Viable suspect: Terry Hobbs #1

[Userid]

Btw, this article is written by Mara Leveritt, who would later write Devil's Knot. She makes a rather bizarre statement in this article: 'The assaults are but another twist in a tragic saga. And here is another: A year and a half ago, it was Jackie Hicks who, as part of a search team scanning West Memphis for the missing children, was the first to discover the bodies of young Steve Branch and his two murdered playmates.'

Respectfully snipped to address one main point -- this is typical Mara Leveritt: exaggerating certain elements of this tragedy to make them more riveting at certain points for the reader.

Obviously, Jackie Hicks wasn't the first one to discover the boys' bodies -- this is total bull crap. Mara wrote this to oh-so-subtly suggest a direct motive as to why TH would shoot him -- because Jackie "knew something" and needed to be eliminated by TH.

I'm sorry, but ML is the biggest hack in this case.

 

[Userid]

I'm always tempted to pose this question when someone brings up a cover-up/conspiracy theory in regards to TH: isn't it possible that he was cleared too hastily -- granted -- but that there isn't a cover-up, per se? I mean, people act like this is somehow completely out of the realm of possibility.

The only father figure that the police thoroughly investigated is JMB. They didn't investigate TM. They didn't investigate any of the natural birth fathers (CB's and SB's). Yet people act like the police went out of their way to not investigate TH. Were they covering up for all them, too?

This illustrates incompetence. It doesn't illustrate a cover-up. TH, to my knowledge, had no direct links to the WMPD. He had no direct links to anyone in office. Just for comparison's sake, JMB had more direct links to the WMPD than TH ever did.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I just recently completed an exhaustive study of all of the evidence testing. I will attempt to be brief, but here is a summary of what I found wrt any testing and/or results of any evidence collected from the parents (natural, adoptive or step) and other family members:

On May 24, 1993, hair and blood samples were collected from both JMB and RTM (MM's father). When those items were tested by the various testing agencies (ASCL is the Arkansas State Crime Lab, GD is the Genetic Design laboratory in North Carolina and ADFS is the Alabama Department of Forensic Science, which did the initial DNA testing), the results were as follows:

For JMB's hair, the ASCL reported that "no evidence of forensic value was found" which means, in layman's terms, no matches to any hairs found at the crime scene. Later, GD reported that JMB's blood was "consistent with that found on E-178" (which is the so-called "Kershaw" knife which needs no further explanation).

For RTM's hair, the ASCL reported that "no evidence of forensic value was found." I'm unsure as to whether or not his blood was ever compared, but ADFS reported no matches w/his hair to any item found at the crime scene.

On October 29, 1993, hair samples only were collected from MB (CB's natural mother), SB (SB's natural father), ShB (SB's wife at the time of the crime), DaM (MM's sister), TH, SRC (CB's half-brother), AH, PH, and DM (MM's natural mother). For all of these samples, the ASCL reported "no evidence of forensic value was found." Further testing by ADFS determined that none of these hairs matched any items found at the crime scene. [Of course, as everyone knows, more thorough testing, post-conviction, by the Bode labs and SERI (Seriological Research Institute) determined that the mtDNA of TH matched, except for one nucleotide, that of a hair found on a ligature used to bind MM.]

Finally, on November 5, 1993, hair samples only were collected from RLM (CB's natural father). Also submitted at that time was a slide w/hairs from someone identified only as "KHH Murray." I'm not sure who that is/was, but it's not important as nothing useful was reported. The ASCL reported "no evidence of forensic value found" and the ADFS reported that these hairs were not matches to any items found at the crime scene.

So, TM (referred to above as "RTM," was considered a suspect early on. In fact, most of the early lab submission forms list both TM and JMB as suspects. However, TH is never listed as a suspect. The natural fathers of both CB and SB were not closely involved in their sons' lives, but TH was. However, TH and the mothers and the natural fathers weren't ever listed as suspects. No blood was ever collected from TH, but it was (early on in the investigation, I might add) from both JMB and TM. Although JMB's blood wasn't actually tested until the "Kershaw" knife was introduced, it was collected, as was TM's, prior to the arrests of DE, JB and JM, Jr. whereas collections for all other family members were done after the arrests.

 

[Userid]

Blood was also not collected from the 2 natural fathers just the same.

