Life for the West Memphis Three - Free After the Alford Plea

[Pensfan]

You are correct. I believe the original poster was referring to the fact that Jessie has the reasoning ability of a child.

Jessie Misskelley's testimony to his attorney is very concise. He does not appear to have a lack of reasoning ability. His tearful episodes before being questioned by the police and his multiple confessions afterwards are evidence that he does not lack the capacity to feel guilt.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Jessie Misskelley's testimony to his attorney is very concise. He does not appear to have a lack of reasoning ability. His tearful episodes before being questioned by the police and his multiple confessions afterwards are evidence that he does not lack the capacity to feel guilt.

He simply answered questions. He cannot independently tell a coherent story.

 

[h818]

He simply answered questions. He cannot independently tell a coherent story.

And you know this how? His own expert testified that his intelligence was within the normal range.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

And you know this how? His own expert testified that his intelligence was within the normal range.

I know he answered questions because I read the document. I know he can't tell a coherent story without help because I've read all of his statements. He only makes sense when he's responding to questions. If he goes on too long on his own, he becomes confused and confusing, IMO.

 

[h818]

I know he answered questions because I read the document. I know he can't tell a coherent story without help because I've read all of his statements. He only makes sense when he's responding to questions. If he goes on too long on his own, he becomes confused and confusing, IMO.

Well, IMO, the confession he made to his lawyer was pretty coherent. Rambling/going off on tangents does not make a story incoherent. It isn't hard at all for me to understand what he's saying.

The first confession is very coherent as well, he said that things happened that the police did not mention, he spoke in complete sentences. Usually during police interrogations, questions are asked and answers are given or not given. Suspects usually don't sit down and tell the whole story without being asked questions.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Well, IMO, the confession he made to his lawyer was pretty coherent. Rambling/going off on tangents does not make a story incoherent. It isn't hard at all for me to understand what he's saying.

The first confession is very coherent as well, he said that things happened that the police did not mention, he spoke in complete sentences. Usually during police interrogations, questions are asked and answers are given or not given. Suspects usually don't sit down and tell the whole story without being asked questions.

Obviously my opinion differs from yours. Jessie's original statement was so full of errors that a "clarification" statement had to be made before a judge would issue the arrest warrants. The accuracy of the two post conviction statements, although better still left a lot to be desired, and they were made after Jessie had heard the State's case presented so they should be 100% accurate. The fact that they aren't is just another proof, IMO, of Jessie's mental disability.

 

[h818]

Obviously my opinion differs from yours. Jessie's original statement was so full of errors that a "clarification" statement had to be made before a judge would issue the arrest warrants. The accuracy of the two post conviction statements, although better still left a lot to be desired, and they were made after Jessie had heard the State's case presented so they should be 100% accurate. The fact that they aren't is just another proof, IMO, of Jessie's mental disability.

Well, I guess you're more able to assess his mental capacity (by reading his statements) than the experts who evaluated him in person and administered his IQ tests are.

They weren't 100% accurate because Jessie wasn't parroting what the state thought happened. He was describing a chaotic and horrific crime involving 6 people as he remembered it. His said that he changed details in the first confession to throw the police off.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Well, I guess you're more able to assess his mental capacity (by reading his statements) than the experts who evaluated him in person and administered his IQ tests are.

They weren't 100% accurate because Jessie wasn't parroting what the state thought happened. He was describing a chaotic and horrific crime involving 6 people as he remembered it. His said that he changed details in the first confession to throw the police off.

His IQ is 72. That's borderline mentally retarded. Such a person simply cannot tell a coherent story. His statements show what his IQ implies.

Jessie was trying to parrot back the State's theory. He couldn't for the reason stated above. And that detail that he changed to "throw the cops off" just happened to be one of the details deliberately kept from the public as a way to determine if a confessing suspect was telling the truth.

The only reason, IMO, that the WMPD accepted Jessie's inaccurate statement was because he said the magic words, "Damien Echols." The State wanted Damien, and Jessie was handing him to them on a silver platter. All they had to do was to manipulate the evidence to fit his story or manipulate his story to fit the evidence or both and they had Damien.

