New witness !!! Has this been discussed?

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Manic-depression is the previous name for bipolar disorder, as this WebMD page explains. That historical name is what my mother's condition was known as for over half her lifetime, which is why I still refer to it as such in that context. Furthermore, my mother often told me that her medications were in control more than she was most of the time, and particularly given all the drugs I saw pumped into her, I'm inclined to take her word on that over yours.
 
Also let's not forget that Damien's psych records where brought in by the defense because they were hoping the "crazier" they make Damien look the less likely it would be for him to get the death penalty.Damien has not been on medication for a very long time so it is very unlikely that he is bipolar or schizophrenic.To me it looks so much like a kid acting up because he lived in a world that did not understand him,nothing in those document suggests he would kill 3 children.That crime to me has meth and ANGER at the children written all over it.Damien was angry at adults and peers not children...
 
Also let's not forget that Damien's psych records where brought in by the defense because they were hoping the "crazier" they make Damien look the less likely it would be for him to get the death penalty.Damien has not been on medication for a very long time so it is very unlikely that he is bipolar or schizophrenic.To me it looks so much like a kid acting up because he lived in a world that did not understand him,nothing in those document suggests he would kill 3 children.That crime to me has meth and ANGER at the children written all over it.Damien was angry at adults and peers not children...

I agree because if his physc statements suggest that he's capable of killing, then so am I because my evaluation reads the same.

You refer to him acting up or out because the world doesn't understand him. If he was suffering a personality disorder this could explain the acting up (not bipolar or depression because these illnesses are treatable with medications)
 
Also let's not forget that Damien's psych records where brought in by the defense because they were hoping the "crazier" they make Damien look the less likely it would be for him to get the death penalty.
That's not quite how it went. The documents didn't come out until the post-trial hearings where the defense was required to submit their records under the principle of disclosure. The fact that they compiled those documents does suggest they were considering an insanity plea, but they chose to go with claiming complete innocence at the trial. Furthermore, I've yet to see any to evidence to suggest the defense omitted or forged Echols' records to make his condition appear worse than it actually was, and hence am left to consider those records an accurate representation of his psychological state over the course of the year leading up to the murders.

Also, bipolar doesn't fit Echols' case in my understanding, and I wasn't suggesting as much when I mentioned the condition. However, his belief that he communicated with demons and spirits, including one which inhabited and bonded with him, along with the reports of eye movement and other mannerisms indicative of auditory hallucinations is consistent with what can occur during manic phases of bipolar disorder. It's also consistent schizophrenia along with other psychological disorders which are far serious than just "a kid acting up".

Regardless, how do square your assessment with the reports of Echols torturing and mutilating animals? Those suggest to me that he was very angry with the world in general, and unleashed that anger whenever the opportunity arose, much as many psychopaths have tortured and mutilated animals before moving on to humans, children and otherwise. Reading those documents reminds me of guy who I went to high school with, a guy who set off chlorine gas reaction in a bathroom at our school which might have killed hundreds if he wasn't caught in the act and the school quickly evacuated, and who killed dozens of ducks in the park with chlorine gas just a few days before. Granted, none of that does anything to prove Echols committed the murders, but it does go a long way in explaining why he was promptly considered as a likely suspect.
 
If I'm right in my assumption, then I'd like you to clarify who's agenda your referring too because im lost a little (sorry just had therapy and it fries me)

To me the physc reports are written very clinical like mine are, and read much the same hence why I did suggest the personality disorder path. I don't quite understand the hidden agenda part? can you fill me in?? For me it appears to be an evaluation and notes/homework on the patient, and I don't read / have the ability to read behind the lines (if that makes sense)

I was referencing the other poster's position and how his/her arguments were influencing me, but probably not in the manner he/she intended. Had nothing to do with your post.

I agree regarding the reports. They are simply notes on an evaluation of the patient.
 