It's irrelevant if the natural fathers were involved or not in their sons' lives. They'd still have just as much motive as everyone's favorite whipping boy -- resentment of their children/ex-spouse for not being involved.

They only took blood samples from 2 male figures in this case.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

However, one of the male figures from whom blood was not taken was one who was living with and actively involved with the child on a daily basis. Additionally, they took blood from several other male figures. I can't remember all of them offhand, but included were SM (whose blood was found on his own shirt) and TD (whose hair was very similar to DE's) and numerous others. Because of the TOS on this board, I cannot identify them all by initial and be understood. Check out these evidence submission lists:

http://callahan.8k.com/images2/ascl/ascl_evidence_submission_5_24_93.jpg

http://callahan.8k.com/images2/ascl/ascl_evidence_submission_5_27_93.jpg

http://callahan.8k.com/images2/ascl/ascl_evidence_submission_5_27_93_2.jpg

Granted, those are not all family members, but that makes the failure to take blood from TH even more unexplainable!

 

[Cher Lockhomes]

Compassionate Reader Wrote: in post #755 this thread.

Or were these questions rhetorical?

CR, yes and no. I am very pleased you decided to answer every question, because I think this whole interview should be discussed in great detail. You have been attached to this case much longer than I have, and I think you can confirm that the TH interview, for reasons I can't understand, is brushed aside as some sort of "TH got a bit mixed up, or it's so long ago I can't remember" thing. I've read this statement so many times, when I read some of the reactions from people who appear to have a fair amount of common sense on other occasions, well, I don't know, I am beginning to doubt my sanity concerning this subject. Perhaps this interview is a bit in the shadows of the Pasdar case. Of course most of my questions were self-explanatory, or maybe not? That's why I was pointing to the most obvious answers myself. Maybe they are obvious for some, but not for others. I will go through your answers, pasting my questions in, and making further comments if needed.

Question 1:

For his part, Terry Hobbs said he’s not worried and that he has nothing to hide. With regard to the retested DNA, he said, “I’ve been told that nothing that’s going on right now is going to change a thing.”

Asked who’d given him that assurance, he replied, “Brent Davis,” the prosecuting attorney.

My question:
If the above citation is correct, why was he even interviewed ?

Your answer:
Q1: IMO, the wmpd only interviewed TH to cover their a$$es! By the time this interview was conducted (and, unlike the interrogation of JMB, this interview was a very "softball" interview), the mtDNA revelations had been made. Maybe the wmpd suddenly realized that they'd never interviewed TH, and it was a rush to "fix" the oversight.

I agree with you, but still ask myself, who were they trying to fool with this ploy ? The whole thing is so blatantly obvious, as a member of the general public, I feel punked. Either they say TH is not a suspect, never, because we know he was around someones house having an affair with someones wife, and we've got to be discrete about it, or he is the step parent of one of the murdered boys, and is a suspect as all of the parents are. After Brent Davis's reassurance that nothing is going to change a thing, this was two steps forward and one step back. This was not a logical move, smells like a bad fish.

Question 2: If the statement that TH made is true, he and 20-40 other people were in the woods at the time, the WM3 were convicted of murdering the boys, in exactly the area (not much bigger than a football field) where the WM3 were said to have murdered the three boys, how was this possible ?

Your answer:
Q2: The simple answer, of course, is that it's not possible. If TH is telling the truth, this statement should have been enough to exonerate them. That it didn't, IMO, shows one of two things. Either the wmpd knew that TH was lying, or the wmpd were just going through the motions in the interview, maybe weren't even really listening to his responses. I think it is the former, and that the wmpd were protecting TH, as he claimed.

Yes I'll take the simple answer, it's not possible. My further question would be, are they protecting themselves, or TH ? If they are protecting themselves, they can't accept TH's answer, because TH's answer says that their conviction of the WM3 was wrong, and this would simultaneously make TH more of a suspect. If TH is lying, the WM3 are back in the boat, but TH has blown another alibi, and has lied to cover something up.

Question 3: If the statements in the TH interview are true, why were the WM3 not released from prison in the same year ?

Your answer:
Q3: It's called the "good ol' boy" network. As I've stated on numerous occasions, IMO, the wmpd were protecting TH because of something he knows. What, I don't know, but I believe that, if we can ever solve that riddle, the case will break - wide open!

