Movie:Devil's Knot

[danzn16]

I had never heard of the case and neither had my fiancé. He picked it out on Netflix one night. It got my attention enough to research the case and watch the documentaries. I'm sure I would have felt differently about it if I already knew of the case prior


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Userid]

Fair enough. Although I wouldn't bet on it, I hope many others accidentally stumble upon it and gain interest as well.

 

[Sulamith]

I just watched Devil's Knot last night on Netflix. It was a "recommendation" and I was not looking for movies about TWM3. The only things I knew about the case were: Satanic panic (I did not realize some people still believed it that garbage. I am old enough to remember the McMartin preschool trial), the defendants were probably innocent and Johnny Depp was coming to their defense.

For me, the movie is a starting point. I want to know more! What a cluster that trial was. I could hardly believe how many mistakes were made!

Now, I am reading a lot of the threads here but there are so many!

Why did Pam Hobbs leave Terry? Did she think Terry was guilty?
Is it strange that John Byers' wife died and the cause of death is unknown?

 

[Ausgirl]

Sulamith, a really useful link is:

http://callahan.8k.com/

.. for case documents.

It pays to keep in mind that there's a lot of people with staunch opinions about who did it, and who make compelling arguments - sadly, they are not all focussed on the same person.

I think there's half a dozen really good suspects, at least, who ought to have been investigated properly and were not.

 

[danzn16]

I just watched Devil's Knot last night on Netflix. It was a "recommendation" and I was not looking for movies about TWM3. The only things I knew about the case were: Satanic panic (I did not realize some people still believed it that garbage. I am old enough to remember the McMartin preschool trial), the defendants were probably innocent and Johnny Depp was coming to their defense.

For me, the movie is a starting point. I want to know more! What a cluster that trial was. I could hardly believe how many mistakes were made!

Now, I am reading a lot of the threads here but there are so many!

Why did Pam Hobbs leave Terry? Did she think Terry was guilty?
Is it strange that John Byers' wife died and the cause of death is unknown?

You can also watch the Paradise Lost documentaries on YouTube for more info.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Cher Lockhomes]

Userid:

I saw this movie the other day and I have to say, I thought it was awful. I'd say don't waste your money. I'm not saying this to put anyone's differing opinion down, but to me, this movie was completely unnecessary to have ever been made. I guess I was hoping that there would be something that would illuminate an aspect of the case -- but there was really nothing that hadn't been covered before by any of the documentaries; and the acting was atrocious. Quite honestly, it was painful to watch at moments because of the acting.

I couldn't have said it any better. Usual Hollywood treatment. Colin Firth could have been replaced by Rowan Atkinson, and Reese Witherspoon as the loving mother "Pam it wasn't my fault, I was at work H" forget it!!! Don't want to be disrespectful, but I've seen better films by Atom Egoyan.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Sulamith,

I'm no "expert" at all, just a supporter who has researched this case for years. There were many inaccuracies in the movie because it was a "Hollywood" movie. However, none of the inaccuracies actually detract from the true events, IMO.

IMO, there were two big inaccuracies. First is the implication that Pam found Steven's knife in Terry's belongings during the trial and gave it to Lax. In fact, the knife wasn't found until years later - right after Pam and Terry divorced (2003, IIRC). At that time, Pam, no longer trusting the State, turned the knife over to Dan Stidham, one of Jessie's attorneys and the only original attorney still involved in the case, even though he is now a judge.

Second, in the movie, it appeared that Pam left Terry right after the trials - permanently. She did leave to go to her parents' home in Blytheville, but they didn't divorce until almost ten years later. Pam is a sad case. She has tried to maintain a relationship (of sorts) with Terry over the years for Amanda's (their daughter's) sake, but unfortunately, whenever she is with Terry IMO he browbeats her and causes her to doubt his involvement in the case. She was heavily medicated during the trials and has, unfortunately, self-medicated subsequently. When she is in her right mind, she says that she thinks Terry is involved, but her statements seem to be unreliable. She is still very fragile and I doubt that she could ever make a coherent statement. It's really sad.

