Is there even a case against Baldwin?

[gheckso]

My take is that the only use polygraphs have is to trip someone up like they did Jessie. Whether they pass it or not almost matters none. But can you trip them up by telling them they failed. That is one of the many problems with Jessie's "confessions" because of his mental faculties, he was more susceptible to being tripped up regardless of guilty or innocence.

I guess I'm a little suspicious of these polygraphs, especially when Allen says he'll use the polygraph to clear up any suspicions, weak police work if you ask me.

 

[missy_g]

I don't recall that episode off hand, but know there are plenty of others where Dexter falsified evidence to suit his own ends. That's how sociopaths operate, and Dexter fooled a lot of people, much like Echols continues to.

I think it was like the second episode. I have only gotten through 3-4 episodes so far because I keep falling asleep :floorlaugh:

And yes, I know Dexter is a sociopath...I guess my point was, that it can happen all the time where the prosecutors/investigators warp evidence the way they want it to be warped.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

As to Jason Howard Baldwin, according to this document his fingerprints were taken in connection with these murders, but came up negative. I think I remember reading somewhere that he had an alibi. However, there's no record of an interview on Callahan's. I would have liked to have seen him investigated more thoroughly, too.

 

[gheckso]

Thanks Cr,
I see there was numerous fingerprints taken from people and subsequently found to be negative. Exactly which fingerprint were these been matched against?
I was under the impression there was a partial and possible fingerprint found at the scene and from what I can see it doesn't seem to contain a lot of usable detail. No expert but IMO I don't see how this partial print could be that definitive to clear these people.

Is this the print? Link

I might be way off but that's my understanding.

 

[Cappuccino]

As to Jason Howard Baldwin, according to this document his fingerprints were taken in connection with these murders, but came up negative. I think I remember reading somewhere that he had an alibi. However, there's no record of an interview on Callahan's. I would have liked to have seen him investigated more thoroughly, too.

Came up negative to what?? There was never any fingerprint evidence involved in this case.

 

[kyleb]

And yes, I know Dexter is a sociopath...I guess my point was, that it can happen all the time where the prosecutors/investigators warp evidence the way they want it to be warped.

Sure, but the warping of evidence in this case has been on the other side, which is why I continue to refer back to such simple examples as Echols denying the fact that he lived in West Memphis at the time of the murders. Also, here's a real world example of warping of evidence by the defense in another murder case for your consideration, where Dr. Werner Spitz insisted that Lana Clarkson spontaneously shot herself with Phil Spector's gun.

 

[reedus23]

warping of evidence in this case

Such as Domini turning into Jason. Or is that not warping, but morphing of evidence instead.

 

[kyleb]

You're the one warping what was actually said about the matter there.

 

[reedus23]

You're the one warping what was actually said about the matter there.

The prosecute did not try to convince the jury that Domini could have been Jason despite the fact that the eye witnesses clearly said it was Domini?

 

[primitivefuture]

The prosecute did not try to convince the jury that Domini could have been Jason despite the fact that the eye witnesses clearly said it was Domini?

From Fogleman's closing:

Now, who [Echols] was with–draw your own conclusions. Says his girlfriend and they describe her as having red hair and long. You got a picture of Jason Baldwin at the time of his arrest. Nothing wrong with having long hair and the picture in there is not shown to shown that he’s a bad person because he got long hair. But think about that. Think about who Damien was with on May the fifth.

And it seems as though the police were already trying to work on backing up this assertion that it was Jason and not Domini walking with Damien when they interviewed Jessie on June 3rd.

RIDGE: These blue jeans that Jason was wearing, designer jeans, or were they old jeans, wore out, holes
JESSIE: They were wore out
RIDGE: What did they look like?
JESSIE: They had holes in them and the knees were cut
RIDGE: Holes in the knees. What color is Jason's hair?
JESSIE: Blonde
RIDGE: Light blonde, or like a sandy reddish type blonde, do you know the difference?
JESSIE: It's like
RIDGE: Sandy colored blonde

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kyleb]

Do you imagine Baldwin didn't have sandy blonde hair and consider it unlikely he'd wear jeans with holes in them and cuts in the knees?

 

[primitivefuture]

Do you imagine Baldwin didn't have sandy blonde hair and consider it unlikely he'd wear jeans with holes in them and cuts in the knees?

Jason did have sandy blonde hair, not strawberry blonde hair. Sandy blonde hair is not reddish. It's likely that Jason had jeans with holes in them. It's unlikely that he had jeans with "white flowers"on them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ausgirl]

Jason did have sandy blonde hair, not strawberry blonde hair. Sandy blonde hair is not reddish. It's likely that Jason had jeans with holes in them. It's unlikely that he had jeans with "white flowers"on them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

^ and those white flowers are mentioned, IIRC, by more than one witness.

