My Theory

[UdbCrzy2]

Yes, I've read the NON's Bible. I am not impressed with any of it. I know that a lot of the information was collected by the defense and presented in the penalty phase of the trial in an effort to get a reduced sentence. Burnett, obviously, didn't believe the pronouncements contained therein as he still sentenced Damien to death, a sentence which has now been set aside as Damien is not a murderer.

Additionally, even if Damien were crazy as a bed bug back in 1993 or even now, that would not make him a murderer. There is simply no evidence to prove his participation in the murders of Stevie, Michael and Chris. Continued attempts to throw these allegations and suppositions around just show how weak any case against him really is. Of course, since he is now a free man, it's all moot.

It was a jury sentencing. I think all death penalty cases are sentenced by jury. The jury saw all of the evidence and heard all of the testimony and came to the conclusion of GUILTY and sentenced accordingly.

'Free', but very guilty and still convicted child murderers especially since they all plead guilty recently.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

You have no proof of any of the things you stated in this last paragraph. I have had students who have made similar threats (about killing a parent or harming a fellow student) who didn't follow through with the threats because the threats were made to gain attention. Yes, Damien was a troubled teen, but that does not prove that he became a murderer any more than any of the students who I heard make similar threats became murderers. In fact, most of those "troubled" students that I taught became productive citizens. None of them went to jail to my knowledge, and many of my former students came by to visit me after they graduated from high school.

Also, whether or not Damien liked the movies to which you refer (the first of which was released when he was two years old) is really immaterial. There is no proof that those movies had anything to do with Damien's name change. That salacious detail was another attempt by the prosecution to make the murders appear to have a Satanic connection, which they did not.

BBM

http://callahan.8k.com/images/500/092.jpg

http://callahan.8k.com/images/500/1/188.jpg

http://callahan.8k.com/images/500/029.jpg

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7202273&postcount=176"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Summary of Damien's Mental Health History[/ame]

 

[Dreamnine]

Your theory is very interesting, Compassionate Reader, and I've spent quite a bit of time lately reading the many threads and following various links..

The manhole theory just doesn't add up for me.. and it's the moving of the bodies that doesn't make sense. As others have said, why not just leave them there? I think the risk of being caught - and the killer couldn't be sure of search activity having completely died by 3am - would outweigh everything.

I have a hard time, too, believing that some of the horrific wounds were caused by animal predation.

But certainly I believe the 3 boys were killed somewhere else and then moved to the ditch.

I'm not sure who committed these crimes - certainly not the WM3 but I don't know just who else.

Interestingly, I find JMB to be completely weird and am puzzled as to why anyone gives anything he says any credence at all.

 

[h818]

So you agree he was not really a sociopath.
I agree he should have been held responsible for falsifying an application.

I am not a doctor so would not be able to make that diagnosis. If he did falsify the documents, which other posters claim he must have, he should be held responsible.

 

[h818]

Interestingly, I find JMB to be completely weird and am puzzled as to why anyone gives anything he says any credence at all.

Well, JMB is an interesting character that's for sure. Supporters were looking for someone to pin it on, he was the unlucky one in Paradise Lost 2. I believe they actually moved into the house he lived in at the time of the murders to look for evidence against him. I think they rented or bought the house that TH lived in as well. They didn't find anything of value to the case in either house as far as I know.

Anyway, at some point, JMB started the message board that this manhole theory actually originated from. On that board, any negative talk of JMB, or even talk about suspicions about him (and there are some shady things) is forbidden. It is basically the supporter mecca these days. JMB successfully passed the buck (of suspicion) so to speak to Terry Hobbs even though there is no evidence against him, either, despite millions spent looking for it.

I don't think TH or JMB are the type of people I would ever associate with, if you know what I mean. They both have things in their pasts that make me think they are not exactly pillars of society.

