West of Memphis

[kyleb]

given that peter jackson donated a million dollars to do forensic tests, and that natalie pasdar ultimately went head to head with terry hobbs, they probably did do research, probably did look a little more, and did use common sense.

So do you figure that for example Peter Jackson knew the claim that Misskelley was interrogated for 12 hours before confessing is a flagrant lie, and do you consider it common sense to use such lies to make one's argument?

The nons want everything tied up in a nice neat little ribbon. They want the system to be good. They want it to be the freaky goth kids rather than the stepfather and other "upstanding citizens" who commit these crimes.

No, it's not a matter of desire for me, but rather comprehension of the evidence which those who brand me a "non" incessantly spout nonsense and outright lies to argue around.

 

[LordYAM]

Whether it was twelve hours or four hours the police lied by showing only part of the confession, which was longer than 45 minutes and miskelley was in custody
For 12 hours which would have influenced the confession. Given that Peter Jackson devoted that much money he knew that based on the info miskelleys confessions were coerced, spouted because it had been hammered into his skull so intensively he believed it or made when he was approached in a moment of emotional weakness that would have made him say what they wanted.

You don't really perceive the evidence. Those who think the wm3 are guilty use multiple leaps in logic (I cited many not the least being that the hair would not survive being pulled through the laces being tied for more than a day, or that Hobbs is indeed a violent lunatic or that the testimony of the three girls could be mistaken) because it's easy. You are inienced by the perception of people who have no sense who want things to be easy and thus allow that to cloud their judgement. Every single site I have seen afvocating their guilt has been run by niave individuals with no common sense and who were desperate to believe they were guilty to the point they lied ignored evidence and did mental Olympics. You are one of them.

 

[kyleb]

the police lied by showing only part of the confession

Are you still clinging to the edit nonsense which [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10018418&postcount=136"]I addressed here[/ame]?

and miskelley was in custody
For 12 hours which would have influenced the confession.

On what evidence do you base the notion that Misskelley was in custody for 12 hours before confessing?

 

[LordYAM]

I'll get into the twelve hours thing later (or maybe someone else will) but I personally still think the edit thing isn't nonsense, and that the police did lie about what happened during the interrogation, despite what you so desperately want to believe.

 

[Ausgirl]

And the police around those parts sure were not adverse to lying, when it suited them....

How can anyone hold these people to any kind of standard of honesty, when they were trading stolen arms, ripping of hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of evidence, and covering for their dishonest mates.

One of 'em was even was even fired -- but hey, not convicted -- for being a sex predator who made terroristic threats to the young girl he wanted to molest. Go figure.

Disgusting, the lot of em. And these are the people who are believed to be so far above reproach they'd not nudge a confession out of Misskelley, or coach him when the tape was off (as I believe happened.. looking at how the interviews proceeded).

 

[kyleb]

I personally still think the edit thing isn't nonsense

Well then perhaps you can share the evidence on which you base that belief on after you present whatever evidence you base your belief that Misskelley was in custody for 12 hours before confessing, as I'm quite curious to know the basis for such beliefs.

and that the police did lie about what happened during the interrogation, despite what you so desperately want to believe.

I've no compulsion to believe anything which isn't evidenced, and your desperate attempts to defend the lack of evidence you've provided to support your beliefs by attacking me aren't going to change that.

How can anyone hold these people to any kind of standard of honesty

I'm not one for double standards, let alone guilt by association and bare assertion.

 

[reedus23]

I'll get into the twelve hours thing later (or maybe someone else will) but I personally still think the edit thing isn't nonsense, and that the police did lie about what happened during the interrogation, despite what you so desperately want to believe.

I have my own beliefs as to what happened when the tape recorder wasn't running but I don't voice them often because there is no evidence and probably never will be. Suffice it to say I have heard way to many times first hand accounts of how cameras are turned off and inmates beaten and/or physically threatened and afterwards the cameras magically come back on. And I don't hear them from the inmates. Now you want to apply that understanding to an already corrupt pd and I have little doubt what happened when the recorder wasn't running. All just my opinion.

 

[kyleb]

Suffice it to say I have heard way to many times first hand accounts of how cameras are turned off and inmates beaten and/or physically threatened and afterwards the cameras magically come back on.

Sure, never mind the fact that Misskelley hasn't claimed anything of the sort, not in his interviews discussing the circumstances of his initial confession with Wilkins, Ofshe, nor otherwise. The fact that such things have happened in other cases is sufficient for imagining they happened in this one, evidence be damned, eh? :facepalm:

 

[LordYAM]

Why would he talk about it? If they were extremely harsh he'd want to forget and would be reluctant to talk about it. Police do that **** a lot. So yeah, it's entirely possible that they interrogated him more roughly then the tape would imply. It's more because of how common that tactic is, and how corrupt and or under pressure the cops would have been to get someone fast. Given that the tape did cut out, and that they were blatantly leading him. They asked him what a penis was (why would they do that to a teenager unless they thought the kid was challenged?)

