Random things about this case...

[Compassionate Reader]

Shortened for brevity-

Not true.

In the crime scene notes, an estimate is made that Moore's body was found 25 feet north of Branch's body. This is consistent with Jessie's many confessions where he never waivered that he had Moore, Moore ran, and he chased and caught him. Jessie stated that he was farther away from the other 4 people and this is what the crime scene notes show.
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/crime_scene_notes_dictated.html

You left out the part where Jessie said that he brought him back to Damien and Jason. So, if Jessie is telling the truth, the bodies would be together.

 

[I Must Break You]

I think it's interesting how his statements progress.first there's that stuff about 5 guys doing all sorts of crazy things in the woods and it's definitely not Jessie.Aaron is scared of Byers and thinks he killed the kids.
Then he starts claiming he was there and starts implicating Damien,Jason and his friend Jessie.he starts out being the hero that fought off the perps and got away.Ultimately he implicates himself as both a victim and perpetrator.
No matter if he really ever did see something strange going on in the woods both his mom and the investigators were screwing undoubtedly with his head.Not only did he have to deal with the death of his friends,his mom's drug use he was also supposed to be the hero,the one who solves the crime,what an unimaginable burden to carry for a child,he lied to please everyone and is traumatized for life.

I honestly don't believe Aaron knows or ever saw anything... Didn't in his initial interview he had 2 of the boys pulling guns on the attackers? I'm almost positive this whole deal with Vickie and Aaron was just a charade by Vickie to get some charges she was facing dropped. So to me I don't believe either play any kind of role in the case.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Are you certain it was the WM3.org Defense Fund, which is completely controlled by Damien Echol's wife, that coughed up $300 for Jessie to turn on his electricity? Are you sure it wasn't a kind individual donor who gave Jessie the necessary $300? Was it 2 or 3 weeks that Jessie spent without electricity? Are Damien and Lorri still taking that expensive vacation in New Zealand? How many years has it been since Lorri, Damien's wife, was employed?

I didn't say where the funds were obtained. I simply said that the shortfall was covered. It wouldn't be an expense the Defense Fund would pay I wouldn't think. That money is now being used to fund the efforts at exoneration. I would imagine that a benefactor, like Peter Jackson who is covering the expenses for the trip to New Zealand, would pay that money. I don't know how long Jessie was without electricity; all I know is that as soon as the situation was known (Jessie didn't make it known) the problem was solved.

From Wikipedia:
(There were concerns) about financial opacity and irregularities associated with the Damien Echols Trust Account, which seemed to be getting all the funds raised by Echol's wife, Lorri Davis and WM3.org. These concerns were shared by Dan Stidham, Jessie Misskelley's original attorney, now a judge, and confirmed by Jason Baldwin's attorney, John T. Philipsborn. The WM3IP demanded transparency and accountability in WM3.org's fundraising process, so that all three wrongly convicted men could benefit from financial donations, not just one. In fact, according to WM3IP's website at the time, very little of the donated funds collected by Lorri Davis via the WM3.org website had made its way to the defense teams for Misskelley and Baldwin, the "forgotten" other two members of the WM3. Stidham called this lack of fairness in the defense fund distribution "an injustice inside an injustice."
Kelly Duda - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yes, there were problems with the defense fund at one time. They have been rectified. BTW, Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia, hardly a reliable source.

 

[Cappuccino]

I honestly don't believe Aaron knows or ever saw anything... Didn't in his initial interview he had 2 of the boys pulling guns on the attackers? I'm almost positive this whole deal with Vickie and Aaron was just a charade by Vickie to get some charges she was facing dropped. So to me I don't believe either play any kind of role in the case.

I wish they had played no role in this case! Instead, they've played an entirely mischievous role, with Aaron starting out by telling tall tales of robed men up in the woods chanting in Spanish and touching each others private parts, and ending up confessing to the crime.

It just shows the dangers of over zealous LEOs questioning child witnesses repeatedly, especially when the child's own mother is encouraging him to lie.

 

[claudicici]

....and it mirrors Jessies investigation IMO,we see how it was done with Aaron,so what makes people think it was any different with Jessie?....just because his story slightly makes more sense .......
I think even if Vickie and Aaron ultimately know nothing exact they were part of the boys environment.Stevie and Chris were both abused children from drug addicted parents.
Vickie was heavily into drugs.I think the answers lay way more closely to that environment including a police force that was being investigated and had stuff to hide as well so it makes sense they created this Satanic panic ,Damien was like a big dog that barks and everyone's attention was on him .....most often its true those dogs don't bite.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

....and it mirrors Jessies investigation IMO,we see how it was done with Aaron,so what makes people think it was any different with Jessie?....just because his story slightly makes more sense .......
I think even if Vickie and Aaron ultimately know nothing exact they were part of the boys environment.Stevie and Chris were both abused children from drug addicted parents.
Vickie was heavily into drugs.I think the answers lay way more closely to that environment including a police force that was being investigated and had stuff to hide as well so it makes sense they created this Satanic panic ,Damien was like a big dog that barks and everyone's attention was on him .....most often its true those dogs don't bite.

