I am not related to anyone in the case. I am a retired teacher, and I taught in an inner city school in a very large city. I taught students like Damien, Jason and Jessie. Therefore, I understand very well the behaviors of teenagers.
My interest in this case started with seeing Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robinhood Hills on HBO. My son, who is one month younger than Damien and wore black T-shirts and listened to heavy metal music during high school, introduced me to the documentary. Because it seemed so adamant about the innocence of the WM3, I decided to investigate further.
I was still teaching at the time. So, my investigating was a little limited. I read some on the Internet, including the trial transcripts and pretrial hearing transcripts at callahan's. Then, I read Blood of the Innocents, a tabloid style account of the crimes, and Devil's Knot, a well-researched (although slightly outdated now) book about the crime. From my experiences with teenagers and my own reading, I formed the opinion that the WM3 were innocent.
At first, like many others, I suspected that Mark Byers was the guilty party. He certainly acted strangely during both documentaries. Also, it seems as if the filmmakers were pointing the finger of suspicion in his direction. Then, I realized that what I was doing was just like what the city of West Memphis did to the WM3 - basing my belief in guilt on actions rather than evidence.
When the DNA results were made public, I began to suspect that Terry Hobbs might be the guilty party. When the Pasdar lawyers investigated Terry Hobbs (since the WMPD wouldn't), I became even more sure that Terry Hobbs was the perpetrator of the crimes. Having read and/or seen his deposition in the Pasdar case and his interview with the WMPD, I am even more convinced of his guilt.
Since I have retired, I have continued reading whatever I could find online about the case. My opinion has not changed. I am still convinced that the young men in prison are innocent.
If I come across as "heavy," I'm sorry. I feel very passionately about this case. Of course, I want you to make up your own mind. Read on callahan's, but don't neglect the pretrial hearing transcripts and the Rule 37 abstracts if you want all the facts.
When there is a miscarriage of justice, as I feel is the case with the WM3, oftentimes the trial transcripts don't tell the whole story, especially if the judge was a State-leaning judge who ham stringed the defense. They will show why the unjustly-convicted were convicted, but they will not show all of the pertinent facts in the case, which is why justice wasn't served. Read it all. Form your own opinion. You'll see.