Summary of Damien's Mental Health History

[Pensfan]

This is what happens when you put any random individual under the laser beam of scrutiny, and simultaneously view them through the skewed lens of hatred.

With absolutely no evidence, Damien Echols morphs into Jeffrey Dahmer and Ed Gein all in one go.

Its one of those arguments that you cannot reason with. It is simply impossible to reason a person out of a position which they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

"Skewed lens of hatred"?

I don't have any hatred for Damien Echols. I clearly view him as a mental health professional who sees him for the dangerous person that HE DESCRIBED HIMSELF TO BE to be as well as many mental health professionals who interviewed him and HIS OWN FAMILY WHO WANTED HIM OUT OF THEIR HOME BECAUSE THEY WERE AFRAID OF HIM.

 

[Cappuccino]

And these people whose opinions you put in capital letters all viewed him as a potential Jeffrey Dahmer or Ed Gein? Or was that your fiction?

So, yes - skewed lens of hatred is what I would describe anybody who described Damien's mental health history as a reason for thinking that Damien's mental health history is a reason for accusing him of murder. Let alone Jason and Jessie, unless you are pursuing a theory of this crime as a "folie a trois".

Btw, this crime was not committed by a mad person. It was the murder of an organised and pre-meditated killer who blends nicely into the background with a suit and tie, and a mask of sanity.

 

[claudicici]

Pensfan,you quote Jerry Garcia, undoubtedly someone who may be obscured by preconceived notions so I know you are aware the great american musician you are quoting may be conceived by some as a fat drug addict.By quoting him I'm sure you are aware of his talent,his artistry and would defend him if someone accused him of murder because of his depression,his addiction,his mental disorder.
I know as a professional you are aware of how many of us have problems and I know you can't be prejudiced of someone with a disorder.My aunt was a schizophrenic and without any education even as a child I knew how different she was.....and if three children would have ended up being murdered close to her I would have never ever suspected her despite all the controversy

 

[Silkprint]

OFF TOPIC
There really should be a DP thread here on WS somewhere as there are alot of diff. opinions on it .

 

[krimekat]

I believe that is an old post you are quoting Krime .

It sure is! I read here at WS (and have for many years) for consolidated information!!! Hey, I kind of care about your opinion, but if it does not conform to FACTS I am able to obtain or you are able to supply, then whatever! To each his own . . .

Another thing, I do not like that fact that some of my posts disappeared. Yeah, whoever is the MOD here, why delete my posts?! I consciously crafted posts well within the Terms of Service . . . you have nastiness going on & it's not being addressed!

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Pensfan,you quote Jerry Garcia, undoubtedly someone who may be obscured by preconceived notions so I know you are aware the great american musician you are quoting may be conceived by some as a fat drug addict.By quoting him I'm sure you are aware of his talent,his artistry and would defend him if someone accused him of murder because of his depression,his addiction,his mental disorder.
I know as a professional you are aware of how many of us have problems and I know you can't be prejudiced of someone with a disorder.My aunt was a schizophrenic and without any education even as a child I knew how different she was.....and if three children would have ended up being murdered close to her I would have never ever suspected her despite all the controversy

Look up the definition of the word "prejudice" or just look at its component parts. From its component parts, it means to judge before something. In common usage, it often means judging someone based on something about them that they cannot change or sometimes judging someone based on some preconceived notion that the "judge" may have about something about the person (like their penchant to wear black or listen to heavy metal music). Usually, in a criminal case, that means judging before having all the facts. IMO, that's what's happening here.

Some people want to say that Damien is guilty because of his past mental history. However, it seems to me that these same people don't want to consider the fact that he was an arrogant teenager at the time. This fact colors his actions in ways that are sometimes hard to ignore, and also, apparently for some people, hard to understand.

Yes, he said many outlandish things, before the murders occurred, during the trial and early on in his period of incarceration. As he matured, however, the outlandishness disappeared. Simply put, he was a confused and possibly depressed teenager, but that simply doesn't make him a murderer.

IMO, many of his outlandishness could easily have been due to improper medication. IIRC, the medication that he was on until he arrived on Death Row has since been judged to be inappropriate for someone as young as he was when he went on it. What long-term effects could that situation have had on him and what effects did it have on him while he was on the medication? IMO, this situation hasn't been addressed at all.