To be fair to the WMPD, they didn't create the Satanic panic; they just IMO unethically made use of it and railroaded three throw away teenagers for three murders that they didn't commit.

 

[Cappuccino]

....and it mirrors Jessies investigation IMO,we see how it was done with Aaron,so what makes people think it was any different with Jessie?....just because his story slightly makes more sense .......
I think even if Vickie and Aaron ultimately know nothing exact they were part of the boys environment.Stevie and Chris were both abused children from drug addicted parents.
Vickie was heavily into drugs.I think the answers lay way more closely to that environment including a police force that was being investigated and had stuff to hide as well so it makes sense they created this Satanic panic ,Damien was like a big dog that barks and everyone's attention was on him .....most often its true those dogs don't bite.

I think Jessie is taken more seriously because, even though he may have been mentally the same age as Aaron, he's physically older. I agree that the murders are much more likely to be a product of something closer to home than teenage satanists, but I think the WMPD was itself infected by Satanic Panic, not deliberately stoking it.

 

[Pensfan]

Yes, there were problems with the defense fund at one time. They have been rectified. BTW, Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia, hardly a reliable source.

If so desired, you can stop spending 70+ hours/week on this thread and find yourself some better sources among other things.




If the Lord of the Rings director, Peter Jackson, funded the men's defense for the past seven years, where have all the millions collected by Lorri’s foundation gone?

The following is from:
http://memphis-news.info/memphis-top-stories/peter-jackson-helped-west-memphis-three-defense.html

Activist group Free West Memphis 3 said the support of (Peter) Jackson and (Fran) Walsh had been "instrumental" in the release of Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley after 18 years. According to a statement from the group, Jackson and Walsh, “funded key investigative efforts on behalf of the defense, in an effort to prove the wrongful conviction of the three men in prison.”
*
"(Peter) Jackson and (Fran) Walsh funded an extensive private investigation over a number of years, which led to uncovering crucial new DNA evidence; they were instrumental in hiring some of the country’s leading forensic experts to re-evaluate the case and uncover new witnesses, all of which contributed to the Arkansas Supreme Court’s decision to reopen the case.

"Peter and Fran have funded seven years of investigation into trying to get these guys freed," he (Jackson’s spokesman, Matt Dravitzki,) said. "

 

[Compassionate Reader]

If so desired, you can stop spending 70+ hours/week on this thread and find yourself some better sources among other things.

If the Lord of the Rings director, Peter Jackson, funded the men's defense for the past seven years, where have all the millions collected by Lorri’s foundation gone?

The following is from:
http://memphis-news.info/memphis-top-stories/peter-jackson-helped-west-memphis-three-defense.html

Activist group Free West Memphis 3 said the support of (Peter) Jackson and (Fran) Walsh had been "instrumental" in the release of Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley after 18 years. According to a statement from the group, Jackson and Walsh, “funded key investigative efforts on behalf of the defense, in an effort to prove the wrongful conviction of the three men in prison.”
*
"(Peter) Jackson and (Fran) Walsh funded an extensive private investigation over a number of years, which led to uncovering crucial new DNA evidence; they were instrumental in hiring some of the country’s leading forensic experts to re-evaluate the case and uncover new witnesses, all of which contributed to the Arkansas Supreme Court’s decision to reopen the case.

"Peter and Fran have funded seven years of investigation into trying to get these guys freed," he (Jackson’s spokesman, Matt Dravitzki,) said. "

First, what I do with my time is my business, not yours.

Second, the statements in bold above indicate to me that, although Mr. Jackson's funding was important, other monies were necessary. DNA testing, and the other investigations and testing, are from what I've seen extremely expensive. That expense is, in part, why the State of Arkansas didn't thoroughly investigate this crime in 1993. I can't totally let them off the hook, however, because there is at least one person that they never thoroughly questioned until 2007 that should have been much higher on their suspect list than any of the WMFree.

 

[Silkprint]

What happened to the missing monies?

 

[Compassionate Reader]

What happened to the missing monies?

I can't give you an item by item account, but all I know is that everyone has kissed and made up over the whole money debacle. IIRC, someone else took over the defense fund to see that it was more equitably distributed. Also, there are addresses where anyone who wishes can now send monies directly to any of the three instead of the defense fund.

 

[Silkprint]

I will have to go look up what happened with the money thing .