Why would you do that rather than keep her on the list and note the discpenacies beteween her timeline and others, with respect to the notion that "all of the statements ultimately have to be considered in order to judge their credibility or what it is they are saying" as you acknolaged previously? Regardless, where do you see anything near 6:30 PM given for the Sanderses in Joe Hutchison's statement, and did you miss the part at the bottom of p. 18 where he says he "cannot be possitve" that Damien was even went to the Sanderses that night?

And on a side note, my agenda is accurate discussion of facts. If you find that rude and are being infulenced away from such discussion, I doubt you can rightly pin the blame on me for that.

I find your manner of addressing people, not just me, rude, but to each their own. And no, I don't blame you for that. It's my perception of your comments and my choice of how to react to them given my perception of them. At this point I don't even know what you are trying to argue or establish. I haven't made any judgments as to the truth or veracity of anyone. I have only stated that certain individuals' statements would have to be disbelieved or disbelieved in part in order to say Damien was involved. If you want to deny that that is the case so be it. Like I said at the outset, I have only read the investigatory reports on callahan and there may very well be more information out there, which was the main point of my initial post...inquiring as to whether there are more documents elsewhere and, if so, if anyone could point me to a place where they could be found.
 
At this point I don't even know what you are trying to argue or establish.
At this point I'm trying to establish the accuracy of your claim here:

Around 6:30, Pam, Joe, Michelle and Damien go to the Sanders according to those same statements.

So, again, how can one get "Around 6:30" from Joe Hutchison's statement in regard to visiting the Sanderses's home, and where is there any statement from Damien to support that timeframe? I'm not asking this to be rude either, but again because my agenda here is accurate discussion of facts.
 
Reedus was referring to me, agreeing with your assessment that I'm rude, and I addressed that notion at the bottom of my previous post.

As for Johnny Depp, yes he clearly considers Damien a close friend, and he's also an amazing actor, the star of some of my favorite movies. However, having put considerable effort into familiarizing myself with the evidince surrounding the murders the three were convicted for, it seems highly unlikely to me that Depp has done the same. Rather, I suspect Depp has simply been mislead by the convinced, and misinformed mostly by others who've been similarly mislead. That includes people who've assumed the three were innocent before they even got to see the evidence presented during the trials, and who've clung to their potions in spite of the evidence which has surfaced since then.

Of course, there's also people who vehemently oppose capital punishment regardless of the circumstances, and even people who idolize murderers. Some such people are bound to be compelled to misrepresent the facts of this case to mislead others who don't share such beliefs. I very much doubt Johnny Depp is such a person though, or the vast majorly of the convicted's supporters, celebrities and otherwise. Again, I figure most supporters have simply been mislead, as the ancient Hindu metaphor from the Katha Upanishad explains: "Abiding in the midst of ignorance, thinking themselves wise and learned, fools go aimlessly hither and thither, like blind led by the blind."


I've not attempted to tell you what your condition is, and rather simply asked you a series of question so that I might assess how accurate your comparison is. Regardless, I will tell you that if you've actually done things comparable to most of what I listed from Echols' history, and particularly if you've done all those things in over the course of a year prior to a horrific multiple murder with ritualistic aspects: LE would be fools not to consider you a likely suspect.

Also, please don't imagine that I'm unsympathetic to such conditions, as that is far from reality. In truth, my mother was diagnosed as manic-depressive/bipolar nearly two decades before I was born, and lived with that condition for another two decades before she committed suicide. She was also an excellent mother and an amazing women in general aside from some short periods when her condition got the better of her. So I do empathize with you in that regard, and with Echols too even, but that doesn't prevent me from acknowledging the evidence against him and the other two.

As for Johnny Depp doing any research on this, I have attached a portion of a link and will also place the website link so you can read for yourself.

Since your not inclined to believe a word I say.

