Greetings - Just came across this thread via a Google search.
I've been interested in the WM3 case since around 2000. I saw the HBO shows (I wouldn't call them documentaries; they were undeniably advocacy pieces) in 1998 and wasn't convinced by them that it was a wrongful conviction.
I'm an attorney - not a defense attorney nor a prosecutor and don't' represent the WM3. I do have significant experience in the criminal justice system.
My views have evolved since I saw the HBO shows, primarily as a result of reading Jessie's statements, reading the trial transcripts, and reading Devil's Knot - the leading (if dated at this point) book on the case. I am now an ardent supporter.
Jessie's statements can be found here - I strongly suggest that anyone interested in the case take the time to read them (and download / LISTEN TO the audio, intonation is important here):
http://www.dpdlaw.com/jmstatements.htm . Before expressing an opinion on this case, TAKE THE TIME TO REVIEW THESE YOURSELF.
Devil's Knot is on Amazon (used copies about $2).
Jessie did indeed make multiple statements. The problem is that he could never make one that came anywhere close to aligning with the physical evidence -- not even close to being close. Even when trying to cut a deal for a better sentence after his conviction, he had to be lead and was constantly vacillating on major details of the crime (were the boys raped? what kind of knife was involved? when did it happen). Between his mentality, the circumstances of the crime, and the content of his statements, one can only conclude that it is a classic case of a false confession. No one with a positive IQ and ANY experience with true / false statements who takes the time to read what he said can walk away with confidence that these statements have any basis in reality.
The comparisons to supports of other, truly guilty people (Scott Peterson, OJ Simpson, Charles Manson, Mumia Abu-Jamal, Amanda Knox, Melanie McGuire, etc) is just an indication that one hasn't read the record here. I'm as irked as the next person at guilty SOB's who have mindless drone supporters - this isn't the case here.
I don't want to make this post too long (too late for that?), but will briefly address some of the posts I've seen -
1 - The WM3 have consistently called for testing of evidence and retesting of evidence with better technology. In my direct experience, truly guilty people don't do this - they back out at the last minute with a statement like "uhh, let's not test it because the police might have messed with the evidence" (etc).
The State, in what can only be described as awe-inspiring bad faith, has fought many of these efforts. AR Attorney General Dustin McDaniel has commented on the "fiber evidence microscopically similar to the WM3" ... a scan 6 months after (successfully) fighting Jason Baldwin's motion to retest the fibers with modern technology (State saying the new testing methods are "new" enough - they POTENTIALLY could have been used in 1994).
Obviously, if the State were concerned with the TRUTH, they'd be the ones yelling to test evidence - not fighting it.
No physical evidence links the WM3 - not a fingerprint, hair, footprint, allele, or single strand of DNA. The closest thing is the fibers .... which the defense has tried to retest with modern, much more precise methods.
2 - A truly world-renowned panel of forensic pathology experts have determined that the wounds on the boys were the result of animal predation, not knives. I won't post the link here, but only needs to do a side-by-side comparison of known cases of animal predation to the wounds on the boys to see it -- it's obvious. (This also conflicts with and completely negates the idea that Jessie Misskelley saw the crimes committed)
3 - Other marks on the boys align 100% with rebar; impressions that even the State says were made at or around the time of death. The boys were not killed on the ditch bank (which had no blood on it in any case), they were killed very nearby at a manhole that the boys played in / around and the bodies moved later in the night (also supported by the lividity status of the boys' bodies). Again, this is forensics, not opinions, not statements or anything else subject to interpretation. (This also conflicts with and completely negates the idea that Jessie Misskelley saw the crimes committed)
3 - In 2007, long-awaited DNA results came back and excluded the WM3 as the source of ANY biological evidence connected to the crime. It also cleared Mark Byers, the adoptive father of one of the victims (Chris Byers) who some had accused of involvement. It implicated Terry Hobbs, the abusive stepfather of one of the victims (Stevie Branch) - but Terry (who IS the killer) is for another post.
Yes, LaurensMom - that was a real broadcast from the time of the murders.
Dirty Larry - there were two trials, the Misskelley statements were not supposed to be used at the Baldwin / Echols trial since Jessie refused to testify against them (and hence couldn't be cross-examined), but a juror did in fact use them (went into the trial with a brother who was facing child-rape charges, lied his way onto the jury, openly boasted that he'd get a conviction by making sure the jurors knew of Jessie's statements) and did so. You're obviously bright, but please keep an open mind and read up more on the case (reading and thinking is what makes WM3 supporters).
I'll post again later on the trial procedure and defects in that; even if one had a question (before the experts, DNA, etc) as to what happened, the trials were an utter farce.
Terry Hobbs is in fact the killer; the WM3 have been wrongly convicted.
I'm not sure if cross-posting is allowed here, so admin feel free to zap this if not -- For more info on the WM3, check out:
http://www.wm3blackboard.com (run by the stepfather of one of the victims, who is an outspoken supporter of the WM3 -- all family members except the Moores support the WM3).
aussiesleuth - what "false facts" are you referring to that supporters have said? Please be specific. I agree that some supporters say stupid things that aren't accurate ("Jessie confessed once and immediately retracted it", "Jessie was questioned for 12 hours", Damien had no psych issues, etc) ... one should view the true facts and trial record.
..... As Arnold would say -- "I'll be back."