Change of beliefs

[ScarlettScarpetta]

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

I think that the only issue I had is with the new evidence and coming hearing, Why not wait until that was over. I think that the prosecutor offered the Alford plea because he knew that it was going to go very bad for them and that they were going to be vindicated.
I think being on DR is one thing that could make you change all you think about what you would do.
I believe that they did not do this and that the person who did is still out there.

 

[MzOpinion8d]

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.

He must be ridiculously stupid, not researching the most publicized case AR has ever had!

 

[sindydee]

He must be ridiculously stupid, not researching the most publicized case AR has ever had!

I was just thinking the same thing.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

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.

By "new prosecutor," are you referring to Ellington? He admitted in the GQ interview and during the Clinton School post-Alford presser, IIRC, that he hadn't read all the evidence in the case. I've never seen him state the above. Do you have a link, or are you referring to a different prosecutor?

 

[reedus23]

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.

Plain and simple. There is no prosecuting attorney in this country who is ever, and I mean ever, going to allow 3 men who have already been convicted of 3 gruesome murders, to just be set free on the streets unless that prosecuting attorney has good reason to believe that they did not, in fact, commit those murders.

 

[reedus23]

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.

BS. That's like saying a prosecuting attorney wouldn't even read Charles Masnon's case file before letting him go. I call BS. On his part because I'm assuming you're accurately quoting him.

 

[reedus23]

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?

It's beyond that. They truly believed they were innocent, they never would have let them on the streets. They had absolutely zero belief that they were guilty. If they had any doubt or question that maybe, just maybe, they were guilty, they would have left them rotting in jail because they didn't have to get a conviction. They already had that.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

It's beyond that. They truly believed they were innocent, they never would have let them on the streets. They had absolutely zero belief that they were guilty. If they had any doubt or question that maybe, just maybe, they were guilty, they would have left them rotting in jail because they didn't have to get a conviction. They already had that.

Exactly! This has been my attitude since the Alford pleas. Those pleas were a face-saving act on the part of the State of Arkansas. They were allowed to keep their "guilty" verdicts (which most people recognize for the BS that they are) while allowing three innocent men to go free.

 

[GoblinKeeper]

Jason B said it most eloquently... "I told the truth, I didn't do it, and they locked me up. I lied and said I did it, and they set me free." Paraphrased, of course, but you get the idea. Justice? Nope, expedience.

 

[zencompass]

Having read all of the transcripts, interviews, movies, etc. I still cannot shake the absolute belief I have that TH committed these horrendous crimes and he was alone doing it. All of the evidence shows this as TH had the rage and violence as shown in his life along with his deep-rooted violence towards his step-son and unwavering sense of entitlement and vengeance as shown towards his neighbours as well as his family. With all of his known behaviours he had the motivation (he called for the kids to come back and they did not obey him!!) as well as the opportunity (neighbours stated that they saw TH at 6:30 at the time and place outside of the woods). Could one person do this ? Just look at what Jeffrey MacDonald did after he flew into a rage at his daughter wetting the bed again and when he realized he had killed her, he continued to massacre the rest of his family to cover it up. Sound familiar? Sounds just like TH. I can absolutely not be convinced otherwise even though I have tried to see other scenarios, the only one that makes sense and has all of the factors that would lead to this is that TH did this and he did it alone. JMO

 

[SpeakForTheDead]

I have followed this case since the first broadcast of Paradise Lost on HBO. At first I believed that the WM3 had been railroaded into prison. I guess because I was a little weird in high school, and listened to hard rock music, I initially empathized with the three. The other two movies only reinforced my beliefs. I didn't do any more studying on this case for more than 10 years. Now I found this thread, and the link to Callahan's. After reviewing most of the evidence there, I have decided to go the other way. Remember that the PL series was produced by HBO/ Time Warner. The two producers were also the producers of a documentary on Metallica. This is why Metallica songs are used throughout the series. But I also viewed the documents in evidence produced by the defendants themselves. DE was hospitalized at least 3 times in mental hospitals. By his own admission, he was homicidal, suicidal, schizophrenic, depressed, etc. And no matter what anyone says, they all plead guilty to the murders under the Alford Plea. If I were actually innocent, there is no way I would plead guilty. They were, and are guilty. They make great folk heroes, but they are still criminals. <mod snip>. I live about 30 miles from there. Same as with the JBR murder. Patsy was from Parkersburg, WV. Charles Manson had relatives in WV. Sad to say, the WM3 are sick, twisted, rapists, and child killers. Maybe someday the world will know the truth. Check out the site, WM3truth.com. Plus Callahan.8k.com.

ukrberserker, we are of like minds. I watched the documentary when it came out, and I was convinced the three were innocent. Being the crime occurred in Arkansas, and there was such a lack of forensic evidence, it didn't seem likely to me that a southern state like Arkansas could catch and convict the right guys. Unfortunately, the police investigation and manner in which the trial were handled left much to be desired, but it does appear they were barking up the right tree the first time.