Again, I'll say that if this movie introduced anyone to the case (as you prove), it was a "good" movie. It's simply up to those of us who have studied the case for years to help those for whom this was an introduction to the case to sort out fact from Hollywood fiction. I would be glad to answer any questions you have - as would many on this board. Don't be shy!

However, I encourage you to research for yourself, as well. The Callahan's site previously linked is excellent. There are several Facebook pages (some of nons - those who still believe Damien, Jason and Jessie are guilty - and some of supporters of their innocence). Just type in "West Memphis 3" in the search and they'll pop up. A word of caution however: some people get nasty! I've found that the moderators on this site are excellent at keeping name-calling and other nastiness off of these pages. Another site you might investigate is jivepuppi. Although extensive, if you have the time, there is a lot of excellent information there, too.

 

[LunaticFringe]

I do NOT recommend this movie at all.I finally saw it this past week.I personally found it boring with a lot of inconsistencies.Reese's portrayal of Pam Hobbs was so far off of the mark that I actually shook my head a few times.Just an overall pitiful *advertiser censored* movie.

 

[danzn16]

I do NOT recommend this movie at all.I finally saw it this past week.I personally found it boring with a lot of inconsistencies.Reese's portrayal of Pam Hobbs was so far off of the mark that I actually shook my head a few times.Just an overall pitiful *advertiser censored* movie.

In what ways was Pam Hobbs portrayal off the mark in your opinion?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[UdbCrzy2]

I knew nothing of this case. I really enjoyed the movie and am aghast at how LE could so poorly handle a murder case. And appalled that a murderer is likely walking free. How it must drive the parents crazy not knowing who did it. I have looked up more info on the case by googling. I am definitely interested in watching documentaries that are more accurate than a Hollywood movie. Any advice on documentaries to watch?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The parents know who did it. Only two of the parents have turned supporter status. The remaining parents including Melissa Byers have always believed that the 3 who were convicted and later plead guilty are the ones who did it. Pam Hobbs seems unsure of who is to blame, at times she is sure it was the WM3 and at other times she is unsure. Mark Byers is no longer being suspected by the supporters since he became one himself, so that tells me something about his change.

What I don't understand is how can supporters continue to stand behind 3 men who have claimed innocence and even claiming they have proof, only to take a plea of guilt and NEVER publicly state what it is that PROVES their innocence? I think supporters have been had

 

[Ausgirl]

Not all supporters of their freedom are supporters of the men themselves. I surely am not. Except perhaps a bit for Jason, who is among my *least* likely suspects.

And I don't see how the beliefs of the parents actually prove anything, either way.

 

[LordYAM]

Uh except Jesse DID have an alibi (he has witnesses placing him with his friends at 7:30, and somewhere else at 6:30.) As for Echols; given that Damian himself is the only one who disputes the time he was at the Saunder's place (his parents, sister, neighbors of the saunders susan saunders, michelle saunders all support Damian being there at 5:30-6:00) I'm more inclined to believe that Damian got the time wrong, and that the others were telling the truth. People have already explained just how contradictory all of Jesse's "confessions" were, and Ellington himself stated he'd probably loose. It could just be that neither side wanted to go to trial (given that the hearing had been delayed for years by Burnett and that the revelation of Kent Arnold's blatant misconduct wasn't enough, I'd suspect the prosecution would still try to keep them locked up even if the hearing was held). There's a reason the prosecution and nons emphasize echols. the other two just don't really come across as "murderer". Echols is the only one who MIGHT, and that doesn't change that Terry Hobbs is still just as violent and more than capable of having performed the murder in a fit of rage. The reason people cling to the "their guilty" is because them not doing so means the prosecution royally ****ed up and that a murderer is still out there. Billy Sinclair (who firmly believes that they're guilty) flat out admitted that there was enough police and jury misconduct to warrant a retrial

 

[ukrberserker23]

Just watched this movie. You can watch it for free on Alluc.to. There are about 20 links for it. Got interested in this case when the first Paradise Lost movie came out years ago. I think Terry Hobbs was involved, and possibly Bojangles man. Can't rule out John Mark Byers either, since he lied about several important facts. Funny that I didn't even know West Memphis existed until this case.There is a short documentary on Youtube where some young men revisit the crime scene 20 years after. Really unrecognizable except for the pipe bridge. Just like the JBR case, the guilty parties will never be prosecuted.