 

[claudicici]

Except here in this document when his IQ was 88 and 84 before the murders and before the malingering. Here is the testimony of Dr. Rickert about the higher IQ testing done previously and it was 88 and 84.
http://callahan.8k.com/cgi-bin/i/images3/jm_trial/jm_rickert/jm_trial_2165.jpg


Dr. Rickert explains that he does not have the mind of a third grader, but performs academically like one. I am guessing because he didn't want to attend school and was on probation at a very young age.

http://callahan.8k.com/images3/jm_trial/jm_rickert/jm_trial_2180.jpg

He further explains here:
http://callahan.8k.com/cgi-bin/i/images3/jm_trial/jm_rickert/jm_trial_2181.jpg

So, you really can't say that he was retarded or was like a third grader or 5-year-old or whatever spin you want to put on it.


:skip::skip::skip:

Well,apparently LE did not agree with you or do you think they would have asked a 17year old with normal intelligence twice if he knows what a penis is?
Do you think a 17year old with normal intelligence who was supposedly a member of a satanic cult would ask his defense attorney who "Satin" is?

 

[Dreamnine]

Well, JMB is an interesting character that's for sure. Supporters were looking for someone to pin it on, he was the unlucky one in Paradise Lost 2. I believe they actually moved into the house he lived in at the time of the murders to look for evidence against him. I think they rented or bought the house that TH lived in as well. They didn't find anything of value to the case in either house as far as I know.

Anyway, at some point, JMB started the message board that this manhole theory actually originated from. On that board, any negative talk of JMB, or even talk about suspicions about him (and there are some shady things) is forbidden. It is basically the supporter mecca these days. JMB successfully passed the buck (of suspicion) so to speak to Terry Hobbs even though there is no evidence against him, either, despite millions spent looking for it.

I don't think TH or JMB are the type of people I would ever associate with, if you know what I mean. They both have things in their pasts that make me think they are not exactly pillars of society.

I do know what you mean - I've met men like that before and I just stay away.

PL 2 annoyed me - the first one was excellent - because JMB was in virtually every shot.. They'd be shooting some reporters outside a courthouse then the camera would draw back and there was JMB, smoking a cigarette, every single time..

I can understand his willingness to shift all the blame onto TH, and perhaps that's where the evidence leads - I don't really know.

But to have a board that just slavishly follows one suspect and one scenario alone, not brooking any criticism of the other players in this long-drawn-out case, well, that's just wrong in my opinion.

 

[Whocanitbenow]

Wow, when do you think we will all start trying to figure out who actually did this as opposed to debating the guilt of the WM3? Every time I get onto WS and i see these posts show up in my "New Posts" my heart twinges and i think about Stevie, Michael and Chris and the fact that they have not received justice. I pray as I write this that somehow, someway their killer(s) will be brought to justice or already have and they received their justice in the place of ALL justice. Those precious little boys deserved SO much more. I can't even imagine the fear they knew in their last hours.. I take solace in the fact that they are in a place of ultimate peace.

I agree.

I know I am behind on this discussion, However, as much as I admire the detail in the opening theory, There is too much supposition and conjecture for me. I don't like TH particularly. I just watched both the PL movies in the last week along with doing some researching...

I am left wondering about that man in the bathroom of that restaurant. That can't be separated from this case for me at this time. It is a lingering event for me.

I believe the WM3 to be innocent and am glad they are free. I however and disheartened that these 3 precious babies have no justice.

What I think this case should be is a warning against witch hunts or focusing on people without evidence because they make a good scape goat. When I watch that first trial, I see nothing different than the witch trials in Salem and in other places around the world currently.

Who is going to fight for these boys? Will they reopen this case?

 

[Cappuccino]

I am left wondering about that man in the bathroom of that restaurant.

That's one of the infuriating things about this case. They never made much of an effort to find him, and even lost the evidence from the bathroom, so we'll probably never know who he was or what his story is.

 

[claudicici]

Your theory is very interesting, Compassionate Reader, and I've spent quite a bit of time lately reading the many threads and following various links..