Very good point.

If Echols being seen ---near-- the crime scene, covered in mud, is evidence able to be used in court, or in popular opinion, as to his guilt, then IMO it defies logic that Domini's presence with Echols --near-- the crime scene, covered in mud, is not viewed the same way.

Mind you, I am inclined to take the whole lot as so much horse puckey. Witnesses with selectively accurate vision and apparent super-hearing aren't what I'd consider reliable, no matter which side of the case they were called for.

Never mind second- and third-hand hearsay rubbish, rumour and gossip.

 

[kyleb]

If Echols being seen ---near-- the crime scene, covered in mud, is evidence able to be used in court, or in popular opinion, as to his guilt, then IMO it defies logic that Domini's presence with Echols --near-- the crime scene, covered in mud, is not viewed the same way.

Condensing the facts into such vague abstractions to make an argument defies logic. It's the fallacy commonly known as reductio ad absurdum.

Witnesses with selectively accurate vision and apparent super-hearing aren't what I'd consider reliable

Your characterization of what the five witnesses you allude actually said is far from reliable, and as is your insinuation that they perjured themselves to send a man to death.

 

[Ausgirl]

Condensing the facts into such vague abstractions to make an argument defies logic. It's the fallacy commonly known as reductio ad absurdum.

I am fairly certain I'm not the only person here, ever, to use such abstractions while making a point.

In any case, the witnesses SAY they SAW 'white flowers' on the jeans, which negates Jason's presence near the crime scene in the company of Echols in that instance. What more is there to say, if the witness testimony is at all to be considered valid?

 

[kyleb]

I am fairly certain I'm not the only person here, ever, to use such abstractions while making a point.

Yeah, using such to fallacies construct arguments is hardly uncommon, but that doesn't make it any less wrong.

In any case, the witnesses SAY they SAW 'white flowers' on the jeans, which negates Jason's presence near the crime scene in the company of Echols in that instance.

Only assuming the Hollingsworths' didn't mistake Baldwin's jeans which "had holes in them and the knees were cut" as Misskelley described for Domini's "black pants that kind of had flowers on them" and "holes above the knees" as for instance Tabatha Hollingsworth described and which all three Hollingsworths had surely seen Teer wear many times before. Which again I agree it's quite possible they actually did see Teer with Echols, and I don't consider the Hollingworths' sighting to be evidence against Baldwin for that reason, but that doesn't come anywhere close to proving they purged themselves on the stand regarding their sighting of Echols, regardless of how much anyone might wish it did.

 

[Ausgirl]

Yeah, using falsies to construct arguments as hardly uncommon, but that doesn't make it any less wrong.


Only assuming the Hollingsworths' didn't mistake Baldwin's jeans which "had holes in them and the knees were cut" as Misskelley described for Domini's "black pants that kind of had flowers on them" and "holes above the knees" as for instance Tabatha Hollingsworth described and which all three Hollingsworths had surely seen Teer wear many times before. Which again I agree it's quite possible they actually did see Teer with Echols, and I don't consider the Hollingworths' sighting to be evidence against Baldwin for that reason, but that doesn't come anywhere close to proving they purged themselves on the stand regarding their sighting of Echols regardless of how much anyone might wish it did.

Yep, lazy of me to use generalisations, but it's the weekend and I can't be arsed. My bad. I don't one bit retract the essence of what I said, though.

I really wish you would cease feeling the urge to constantly add these little "as much as anyone might wish" sort of jabs while replying directly to my posts. It gives the impression that you are approaching me from a position of contempt, and from a belief that I'm some sort of Echols groupie.

Feel free to continue doing so, it's your prerogative, but it really does nothing to promote enthusiasm for discussion between us, iyswim.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Came up negative to what?? There was never any fingerprint evidence involved in this case.

I had the same thought! I guess the fact that his fingerprints didn't match anything ruled him out. The fact that Damien's, Jason's and Jessie's fingerprints weren't a match to anything seems to have escaped notice.

 

[Ausgirl]

As for the jeans, I would contend that anyone who cannot tell boy from girl, nor blue jeans from black, nor flowered pants of one colour from plain pants of another colour, has no business being touted as a reliable witness in a murder trail.

The other option, in which the witness is reliable, is that she saw both Echols and Teer close to the crime scene.

I am not saying this proves guilt, for goodness' sake. I'm saying I find the conclusion that the witness mistook Teer for Baldwin untenable, if the witness testimony is to be considered remotely viable for any purpose at all.

 

[gheckso]

I had the same thought! I guess the fact that his fingerprints didn't match anything ruled him out. The fact that Damien's, Jason's and Jessie's fingerprints weren't a match to anything seems to have escaped notice.

Not just him either, there are numerous people with negative results, Is this the extent of investigation into some of them? I've wondered for a while where the "negative" came from.