CR, this is where I am torn between two things. I am always a bit cautious in jumping on conspiracy trains, if there was reason to jump on one, it would be here, but the deeper I get into the case, the more I am convinced that the wmpd are protecting their own behinds, and TH is protecting his. We know little about TH's past, if TH had a connection, there could be a few possibilities. Maybe we should discuss these possibilities in another post.

Question 4: TH says the WM3 are guilty up until this very day, yet he himself made the statement that makes it impossible that the WM3 were responsible, how does TH explain this ?

Your answer:
Q4: IIRC, he has said that the boys were silenced in some way. Of course, that doesn't make sense, nor does it agree with JM's statements, but, again, good ol' "Teflon Terry" seems to get away with a lot - even murder! There simply is no explanation for this quandary, IMO.

As John Douglas said, "a lot of time has passed, TH has got an answer for everything" or something along those lines.

Question 5: How do the Moores feel about the TH statement, do they believe TH or not ?

Your answer:
Q5: TM and his then-wife have been unusually quiet about this over the years - at least publicly. I know that TM posted for a while on another board (The Hoax) and continued to assert that Damien, Jason and Jessie were guilty. IIRC, he finally got angry at some people and left. After the Alford pleas, that board shut down. AFAIK, neither TM nor DM have made a statement of any kind since the rant against the Oscar nomination that the third documentary movie received. They refused to attend the preview offered by the defense team before the mtDNA revelations (both JMB and PH attended) and have rejected the evidence presented out of hand.

I can't say a lot to this. If the Moores want to handle the murder of their son this way, it's their cup of beer. The TH statement will remain in their subconscience.

Question 6: If the TH statement is not true, why is it not true ? Is he lying ? Has he got a bad memory ?

Your answer:
Q6: Again, the simple answer is that he's lying. As you stated, people remember traumatic events, with unquestioned clarity. All Americans remember, vividly, where we were in great detail as the events of September 11, 2001, unfolded. Likewise, those of us old enough to remember the Challenger explosion and the JFK assassination remember those with equal clarity. Those in Australia, no doubt, remember the Ayers Rock situation; those in the UK remember the subway bombing (and any number of similar disasters). I'm sure that other countries have equally devastating shared experiences that are remembered in vivid detail. More importantly, these National disasters/occurrences weren't necessarily personal to us! As the (supposedly loving) parent of one of the murdered children, TH should remember everything. JMB's story has been consistent over the years, as has PH's story. TH was lying - pure and simple.

CR, I agree with you wholeheartedly. The only other explanation, TH did not care one single bit about SB, thus the whole thing was not traumatic for him. If this is true, he would most probably not be the murderer, because the murderer hated SB, hated CB, and possibly hated MM. There is almost no other explanation for the children being beaten so badly. This is not a beating of anger, this is a beating of Hate.If the perp did not know them, did not hate them, the boys would have been killed in a different way IMO.

Question 7: How do the wmpd feel about the TH statement ? If it's true, then the wrong men were convicted, or the circumstantial evidence on which they were convicted was wrong, if the TH statement is false, are they not interested in asking TH about why it does not fit in with the conviction of the WM3 ?

Your answer:
Q7: To the last part of this question, I'd say that some may wonder, but most are probably too scared of losing their job that they don't want to rock the boat. I remember some time back that SJ (JD's partner in the juvenile devision) had made some sort of statement about the case, implying that he now believed it possible that the wrong people were convicted, but I don't think that there's any documentation of that (unless maybe in either PL3 or WofM). Personally, I believe that there may be some who doubt the veracity of the convictions but are simply too afraid (maybe because of who is being protected by the wmpd's protection of TH) to say anything. Some people in Arkansas (and Washington, DC) have died because they tried to expose the secrets of certain powerful people

I think it was WOM where he (SJ) said that. Yes, I posted on this subject in "Random things about this case". As you stated before, you were worried about making it onto this list yourself.

Question 8: Why is there not one single person can confirm TH's statement ? Not one single person from 20 to 40 people ? On the other hand, Regina Meeks, DM, DJ, PH, JMB,and JCB contradict his statements.

Your answer:
Q8: Exactly! That, IMO, is just further proof that TH was lying through his teeth! If anyone else has a more logical explanation, I'd like to hear it.