The manhole theory just doesn't add up for me.. and it's the moving of the bodies that doesn't make sense. As others have said, why not just leave them there? I think the risk of being caught - and the killer couldn't be sure of search activity having completely died by 3am - would outweigh everything.

I have a hard time, too, believing that some of the horrific wounds were caused by animal predation.

But certainly I believe the 3 boys were killed somewhere else and then moved to the ditch.

I'm not sure who committed these crimes - certainly not the WM3 but I don't know just who else.

Interestingly, I find JMB to be completely weird and am puzzled as to why anyone gives anything he says any credence at all.

ITA with your post.
I don't trust JMB at all.There's so much that just doesn't make sense.
The knife,for example.Why would he give a bloody knife to a film crew?
and then lie about it never being used?
:waitasec:

 

[I Must Break You]

That's one of the infuriating things about this case. They never made much of an effort to find him, and even lost the evidence from the bathroom, so we'll probably never know who he was or what his story is.

I am very interested in this also, I have never gotten how so many supporters have all but dismissed Mr. Bojangles as a suspect at this time. For me he still right up there with TH amongst others... There are coincidences in this world but a bloody, muddy and crazed looking person bumbling about very close to where 3 boys were discovered in a muddy ditch, seems like a bit more than a coincidence. I know he was addressed in the manhole theory and that scenario of how he got into the condition he did is certainly plausible, but just feels unlikely to me.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Except here in this document when his IQ was 88 and 84 before the murders and before the malingering. Here is the testimony of Dr. Rickert about the higher IQ testing done previously and it was 88 and 84.
http://callahan.8k.com/cgi-bin/i/images3/jm_trial/jm_rickert/jm_trial_2165.jpg

Again, that was not the full scale IQ score. That was the performance portion of the test only. Please read the document you linked to more carefully and you will see that I'm right. Look on the same page in your link. "Q: And that would be performance? A: Right." Later, he explains the two portions of the IQ test. Also, right before that, he agrees that Jessie's scores were in the borderline range.

Dr. Rickert explains that he does not have the mind of a third grader, but performs academically like one. I am guessing because he didn't want to attend school and was on probation at a very young age.

http://callahan.8k.com/images3/jm_trial/jm_rickert/jm_trial_2180.jpg

Jessie went to school through the ninth grade. He said so at the 8/19/2011 hearing. I have seen nothing to indicate that his failure to continue in school was because of being on probation. That is pure speculation, IMO. Generally, when you're on probation, if you're of school age, one of the conditions of the probation is to attend school. Also, IMO, when Dr. Rickert explained that he "performed" like a third grader, he was saying that he reasoned like a third grader. That's not the same thing at all as having the mind of a third grader. If he had the mind of a third grader at his age, he would be retarded. He is not retarded; he is borderline mentally retarded.

He further explains here:
http://callahan.8k.com/cgi-bin/i/images3/jm_trial/jm_rickert/jm_trial_2181.jpg

Yes, he explains IMO the difference between mental retardation (which I have never used to describe Jessie) and someone who reasons like an eight year old. If a seventeen year old young man reasons like an eight year old, he is borderline mentally retarded, as I have repeatedly stated, and as Dr. Rickert himself stated. His performance scores, which seem to be consistently in the mid to upper eighties (remember that 100 is "normal"), indicate that he can function in society better than an eight year old. What is in question with Jessie is his reasoning ability, his verbal IQ score, which has consistently been in the low seventies or even on some occasions in the upper sixties.

So, you really can't say that he was retarded or was like a third grader or 5-year-old or whatever spin you want to put on it.

His full scale IQ was consistently tested in the 70 - 74 range from the time he started to school. That's why, in part, he was in Special Education classes. I'm not spinning anything. I know from working with students with IQ's in that range how they think and reason, and it is about like an eight year old. That's a second or third grader. Stidham has said that he reasons (thinks) like a five year old. That's possible, too, but I would say it's more like an eight year old.