 

[h818]

His IQ is 72. That's borderline mentally retarded. Such a person simply cannot tell a coherent story. His statements show what his IQ implies.

Jessie was trying to parrot back the State's theory. He couldn't for the reason stated above. And that detail that he changed to "throw the cops off" just happened to be one of the details deliberately kept from the public as a way to determine if a confessing suspect was telling the truth.

The only reason, IMO, that the WMPD accepted Jessie's inaccurate statement was because he said the magic words, "Damien Echols." The State wanted Damien, and Jessie was handing him to them on a silver platter. All they had to do was to manipulate the evidence to fit his story or manipulate his story to fit the evidence or both and they had Damien.

His IQ is 72 at the lowest. His own expert conceded that he showed signs of playing dumb. Below 70 is MILDLY mentally retarded. He functioned and lived a normal life. He spent time with peers, came and went from his home pretty much as he pleased.

Supposedly they kept the genital mutilation out of the media too...and he knew about that. In what way did they manipulate the evidence to fit his story? The police wanted to catch the killers. They didn't frame Damien. If they'd wanted to frame him, they could have made the case much more convincing.

 

[h818]

Looks like he's already figuring out how to use Facebook and gotten engaged. Not too bad for a retarded man who has spent the last 18 years in prison.

 

[Cappuccino]

I don't get all the fuss about Jessie's IQ. Even people with very high IQs have been known to make false confessions, especially juveniles interviewed with no parent or lawyer present, and I doubt even the most ambitious non would try and deny that Jessie was only 17 at the time.

There was nothing wrong with Michael Crowe's IQ, or his co-defendant who also confessed.

 

[h818]

I don't get all the fuss about Jessie's IQ. Even people with very high IQs have been known to make false confessions, especially juveniles interviewed with no parent or lawyer present, and I doubt even the most ambitious non would try and deny that Jessie was only 17 at the time.

There was nothing wrong with Michael Crowe's IQ, or his co-defendant who also confessed.

Maybe some people get all fussy about it because supporters make repeated and untrue assertions about Jessie being retarded? He wasn't tortured, and his confessions included lots of details (like Micheal Moore running away and him catching and returning him to be killed) that he would have had no reason to make up. I guess the 'he's retarded' bull seems like the best way to explain stuff like that.

Michael Crowe was interrogated for more than 24 hours I think? Jessie was questioned for about 4 hours before confessing. Michael Crowe was 14. Jessie was just weeks from turning 18. If I were betting, I'd say that Jessie had way more street smarts, even if his IQ is considerably lower.

Oh, and MC didn't continue to confess. He didn't confess to his own defense attorney. Only a retarded person would do that...

 

[Nova]

I think it was just "bad timing" for the media for them to get released now. Its been what over 10 years since PL2, and 3 doesn't come out for a few more months... so on the collective conscious they were pretty below the radar at this point. I know the supporter movement is pretty large but in the grand scheme of ratings they are pretty minuscule.

I'm sure you are right. But I would also add that the sexiest story was "satanists mutilate and kill children." When that story proved impossible to support, the next best was "small town ignorance puts wrong men in prison."

Not that they've been released, the story is less interesting still.

 

[Nova]

Children are given different tests, but IQ does usually remain about the same unless there is a brain injury. But we all (I hope?) know that he didn't score low enough on any of the multiple IQ tests given to him to qualify as even mildly mentally retarded. His own defense experts testified that his performance during the tests indicated that he was trying to do poorly. And that he wasn't mentally retarded. He still scored within the normal range. He isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer, but he definitely isn't mentally retarded. Nor does he have the mind of a child.

Could we see a link to his own lawyers claiming he was trying to flunk the test? I'm not doubting you; I just haven't seen such reports subjected to critical analysis.

