My view has done a complete 180

[JBean]

A great post by Pat Brown:

What the defense often does when trying to convince a jury or the media or supporters of their client's or clients' innocence is to downplay the totality of the evidence and overemphasize one bit of evidence or information they connect to another suspect. Or they mock a piece of prosecution evidence but they crow over a similar bit of evidence on the defense's side. For example, the knife found in the lake behind Jason Baldwin's house is called meaningless but the fact Hobb's ex-wife said he had his stepson's knife is proof positive that Hobbs was at the crime scene (because supposedly the boy never went anywhere without his knife). Fibers consistent with material at the WM3' homes is laughed at but Terry Hobb's hair at the scene is considered damning. Yet Terry Hobbs DID have contact with his stepson earlier in the day so a secondary transfer makes sense but if the WM2 didn't commit the crime, it is quite coincidental that a bunch of fibers microscopically similar to clothing from their homes ended up at the scene. Likewise, blood on Damien's necklace taken off his neck when he was arrested had a blood on it that matched the blood type of James and Steven. While it may be true that Damien went somewhere else and someone with that very same blood type bled on his necklace, it is more likely that the blood came from the victims' of the crime.

Except for seriously conclusive nuclear DNA matching a suspect to a crime in a manner that leaves no question that he did the deed, most cases are built on trace evidence (like fibers) plus lack of alibis plus circumstantial evidence plus confessions plus behavioral evidence. In other words, it is the TOTALITY of the evidence that usually convinces a jury someone is guilty. Yet the defense and the supporters of the WM3 attempt to discredit each piece of evidence as a way of convincing others not to look at the amount of evidence that adds up to guilt. And, then, they trumpet one piece of circumstantial evidence or trace evidence as the smoking gun and try to label another individual guilty because of just that! All smoke and mirrors and a fairly common defense scenario.

I will concede that prosecutors can put people in prison on crappy evidence; I worked one case where the man was convicted because his angry ex-wife claimed he once owned a gun (a .38) LIKE the one used in the crime and she even wrote the manufacturer's name on a piece of toilet paper which she subsequently lost. I profiled that crime and I do not believe the evidence supports the guilt of that man (and he was a piece of pondscum himself). I don't have any particular liking either Mr. Hobbs or Mr. Byers and I think both of them are perfectly capable of committing criminal acts, but, in this case, I just don't find the evidence supports their involvement.
March 10, 2010 12:33 AM

please supply a link for this post in this post. thanks in advance.

 

[JBean]

lots of the posts in this forum are getting personal and attacking towards other members.
Please stop.
You can argue your points easily enough without attacking other member personally, be it directly or indirectly.

Thanks in advance and where this post lands is random.

 

[Nova]

Q: Is there any reason why the supporters of the WM3 went after John Mark Byers first and then went after Terry Hobbs?

and did any supporters in the beginning of this case think that Terry Hobbs should be the main suspect?

and did any of the parents ( Todd & Dana Moore, Pam Hobbs, Melissa Byers etc., extended family members) of the victims think that Terry Hobbs should be looked at as a suspect early on in the investigation?

I'm sure "went after" is a fair characterization of some supporters, both with regard to Byers and to Hobbs.

But I want to add that there were lots of us who found Byers' behavior suspicious, but always stopped well short of accusing him. About Hobbs, we knew nothing until he shot his brother-in-law and his hair was identified as having been found on one of the victims. (How could we know anything, since the WMPD failed to interview him?) And still we stop short of claiming there is definitive proof of Hobbs' involvement, simply pointing out there is more evidence of Hobbs on the victims than has ever been compiled against the WM3.

 

[iluvmua]

Besides the hair, What other evidence is there that connects Terry Hobbs to the murders of 3 little boys?

 

[Nova]

Besides the hair, What other evidence is there that connects Terry Hobbs to the murders of 3 little boys?

In the first place, that would be hair(s), plural.

In the second, there is the neighbors' testimony that they saw Hobbs calling to the three boys (who were within view) while Hobbs swears he never saw the children.