Like you, I'm going to continue to look through the evidence though I've read quite a bit of it already, because I like to really solidify my opinion about something as serious as this case. I really hope that folks who are convinced of the guilt of these three can continue to collaborate to exchange information and ultimately allow for an opportunity for a new trial. These families deserve justice, and I can't imagine the four parents who are convinced of the guilt of the Memphis Three are feeling knowing that the likely murders are free.

 

[MzOpinion8d]

ukrberserker, we are of like minds. I watched the documentary when it came out, and I was convinced the three were innocent. Being the crime occurred in Arkansas, and there was such a lack of forensic evidence, it didn't seem likely to me that a southern state like Arkansas could catch and convict the right guys. Unfortunately, the police investigation and manner in which the trial were handled left much to be desired, but it does appear they were barking up the right tree the first time.

Like you, I'm going to continue to look through the evidence though I've read quite a bit of it already, because I like to really solidify my opinion about something as serious as this case. I really hope that folks who are convinced of the guilt of these three can continue to collaborate to exchange information and ultimately allow for an opportunity for a new trial. These families deserve justice, and I can't imagine the four parents who are convinced of the guilt of the Memphis Three are feeling knowing that the likely murders are free.

What do you mean, a new trial? They can't try them for a crime they were convicted of and served a sentence for already.

 

[SpeakForTheDead]

What do you mean, a new trial? They can't try them for a crime they were convicted of and served a sentence for already.

Are you a lawyer? I understand double jeopardy exists, but does that apply here? The fact is, prior to the Alford Plea, a new trial was every likely even though they were already convicted. Does this plea now take away that possibility?

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

What do you mean, a new trial? They can't try them for a crime they were convicted of and served a sentence for already.

Hmm.. That is interesting. People that are charged and punished are granted appeals and new trials. So that is interesting. They can not rescind their plea, but it could be possible to exonerate them and have their convictions overturned.

That is interesting. What bothers me is that I just don't believe that anyone is working on this anymore. I am still disgusted that the stepfather has not been brought in and questioned but it will not ever happen because they have 3 people who pleaded guilty. I know why they did it, But I just wish they would have waited until they had a chance for a new trial. I think we would know the truth and be able to fill in the holes.

 

[SpeakForTheDead]

Hmm.. That is interesting. People that are charged and punished are granted appeals and new trials. So that is interesting. They can not rescind their plea, but it could be possible to exonerate them and have their convictions overturned.

That is interesting. What bothers me is that I just don't believe that anyone is working on this anymore. I am still disgusted that the stepfather has not been brought in and questioned but it will not ever happen because they have 3 people who pleaded guilty. I know why they did it, But I just wish they would have waited until they had a chance for a new trial. I think we would know the truth and be able to fill in the holes.

Based on my understanding as a non-lawyer, it does appear likely the West Memphis Three could force a new trial. It would require some legal hearings but it would be possible. Obviously, that is unlikely to occur.

The point I believe MzOpinion is making is that the Three have already been tried and convicted and can't be retried. I've done a bit of research and it's my understanding the Alford Plea may or may not eliminate the possibility of retrial by the state. Simply put, there doesn't appear to be legal precedence to support or oppose the possibility. In addition, the actual existence of the Alford plea does not appear to have a lot of respect in the legal community with many arguing the legal validity of the plea to begin with.

Simply put, MzOpinion implies a new trial isn't possible, but that appears to be an uninformed decision. I'm going to simply reiterate what I said, I hope there is a retrial of the Memphis Three, the victims, parents, and state of Arkansas should get justice regardless of the outcome of the trial. The Alford plea may have been expedient for both the State and the convicted, but it was a farce as far as justice is concerned.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I've consulted attorneys about this. When the Alford pleas were made, what actually happened was a new trial. Read the documents on Callahan's about it and you'll understand better. The original verdicts were overturned; new pleas, on lesser charges were accepted, and they were sentenced to time served plus a 10-year SIS . Our "double jeopardy" laws would prevent a retrial otherwise because no one can be tried for the same crime twice. Appeals are another thing altogether. They allow someone who has been adjudicated "guilty" to appeal the verdict, citing new evidence, jury, judicial or prosecutorial misconduct, insufficient counsel or many other things, one of which now is DNA findings unavailable at the original trial. Upon reading the Alford documents, you will discover that Damien, Jason and Jessie revoked the right to appeal the verdicts of the August 19, 2011 proceedings.