Jessie's IQ was most certainly NOT in the "normal" range. He is at the bottom of the "borderline deficiency" category and closer to "feeble-minded" than normal. Put another way, Jessie ranks in the lowest 3% of the population in terms of intelligence.

http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/IQBasics.aspx

 

[Nova]

Looks like he's already figuring out how to use Facebook and gotten engaged. Not too bad for a retarded man who has spent the last 18 years in prison.

As with his published statement after his release, I'm sure Jessie has help with some of these tasks.

 

[Nova]

Maybe some people get all fussy about it because supporters make repeated and untrue assertions about Jessie being retarded? He wasn't tortured, and his confessions included lots of details (like Micheal Moore running away and him catching and returning him to be killed) that he would have had no reason to make up. I guess the 'he's retarded' bull seems like the best way to explain stuff like that.

Michael Crowe was interrogated for more than 24 hours I think? Jessie was questioned for about 4 hours before confessing. Michael Crowe was 14. Jessie was just weeks from turning 18. If I were betting, I'd say that Jessie had way more street smarts, even if his IQ is considerably lower.

Oh, and MC didn't continue to confess. He didn't confess to his own defense attorney. Only a retarded person would do that...

What is the independent evidence that Michael Moore ran away and was recaptured?

Why would anyone cite such a detail if it can't be independently verified?

 

[h818]

Could we see a link to his own lawyers claiming he was trying to flunk the test? I'm not doubting you; I just haven't seen such reports subjected to critical analysis.

Jessie's IQ was most certainly NOT in the "normal" range. He is at the bottom of the "borderline deficiency" category and closer to "feeble-minded" than normal. Put another way, Jessie ranks in the lowest 3% of the population in terms of intelligence.

http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/IQBasics.aspx

It wasn't his lawyers, it was an expert called by the defense. The PhD who gave him an IQ test. The test he scored the lowest on. He also testified that Jessie's performance IQ was low average and average on 2 tests. Feeble minded is not a a classification that is given anymore, I think they stopped using that scale many years ago.

http://www.callahan.8k.com/wm3/wwilkins2.html
DAVIS: And in that particular test, what was the performance IQ?

WILKINS: 75? Let me—yes.

DAVIS: Now, you had in your file some past tests that had been conducted on Jessie to determine IQ, did you not?

WILKINS: Yes I did.

DAVIS: Ok. And in ’89 did you have a test, an IQ test that was performed on him to determine what his functioning was at that point?

WILKINS: Uh, let me—yes I did. I need to find the records to find exactly what—

DAVIS: Sure, Doctor, go ahead.

WILKINS: I can’t remember (unintelligible). Yes, I’m sorry. Ok, yes.

DAVIS: Ok, and what was that performance IQ in 1989?

WILKINS: 1989, uh, I’m sorry, it’s not in this report. I’ll have to dig out all the old evidence, I thought it was in this report and it’s not.

DAVIS: Sure, I understand.

WILKINS: In, uh, which year are we talking about now?

DAVIS: 1989.

WILKINS: 1989 we had a performance of 84 and a verbal of 68 and a full-scale of 74.

DAVIS: Ok, and in 1992 there was also—prior to the time you did your examination there was another IQ test, correct?

WILKINS: Yes.

DAVIS: What was his performance IQ at that time?

WILKINS: 88.

DAVIS: Ok, and what was his full-scale IQ at that time?

WILKINS: 73.

DAVIS: Ok, so the two past IQ examinations that had been performed on him immediately prior to the one that you did indicated that his performance level was in the average range, is that correct?

WILKINS: Uh, low average, yes. The first placed low average, the second one average, yes.

DAVIS: Ok, well am I correct in understanding that anything above 80 is in the average?

WILKINS: That depends on the criteria you want to go by. Typically it’s—Social Security uses 80 above, other places use 84, so yea.

DAVIS: So, by most criteria 84 and 88 would be in the average range?

WILKINS: Yes.

DAVIS: Ok. And when we talk about performance IQ, describe what that is, what that involves.