One additional thing about Dr. Rickert's testimony: He was called by the State in an attempt (which IMO was successful mainly because of Burnett) to discount a relatively new (at the time) test for suggestibility, the Gisli Gudjonsson Scale of Suggestibility. IOW, he was called to refute parts of Dr. Wilkins' and Dr. Ofshe's testimonies. However, nothing in Dr. Rickert's testimony indicates that Jessie was not borderline mentally retarded. In fact, during the hearing held away from the jury, Dr. Rickert admitted that he was basically unfamiliar with the research that led to the testing for suggestibility that he was discounting, having examined it only briefly during a ten minute recess. Yet, Burnett allowed him to testify.

http://www.callahan.8k.com/wm3/vaughnrickert.html

 

[UdbCrzy2]

His full scale IQ was consistently tested in the 70 - 74 range from the time he started to school. That's why, in part, he was in Special Education classes. I'm not spinning anything. I know from working with students with IQ's in that range how they think and reason, and it is about like an eight year old. That's a second or third grader. Stidham has said that he reasons (thinks) like a five year old. That's possible, too, but I would say it's more like an eight year old.

One additional thing about Dr. Rickert's testimony: He was called by the State in an attempt (which IMO was successful mainly because of Burnett) to discount a relatively new (at the time) test for suggestibility, the Gisli Gudjonsson Scale of Suggestibility. IOW, he was called to refute parts of Dr. Wilkins' and Dr. Ofshe's testimonies. However, nothing in Dr. Rickert's testimony indicates that Jessie was not borderline mentally retarded. In fact, during the hearing held away from the jury, Dr. Rickert admitted that he was basically unfamiliar with the research that led to the testing for suggestibility that he was discounting, having examined it only briefly during a ten minute recess. Yet, Burnett allowed him to testify.

http://www.callahan.8k.com/wm3/vaughnrickert.html

The defense expert witness Dr. Wilkins says that he's above normal levels and about malingering. That does not sound like he's retarded or like the age of a 5 or 8 year old to me.

If he were actually borderline retarded as supporters claim, wouldn't he qualify for social security benefits?


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.

http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/wwilkins2.html

 

[UdbCrzy2]

Well,apparently LE did not agree with you or do you think they would have asked a 17year old with normal intelligence twice if he knows what a penis is?
Do you think a 17year old with normal intelligence who was supposedly a member of a satanic cult would ask his defense attorney who "Satin" is?

Well, I don't know how Misskelley would have pronounced Satan if he were to read it instead of hearing someone say it. Could have mistaken it for Satin if he read it.

As far as knowing what a penis is. Would he call it a penis or just call it something else like 'thang'? I guess they wanted verification of what a 'thang' was. Was Misskelley familiar with medical terminology?


(illegible note in margin) Had hands over their mouth/to keep quiet
Also - Put shitr into their mouths
Stuck their- thang (Penis) in mouth
iKept hitting the boys - all the time
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/jm_gg2.html

 

[Compassionate Reader]

The defense expert witness Dr. Wilkins says that he's above normal levels and about malingering. That does not sound like he's retarded or like the age of a 5 or 8 year old to me.

Five year olds are capable of making up stories. They often lie to keep from being punished. Of course, most parents can see through the lies, and they get punished any way. That is one way that they learn not to lie.

If he were actually borderline retarded as supporters claim, wouldn't he qualify for social security benefits?

Possibly. However, IIRC, he never applied. In order to qualify for SSI you must apply.

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.

http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/wwilkins2.html

Jessie is capable of making things up, of course. In fact, he made up the whole story of the killing. Also, please note that the elevated score showed that he could be malingering, not that he was malingering. IMO, because of Jessie's low IQ, some of these types of scores could be out of whack. The indication of malingering could also possibly be caused by his nervousness at the time. It is simply not proof positive that he was lying for gain. As I said, I know that he is capable of lying. Very often in my career I witnessed students with IQs in this range lying for various reasons, usually to get out of the hot seat - saying whatever they perceived the questioner wanted to hear in order to get the questions to stop. That is often how a person with an IQ in this range reacts to stress and intense questioning.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

