On False Confessions

[kyleb]

I looked and cannot find the post here, but the poster was dismissing the rape because there wasn't enough penetration for them to think it was rape - no tearing.

Right, but you said "It says in that document that Echols told him that the rape would not have showed up if the boys were already dead too", and again I'm pretty sure that's not what Jesse Hurst actually said, though I'd like to see a quote of what you are referring to if I am wrong.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Christopher Byers Autopsy: http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/autcb.html
Steve Branch Autopsy: http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/autsb.html
Michael Moore Autopsy: http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/autmm.html

This is interesting..

Christopher Byers: The right wrist was bound to the right ankle with a black shoe lace and the left wrist was bound to the left ankle with a white shoe lace.

Steve Branch: The body was that of a well developed, well nourished nude white male. The body was covered with mud, leaves and debris. The right hand bound to the right ankle with a black shoe lace, the left hand was bound to the left ankle with a white shoe lace.

Did both Steve and Chris have one white and one black shoelace, or were shoelaces from two pairs of shoes used on both of them, was it ever made clear at the time which lace in each of the bindings came from which shoe?

 

[Cappuccino]

was it ever made clear at the time which lace in each of the bindings came from which shoe?

And with the inevitability of night following day, everybody with an ounce of common sense who reads up on this case always asks this question.

Congratulations, Mrs G Norris, you've joined the club. Now I dare you to try and puzzle it out, (but get a headache tablet ready first).

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Well you have to wonder don't you? If they aren't sure which binding came from which shoe, then are they even sure if the bindings on Michael Moore weren't possibly the shoelaces from Steve Branch, or did they never find out at all?

 

[UdbCrzy2]

Right, but you said "It says in that document that Echols told him that the rape would not have showed up if the boys were already dead too", and again I'm pretty sure that's not what Jesse Hurst actually said, though I'd like to see a quote of what you are referring to if I am wrong.

I re-read it and I'm mistaken. It's very difficult to read.

I thought he was saying that if they were already deceased and raped it would not show up at autopsy instead of it would show up.

 

[Ausgirl]

I don't think I said that they did struggle

No, but Jessie did. Though I see you misquoted Echols.. so yes, it doesn't matter, never mind.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

No, but Jessie did. Though I see you misquoted Echols.. so yes, it doesn't matter, never mind.

It was Echols cellmate and no it doesn't matter.

But, now I'm thinking about what I thought he said. LoL
Would it show if the boys were deceased and then raped?

 

[kyleb]

Well of course less struggle means less chance of injury, be it due to death or unconsciousness.

 

[LordYAM]

So other instances of leading mean nothing, and that witnesses might not be credible thanks to timing nature of statement nature of witnesses. You hated more faith in human nature and the system then me

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Someone on a Facebook page I follow posted this youtube link:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmTu9wOocMY&feature=share"]Learn to recognize interrogation tactics that cause false confessions. - YouTube[/ame]



That "good guy/bad guy" stuff discussed reminds me of the "good circle/bad circle" that Gitchell used to get Jessie's "confession." As I've stated before, when a suspect is mentally challenged, it doesn't take ten hours to confuse and manipulate them into a false confession.

 

[gheckso]

Someone on a Facebook page I follow posted this youtube link:

Learn to recognize interrogation tactics that cause false confessions. - YouTube



That "good guy/bad guy" stuff discussed reminds me of the "good circle/bad circle" that Gitchell used to get Jessie's "confession." As I've stated before, when a suspect is mentally challenged, it doesn't take ten hours to confuse and manipulate them into a false confession.

Makes you sick to the stomach to see the lengths taken to get a result.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I was watching a show on Damon Thibodeaux. How he gave a false confession and it was proven eventually with REAL evidence.

It happens. That it happened with a kid who is not working at a normal level and with facts that were not true and all the bad details.. I can not believe these people are not just embarrassed to all get out that they took this kids confession as true.

It is shameful.

There are a lot more than people think.

 

[LordYAM]

It's in their interests. Accepting that means they may have to accept that Jessie's other confessions were bogus, and when you really get down to it those confessions are some of the only real "evidence" they've got. They have no physical evidence to actually place them at the scene, most real experts conclude that the lake knife was NOT the murder weapon, witness testimony that's questionable at best….

Most of the other stuff is arguments about how Damian was unstable or narcisstic which I'm sorry, is not really evidence in and of itself.

If the Confessions go than the entire case will take a massive blow.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

At the time (1994), the idea of false confessions was really in its infancy. Although that doesn't excuse the injustice in this case, it might explain it, at least in part. I wonder just how many people were convicted on a false confession years ago. Remember that Burnett tried to get a law passed (after he was elected to the State Senate) that would have basically opened the door for conviction based solely on confession. It didn't work but, IMO, it's pretty typical of his mindset. IMO, he introduced that bill to cover his a$$ in this case. IMO, that was pretty despicable. I'm certainly glad that he didn't succeed! IMO, the "evidence" that false confessions exist is overwhelming - and Jessie's "confession" is certainly a perfect example of such!

 

[LordYAM]

Sorry to necro an old thread but I have two questions.

What are the alleged cases Jesse confessed while he was in prison?

Another argument is that Jessie had run ins with the cops (4) and thus would know what a miranda right was.

I'm just curious about how these would have played in to the false confessions thread.

 

[Ausgirl]

There have been 321 post-conviction DNA exonerations in the United States.

• The first DNA exoneration took place in 1989. Exonerations have been won in 38 states; since 2000, there have been 254 exonerations.

• 20 of the 321 people exonerated through DNA served time on death row. Another 16 were charged with capital crimes but not sentenced to death.

