the state?

To cover their butts. The state was tired of dealing with endless appeals, and Arkansas is not noted for its wealth. Strong community opinion on both sides . Then Depp and Vedder brought national attention to the case. This prosecutor was new, and he saw the hand-writing on the wall. The Alford Plea was not only a way out for the WM3, it was also a way out for the newly elected DA. Convictions went on the state books, and though it wasn't ideal, it wouldn't cause damage to any future political aspirations he might have had. I don't know what if any political aspirations the guy had. This is simple just my opinion as to what would account for the state doing what they did.

 

[cpaul]

If I were actually innocent, there is no way I would plead guilty.

I think after 18 years on death row you'd find it quite easy.

 

[MzOpinion8d]

I think after 18 years on death row you'd find it quite easy.

Agree completely.....and if the state truly believed they were guilty and belonged on death row, why would they have even entertained the Alford Plea?

 

[iluvmua]

I forget where I read it but the new Prosecutor said that if he would have read more about this case, He would have kept them in prison.