When I first saw the first documentary, I saw Damien through my teacher's eyes. I recognized a troubled, depressed, arrogant teenager who seemed to hate the world. (I've seen the same person with hundreds of different faces.) I never for one minute believed that those qualities made him a murderer - a suspect, yes, but not a murderer.

What I looked for as I investigated this case was evidence that the WMFree committed these murders. I didn't find any. Knowing small-town justice as I do, I simply didn't believe without question the two jury decisions. (Don't get me started about juries because my thoughts might really anger you!)

As I investigated and still found no evidence pointing directly to the WMFree, I began to wonder who could have killed the little boys. I continued reading and found my answer. Now that the WMFree are free, I just want justice for those three precious lives cut so tragically short.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

I believe that is an old post you are quoting Krime .

That is a very old post. Many would of never thought that they would be released this quickly. With them being so young when they were convicted, it was likely that they would be released.

In this case when the chance of a new jury trial they decided that they would avoid a chance of another conviction and just plead guilty and take time served. I guess I can't blame them for that, but to continue to profess innocence makes me scratch my head because they claim the have evidence to prove they are all innocent. Just doesn't make good sense to me.

adding:
People do get new trials and most of them plead guilty and take time served. Arkansas is also a state that has time off for good behavior, which I totally think sucks for violent crimes.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

In this case when the chance of a new jury trial they decided that they would avoid a chance of another conviction and just plead guilty and take time served. I guess I can't blame them for that, but to continue to profess innocence makes me scratch my head because they claim the have evidence to prove they are all innocent. Just doesn't make good sense to me.

<respectfully snipped>

The problem was Damien's health, both his physical health and his dental health. He had been in solitary confinement (as are all Death Row inmates, I know) and unable to go outside for about ten years. Almost every time he was interviewed, the guards tossed his cell and often threw away many of his belongings. It was beginning to wear him down. They are continuing to fight to prove their innocence, but, as Damien said, now they can do it as free men.

This is just speculation on my part, but I think that part of the problem might have been that all the test results weren't back yet, and the possibility that the results wouldn't be back by the deadline might have played into this decision. Eventually, however, these results will come back, and, if Ellington is a man of his word, this case may yet be reopened. That would be a good thing because then the real killer of those three little boys can be placed in prison where he belongs.

What makes less sense is the State of Arkansas saying, "OK. Now that you have said the magic word, we'll let you go." If I were a citizen of Arkansas and I truly believed that these three men were murderers (which they aren't), I'd be very upset by that turn of events. Why did the State, who already had them in prison, agree to a plea that let them out? They got out; that's why they accepted the deal. They can still work to be exonerated even thought they pleaded guilty by Alford.

What did the State of Arkansas get? Well, they were able to save face and fend off the multimillion dollar law suits that would have followed the not guilty verdicts at the new trials (which would have also cost the taxpayers of Arkansas millions). The State was able to keep some politicians in office that would have surely been impeached (or voted out) after the inevitable not guilty verdicts. Hmm . . . seems to me that the State did pretty well.

Does anyone here believe that the State of Arkansas would have agreed to this deal if they really believed that Damien, Jason and Jessie were guilty? If they would have accepted the deal and were 100% convinced of their guilt, well, that's sick! It's obvious that either the State knew or suspected that Damien, Jason and Jessie were innocent or they are so cash-starved in Arkansas that they are willing to let murderers go free just so they don't have to pay for another trial.

What happened to that "11" case Gitchell discussed? It kinda went away with the Satanic panic, didn't it? All the State ever had was Satanic panic and Jessie's stories. They knew that, with that motive gone, they couldn't railroad these three young men again, especially with attorneys that could impeach Jessie's bogus statements. IMO, all of the above information in the previous three paragraphs is why the State took this deal.

 

[SunD]

<respectfully snipped

Does anyone here believe that the State of Arkansas would have agreed to this deal if they really believed that Damien, Jason and Jessie were guilty? If they would have accepted the deal and were 100% convinced of their guilt, well, that's sick! It's obvious that either the State knew or suspected that Damien, Jason and Jessie were innocent or they are so cash-starved in Arkansas that they are willing to let murderers go free just so they don't have to pay for another trial.

This sounds about right. These officers and lawyers are human beings. I find it hard to believe that doubts never crossed their minds.