"The West Memphis Three case has inspired numerous individuals to intervene on their behalf. Bruce Sinofsky and Joe Berlinger created a documentary about the West Memphis Three, Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills, and released it in 1996, hoping to encourage the public to remain interested in the fate of the three convicted men. (Sequels to the documentary were released in 2000 and 2012.) Burk Sauls, Kathy Bakken, and Grove Pashley, three friends from Los Angeles, California, traveled to Arkansas to visit Echols, Baldwin, and Misskelley in October 1996. Upon deciding that they believed the West Memphis Three to be innocent, the three friends created a website, “Free the West Memphis Three,” to inform the public about the case as well as to ask for donations to help fund the defense team. Mara Leveritt, an Arkansas reporter, wrote a book titled, Devil’s Knot: The True Story of the West Memphis Three (2002) in response to a challenge made by state officials that a true, honest examination of the case would prove the guilt of the three defendants. After extensive research, Leveritt concluded that the entire situation was a tragedy and a gross miscarriage of justice. Numerous celebrities agreed with Leveritt. Eddie Vedder of the rock group Pearl Jam visited Echols on death row and used his music and fame to spread the message that Echols and the others were innocent. Actor Johnny Depp and singer Natalie Maines of the group the Dixie Chicks also leant their support."

He agreed with leveritt who did EXTENSIVE research, sure he personally didnt do it but your statement imply he's been led astray by defense is complete and utter tripe.

http://www.encyclopediaofarkansas.net/encyclopedia/entry-detail.aspx?entryID=3039
 
Pardon me please for the intrusion, but I'm just curious. Who here wouldn't have any qualms with Damien as their pet sitter?
 
Pardon me please for the intrusion, but I'm just curious. Who here wouldn't have any qualms with Damien as their pet sitter?

I wouldn't because, as far as I'm concerned anyone is capable of hurting an animal not just Damien Echols.

In fact, I don't believe there is anything to state in LE or MSM that states he is mutilating animals currently.
 
I didnt think there were THAT many sadistic people in the world.

I certainly wouldnt intentionally cause suffering to any helpless creature. But thats just me. I guess i am in the minority.
 
Really? Anyone?
Would you kick a sick dog to death?

Yes anyone COULD be capable.. Including me.

Just because Damien Echols did mutilate animals in the past doesn't mean he's continued that behaviour. It's very clear from the physc reports he suffers from a mental illness and I assume from the notes which read similar to my own personal physc notes, that he is in fact suffering or suffered from a personality disorder.

I'm not excusing the mutilation or I'll treatment of animals I just answer with a generalized comment that anyone could be capable of hurting animals.

I went to school with four young boys who set fire to a wombat for fun. The wombat was set alight after they beat it with sticks and kicked it, the wombat was alive when set alight and barely alive when found.. NONE of these kids went on to murder anyone nor did they continue to mutilate animals. So I based my ANYONE COULD BE capable on this fact.

I have searched for the link reporting the case via MSM but no results, it is a 12 year old animal cruelty case and at the time one of the boys involved was the son of a local member of parliament.
 
Pardon me please for the intrusion, but I'm just curious. Who here wouldn't have any qualms with Damien as their pet sitter?

I don't think I'd have Damien, Jason, Jessie, Terry, Joe, Buddy, Mark, Ridge, Gitchell or nearly any other name that has ever been connected to this case watch my pet and certainly not my kids.
 
I didnt think there were THAT many sadistic people in the world.

I certainly wouldnt intentionally cause suffering to any helpless creature. But thats just me. I guess i am in the minority.


Since I'm so sadistic, I guess I just don't realise how many ignorant people there are in this world :)
 
I didnt think there were THAT many sadistic people in the world.

I certainly wouldnt intentionally cause suffering to any helpless creature. But thats just me. I guess i am in the minority.


I always feel like I have to qualify my statements with the fact that I have only recently started reading up on this case. Up until a couple months ago I truly thought that the West Memphis 3 was a music group...maybe because I loosely heard of it and it was always in connection with some of the supporters being musicians.

Anyways, I have no idea if he in fact did or did not do those things and will assume he did. If he did, in fact, do that as you suggest, I would say that it is pretty sick and demented. I would also say that that doesn't mean he killed any human being though. Assuming there are other indicators as well, I could understand LE wanting to rule in or rule out possible involvement.
 