Agreed.

Question 9: How do we explain that a person can remember situations prior to the murders very well, knows where he bought a car, yet is not sure what colour or type it was, and does not even mention the other car he owned at the time, yet a highly traumatic situation that lasts almost 2 days skews his memory so badly ? I have talked to hundreds of people about traumatic experiences, those that wanted to remember, knew every detail. A traumatic experience that is not totally suppressed, is re-lived for many days just after it happens. Every minute is reconstructed for days on end (take a look at PH), and though minor details may be forgotten or mixed up after a long time, the major events remain very vivid, almost too vivid for many peoples comfort.

Your answer:
Q9: Again, the only logical explanation is that TH is lying, just like he lied about the "black bum" he purportedly saw - months before that he somehow managed to remember!

Or, selective amnesia. Another possibility could be that TH is deliberately laying down false trails to confuse and irritate the many people who are investigating this case. I will talk about this in another post. There are a lot more things I would like to point at in his statement, it is a psychological treasure chest.

 

[Userid]

However, one of the male figures from whom blood was not taken was one who was living with and actively involved with the child on a daily basis. Additionally, they took blood from several other male figures. I can't remember all of them offhand, but included were SM (whose blood was found on his own shirt) and TD (whose hair was very similar to DE's) and numerous others. Because of the TOS on this board, I cannot identify them all by initial and be understood. Check out these evidence submission lists:

http://callahan.8k.com/images2/ascl/ascl_evidence_submission_5_24_93.jpg

http://callahan.8k.com/images2/ascl/ascl_evidence_submission_5_27_93.jpg

http://callahan.8k.com/images2/ascl/ascl_evidence_submission_5_27_93_2.jpg

Granted, those are not all family members, but that makes the failure to take blood from TH even more unexplainable!

The point is that TH received no special treatment from the WMPD, since he wasn't the only one whose blood wasn't taken.

Why some people's blood was taken over others, we will never know. Again, that isn't a cover-up. That's incompetence.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Yes, it is. His Pasdar deposition is even more revealing because he was asked the hard questions! If you haven't perused that one, do so!

I'll only address two other things: the Moores and the idea of conspiracy. First, wrt TM and DM, I was called to task on a different board for mentioning this, but I'll say it again here. IMO, they could have made some sort of deal w/either the wmpd or someone higher up in Arkansas when DM had her accident and killed someone in a drunk driving accident some time after the murders and trials (probably after the first documentary aired and someone realized how bad they looked) but before the case became a cause celebre. Again, this is just my speculation, but I believe that they went easy on DM (IIRC, she just received probation - like TH in the shooting of JH, Jr. - for that incident). I believe the deal was for them to continue to support the State's case and remain "out of the spotlight" as much as possible. Of course, I have no proof of this, just a "working knowledge" of how things are done in small towns all over America. Finally, the conspiracy idea is tied into several points above, especially Q1, Q2 and Q3. Simply put, there are some former Arkansans who are very powerful - to this day! As you (IIRC) previously posted, there are a trail of deaths that can be linked to them. If TH knows something that the wmpd doesn't want known, maybe it's about one of these former Arkansans or maybe it's about someone in the wmpd who knows something about the former Arkansans. Either way, IMO, TH knows "something" about "someone" that has to be hidden. Again, that's the way small town politics work!

 

[Userid]

The jury and/or prosecution went easy on her -- not the police department. They went easy on her because her son was killed. They pitied her -- granted -- but again, no cover-up. You're seeing things that aren't there.

It's been awhile, but I've read the Pasdar depositions in full. Also, I think you're confusing me with someone else (trail of murders leading up to Arkansas higher-ups -- no clue about that).

There are no direct connections from TH to the WMPD nor any Arkansas politician. If you want to talk about direct connections, how about we talk about JCB and JB's wife?

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Userid,

That post was not directed to you. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[Userid]

No problem.

 

[Lethalmatthew]

Respectfully snipped to address one main point -- this is typical Mara Leveritt: exaggerating certain elements of this tragedy to make them more riveting at certain points for the reader.

Obviously, Jackie Hicks wasn't the first one to discover the boys' bodies -- this is total bull crap. Mara wrote this to oh-so-subtly suggest a direct motive as to why TH would shoot him -- because Jackie "knew something" and needed to be eliminated by TH.