 

[Wishbone]

It sure is! I read here at WS (and have for many years) for consolidated information!!! Hey, I kind of care about your opinion, but if it does not conform to FACTS I am able to obtain or you are able to supply, then whatever! To each his own . . .

Another thing, I do not like that fact that some of my posts disappeared. Yeah, whoever is the MOD here, why delete my posts?! I consciously crafted posts well within the Terms of Service . . . you have nastiness going on & it's not being addressed!

I’ve had a post disappear as well. I voiced my opinion on a poster giving invalid information that was proven wrong very quickly. I now completely discount any information that is posted by that particular person!!

 

[JBean]

It sure is! I read here at WS (and have for many years) for consolidated information!!! Hey, I kind of care about your opinion, but if it does not conform to FACTS I am able to obtain or you are able to supply, then whatever! To each his own . . .

Another thing, I do not like that fact that some of my posts disappeared. Yeah, whoever is the MOD here, why delete my posts?! I consciously crafted posts well within the Terms of Service . . . you have nastiness going on & it's not being addressed!

Typically posts are removed because they violate rules or etiquette and/or they quote a post that violates TOS or etiqutte.

Typical reasons for post removal are personal attacks on members, members trying to moderate others, members discussing other members on the board, going OT, things like that.

Moderators do not read every post. If a violating post stands it is most likely because no moderator ever read it and no member ever reported it. In this case someone reported your post or it may not have been ever seen by a moderator. This post would not typically stand as it is a violation in etiquette. discussing nastiness in the forum and asking a mod publicly rather than privately why a post was removed and generally complaining about moderation. It is all OT and a violation of etiquette.

So, if a post violates be sure to report it by clicking the little red trinagle in the upper right corner of each post.
Above all don't respond to a post that is in violation because then your post is also in violation.

 

[JBean]

I’ve had a post disappear as well. I voiced my opinion on a poster giving invalid information that was proven wrong very quickly. I now completely discount any information that is posted by that particular person!!

For example a post like this is in violation and would be removed. It is discussing another member. Sorry to single you out but since you all were asking I am answering.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Typically posts are removed because they violate rules or etiquette and/or they quote a post that violates TOS or etiqutte.

Typical reasons for post removal are personal attacks on members, members trying to moderate others, members discussing other members on the board, going OT, things like that.

Moderators do not read every post. If a violating post stands it is most likely because no moderator ever read it and no member ever reported it. In this case someone reported your post or it may not have been ever seen by a moderator. This post would not typically stand as it is a violation in etiquette. discussing nastiness in the forum and asking a mod publicly rather than privately why a post was removed and generally complaining about moderation. It is all OT and a violation of etiquette.

So, if a post violates be sure to report it by clicking the little red trinagle in the upper right corner of each post.
Above all don't respond to a post that is in violation because then your post is also in violation.

This is what keeps the discussion on this board civil. Thank you.

 

[Wishbone]

For example a post like this is in violation and would be removed. It is discussing another member. Sorry to single you out but since you all were asking I am answering.

Appreciate knowing what happened. I did not respond directly to or name the person that posted the disinfo but I did state in my post that it was very confusing to have erroneous info stated as fact.

 

[Pensfan]

Pensfan,you quote Jerry Garcia, undoubtedly someone who may be obscured by preconceived notions so I know you are aware the great american musician you are quoting may be conceived by some as a fat drug addict.By quoting him I'm sure you are aware of his talent,his artistry and would defend him if someone accused him of murder because of his depression,his addiction,his mental disorder.
I know as a professional you are aware of how many of us have problems and I know you can't be prejudiced of someone with a disorder.My aunt was a schizophrenic and without any education even as a child I knew how different she was.....and if three children would have ended up being murdered close to her I would have never ever suspected her despite all the controversy

Projecting.

About a year ago I put that quote in my signature as a parody. This was after a xanax-deficient individual placed a quote from an ancient Roman philosopher in her signature. (This person has since been banned.) I don't have any interest in defending the weight or mental health of Mr. Garcia unless this is him.

I listen to classic rock from old British bands which is very different from the bluegrass and folk music sound of the Grateful Dead.

I am saddened that your aunt lived with schizophrenia. You chose the word "was schizophrenic", so if she passed, I sincerely hope that she passed peacefully.

 

[Mary456]

Many posters have asked for page numbers referencing Exhibit 500, so here is a revised copy.

