SURPRISE HEARING Friday 18th August

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion...st-memphis-three-rele20110823,0,5089781.story
I think this is a great article.I think it is so true whether we are supporters or non we are all prone to these "cognitive biases".
I truly try to understand both sides.I try to understand why the non supporters seems so aggressive and I do think it 's because they are stuck at the point that they believe Damien is a raging sociopath ,then of course they will not allow themselves to look at the facts that actually have to do with the crime.That's why I believe his mental health records are being brought up over and over again.At least that's how I can explain that to myself now.

I'm glad you posted this, it helps me to better understand where some people are coming from. (Though I may have to read it several more times as a reminder! :D)
 
http://blogs.discovery.com/criminal...tersweet-victory-for-the-west-memphis-3-.html

Aphrodite Jones Reports: A Bittersweet Victory for the West Memphis Three

As I see it, the power of media, and of social media, had a direct hand in changing the fate of the West Memphis Three. When the landmark deal was signed in the Arkansas judicial system last week, somehow, thousands of us played a role in helping three falsely accused teens find a form of justice. The notorious WM3 ended up making an unusual plea deal, pleading guilty to triple homicide in exchange for their freedom.
 
Without trying to sound snarky I think this thread should be closed as the hearing was over days ago and it seems that this thread has turned into a debate about the evidence.

If there are good points made then they will get lost in this thread.
 
Don't know if this has been posted yet. I have been getting kicked off the internet regularly since the earthquake this afternoon. Sorry if this is a repost. Reading what I can, while I can...

"Entertainment Weekly has learned that director Peter Jackson and his partner Fran Walsh will continue to fund the West Memphis Three investigation, even now that the men have been released from prison — free, but technically still considered guilty in the eyes of the law. “The ongoing work will focus on proving the convicted men’s innocence, as it always has,” says Jackson’s manager, Ken Kamins."

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/08/23/peter-jackson-west-memphis-three-investigation-exclusive/

I would prefer their focus be on finding the truth wherever it leads.
 
No. They pled guilty. That does not mean they ARE guilty.

I think all of us need to try to incorporate phrases like "in my opinion", "I believe" etc., a bit more, when stating opinions, rather than facts.

Fact: The WM3 pled guilty.
Opinion: They are not guilty.
Opinion: They are guilty.

Fact: casey anthony was acquitted.
Opinion: She is innocent.
Opinion: She is guilty.

To me, we come across as rude in this debate, when we insist that opinions are true and insult others for not agreeing. And it's happening on both sides of the argument.

It's annoying to read. As I said before, both sides have powerful reasons for their opinions, no one here is an idiot and it is seriously highly unlikely that anyone is going to change another poster's mind, especially by repeating their beliefs, over and over again. :twocents:
Perhaps both sides should be told to add imo and not only the WM3 are innocent side.

mo
 
No. They pled guilty. That does not mean they ARE guilty.

I think all of us need to try to incorporate phrases like "in my opinion", "I believe" etc., a bit more, when stating opinions, rather than facts.

Fact: The WM3 pled guilty.
Opinion: They are not guilty.
Opinion: They are guilty.

Fact: casey anthony was acquitted.
Opinion: She is innocent.
Opinion: She is guilty.

To me, we come across as rude in this debate, when we insist that opinions are true and insult others for not agreeing. And it's happening on both sides of the argument.

It's annoying to read. As I said before, both sides have powerful reasons for their opinions, no one here is an idiot and it is seriously highly unlikely that anyone is going to change another poster's mind, especially by repeating their beliefs, over and over again. :twocents:

Is it ever!
Question-can we put IMOO in our signature line and it be for all our comments and replies?
 
After this reply I plan to start two new threads, one explaining what I think happened so posters can agree or disagree with my theory and a second to continue the discussion about what happened 8/19/2011. I want to reply to some of the posts in the last few pages, but for the sake of space, I'll just name the poster.

jt, As to your explanations of Jessie's mistakes in his original confession, first on the time, you said he picked a time when he had an alibi. I think he just picked a time. The same for the brown rope vs. shoelaces mistake. Remember, the fact that the boys were tied with shoelaces was withheld from the public. The fact that Jessie didn't know this should have been a red flag to the WMPD that he didn't know what happened.

New testing on the fibers was ordered. If completed, it could have shown that the fibers at the scene did not come from the garments from the defendants' homes. IMO, that's one reason the State agreed to the Alford plea. It's possible that the results came back and the garments were ruled out as the source.

As to TH, by refusing to cooperate he just looks guiltier IMO. DJ gave an oral swab voluntarily. To me, that indicates that he had nothing to hide. The defense team was planning to call TH in December, and they had a lot more than one hair!

