Scarlett, reedus, you both make good points.
I agree that lack of proof of innocence (in the case of a Very Good Suspect) should not equate to guilt. Yet, Echols and Misskelley are actually not off my suspect list. For reasons I won't list here (I think there's a better thread for that)-- suffice to say, for now, they're just not.
Being formerly one of those WDK's (Weird Dark Kids) myself, I can empathise with Echols, and I do. But that doesn't stop me looking at -actual- acts of violence, mental issues that are ongoing and relevant, in short, the reality of Echols that puts him squarely in the 'coulda' camp.
Same with Jessie. I think because Echols is the superstar of this whole mess, I find few full on discussions about Jason or Jessie by themselves.. Now, Jessie was a flat out bully with a temper. He punched a 13 yo girl in the stomach after spreading it about that he'd slept with her. I'm thinking, if a 17 YO boy did that to MY girl, I'd have no trouble believing he'd hurt other kids. This is who Jessie was, that's the reality of him. Doesn't make him a murderer, sure --- BUT it does indicate someone who is capable of being ruthless toward younger, weaker kids.
I can't ignore these things. Not 'proof' of guilt, nope. But reason to keep 'em both on the list in the present?-- for sure.