SUMMARY OF DAMIEN ECHOLS’ MENTAL HEALTH HISTORY

Source: Exhibit 500 http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/img/exh500.html
Page numbers are in parentheses.


5/7/92.* E. Arkansas Mental Health Center:* Client admits to having been suspended seven times this past semester for initiating fights at school and starting fires.* States in one fight he almost gouged out the victim’s eyes. (29)

6/1/92 - 6/25/92.* Committed to Charter Hospital of Little Rock:* Admits to a history of violence and attempting to scratch out the eyes of a classmate.* There were major concerns that Damien was exhibiting disturbed thinking.* He has a history of extreme physical aggression toward others.* It was felt that he needed to be temporarily removed from his environment to provide protection for him and protection for others. ( 92, 188).

Damien states, “I burn myself with lighters. I have huffed gas and paint, used speed, marijuana, glue, and alcohol.” (232).

Psychosocial Assessment: Patient appeared to be sniffing the air around him as if he were responding to an external stimulus. He also cut his eyes in one direction or the other; may have been experiencing auditory hallucinations. (237).

Verbalized concern that there are surveillance cameras behind his mirror and under his desk. Quite paranoid, drawing symbols. Damien definitely bears watching. ( 281, 297).

Damien states, “If he (girlfriend’s father) had hit her, I would have blown him away. Next time I will eliminate that person.” (295). Damien also threatened to kill police officers. (366).

Mother concerned that son “not learning to deal with anger and rages.” Mother said Damien might be responding to outside stimulation, voiced fear that “son may be crazy.” (301).

Psychological Report: The behavior of this youngster is characterized by impulsive hostility...the desire to gain power and demean others springs from animosity and a wish to vindicate past grievances.* This teenager believes that past degradations may be undone by provoking fear and intimidation in others.* Cool and distant, this youth demonstrates little or no compassion for others. (212)

6/25/92: Discharged to mother with instructions for continuing care. Family moving to Oregon. (309)

9/2/92 - 9/4/92. Committed to St. Vincent’s Hospital in Oregon. Patient denies suicidal or homicidal ideation. However, in talking with family members, they state that he made it quite clear that he had thoughts of harming other people, i.e. was going to cut his mother’s throat and made verbal threats to his father in the emergency room. (104). Because of Damien’s threats, both parents do not want him to return to their home.* They are frightened of him and what he can do, not only to them but to the two other children who reside in the home.* Damien is to return to Arkansas by bus. (150).

9/14/92 - 9/28/92.* Readmitted to Charter Hospital.* While in Oregon, Damien made a plan to “slash my parents’ throats and eat them alive.” Damien believes that he is a vampire and does worship the devil. Has made several statements indicating that he has a desire to harm others.* He admitted to sucking the blood out of a peer’s neck. (87, 374, 375).

Stated he had attempted suicide before and “wasn’t worried about trying again, because I know I can come back.” (377)

Discharged 9/28/92. Aftercare to be arranged by T. Deaton, Dr. Gallien/M. Wilson.
Diagnosis: 1. Psychotic Disorder NOS and 2. Dysthymia. (344, 439).

1/5/93.* Mental Health Center reopens case:* Reports self-mutilation, cutting self with knives.* Will “trance out” since 5th grade - doesn’t have to deal with what’s going on.* Says he thinks a lot about life after death-- “I want to go where the monsters go.” (41, 42).

He has tried to steal energy from someone else and influence others’ minds with witchcraft.* Describes self as “pretty much hates the human race.”* Relates that he feels people are in two classes--sheep and wolves (wolves eat the sheep). (42).

1/19/93:* Reveals history of abuse as he talked of how he was treated as a child.* States, “I just put it all inside.”* Describes this as more than just anger - like rage.* Sometimes he does “blow up.”* Relates that when this happens, the only solution is to “hurt someone.”* When questioned on his feelings he states, “I know I’m going to influence the world.* People will remember me.” (50).