I'm sorry, but ML is the biggest hack in this case.

I agree that she probably made this up to make it more interesting for the readers. Didn't she also lie about the bodies being found in Devil's Den? However, I don't think she said it to make TH look more guilty. I think that in 1994 the general consensus was that a) the WM3 were guilty, or b) JMB did it. AFAIK, the first time that TH came in the spotlight was when DNA research linked him to the crime scene in 2007.

 

[Lethalmatthew]

The fact that even TM was considered a suspect, but not TH, is pretty astounding! TM had a solid alibi: he was driving his truck at the time of the murders and didn't return to West Memphis until the next morning. I also think it's very strange that TH wasn't interviewed immediately after the murders. Isn't it routine to interview the parents and stepparents of victims? Like CR said, the WMPD never took blood samples from TH. It's the combination of these things that make me very suspicious of the WMPD. Was it incompetence? Maybe, but I think it's more likely that TH was protected in some way.

 

[Userid]

I agree that she probably made this up to make it more interesting for the readers. Didn't she also lie about the bodies being found in Devil's Den? However, I don't think she said it to make TH look more guilty. I think that in 1994 the general consensus was that a) the WM3 were guilty, or b) JMB did it. AFAIK, the first time that TH came in the spotlight was when DNA research linked him to the crime scene in 2007.

Good points, you're right about TH not being on anyone's radar at the time she wrote it. But like you said, she was still trying to make it more "salacious" (for lack of a better word) by saying he was the one who discovered the bodies, which is not only unnecessary but completely disingenuous. I used to be a writer; I've had small works (nonfiction included) published, so perhaps I'm more sensitive to this sort of thing than others, but as a writer, you don't effing do that, ever. You have a responsibility to your readers not to do that. If you want to write fiction, then go write fiction -- don't take a real story and add fictitious elements because you're not a skilled enough writer to make it engaging on your own. And have some damn respect for the victims to not exaggerate any elements in this tragedy. OK, rant over -- I apologize.

And yes, she said the bodies were discovered in the Devil's Den -- which is completely inaccurate. The Devil's Den is the area by the Goodwin entrance with the tire swing, where the boys were last seen entering near. It's a completely different area from the Blue Beacon woods where the bodies where found, but you know, she just couldn't pass up using "Devil's Den." It's either a matter of gross negligence in not properly researching the case or it was done to feed another salaciously false tidbit for the reader's imagination to dwell on.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

The fact that even TM was considered a suspect, but not TH, is pretty astounding! TM had a solid alibi: he was driving his truck at the time of the murders and didn't return to West Memphis until the next morning. I also think it's very strange that TH wasn't interviewed immediately after the murders. Isn't it routine to interview the parents and stepparents of victims? Like CR said, the WMPD never took blood samples from TH. It's the combination of these things that make me very suspicious of the WMPD. Was it incompetence? Maybe, but I think it's more likely that TH was protected in some way.

BBM

I believe that TM was cleared pretty quickly by his trucker logs, but I sure wish I could see them! As to TH not being interviewed, even GG said in his Pasdar deposition that family members should be the first suspects. Again, finding out why TH was "protected" is, IMO, the key to the case.

 

[zencompass]

The fact that even TM was considered a suspect, but not TH, is pretty astounding! TM had a solid alibi: he was driving his truck at the time of the murders and didn't return to West Memphis until the next morning. I also think it's very strange that TH wasn't interviewed immediately after the murders. Isn't it routine to interview the parents and stepparents of victims? Like CR said, the WMPD never took blood samples from TH. It's the combination of these things that make me very suspicious of the WMPD. Was it incompetence? Maybe, but I think it's more likely that TH was protected in some way.

BBM Every turn and twist in this sad story turns to TH yet he was protected - by whom and why - would likely turn this case upside down and I hope and pray one day it does so that there is justice for Michael, Chris and Stevie and for the families to finally know the truth. As importantly, all of the individuals who were harmed by collateral damage from the deceit will no longer have to feel guilty or be seen as being guilty. The truth will eventually light up this darkness.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

BBM Every turn and twist in this sad story turns to TH yet he was protected - by whom and why - would likely turn this case upside down and I hope and pray one day it does so that there is justice for Michael, Chris and Stevie and for the families to finally know the truth. As importantly, all of the individuals who were harmed by collateral damage from the deceit will no longer have to feel guilty or be seen as being guilty. The truth will eventually light up this darkness.