Jessie is capable of making things up, of course. In fact, he made up the whole story of the killing. Also, please note that the elevated score showed that he could be malingering, not that he was malingering. IMO, because of Jessie's low IQ, some of these types of scores could be out of whack. The indication of malingering could also possibly be caused by his nervousness at the time. It is simply not proof positive that he was lying for gain. As I said, I know that he is capable of lying. Very often in my career I witnessed students with IQs in this range lying for various reasons, usually to get out of the hot seat - saying whatever they perceived the questioner wanted to hear in order to get the questions to stop. That is often how a person with an IQ in this range reacts to stress and intense questioning.

I've shown you documents of the defense experts testimony in the posts above this one clearly indicating that his IQ was not low.

I guess that we will just have to agree to disagree about Misskelley's IQ

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I am very interested in this also, I have never gotten how so many supporters have all but dismissed Mr. Bojangles as a suspect at this time. For me he still right up there with TH amongst others... There are coincidences in this world but a bloody, muddy and crazed looking person bumbling about very close to where 3 boys were discovered in a muddy ditch, seems like a bit more than a coincidence. I know he was addressed in the manhole theory and that scenario of how he got into the condition he did is certainly plausible, but just feels unlikely to me.

I'm not sure what to think about Mr. "Bojangles." One thing is sure, the WMPD really botched up any hope of finding out who he is/was or how or if he was connected to the murders when they lost the blood evidence. Just another of those things that makes me go hmmm when thinking about the whole investigation and how it was conducted.

I do find it interesting that TH mentions a "wet, black bum" as being seen on the morning of May 6, 1993, near the discovery ditch. However, he doesn't mention this "bum" until much later. I believe that the first time TH mentions him is in the 2004 Dimension films interview. I could be wrong; it could have been in the 2007 WMPD interview. However, whenever it was, he seeks to verify the sighting by saying that Pam saw him, too. Pam has always denied seeing the bum, however.

As to what I think personally, I tend to believe that Mr. "Bojangles" was:

1) totally innocent and was merely a homeless person that slipped and fell and possibly cut himself on some glass and went to the restaurant to clean up

or

2) present in the woods in the wee hours and saw the bodies being placed into the ditch.

If the second scenario is true, it is possible that TH saw him and shot at him and grazed his arm. Unfortunately, in Arkansas, a black man would not be inclined to come forward with information about this crime as he would fear that he would be blamed if he placed himself at the scene. It is possible that this man has not come forward because he is dead, either at the hands of the killer of the little boys (because "Bojangles" was a witness) or due to some other cause.

Another possibility is that he was an OTR driver and simply left the area. Maybe the guy was high on something and fell or in some other way injured himself. Remember he went into the ladies room at the restaurant. After he cleaned up, he got into his truck, sobered up and left the area. Maybe he has never heard of these murders and to this day doesn't know that he is "involved" in this case.

I would like to know who he is/was, too. Although I don't think it very likely, it is within the realm of possibility that he was an accomplice in these murders. However, I don't put too much faith in that possibility.

 

[claudicici]

Well, I don't know how Misskelley would have pronounced Satan if he were to read it instead of hearing someone say it. Could have mistaken it for Satin if he read it.

As far as knowing what a penis is. Would he call it a penis or just call it something else like 'thang'? I guess they wanted verification of what a 'thang' was. Was Misskelley familiar with medical terminology?


(illegible note in margin) Had hands over their mouth/to keep quiet
Also - Put shitr into their mouths
Stuck their- thang (Penis) in mouth
iKept hitting the boys - all the time
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/jm_gg2.html

so why are you arguing against Jessie's low IQ then ,when you obviously know it's low?

 

[UdbCrzy2]

so why are you arguing against Jessie's low IQ then ,when you obviously know it's low?

I think he is uneducated and probably not good in academics, so if he read Satan, he may have thought it was Satin.

As far as 'thang' that's what he said and LE wanted clarification on what exactly he did mean.

 

[claudicici]

He said "buttom"