1/25/93:* Speaks of rituals, drinking blood, more involved in demonology.* Damien explained that he obtains his power by drinking blood of others.* He typically drinks the blood of a sexual partner or of a ruling partner.* This is achieved by biting or cutting.* He states, “It makes me feel like a god.” He wants very much to be all powerful. He wants very much to be in total control. (52)

Damien relates that a spirit is now living with him. This is reportedly a spirit of a woman who was killed by her husband.* In addition, he also reports conversations with demons and other spirits.* This is achieved through rituals. (52)

2/5/93:* Damien is noted to have cuts on his right arm and hand.* Related feeling very angry yesterday*when running into previous girlfriend.* “I controlled it - I can do anything. “ (54)

The Social Security Administration determined that Echols was 100% disabled due to mental impairment and granted him full disability benefits. (http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/gwoods.html 8.b)

5/5/93 A.M:* At times he is impulsive and does things that may be harmful to him.* He has impulses to do strange and harmful things. (61 and http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/ebtrial/jmoneypenny.html)

5/5/93 P.M.:* Christopher Byers, Stevie Branch, and Michael Moore are murdered.* * * * *

 

[Paige SC]

Randomness:

Do rebellious teens mutilate animals?

"On 10-27-92 I was at Lakeshore Trailer Park with Damien Echols when he killed a Black Great Dane. The dog was already sick and he hit the dog in the back of the head. He pulled the intestines out of the dog and started stomping the dog until blood came out of his mouth. He was going to come back later with battery acid so that he could burn the hair and skin off of the dog's head. He had two cat skulls, a dog skull and a rat skull that I already knew about. He kept these skulls in his bedroom at Jack Echols house in Lakeshore. He was trying to make the eyeballs of the dog he killed pop out when he was stomping. Damien had a camoflouge survival knife to cut the guts out of the dog with. This statement was written by Det. Ridge at my request.

This statement was completed at 2:07 PM on the 14 day of June 1993.

Witness: Det. B. Ridge
X Joe Bartoush(Signature of person giving voluntary statement)

Witness: Hubert B. Bartoush"

http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/joehb.html#jhb

Was this credible testimony or an eye witness account?

Do normal rebellious teens change their name to that of a demonic possessed child (under the pretense of something innocent?) Why didn't he return to his birth name of Michael Wayne Hutchison after the **** storm surrounding him?

Really I don't know much about this case but when Hollywood and/or HBO becomes involved - it's never a good thing.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

IIRC, most people believe that the Bartoush statement was either an outright lie or a gross exaggeration. No one except Joe Bartoush made a statement to this effect, and the witness to the statement was just witnessing the statement, not the act (which IMO never happened). IMO, Joe Bartoush was seeking his 15 minutes of fame. Note that the statement was taken about two weeks after the arrests of the three innocent men when the media frenzy was at its height (along with the whole "Satanic panic" thing). People close to Damien, like his father, have said that he loved animals and was gentle with them.

 

[Paige SC]

Who are "most people" and was this statement ever discredited? I wouldn't expect "people closest to Damien (especially a mother or a father) to implicate him with a statement such as this but what do I know? And just because it only was witnessed by one person doesn't mean it didn't happen. 2 wks after the arrests seems like the normal time frame for someone to come forward with a story like this, IMHO.. it's not like it was 6 months or a year later? And I don't see what this person stood to gain by telling a lie about someone he knew who was under arrest for triple homicide. That's basically calling him a liar who wanted to help an "innocent" person go to jail for.. what exactly?

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Who are "most people" and was this statement ever discredited? I wouldn't expect "people closest to Damien (especially a mother or a father) to implicate him with a statement such as this but what do I know? And just because it only was witnessed by one person doesn't mean it didn't happen. 2 wks after the arrests seems like the normal time frame for someone to come forward with a story like this, IMHO.. it's not like it was 6 months or a year later? And I don't see what this person stood to gain by telling a lie about someone he knew who was under arrest for triple homicide. That's basically calling him a liar who wanted to help an "innocent" person go to jail for.. what exactly?

I have read extensively about this case, and the majority of the information that I have read about the supposed incident referred to dismisses it as unreliable. The person making the statement was not called to testify at either the trial or the penalty phase of the trial. Damien has said that he never killed a dog as described. So, in that way, the statement has been discredited. IMO, it has never been proven to be true because the witness was not called to testify at the trial. Also, no Great Dane owner has come forward to claim than his dog was killed, and it's highly unlikely that a Great Dane would be a stray.

IMO, that means one of two things: the prosecution didn't think the witness was credible or the prosecution didn't think his statement was important. In a case about a Satanic killing, I would think someone making a statement about Damien killing a dog (which would back up some of Jessie's ramblings) would be important. Therefore, I must conclude that the prosecution didn't see the witness and/or his information as credible or reliable.