 

[SaintGirl]

Sulamith,

I'm no "expert" at all, just a supporter who has researched this case for years. There were many inaccuracies in the movie because it was a "Hollywood" movie. However, none of the inaccuracies actually detract from the true events, IMO.

IMO, there were two big inaccuracies. First is the implication that Pam found Steven's knife in Terry's belongings during the trial and gave it to Lax. In fact, the knife wasn't found until years later - right after Pam and Terry divorced (2003, IIRC). At that time, Pam, no longer trusting the State, turned the knife over to Dan Stidham, one of Jessie's attorneys and the only original attorney still involved in the case, even though he is now a judge.

Second, in the movie, it appeared that Pam left Terry right after the trials - permanently. She did leave to go to her parents' home in Blytheville, but they didn't divorce until almost ten years later. Pam is a sad case. She has tried to maintain a relationship (of sorts) with Terry over the years for Amanda's (their daughter's) sake, but unfortunately, whenever she is with Terry IMO he browbeats her and causes her to doubt his involvement in the case. She was heavily medicated during the trials and has, unfortunately, self-medicated subsequently. When she is in her right mind, she says that she thinks Terry is involved, but her statements seem to be unreliable. She is still very fragile and I doubt that she could ever make a coherent statement. It's really sad.

Again, I'll say that if this movie introduced anyone to the case (as you prove), it was a "good" movie. It's simply up to those of us who have studied the case for years to help those for whom this was an introduction to the case to sort out fact from Hollywood fiction. I would be glad to answer any questions you have - as would many on this board. Don't be shy!

However, I encourage you to research for yourself, as well. The Callahan's site previously linked is excellent. There are several Facebook pages (some of nons - those who still believe Damien, Jason and Jessie are guilty - and some of supporters of their innocence). Just type in "West Memphis 3" in the search and they'll pop up. A word of caution however: some people get nasty! I've found that the moderators on this site are excellent at keeping name-calling and other nastiness off of these pages. Another site you might investigate is jivepuppi. Although extensive, if you have the time, there is a lot of excellent information there, too.

Thanks for this information and the links. You too, Ausgirl. You've all done a lot of work and research.

I also stumbled on this movie last night. It was "recommended" for me on Netflix. I had never heard of the case; ended up staying up reading everything I could find.

I will definitely read more but from what I've read so far it seems there is no prevailing theory as to what happened. Would you say that is a correct statement? Or do people lean more one way than the other?

 

[Compassionate Reader]

The people still following this case fall into three groups: supporters (of the innocence of Damien, Jason and Jessie), non-supporters (called "nons") and "fencies" who just can't decide. IMO, the last group is the smallest. Most people following the case have a very definite opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the three men who were freed on the Alford pleas in August, 2011. As to a "prevailing theory" as to what happened, that depends on in which group you seem to find yourself. Nons believe the State's theory - it was a Satanic ritualistic murder committed by Damien, Jason and Jessie. Supporters are splintered. Some believe that TH (the step father of SB) is guilty. Some believe that someone else is guilty, but they are unsure who that person is. Some have a definite suspect other than TH. Of course, fencies just don't know what to believe - yet! They're still investigating.