Steve Branch, Sr. relinquished all parental rights to Stevie so he wouldn't have to pay child support according to JMB, and he said it could be verified from court records.

twall, The difference between a guilty plea and an Alford Plea is that in the traditional guilty plea, the defendant must describe the crime in detail. These defendants didn't because they weren't there!

CCmakes3, Somebody for ADC said that this was the first time a Death Row inmate had been released without having been exonerated. I wish I could provide the link, but there's been so much released recently. I want to say her name was Ellison, but I'm not real sure. If I find it, I'll post it.

Tessa, MOO, but Damien needed to get off of Death Row for health reasons. I believe that played a part in the whole Alford Plea agreement. As has been pointed out, even Ellington believed that they would have been granted a new trial and, because of time passed, stories changed and a lot of other CYA BS, they would have been found not guilty at new trials.

SheBoss, As to the tennis shoes, Jessie gave them to Buddy Lucas. Buddy gave them to the police. They were compared to the shoe prints at the scene and were not a match.

wonders, Participants were interviewed on CBS's The Early Show and NBC's Today Show. Links are on the Blackboard. I don't remember seeing anything about ABC's Good Morning America, though. Remember that CNN streamed coverage from outside the hearing and broadcast online the complete hearing when it was over. The release was reported on FOX News, but since most of their programming is political, they didn't have much coverage.

gitana, Some might think that they could be at risk to reoffend, at least Jessie because of his mental disability. However, the supporter movement is providing them with a support system (LOL) that, hopefully, will keep that from happening. I'm confident everything will be fine! IMO, Damien and Jason won't have problems, both being intelligent and capable young men, not the alienated teens that went to prison back in 1994.

my2sense, I doubt that they will release a transcript of the private hearing because, as I understand it, it was very technical and mostly procedural. It was mainly to be sure everyone understood what was happening, at least that's what Judge Laser said at the end of the public hearing. I could be wrong. It's just my opinion.

Nyla, MOO, but Jessie would have felt very out of place at the party. He was much happier at his daddy's block party and with his trip to Wal-mart to get his new shades!

~n/t~, All that mess Damien said in PL1 was just sarcasm and teen angst.

Robinez, Again, they were teenagers. They had had minor run ins with the law, but nothing truly violent. What happened back in 1993-1994 is that they were judged by the community based on what they wore, the music they listened to, and other surface things. IOW, they were prejudged to be guilty because they were different.

UdbCrzy2, All that you've shown is how messed up the criminal justice system in Arkansas (and possibly other states) really is.
 
I would prefer their focus be on finding the truth wherever it leads.


According to this article they hope to do just that....

snipped

The ongoing work will focus on proving the convicted men’s innocence, as it always has,” says Jackson’s manager, Ken Kamins. He adds that the investigation will include “evidence testing and further investigation which will hopefully lead to the unmasking of the actual killer.”

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/08/23/peter-jackson-west-memphis-three-investigation-exclusive/
 
After this reply I plan to start two new threads, one explaining what I think happened so posters can agree or disagree with my theory and a second to continue the discussion about what happened 8/19/2011. I want to reply to some of the posts in the last few pages, but for the sake of space, I'll just name the poster.

jt, As to your explanations of Jessie's mistakes in his original confession, first on the time, you said he picked a time when he had an alibi. I think he just picked a time. The same for the brown rope vs. shoelaces mistake. Remember, the fact that the boys were tied with shoelaces was withheld from the public. The fact that Jessie didn't know this should have been a red flag to the WMPD that he didn't know what happened.

New testing on the fibers was ordered. If completed, it could have shown that the fibers at the scene did not come from the garments from the defendants' homes. IMO, that's one reason the State agreed to the Alford plea. It's possible that the results came back and the garments were ruled out as the source.

As to TH, by refusing to cooperate he just looks guiltier IMO. DJ gave an oral swab voluntarily. To me, that indicates that he had nothing to hide. The defense team was planning to call TH in December, and they had a lot more than one hair!

Steve Branch, Sr. relinquished all parental rights to Stevie so he wouldn't have to pay child support according to JMB, and he said it could be verified from court records.

twall, The difference between a guilty plea and an Alford Plea is that in the traditional guilty plea, the defendant must describe the crime in detail. These defendants didn't because they weren't there!

CCmakes3, Somebody for ADC said that this was the first time a Death Row inmate had been released without having been exonerated. I wish I could provide the link, but there's been so much released recently. I want to say her name was Ellison, but I'm not real sure. If I find it, I'll post it.

Tessa, MOO, but Damien needed to get off of Death Row for health reasons. I believe that played a part in the whole Alford Plea agreement. As has been pointed out, even Ellington believed that they would have been granted a new trial and, because of time passed, stories changed and a lot of other CYA BS, they would have been found not guilty at new trials.