There are other inconsistent statements from Hobbs as well, but somebody like CR can list them better than I.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

The direct connections are the hairs, the fact that he lied about seeing the boys on May 5th, and the fact that his alibi has at least partially fallen apart. Also suspicious is his leaving town about two weeks after the murders, his quitting his job because he just couldn't stand the sympathy of his coworkers and him telling his then-wife, Pam, to "just get over it" about the death of her son. Indirectly, if you read some of the Pasdar depositions, particularly the one by Mildred French, there is evidence that he has a violent past. I'm not mentioning the depositions by Pam's family. Since TH was responsible for the death of Pam's brother, some people say that the things the family said after that time were pure revenge. Maybe so, maybe not. Also, when you read his Pasdar deposition, he is not very forthcoming with answers to reasonable questions put to him by the lawyers. Remember, he brought the suit, and then he doesn't want to cooperate with the lawyers when they are trying to get information. BTW, the suit was dismissed and TH was ordered to pay court costs. Truly, most of the damning information we have about TH came out as a result of the Pasdar case, which he instigated. Ain't that a kick in the head?

 

[missy_g]

I'm a fence sitter leaning towards innocence of the WM3

I was convinced JMB was the perp but that was after viewing the documentaries. When I came back to this case years later before I read anything I watched the documentaries again and to me JMB looked like a grieving man. I felt so bad for him and couldn't imagine what he went through. JMB seems like a free spirit anyway but think about it, what would you do if you lost your wife and child within a short time period? Some people might break down and hate life and become depressed, other people will act out like JMB did. Remember too that after PL JMB life was almost ruined and he had to leave town.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I'm a fence sitter leaning towards innocence of the WM3

I was convinced JMB was the perp but that was after viewing the documentaries. When I came back to this case years later before I read anything I watched the documentaries again and to me JMB looked like a grieving man. I felt so bad for him and couldn't imagine what he went through. JMB seems like a free spirit anyway but think about it, what would you do if you lost your wife and child within a short time period? Some people might break down and hate life and become depressed, other people will act out like JMB did. Remember too that after PL JMB life was almost ruined and he had to leave town.

Thankfully he's doing better now. He has a new wife who has joined him in working for justice for his adoptive son, Chris, and the other two little angels along with seeking the freedom for the three wrongfully-convicted young men. Here's a question to ask yourself, if your son were killed, why would you work for freedom for those that LE said committed the crime? I don't think that there's enough money or celebrity out there that would allow me to work to free anyone that I thought might have killed my son. Yet, both Pam Hicks (formerly Hobbs) and JMB are doing that now. They both feel that they were duped by LE and want to find justice for their sons.

 

[missy_g]

Thankfully he's doing better now. He has a new wife who has joined him in working for justice for his adoptive son, Chris, and the other two little angels along with seeking the freedom for the three wrongfully-convicted young men. Here's a question to ask yourself, if your son were killed, why would you work for freedom for those that LE said committed the crime? I don't think that there's enough money or celebrity out there that would allow me to work to free anyone that I thought might have killed my son. Yet, both Pam Hicks (formerly Hobbs) and JMB are doing that now. They both feel that they were duped by LE and want to find justice for their sons.

I agree and I was also going to say that it takes a lot of guts to accuse someone then turn around and stand up for them. We all saw how JMB acted (whether it was for the cameras or not) and acting like that towards someone else, a lot of people might find unforgivable.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I agree and I was also going to say that it takes a lot of guts to accuse someone then turn around and stand up for them. We all saw how JMB acted (whether it was for the cameras or not) and acting like that towards someone else, a lot of people might find unforgivable.

Damien has forgiven him, and I believe so have the others. It's really amazing that someone in Damien's position can reach out with an olive branch. Some may say, "Why shouldn't he? JMB is on his side now." Well, I've seen lots of similar stories on ID TV, and there are cases where the falsely-accused can't ever forgive the accusers, whether it's the State or individuals. My hat is off to both of them for their actions. It shows just how far they have both come since 1994.

 

[Rebdot]

The direct connections are the hairs, the fact that he lied about seeing the boys on May 5th, and the fact that his alibi has at least partially fallen apart. Also suspicious is his leaving town about two weeks after the murders, his quitting his job because he just couldn't stand the sympathy of his coworkers and him telling his then-wife, Pam, to "just get over it" about the death of her son. Indirectly, if you read some of the Pasdar depositions, particularly the one by Mildred French, there is evidence that he has a violent past.