However, the State of Arkansas has the power to vacate those verdicts. In fact, unless they wanted to come up with some theory stating that the real killer acted in concert with Damien, Jason and Jessie, trying someone else would necessitate the overturning of the verdicts and the exoneration of Damien, Jason and Jessie before new charges are laid against another person. That little glitch is, IMO, one additional reason that the State in the person of Ellington grabbed the "maggot sandwich" and chomped it down.

BTW, I'm sure that things are happening "behind the scenes" right now. Those working for the truth to be made known are not going to make their actions public. That would be foolish! As I've said repeatedly, patience is the key. All will be made known, in due time!

 

[reedus23]

Are you a lawyer? I understand double jeopardy exists, but does that apply here? The fact is, prior to the Alford Plea, a new trial was every likely even though they were already convicted. Does this plea now take away that possibility?

They cannot be tried again for these crimes. Impossible. Not going to happen. Besides that, why would they want to try three guys that they believe are innocent?

 

[reedus23]

Based on my understanding as a non-lawyer, it does appear likely the West Memphis Three could force a new trial. It would require some legal hearings but it would be possible. Obviously, that is unlikely to occur.

The point I believe MzOpinion is making is that the Three have already been tried and convicted and can't be retried. I've done a bit of research and it's my understanding the Alford Plea may or may not eliminate the possibility of retrial by the state. Simply put, there doesn't appear to be legal precedence to support or oppose the possibility. In addition, the actual existence of the Alford plea does not appear to have a lot of respect in the legal community with many arguing the legal validity of the plea to begin with.

Simply put, MzOpinion implies a new trial isn't possible, but that appears to be an uninformed decision. I'm going to simply reiterate what I said, I hope there is a retrial of the Memphis Three, the victims, parents, and state of Arkansas should get justice regardless of the outcome of the trial. The Alford plea may have been expedient for both the State and the convicted, but it was a farce as far as justice is concerned.

They would have to try to have their current plea deals set aside by the court first. Trust me when I tell you they are not going to do that unless they are nearly guaranteed to have the charges completely dropped and someone else potentially tried for the crimes.

I do agree that the Alford Plea, while it might have been the only mechanism both sides could agree on, it leaves nothing but questions unanswered and while it is respected, it is not preferred or used widely as a means of bringing a conclusion to cases.

 

[reedus23]

I've consulted attorneys about this. When the Alford pleas were made, what actually happened was a new trial. Read the documents on Callahan's about it and you'll understand better. The original verdicts were overturned; new pleas, on lesser charges were accepted, and they were sentenced to time served plus a 10-year SIS . Our "double jeopardy" laws would prevent a retrial otherwise because no one can be tried for the same crime twice. Appeals are another thing altogether. They allow someone who has been adjudicated "guilty" to appeal the verdict, citing new evidence, jury, judicial or prosecutorial misconduct, insufficient counsel or many other things, one of which now is DNA findings unavailable at the original trial. Upon reading the Alford documents, you will discover that Damien, Jason and Jessie revoked the right to appeal the verdicts of the August 19, 2011 proceedings.

However, the State of Arkansas has the power to vacate those verdicts. In fact, unless they wanted to come up with some theory stating that the real killer acted in concert with Damien, Jason and Jessie, trying someone else would necessitate the overturning of the verdicts and the exoneration of Damien, Jason and Jessie before new charges are laid against another person. That little glitch is, IMO, one additional reason that the State in the person of Ellington grabbed the "maggot sandwich" and chomped it down.

BTW, I'm sure that things are happening "behind the scenes" right now. Those working for the truth to be made known are not going to make their actions public. That would be foolish! As I've said repeatedly, patience is the key. All will be made known, in due time!

The mechanics of how it transpired is spot on. First, the Motions for New Trials were granted, thereby overturning the original convictions. Second, the plea agreements were entered as you described, thereby bringing finality to the case in lieu of an actual trial.

 

[shadoworder]

JMK was held for 12 hours and confessed after 8. He was picked up at 9:45 AM and was not allowed to eat or use the bathroom till 6 PM. That being when they finished their interrogation. Also a Documentary cannot possibly include every bit of information about the case. The truth is that their was more kept out that was beneficial to the WM3, then for the prosecution. Nothing was said about Byers history of violence, The pedophile James Kenny Martin Sr, or those two kids who went to california and confessed, then recanted..etc. The filmmakers made it clear that they went in thinking that they were really guilty, and as time went on they released they were being railroaded. Also why did the prosecution take the Alford plea deal? They were the ones who told the defense to make an offer "to make this go away". Why didn't they insist on the retrial?? So you think they allowed three child killers to walk away free?