I always feel like I have to qualify my statements with the fact that I have only recently started reading up on this case. Up until a couple months ago I truly thought that the West Memphis 3 was a music group...maybe because I loosely heard of it and it was always in connection with some of the supporters being musicians.

Anyways, I have no idea if he in fact did or did not do those things and will assume he did. If he did, in fact, do that as you suggest, I would say that it is pretty sick and demented. I would also say that that doesn't mean he killed any human being though. Assuming there are other indicators as well, I could understand LE wanting to rule in or rule out possible involvement.

Reedus23

I am new also to this case but I do know the background story a bit, however since he was convicted and released I'm assuming his innocence until there is clear evidence of guilt.

However since I'm australian and don't have an understanding of the legal system in USA, all ive ever heard of is the double jeopardy rule... would this apply to the WM3? And does it make it harder to prove/reopen a case that's been tried/sentenced and convictions then overturned...
 
Claudici, I truly apologize for hijacking your thread, but I wasn't sure where else to ask this. I just got done reading the state's case in chief in Jessie's case. I have very briefly summarized what I recall reading as far as it relates to specifically tying Jessie to the murders. Can anyone kindly tell me if I misread or completely missed testimony that specifically ties Jessie to the crime. What I saw was:

Dana Moore: Nothing
Pam Hobbs: Nothing
Melissa Byers: Nothing
Debra O'Tinger: Nothing
Regenia Meek: Nothing
John Moore: Nothing
Ryan Clark: Nothing
Allen: Nothing
Ridge: Nothing
Griffin: Nothing
Peretti: Nothing
Allen: Nothing
Durham: Polygraph
Ridge: Confession
Gitchell: Confession
Hollingworth: Nothing
Gitchell: Confession
Hutcheson: Nothing
Byers: Nothing
Ridge: Nothing(Echol's Search Warrant)
Sudbury: Nothing(Echol's Search Warrant/Baldwin's boots)
Sakevicius: Nothing
Turbyfill: Nothing
Channell: Nothing
DeGuglielmo: Nothing
Driver: Nothing

I feel I must have missed something because the only thing I saw as far as evidence directly tying Jessie to the murders was the testimony concerning the confession. Help is appreciated.
 
Reedus23

I am new also to this case but I do know the background story a bit, however since he was convicted and released I'm assuming his innocence until there is clear evidence of guilt.

However since I'm australian and don't have an understanding of the legal system in USA, all ive ever heard of is the double jeopardy rule... would this apply to the WM3? And does it make it harder to prove/reopen a case that's been tried/sentenced and convictions then overturned...

Your first comment is probably a safe bet. I was holding back on my own judgment until I read through the cases, but I'm finding myself drawn into the arguments regardless. It is a very very very safe bet that absolutely no prosecuting attorney anywhere in this country would ever even remotely consider taking the actions that the prosecuting attorneys did here that allowed for the release of 3 individuals convicted of murder unless the prosecuting attorneys were not 100% convinced, but 200% convinced that the persons being released did not, in fact, commit the crimes. That just would not happen for multiple reasons.

Double jeopardy would prevent the same person from being charged with the same crime twice so the WM3 could not be tried again but it wouldn't prevent others from being charged and tried. The state is still free to charge other people as far as the law is concerned. While the charges could be brought, obtaining a conviction would be extremely difficult because the state has already tried and convicted others. Think about all the arguments a defense attorney could make because the prosecution has already asserted someone else was responsible.
 
Torturing animals is a big red flag.
Again, I have never tortured a helpless creature and by my nature can not ever torture a helpless creature.
i dont have it in me. I am NoT capable of it. I have empathy.. Sadistic behaviour is not in my dna. now Im not saying I wouldnt be able to kill an animal for food if I had too, but it would be a quick and painless death for the poor thing. Does torturing and mutilating poor helpless creatures implicate him in the torture and murder and mutilation of those 3 helpless young boys? No. But his actions sure do earn him some points on Hare`s checklist.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
178
Guests online
543
Total visitors
721

Forum statistics

Threads
608,306
Messages
18,237,562
Members
234,338
Latest member
Nicolemc71
Back
Top