 

[redheart]

The people still following this case fall into three groups: supporters (of the innocence of Damien, Jason and Jessie), non-supporters (called "nons") and "fencies" who just can't decide. IMO, the last group is the smallest. Most people following the case have a very definite opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the three men who were freed on the Alford pleas in August, 2011. As to a "prevailing theory" as to what happened, that depends on in which group you seem to find yourself. Nons believe the State's theory - it was a Satanic ritualistic murder committed by Damien, Jason and Jessie. Supporters are splintered. Some believe that TH (the step father of SB) is guilty. Some believe that someone else is guilty, but they are unsure who that person is. Some have a definite suspect other than TH. Of course, fencies just don't know what to believe - yet! They're still investigating.

Seriously? I'm on the fence, leading towards believing in the guilt of the WM3 and do not think it was a Satanic ritualistic murder. I've been reading about this case waaaay too much for the last month or so and have found only a smattering of people on the web (and certainly less than that on here) who actually believe this was a Satanic ritualistic murder. One can believe in the guilt of the WM3 without believing that it was a ritualistic killing. Stating unequivocally that "nons" believe that is an offensive way to try to undermine opinions contradictory to your own.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Didn't mean to undermine anyone's opinion. I've studied and discussed this case since 1996 (the airing of the original documentary), and my experience is that nons generally fall into line with the police story which, officially, is still a Satanic ritualistic murder. In fact, IMO, one reason that the State was glad to accept the Alford pleas was because the original motive had disintegrated so badly. Since the original Satanic Panic died down, I guess some nons are trying to come up with another motive (other than a "thrill kill" as the facts of this case don't seem to support that motive, IMO). I've repeatedly asked nons to give me their theory of how and why the murders happened, given the information that has come to light since the murders. No one has - yet. I'd still like to hear a scenario that explains all known facts with Damien, Jason and Jessie as the killers.

 

[SaintGirl]

Didn't mean to undermine anyone's opinion. I've studied and discussed this case since 1996 (the airing of the original documentary), and my experience is that nons generally fall into line with the police story which, officially, is still a Satanic ritualistic murder. In fact, IMO, one reason that the State was glad to accept the Alford pleas was because the original motive had disintegrated so badly. Since the original Satanic Panic died down, I guess some nons are trying to come up with another motive (other than a "thrill kill" as the facts of this case don't seem to support that motive, IMO). I've repeatedly asked nons to give me their theory of how and why the murders happened, given the information that has come to light since the murders. No one has - yet. I'd still like to hear a scenario that explains all known facts with Damien, Jason and Jessie as the killers.

Thanks for your reply. I would say Devil's Knot definitely leaned towards their innocence. Not knowing anything about the case, I was stunned toward the end about Terry Hobbs. With the exception of one scene, they did not portrait him as an abuser and you could almost (not fully, but almost) justify that one scene as grief. I didn't understand the title of the movie until the very end ... about the hair found in a shoelace knot. So I'm assuming the movie leans towards TH as the guilty party?

Thanks again...

 

[GoblinKeeper]

SaintGirl, the book by Mara Leveritt came out a while back, and the movie took its name from that book. However, I believe Devil's Knot does not refer to the shoelace knot and the hair found in it, but to the fact that everyone was so tied up in a "Satanic Panic" at the time of the trials. Tied up in the fear of the Devil and his "worshippers" there was a Devil's Knot firmly in place in law enforcement and the courts when the three teenagers were tried. (Sorry if I tread on anyone's toes, especially Compassionate Reader.) But then, I'm a newcomer to the forum as well, so don't take my opinion of it as gospel... it's just my own take on it!

 

[Compassionate Reader]

SaintGirl, the book by Mara Leveritt came out a while back, and the movie took its name from that book. However, I believe Devil's Knot does not refer to the shoelace knot and the hair found in it, but to the fact that everyone was so tied up in a "Satanic Panic" at the time of the trials. Tied up in the fear of the Devil and his "worshippers" there was a Devil's Knot firmly in place in law enforcement and the courts when the three teenagers were tried. (Sorry if I tread on anyone's toes, especially Compassionate Reader.) But then, I'm a newcomer to the forum as well, so don't take my opinion of it as gospel... it's just my own take on it!

FWIW, GK, I think you're right!