• The average length of time served by exonerees is 13.5 years. The total number of years served is approximately 4,337.

• The average age of exonerees at the time of their wrongful convictions was 27.

Races of the 321 exonerees:

202 African Americans
95 Caucasians
22 Latinos
2 Asian American

• The true suspects and/or perpetrators have been identified in 158 of the DNA exoneration cases.

• Since 1989, there have been tens of thousands of cases where prime suspects were identified and pursued—until DNA testing (prior to conviction) proved that they were wrongly accused.

• In more than 25 percent of cases in a National Institute of Justice study, suspects were excluded once DNA testing was conducted during the criminal investigation (the study, conducted in 1995, included 10,060 cases where testing was performed by FBI labs).

• 65 percent of the people exonerated through DNA testing have been financially compensated. 29 states, the federal government, and the District of Columbia have passed laws to compensate people who were wrongfully incarcerated. Awards under these statutes vary from state to state.

• An Innocence Project review of our closed cases from 2004 - 2010 revealed that 22 percent of cases were closed because of lost or destroyed evidence.

• The Innocence Project was involved in 173 of the 321 DNA exonerations. Others were helped by Innocence Network organizations, private attorneys and by pro se defendants in a few instances.

• 31 of the DNA exonerees pled guilty to crimes they did not commit.

False confessions and incriminating statements lead to wrongful convictions in approximately 27 percent of cases. Looking only at the homicide cases, false confessions are the leading contributor to wrongful convictions, contributing to 64 (62%) of the 104 homicide wrongful convictions that were overturned by DNA evidence, where as misidentifications contributed to only 32 (31%) of the homicide wrongful convictions.

http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/DNA_Exonerations_Nationwide.php

 

[Ausgirl]

Here's a really good lecture that addresses in part how innocent people incriminate themselves:

[video=youtube;6wXkI4t7nuc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6wXkI4t7nuc[/video]

 

[Miranda!]

Sorry to necro an old thread but I have two questions.

What are the alleged cases Jesse confessed while he was in prison?

Another argument is that Jessie had run ins with the cops (4) and thus would know what a miranda right was.

I'm just curious about how these would have played in to the false confessions thread.

I am not aware of any 'run-ins' that were dire enough to possibly end up in court...plus, as CR has so often stated, and I endorse, those who find it challenging to understand what is going on will act as if they know rather than admit to not understanding. Very typical behaviour to avoid being 'shown up'.

As to your first point - I am not quite sure what you mean here. Many of those who are easily manipulated in to making a false confession also try, very hard, to please who ever the person who is doing the interrogation in an effort to make things easier! This 'people pleasing' attitude continues such that they often carry on 'confessing' in the vain hope that eventually they will come up with the right sort of response that will get them out of the situation they are in. A vain hope, but no one thinks they are bright enough to see how hopeless that is.

Also, given the make up of his peer group once he was incarcerated, it is highly unlikely that he would try to make out that he was a 'good' guy; beyond the inevitable 'I am innocent' claims of most convicts! In order to blend I am sure that at times he would try and 'talk himself up' in an effort to be accepted.

 

[Userid]

Also, given the make up of his peer group once he was incarcerated, it is highly unlikely that he would try to make out that he was a 'good' guy; beyond the inevitable 'I am innocent' claims of most convicts! In order to blend I am sure that at times he would try and 'talk himself up' in an effort to be accepted.

I really don't have a dog in this fight, but I just wanted to point out one thing: I don't really know how it was were JM was incarcerated, but I know in regular prisons around the country, child abusers/killers are singled out by the other inmates and severely beaten, raped, or both. In other words, even in US prisons, there is a "code" (if you will); and child abusers are the lowest of the low even there. So, if where JM was anything like the majority of US prisons around the country, that would have been the last thing he would have wanted to admit; and if he didn't realize that immediately upon entering prison, he would've learned damn fast.

I guess it would depend on when these confessions were made -- was it when he was still a juvenile? If it was, even in juvenile prison, such an admittance would do more harm than good, as far as trying to "blend in."

 

[Miranda!]

I know in regular prisons around the country, child abusers/killers are singled out by the other inmates and severely beaten, raped, or both. In other words, even in US prisons, there is a "code" (if you will); and child abusers are the lowest of the low even there. So, if where JM was anything like the majority of US prisons around the country, that would have been the last thing he would have wanted to admit; and if he didn't realize that immediately upon entering prison, he would've learned damn fast.

I guess it would depend on when these confessions were made -- was it when he was still a juvenile? If it was, even in juvenile prison, such an admittance would do more harm than good, as far as trying to "blend in."

You make a good point. Over here it is one of 'our' civil rights that our government has a statutory duty of care so anyone who is deemed 'at risk' in the prison system is carefully monitored or even put in a seperate part of the prison. In the US it seems, as far as I can make out, more a situation where the inmates are thrown in. locked away and left at the mercy of the hierarchy of the inmates. Misskelley has never talked about his time inside but, like Badwin, I should imagine he gained some security after the first film came out and also gained a degree of respect that he did not 'testify' against Echols or Baldwin!

One cannot justify the harsh prison system and length of sentences by saying that all inmates lack humanity! Or that all inmates are stupid! I would tend to think that Misskellley tried to 'brag' about being a hardened 'con' whilst also denying involvement in the child killings and would have been seen to not be the sharpest knife in the drawer. As such, he may well have won some 'protection' that enabled him to survive his time whilst also making him very doubting about the motives of people he did not know. I doubt we will ever learn much as he has shown no desire whatsoever to talk about his time inside. His alleged agoraphobia and severe lack of trust are testament to that.