I've been saying this for years! Finding out "why" good ol' TH is "protected" (and maybe by whom) is the key. Yet, AFAIK, no one (at least officially) is concerned. If that's not a conspiracy, what is?!

 

[Cher Lockhomes]

So far we have seen that not a single person of the 20 - 40 people searching the woods with TH around 6:00 to 6:30, could confirm his statement in the 2007 police interview. On the contrary, Regina Meeks, DM, DJ, PH, JMB,and JCB contradict his statements.

In the Pasdar Deposition, he was questioned further, as to who told him that the boys were seen heading for the woods.


11 Q. Why did you go to Robin Hood with the police?
12 A. That’s the last place that we had heard that
13 someone had seen them.
14 Q. Well, wait a second now. Who said that they
15 had seen the boys at Robin Hood?
16 A. A lot of people.
17 Q. Who?
18 A. I don’t know their names.
19 Q. Can you give me one person who told you,
20 prior to the time that the police came to
21 Catfish, who told you that they had seen the boys
22 at Robin Hood?
23 A. No, I cannot.
24 Q. Well -- and you told the police that they
25 were last seen at Robin Hood, right?

Page 94
1 A. That’s what we had been told.
2 Q. Who told you -- and when you say we, that’s
3 what somebody had told you?
4 A. Exactly.
5 Q. And who had told you that the boys were last
6 seen at Robin Hood?
7 A. I’m not sure of their names.
8 Q. Well --
9 A. A local.
10 Q. Where did you find these people?
11 A. We were going door to door or people out in
12 their front yards asking, have you seen three
13 little boys.
14 Q. On bicycles?
15 A. Uh-huh. Yes. Someone had told us that we
16 had seen them going into Robin Hood.
17 Q. And do you recall -- you don’t recall who
18 that was?
19 A. No, I don’t.
20 Q. It was someone in your neighborhood?
21 A. No. In the neighborhood, the Robin Hood.
22 Q. Was it a man or a woman who told you that?
23 A. Seemed like it was a man.
24 Q. Do you recall -- I take it you don’t know
25 that person’s name?

Page 95
1 A. Correct.
2 Q. Do you know how old that person was?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Teenager, elderly person?
5 A. Older person.
6 Q. Kind of old like me or old like my
7 grandfather?
8 A. I couldn’t tell you. Just older. An adult.
9 Q. An adult. Okay. And was this between 4:00
10 and 6:00 before you went to the Jacoby’s that
11 somebody told you this or was this when you were
12 with Mr. Jacoby driving around?
13 A. It was before I picked Pam up.
14 Q. That’s not my question.
15 A. I’m not sure of your answer.
16 Q. Well, that’s not my answer, it’s your answer.
17 I want to know, did the person who told you that
18 they had last seen the boys in the Robin Hood
19 area, was that before or after you went to Mr.
20 Jacoby’s house?
21 A. I’m not sure.
22 Q. Were you alone searching for Stevie anytime
23 between 4:00 and 6 o’clock?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Were you alone searching for Stevie anytime

Page 96
1 between -- well, let me back up. Between 4:00
2 and 6:00, it was you and Amanda?
3 A. Me and Amanda after we took Pam to work.
4 Q. Okay. And Amanda at this point was four?
5 A. She was.
6 Q. And between 6 o’clock and, say, 7 o’clock,
7 were you alone at any point and time looking for
8 Stevie?
9 A. Not, not to my knowledge.
10 Q. It was always with Amanda?
11 A. Amanda or David.
12 Q. And Mr. Jacoby --
13 A. And there’s a time I picked David up.
14 Q. All right. And then you were with David from
15 the time that you dropped Amanda off at his house
16 until you went back to his house to pick up
17 Amanda to go get Pam; is that your testimony?
18 A. I was with David and a lot of other people
19 from time to time.
20 Q. And the other people were the other people in
21 the neighborhood looking for the three little
22 boys?
23 A. Yes, sir.