I also believe that his own daughter A. Hobbs has claimed that he sexually abused her as a child, and in their divorce papers his first wife claimed that he sexually abused their son.

I also believe that Pam Hobbs made green beans for dinner and they were found in Stevies stomach at autopsy suggesting that he had been home and had dinner when TH said he had not.

Also I recently read that before TH moved away PH come home to find Stevies items including a Ninja Turtles case gone and TH claimed to not know where they were, shortly after they were found in his trunk.

Pam Hobbs now suspects TH.

Compassionate Reader- You might be pleased to know that I finished reading the transcripts :great:

 

[Auburn]

I'd like to think that, too, that most people wouldn't stand by while innocent people were imprisoned and executed. And most people probably wouldn't.

But what does happen is that opinions harden and officials have trouble admitting they made mistakes.

//////////////////////

Keep in mind the state of mind back then in the early '90s...in Arkansa.
It was a witch hunt from the beginning. satanic ritual,my butt!
There were even experts that said the genital multilation was done by animals post-mortem....that eleminates the satanic element right there....and what about Terry Hobbs....his hair was found under one of the ligatures...there are family witness's(one of the boy's mother's) who had seen the boys w/him...in other words he had the poortunity....and Terry Hobb's was a STEP-parent....usually in these types of crimes...they know their killer.

MOO........OF COURSE!!!!!!!!

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I also believe that his own daughter A. Hobbs has claimed that he sexually abused her as a child, and in their divorce papers his first wife claimed that he sexually abused their son.

I also believe that Pam Hobbs made green beans for dinner and they were found in Stevies stomach at autopsy suggesting that he had been home and had dinner when TH said he had not.

Also I recently read that before TH moved away PH come home to find Stevies items including a Ninja Turtles case gone and TH claimed to not know where they were, shortly after they were found in his trunk.

Pam Hobbs now suspects TH.

Compassionate Reader- You might be pleased to know that I finished reading the transcripts :great:

And, Stevie's pocket knife was found in TH's possession much later. His explanation? He took it away from Stevie because he didn't think an eight year old should have a knife. Rebdot, congratulations! That is no small task, as I well know.

 

[justthinkin]

If the so called mutilation injuries to Christopher Byer occurred post-mortem due to animal predation, then what other injury accounted for this child's death since he did not drown?

 

[Compassionate Reader]

IMO, the degloving was done perimortem, and this was the cause of the loss of blood. Christopher was knocked unconscious by some sort of blow to the head or fall onto the concrete. Alligator snapping turtles predated on his genital area while he was unconscious, causing loss of blood as he was in the water which increased the bleeding.The other boys drowned because they were left unconscious in the water. I believe that, after the initial attack in the manhole area, the boys were left unconscious, but the murderer thought that they were already dead. As the night progressed, the water rose in the manhole. I don't know why Christopher was the only one whose genitals were predated upon. Maybe it was the location of his body in relation to the predators. However, for whatever reason, he was the only one who was sufficiently predated upon to bleed to death. The other boys just drowned as the water rose. When the murderer returned, he may have been surprised to find the boys dead which would explain why he didn't bring anything to help with the transport of the bodies and had to use the shoelaces to hog tie them.

 

[Rebdot]

I read the manhole theory and I believe it to be what happened, The rebar makes on the thigh of one of the victims and the marks on the scalp are very convincing.

 

[sindydee]

To my knowledge, no. He has refused to take a lie detector test, saying, "Why should I?" During the Pasdar deposition (if you haven't read that, do), he was evasive in most of his answers, saying things like "I dunno" and "I can't remember" and "It's none o' your business" and calling other depositions that called his actions into question a "bunch o' garbage" and saying that he just wanted everyone to "get offa my trail" about the case. It was a very revealing interview. But take a polygraph? He has adamantly refused to do that. Not that it would prove anything, really. As many here and elsewhere have pointed out, polygraphs are inadmissible in court for a reason. They are unreliable. Kind of like eyewitness testimony. Two people seeing the same thing can give two very different reports. That's why physical evidence linking a person to a crime is really better IMO than eyewitness testimony.

Here's the link to the Hobbs deposition: Part 1: http://callahan.8k.com/hobbs_pasdar/t_hobbs_depo1.html
Part 2: http://callahan.8k.com/hobbs_pasdar/t_hobbs_depo2.html

Thank you for posting this link. I found it very interesting reading. I didn't know too much about TH before this.

