so there is no DNA evidence that ties the WM3.....

[gryncher]

Do you know how many more appeals Damien has until they give him his execution date?

18 years is a LONG time to be on DR.

A good place to ask that is the Farm - I think I've seen your name there?

There are a lot of very knowledgeable folks on that site.

I could tell you, but I'd be guessing.

 

[iluvmua]

A good place to ask that is the Farm - I think I've seen your name there?

There are a lot of very knowledgeable folks on that site.

I could tell you, but I'd be guessing.

Yes, I am a member of WM3 Hoax, I go by iluvmua on there also.

I agree they are very knowledgeable about this case.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I agree that a needle awaits, and rightfully so. However, I don't believe it will go into the arm of Damien Echols as he is innocent of these murders.

 

[gryncher]

I agree that a needle awaits, and rightfully so. However, I don't believe it will go into the arm of Damien Echols as he is innocent of these murders.

He will be so disappointed. No longer will children fear him as the West Memphis Boogieman. He really enjoyed that feeling. What a let down that will be for poor Damien.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Personally I believe that, when he is released, Damien will just want to get on with his life and will feel no regrets that he is no longer the West Memphis Boogeyman. BTW, that statement was made by a foolish teen, not the intelligent and insightful young man who now (temporarily) resides unjustly on Death Row.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

There were many hairs at the scene. Very few of those hairs have been tested. That is a fact.

Misstatement... I meant JMB's wife. SHE committed suicide. Funny how the WM3 supporters used that as even more evidence that it was JMB who committed the crime, that his wife knew, and that she just couldn't live any longer. THAT is what's hilarious.

But of the parents currently alive, only Pam (who had a rough divorce from the very man she now claims was involved in the crime) and JMB (who's thankful that the supporters aren't targeting him any longer) support the WM3.

The parents of Mike Moore do NOT support the WM3 and are confident that the right people are in prison. How long til you guys turn on them and try to find a way to implicate them for the murders?

And, hellooooo, Terry gave samples when they were requested, 17 years ago to the prosecution. He didn't hesitate to do so.

But possibly something about helping the murderers of his stepchild get out of prison is why he's hesitant now. I don't blame him. He believes the right people are in prison--as do the Moores.

You are correct about only testing 'some' of the evidence. And we have to remember that there were others at the crime scene who were working the crime scene.

Let's see, we've gone from BoJangles to Melissa Byers to Mark Byers and now to Hobbs. Well, just about anyone as a suspect except for the one's who actually committed this heinous crime.

If we wait just a few minutes I'm sure there will be someone new coming up as yet another suspect. All you have to do is wait awhile for a new movie release. LOL

 

[Cappuccino]

Yup - the needle awaits. I look forward to that day.

LOL. Its hilarious when these old threads get resurrected and you see all the inaccurate predictions nons have made over the years.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

I believe both Sanders girls were mistaken about their reference to memory of Damien Echols activities on the evening of May 5, 1993. Both girls based their testimony on their memories of watching 90210.

According to
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0522918/ which lists the original air dates for each episode of 90210, there was no 90210 episode shown the week of May 5, 1993.

That's a pretty interesting find. When a so-called 'new witness' comes onto the scene and it's been 18-years later, it's usually a setup. This time it failed.

 

[Cappuccino]

The Sanders girls didn't come forward 18 years later, they were part of Damien's original alibi for May 5th.

And there was an episode of Beverley Hills 90210 aired that evening...

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6132349&postcount=38"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - so there is no DNA evidence that ties the WM3.....[/ame]

 

[WhiteLilly]

To add why the hair is so interesting - Damien Nichols had long black hair. Did LE find a single hair that matched DN amongst the site? Yes, I realize it did rain, but hair can become entwined in branches/rocks/mud. Who's to say all trace evidence went down the river.

MOO

Mel

It's Damien ECHOLS, not Nichols.

 

[WhiteLilly]

when its announced that they are getting a new trial im going to pop open a bottle of champers... when they are released i will then open 2!!!! I am sooooo anxious!

WM3 - Australia supports you!!!

I beg to differ. I am Australian and I believe them to be guilty.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I beg to differ. I am Australian and I believe them to be guilty.

A lot of Australians believe them to be innocent, however. Did you think Lindy Chamberlain was guilty until they found the matinee jacket?

 

[WhiteLilly]

A lot of Australians believe them to be innocent, however. Did you think Lindy Chamberlain was guilty until they found the matinee jacket?

I was about 3 years old so I didn't have an opinion.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I was about 3 years old so I didn't have an opinion.