Again we have the same picture. He can't confirm who told him. As far as my knowledge goes, the first time TH heard about the boys going in the direction of the woods that can be confirmed, was when DM, JMB and Regina Meeks met at the Byers house between 8:10 and 8:30. Dana M had sent Dawn M in this direction after seeing the boys, and JMB had spoken to neighbours children who had seen them heading in that direction.
Is there any confirmation in the door to doors that a Man with a smal girl was asking for the boys ?

Question 1: Who told TH that the three boys were headed for the woods ?
Question 2: Who told TH that the boys were missing at 6:00
Question 3: Who told TH that the three boys were together, PH told him that SB and MM were together riding bikes, he did not know that CB was with them, so why was he looking for three boys ?

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Again, Cher, these questions have been asked over and over. The last one, especially, is the real dead (sorry!) giveaway. Why was he looking for three boys that early on? That stuck out to me right away when I first read it.

On a lighter note, does anyone else feel like this is Abbott and Costello's "Who's on First?" routine, or is it just me?

 

[Cher Lockhomes]

Compassionate Reader wrote:

On a lighter note, does anyone else feel like this is Abbott and Costello's "Who's on First?" routine, or is it just me?

LOL!:laughing: Very similar.

Abbott & Costello Who's On First

*ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTcRRaXV-fg (replace asterisk with "h")


CR, you are so right, these questions have been asked again and again. These are still the most important questions as far as I am concerned. I would be willing to move on if any of these questions could be answered. The fact that TH has no alibi, that his stories contradict everything and everyone, the fact that he has a strong motive for the killing of SB, and in my eyes a strong, for others maybe a less obvious motive, for the killing of CB. This guy gives me the creeps, and I am trying to fit things together to give a complete picture.

I found an interesting post today, I find this post is a good example of how people make things fit into their picture, it makes things so much easier to bear using this technique. I think this might explain why so many of TH's lies, deviations, and ill-minded activities are accepted.

I live in a town an hour away and grew up in what seems to be the twin of
West Memphis . I was the same age as Jason when the murders happened and the fear spread here as much as it did there. I see lives ruined for everyone involved in this case and no debate is going to change what has happened to the parents of three 8 year old boys. I will not try to defend any one of the people who have had the finger pointed at them. Terry Hobb’s, though, has the right to hopefully get a clear picture. If your not from this type of southern small town, he looks like the biggest *advertiser censored* ever and most likely is, hell, he beat his wife. (Reminds me of my dad, and every other man around here.) Look to the Mary Winkler case in Selmer for a religious view of some people’s way of thinking around here. Most men that age never finished school because they had to work. They grew up in the south taught to rule your family with an iron fist and never show emotion. Hearing his interviews and in PL3 watching his depo. he is many many southern white men. Men who don’t bow down to “big shots” and have a fierce hatred of outsiders; even inside his own hometown. I got whipped with steel toe boots, planks, all that but that violence is a part of many of our small towns. Today I have learned that these people are doing what they were taught by thier own parents and without condoning the behavior at least I understand it. Do I believe Hobbs murdered three boys? It’s unimaginable to me. Do I believe the WM3 did so. Also unimaginable. To bad Bojangles was never thoroughly investigated. Backwards, yes, we are. But we ALL love our neighbors, and in our small towns we all keep close eyes on our children. I want to say I feel pain for all the parents. Mark Byers in the midst of all the tragedy is so funny, and as for shoooting dang pumpkins, well…if the cops ever told me that a peticular person had done those things to one of my children we’d all be shooting pumpkins in this backwoods hole. Right or wrong.

First of all I would like to point out that the "White man iron fist" is nothing specific to "southerners" in the USA. This kind of method is found all over the world, where education is low, and male chauvinism is high. It is sadly, generally accepted by a lot of people, and for me it was also the story of my childhood. I would however say, the picture that is painted above, might fit JMB in certain aspects, but TH is a complete different story. He does not love his neighbours (Mildred F.) , and his children? I've said it a few times, this picture of TH "average Joe" does not fit.

Concerning the above subject on a lighter side, I love Reggae music, and a Reggae musician from Wolverhampton, UK, called "Macka B" writes wonderful lyrics on such subjects. One of his songs (Don't beat her) asks why men beat up their wives and children, and then say they do this because they love them. He then wonders how the same men love their cars and their TV, but never beat these items up.