WILKINS: Those entail, problem solving, conceptualization tasks, thinking tasks, they’re non-verbal. Example is putting together puzzles. Being able to—I show you a pattern of blocks and you have to build designs that match the pattern of blocks. It’s conceptualization in a non-verbal form, problem solving in a non-verbal form.

DAVIS: And in regard to that he rates about average, right?

WILKINS: On those two testings, yes.

DAVIS: Now the MMPI-2, that was another test that you conducted on him, is that correct?

WILKINS: Yes.

DAVIS: Now I don’t want to get too complicated ‘cause I don’t understand all this stuff, but I notice down here you said, let’s see, you said he had a high—or you said a mild elevation in the F scale.

WILKINS: Yes.

DAVIS: Ok. Now Doctor it’s true that what you actually found was a T value in that F scale of 83.

WILKINS: Yes.

DAVIS: Now are you telling me that that’s a mild elevation?

WILKINS: It’s an elevation above normal levels.

DAVIS: Well don’t they rank the elevations—as far as the T scale is concerned isn’t that something that’s actually ranked in terms of low range, middle range, moderately high range and very high range?

WILKINS: Yes. That may have been a mistake then. I may well have mispronounced what it was supposed to be.

DAVIS: This is a text regarding—MMPI Handbook. Show me here what an 82 to 88 T score on the F scale indicates to you in that book.

WILKINS: Uh, very high.

DAVIS: Very high?

WILKINS: Yes. This would not be quite the same because this is for the MMPI rather than the MMPI-2, which changed critera, but it would still be in the high range.

DAVIS: So when you put in here that that was a mild elevation, that would not be accurate would it?

WILKINS: No. It would not be. No.

DAVIS: And then from that statement that it was a mild elevation you interpreted that that could show malingering, right?

WILKINS: Yes.

DAVIS: And malingering means what, Doctor?

WILKINS: It means, uh, making up stuff. Trying to present yourself as being ill when you’re not for some particular gain.

 

[h818]

What is the independent evidence that Michael Moore ran away and was recaptured?

Why would anyone cite such a detail if it can't be independently verified?

The evidence is that Miskelley said it with no reason to? It obviously couldn't be proven or disproven.

The reason I cite it is that it defies my understanding why someone would make up a detail like that in a false/made up/coerced confession. The police certainly didn't lead him to that or imply that he should say that. So why make up something like that?

 

[h818]

As with his published statement after his release, I'm sure Jessie has help with some of these tasks.

Ah, what independent verification is there of that? Just splitting hairs, my mom definitely has a decent IQ and would probably want help if she decided to make a FB.

My point is, he is able to function normally in society. Always has been. Retarded people are not able to.

 

[Cappuccino]

Maybe some people get all fussy about it because supporters make repeated and untrue assertions about Jessie being retarded? He wasn't tortured, and his confessions included lots of details (like Micheal Moore running away and him catching and returning him to be killed) that he would have had no reason to make up. I guess the 'he's retarded' bull seems like the best way to explain stuff like that.

No, the best way to explain it is that he was a teenager making a compliant false confession after being left alone with the police for about four hours. The resulting statement is such a load of bollocks he should have been let go then. Instead he was kept and questioned for another 8 hours till they could finally manage to get a statement which sounded accurate-ish enough to get arrest warrants.

Michael Crowe was interrogated for more than 24 hours I think? Jessie was questioned for about 4 hours before confessing. Michael Crowe was 14. Jessie was just weeks from turning 18. If I were betting, I'd say that Jessie had way more street smarts, even if his IQ is considerably lower.

What about Joshua Treadway? Marty Tanklieff? Peter Reilly? The Central Park Five?

Oh, and MC didn't continue to confess. He didn't confess to his own defense attorney. Only a retarded person would do that...

Jessie's post conviction confessions were an obvious attempt to try and get his sentence cut. Luckily for Michael Crowe, his local police department weren't inefficient enough to lose evidence which pointed towards someone else, so that case never got far enough for either Michael or Joshua to be faced with the temptation Jessie was faced with.