Guess I'm showing my age, huh?:giggle:

 

[justthinkin]

There was an episode of Beverly Hills 90210 Aired on May 5, 1993



http://www.fancast.com/tv/Beverly-Hills-90210/62607/episodes/A-Night-to-Remember/227530

Too bad that episode aired April 28th, the week prior to the murders.
Release Date: 28 April 1993 (USA)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0522722/

Something in the Air was the episode which should have aired on May 5, 1993, but was preempted by something else. Release Date:12 May 1993 (USA
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0522918/



So find anything anywhere on the web that says that show, "A Night to Remember" aired on May 5, in West Memphis, other than from some supporter site.

The Sanders girls got it wrong, but lots of people will cling to that wrong information as if it were the truth. It's not. I'm not not saying they lied, they just remembered incorrectly, an honest mistake.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

There are receipts that support the fact that the Sanders adults went to the casino (IIRC) that night. The Sanders girls may have been mistaken about what was on television, but they were not mistaken about the Echols' being at her house that night. After all, if the girls were visiting with the Echols, they might not remember what was on television.

 

[justthinkin]

That's right, the Sanders adults were at the casino MAYBE or maybe not. The Sanders girls I was referring to was actually the older one who was not at home, but across the street at her cousin's house. I was loosely calling the cousin a Sanders girl because her name wasn't on the tip of my tongue. Regardless, the Sanders girl at her home, and the sister who was at the cousin's house across the street both testified to watching 90210 on Wednesday, May 5th., despite the fact the show didn't air that week in West Memphis or anywhere else. It was preempted by something, but I can't remember what. Could have been the NCAA basketball tournaments? I really don't know the event that preempted regular TV broadcasts that evening. A presidential speech?

The younger Sanders girl who remained at home also testified that she remembered the date of May 5, 1993 as the date the Echols/Hutchinsons came over because her boyfriend participated in a band event for the school on that date, and which turned out to be incorrect.

Fogleman: Alright. And last year did you have a person by the name of Nick Garza in your band?

Pokorski: Yes sir, I did.

Fogleman: Ok. And did you have a school spring concert?

Pokorski: Yes sir, we did.

Fogleman: Alright. When was the spring concert?

Pokorski: Uh - the spring concert was Monday night, May 17th in the West Memphis civic auditorium.

Fogleman: Alright. Now, did you have any other practices or concerts or anything of that nature in May of last year in West Memphis?

Pokorski: No sir.

Fogleman: I don't have any further questions.
----

My point is neither Sander's girl's testimony was reliable as evidence since the younger got the reason she remembered the date wrong, and the older one said this in testimony :

Davidson: And how do you know that this was May 5th of 1993?

(Stacy)Sanders: I don't know, um - because it was the first time my parents went to Splash and it was on a Wednesday night because 90210 come on and -
------

Both Sanders girls relied on watching 90210 that evening, and if 90210 was indeed on, then the date they actually recall the Echols/Hutchinson family being at their parents' house is not May the 5th, 1993, but some other date either prior to or after the murders.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Gail Poindexter Sharp, who was also at the casino, remembered the date to be May 5 because she won $10,000 at the slot machines. Mr. Sanders (Randy) was confused about dates, but he did say that the night Gail won was the first time they had gone to the casino. Gail had some sort of receipt verifying the date.

I don't think that the girls' memories about what was on television are reliable because I believe that they remember seeing Damien and his family at their home when their parents were at the casino. I don't think what was on television was important and they just said 90210 because that's what is usually on at that time. I think their memories of talking to/seeing Damien and his family are more vivid than what was on television.

Randy testified that they only went to the casino three or four times. The first time apparently stood out in their minds because of the windfall that their friend, Gail, received. So, the Sanders were at the casino on May 5th and Damien and his family visited the Sanders home while they were gone. What was on television is simply not important, and the fact that the girls don't remember can be explained, as I said before, by the fact that, with Damien and his parents visiting, the girls were probably talking to them instead of watching television. The fact that Damien and his family visited while the parents were at the casino is what is important.

It is possible that the preemption was unplanned and that 90210 started but didn't finish and was replayed on May 12th. (BTW, it wouldn't have been the NCAA tournament. That is called "March Madness" and is in March.) Here's a possible scenario. When Damien and his parents got to the Sanders' house, 90210 had started and the girls used it as a point of reference. The girls didn't realize that the show didn't really air because they were talking with Damien and his parents. That IMO is a plausible explanation of what could have happened and why the 90210 show wasn't broadcast at that time.

 

[Cappuccino]

I wonder what was broadcast that night instead? Obviously from the IMDB listings Wed night at 7 pm was its regular time slot, and presumably for it to be moved there must have been something important that needed to be shown that night instead? Can anybody remember what, or think of a way to find out 18 years later?

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Maybe someone with a connection to the case kept the newspaper for May 5, 1993, with the TV listings. I'll have to ask around. It would sure be interesting to find one!