 

[hello people]

But the hair wasn't equivocally 150% Hobbs' was it?

So...that's not really hard evidence in anyway shape or form

Heck...the makers of West of Memphis counldn't even get Jocoby to slip Hobbs' tongue up.

Tight those two.

Hmmm come to think of it....what the hell was Jacoby unleashing a torrent of crocodile tears for?

Did he think they would pay him more if he cried?

Was he feigning those tears to cover his murderous credentials?

Was he covering for that sinister and seedy Hobbs?

Was he truly overcome...as a man...removed from the victims...by 20 years...in the pool room...with the reporter...with the cameras....holding the pool cue...Colonel Mustard...in the kitchen...with the candlestick?

It's all one big grey area

I lean towards this:

They did it

 

[HastingsChi]

But the hair wasn't equivocally 150% Hobbs' was it?

So...that's not really hard evidence in anyway shape or form

Heck...the makers of West of Memphis counldn't even get Jocoby to slip Hobbs' tongue up.

Tight those two.

Hmmm come to think of it....what the hell was Jacoby unleashing a torrent of crocodile tears for?

Did he think they would pay him more if he cried?

Was he feigning those tears to cover his murderous credentials?

Was he covering for that sinister and seedy Hobbs?

Was he truly overcome...as a man...removed from the victims...by 20 years...in the pool room...with the reporter...with the cameras....holding the pool cue...Colonel Mustard...in the kitchen...with the candlestick?

It's all one big grey area

I lean towards this:

They did it

I'd imagine that you've never leaned towards the possibility they are innocent or even took a non leaning, open minded view of it...

 

[hello people]

Yes I have.

At first I thought they were innocent

But the deep evidence doesn't show that

 

[HastingsChi]

Yes I have.

At first I thought they were innocent

But the deep evidence doesn't show that

I'd be quite interested to learn specifically what you believe is the deep evidence and what specifically about each item of "deep evidence" demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that they are guilty (or innocent)?

Thanks, in advance, for your thoughtful feedback.

 

[kyleb]

I suspect that by "deep evidence" HP was making a general reference to the evidence which has been either flagrantly misrepresented or outright ignored in mainstream accounts of the case, his use of the term deep referring to the fact that one has to dig past such accounts to find that evidence. Regardless, assessing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt isn't a matter of considering each item of evidence individually, but rather one of determining if reasonable doubt is tenable given the body of evidence as a whole. If convictions required smoking guns, proverbial or otherwise, all but the dumbest of degenerates would walk free from the law.

 

[Cappuccino]

I suspect that by "deep evidence" HP was making a general reference to the evidence which has been either flagrantly misrepresented or outright ignored in mainstream accounts of the case, his use of the term deep referring to the fact that one has to dig past such accounts to find that evidence.

I'd be very surprised if any regular poster in this sub forum didn't already know about this so called deep "evidence".

Regardless, assessing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt isn't a matter of considering each item of evidence individually, but rather one of determining if reasonable doubt is tenable given the body of evidence as a whole.

Not quite. You're supposed to assess each piece of evidence individually first to see whether or not its true. Then you put together what's left to see if the case is tenable with the body of evidence that is actually true.

Not much point in putting together a case which involves false confessions, flawed eye witness statements, discredited fibre evidence and an idiot who bought his diploma and claimed expert witness status to testify that 8 year old boys produce semen. That's not a tenable case beyond reasonable doubt, its just sling alot of mud at the wall and hope some of it will stick.

If convictions required smoking guns, proverbial or otherwise, all but the dumbest of degenerates would walk free from the law.

These convictions were not lacking smoking guns. They were lacking evidence beyond reasonable doubt, and like most flawed convictions, those doubts became stronger and more widespread the more forensic science advanced. In any real case the opposite happens - the defendants' claims for innocence fall apart the more technology advances. See for example Rodney Alcala, who won three retrials on he said/she said stuff, until DNA cropped up and bit him firmly in the *advertiser censored*.

 

[Nova]

I understand people feel strongly on one side or the other, but for those of us new to the case and reading things, trying to discuss it here is nearly impossible. some people are really defensive.

Peepers, on behalf of all of us with strong opinions, I apologize if you feel you haven't been able to explore the case here. I don't think anyone means to attack you or anyone else personally.

But this case has been in the news for nearly 20 years. A lot of us have read multiple books and articles and followed every development over those many years. Naturally, our opinions have tended to harden.

I hope you won't take our vehemence too much to heart.

 

[Nova]

This is very personal for some posters because they falsely believe they must defend themselves/their subculture by defending anyone who has a similar subculture.

Perhaps, but speaking for myself, I have very little in common with the defendants. But I feel very strongly about miscarriages of justice, especially when the irreversible d.p. is involved.