SheBoss, As to the tennis shoes, Jessie gave them to Buddy Lucas. Buddy gave them to the police. They were compared to the shoe prints at the scene and were not a match.

wonders, Participants were interviewed on CBS's The Early Show and NBC's Today Show. Links are on the Blackboard. I don't remember seeing anything about ABC's Good Morning America, though. Remember that CNN streamed coverage from outside the hearing and broadcast online the complete hearing when it was over. The release was reported on FOX News, but since most of their programming is political, they didn't have much coverage.

gitana, Yes, they could be at risk to reoffend, at least Jessie because of his mental disability. However, the supporter movement is providing them with a support system (LOL) that, hopefully, will keep that from happening. IMO, Damien and Jason won't have problems, both being intelligent and capable young men, not the alienated teens that went to prison back in 1994.

my2sense, I doubt that they will release a transcript of the private hearing because, as I understand it, it was very technical and mostly procedural. It was mainly to be sure everyone understood what was happening, at least that's what Judge Laser said at the end of the public hearing. I could be wrong. It's just my opinion.

Nyla, MOO, but Jessie would have felt very out of place at the party. He was much happier at his daddy's block party and with his trip to Wal-mart to get his new shades!

~n/t~, All that mess Damien said in PL1 was just sarcasm and teen angst.

Robinez, Again, they were teenagers. They had had minor run ins with the law, but nothing truly violent. What happened back in 1993-1994 is that they were judged by the community based on what they wore, the music they listened to, and other surface things. IOW, they were prejudged to be guilty because they were different.

UdbCrzy2, All that you've shown is how messed up the criminal justice system in Arkansas (and possibly other states) really is.

CR-I am looking forward to the new threads!
 
According to this article they hope to do just that....

snipped

The ongoing work will focus on proving the convicted men’s innocence, as it always has,” says Jackson’s manager, Ken Kamins. He adds that the investigation will include “evidence testing and further investigation which will hopefully lead to the unmasking of the actual killer.”

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/08/23/peter-jackson-west-memphis-three-investigation-exclusive/

Saying "the actual killer" would mean somebody other than the WM3, so it does seem they have their mind made up.
 
I meant they've made up their mind the WM3 didn't do it, not that they had somebody else in mind. And Peter Jackson is a director, not a lawyer.
 
LOL!

I thought you were talking about one of the lawyers' statement. One of them said something similar. I'm going batty trying to keep up with all the print media about this!
 
LOL!

I thought you were talking about one of the lawyers' statement. One of them said something similar. I'm going batty trying to keep up with all the print media about this!


This article might help
snipped

The Lord of the Rings director has spent the past several years quietly funding private investigations and forensic experts to help clear the West Memphis Three. Jackson has been a longtime advocate of Jason Baldwin, Jessie Misskelley Jr., and Damien Echols — the trio of men many believe were wrongly convicted in 1994 of murdering three 8-year-old boys in West Memphis, Ark., and whose nightmare odyssey in the legal system became the subject of the award-winning 1996 HBO documentary Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills. Eddie Vedder, Johnny Depp, Natalie Maines, and Henry Rollins were among the others who rallied to support the West Memphis Three.



“When Peter and Fran got involved, they had to decide how to best serve the case,” Kamins says. “Damien, Jason, and Jessie had great public advocates in Eddie, Johnny, Natalie, Henry, Paradise Lost, and everyone else who was raising money and bringing public attention to the case. Peter and Fran, therefore, decided to put their attention into funding and spearheading DNA work, hiring forensic and other experts, plus extensive private investigations into all aspects of the case.”

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/08/23/peter-jackson-west-memphis-three-investigation-exclusive/
 
Respectfully snipped from Compassionate Reader:

"SheBoss, As to the tennis shoes, Jessie gave them to Buddy Lucas. Buddy gave them to the police. They were compared to the shoe prints at the scene and were not a match."

Thanks, I thought this is what happened, but even my notes on this case are several pages long. It's getting harder and harder to find anything in them quickly. I just knew I remembered that JM said he was wearing Adidas tennis shoes and he gave them away. I couldn't remember if they were a match to the shoe print at RHH. Thanks Again!
 
Hi,

I don't usually post, but I've been looking for any information about what jurors have to say about the cases: now or in the past. Were jurors interviewed for any of the documentaries? Any reporters talked to them about the Alford pleas? Thanks for your help.
 
I haven't seen or read any recent interviews with jurors. I know that a couple of them gave statements (affidavits, IIRC) for the Rule 37 hearing, but I can't find them in the Abstracts. I believe that's something that the defense team still has. Hopefully, they will release some of that now. I can't see how jurors' statements could be confidential now, but I'm no attorney.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
83
Guests online
1,692
Total visitors
1,775

Forum statistics

Threads
605,983
Messages
18,196,375
Members
233,685
Latest member
momster0734
Back
Top