This guys comes accross exactly as you said above. He is saying people are making his life a misery by accusing him of being the murderer, yet quite clearly states he is not prepared to prove them wrong by taking a lie detector test or in any other way at all.

His back ground is interesting too. To briefley sumarise what I have just read, he was heard beating his first wife and son, by an older neighbour. He then goes on to, break into her house an molest her.

He backhands his wife in the face and the same day later shoots her brother in the stomach.

He as been accused of child molestation, beating stevie with a belt, and locking him in a cupboard.

He didn't call the police until 19.19 on May 5th even though he has given several different versions to different people of the time he did this. Including his own journal.

His hair was found at the crime scene (which yes, I agree totally that it could be a transferred hair) but so was mr jacobys. I found his reaction interesting, seeing as mr Jacoby had said he wasnt at the crime scene but his hair was there. The following response I just didn't think was right:-

"5 Q. Can you explain -- can you explain how DNA
6 consistent with Mr. Jacoby’s DNA was found at the
7 crime scene, Mr. Hobbs?
8 A. I don’t think it was found at the crime
9 scene. It might have been found in the woods. I
10 don’t think it was at the crime scene like you’re
11 saying.
12 Q. If it was found at the crime scene, would
13 that be a damning fact in your opinion?
14 A. No.
15 Q. No?
16 A. Because me and him never have been to the
17 crime scene. I didn’t go there a long time
18 after.
19 Q. Have you ever been there?
20 A. Sure.
21 Q. When did you first go to the crime scene?
22 A. Probably a year later.
23 Q. Why?
24 A. My wife wanted me to go with her. She felt
25 like she needed to go.

If that were my child and anyone elses hair was found at the crime scene I would be demanding to know why.

In the above transcript when asked about any of the above incidents, he firstly said no, that didnt happen, then he said he didnt remember, even when confrunted with evidence, it might of happened. Or everyone else is lying. Read through it and you will see his way of answering the questions is the same everytime.


Sorry if that went a bit off this topic, I just found it interesting what I had read and wanted to share.

 

[Nova]

In fairness to TH, who among us hasn't left DNA somewhere that we can't explain? Lawyers' deposition (and trial examination) questions are deliberately worded so that almost any answer will be (a) incriminatory or (b) perjury.

What difference does it make whether TH finds the evidence incriminating? TH is neither a juror nor a judge. The question isn't intended to elicit info, it's intended to intimidate TH into telling a lie (or into looking foolish as he tries to avoid an admission that can be used against him).

 

[Mariah]

Words not matching actions is pretty typical for a guy like Damien. He had a "persona" to uphold. He would work very hard to avoid looking scared because he had to maintain his "bad boy" image. Yes, that was a foolish attitude. He was acting like a teenager. Sad, but true. Any mature person, knowing the mess he/she was in, would not have acted like Damien did. IMO, that's even more proof of his innocence. Like he said, he didn't think that he could be convicted since he was innocent.

This doesn't make sense....if scared he would not be upholding a "persona"

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I don't believe being scared was reason enough for him to let down his mask, which is what "persona" means. He had tried to appear tough throughout this ordeal because he knew he was innocent and he wanted to be left alone. As I said before, a mature person knows better than to act the way he did, but he was an immature teen who was being persecuted because of his beliefs, his taste in clothes and music and a community's desire to punish someone for these heinous crimes. To the community, even if he wasn't guilty, he was weird. Jessie and Jason were collateral damage; they just picked the wrong friend. So, "Hang 'em; hang 'em high" was their attitude, one fostered by the police and the media at the time. Although the media is definitely coming around (at least part of it), the police are still sticking to their original ideas of the guilt of the guys. The only reason (and it's certainly a lame one IMO) that I can think of for this action on their part is that careers were made on this case, and changing now would make them look like the fools that they are. However, when the guys are freed, I look for a monster of a tap dance by the AG and several other people.

Also, looking back on what sindydee said about the deposition, I just realized that TH was saying that the hairs weren't found at the crime scene. He's right about that, you know. They were found at the dump site. IMO, the crime scene was a nearby manhole that has never been found/investigated.