So yeah I can buy that the police were more forceful than they let on, and that they edited sections of the interview.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

Sure, never mind the fact that Misskelley hasn't claimed anything of the sort, not in his interviews discussing the circumstances of his initial confession with Wilkins, Ofshe, nor otherwise. The fact that such things have happened in other cases is sufficient for imagining they happened in this one, evidence be damned, eh? :facepalm:

Misskelley was willing to confess. They didn't have to pressure him at all. He confessed in front of his own attorney and also another time on the way to prison in the back seat of the police car. There was nobody pressuring him to any of that. His confession to another inmate I don't think was pressured either.

So, you're right Kyleb, he was never pressured and that's why there is no evidence of it except for some that want to say so which doesn't make it true no matter how many ways or times they want to say such a thing.

 

[kyleb]

Why would he talk about it?

It's called a conscience.

So yeah I can buy that the police were more forceful than they let on, and that they edited sections of the interview.

Why are you so desperate to believe what isn't evidenced?

 

[LordYAM]

Overall he was in police custody for twelve hours. The interrogation itself was not (probably about four hours) but it was still longer then the amount of time indicated on the tape (it was more than thirty minutes let's put it that way.) What was seen on the tape was only part of the confession.

During the trial itself stidham secured an expert on false confessions that took issue with the confession for four reasons.

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/famous/memphis/confess_6.html

So to repeat the interrogation itself was not 12 hours. However he did spend twelve hours between being taken to the station and being returned to his dad.

 

[kyleb]

Your claims of Misskelley being in custody for twelve hours and then being returned to his dad stand in flagrant contradiction to the evidence I've seen. So again I ask, what evidence do you base these claims on?

 

[LordYAM]

I'm not entirely sure about the twelve hours. However it is still pretty that the taped statement was only part of the overall interrogation and questioning, and that the police willingly refused to record the whole thing. Ofshe certainly believes so.

I'll ask another question. You ask why he never discussed the details with Wilkins and ofshe?

1.) if the police were particularly harsh and the experience traumatizing he wouldn't want too.

2.) ofshe concluded that the confession was a crock of horseshit not just from listening to miskelley in person but reading the transcript and hearing the full tape. He stated that further issues were that nearly three hours were omitted from being recorded. Also he felt that the police were definately coaching miskelley. Give ofshe's status as an expert, I'll defer to his opinion on the subject, in addition to his statements about the police using intimidation


In addition Warren Holmes ( an expert in interrogation as well as an expert in lie detection testing also concluded that on the polygraph jesse was telling the truth and that the confession was false. I can't cut and paste what he said exactly since I'm on a phone but the link I cited earlier does contain his explanation.

Jivepuppi notes that miskelley was questioned for longer than 5 hours. Given that only part of the questioning is on record that hints at something fishy.

Jesse miskelley may not have been in custody 12 hours but that doesn't change the the police did not record the whole interview/questioning.

 

[kyleb]

However it is still pretty that the taped statement was only part of the overall interrogation and questioning

Of course it is, and the documentation I linked in my previous post provides a perfectly reasonable and begin explanation as to why.

You ask why he never discussed the details with Wilkins and ofshe?

No, I pointed out the fact that Misskelley did discuss the details of his inital confession with Ofshe and Wilkins, and that evidence contractions the notion that he he was subjected to violence and/or threats.

As for Ofshe, he's claimed a lot of confessions are false when the evidence suggests otherwise, eight other examples along with Miskelley are detailed in the The Guilty and the "Innocent": An Examination of Alleged Cases of Wrongful Conviction from False Confessions.

 

[LordYAM]

I had a pm discussion with compassionate reader

She said

IIRC, Jessie was taken into custody at around 10 am on June 3, 1993. His arrest warrant states that he was arrested at 2:44 pm. However, the second "clarification" statement wasn't taken until after 3:45 pm. Judge Pal Rainey issued the warrants for his and Damien's and Jason's arrest. Damien and Jason weren't arrested until about 10 pm that evening. That's were the whole 12 hour idea originated. Jessie's initial statement was recorded starting at 2:44 pm, which is why the arrest record states that time. (Technically, what happened according to the wmpd log is that Jessie said he was present at the murders about 2:20 pm, which caused the wmpd to begin recording his interview.) That police log also indicates that Judge Rainey wasn't contacted until after 9 pm that night to issue the arrest warrants and search warrants for the three. It is accurate to say that Jessie was "in custody" for almost 12 hours, but he began to talk at about 2:30, only about four and a half hours after the questioning initially began. So, IMO, the question becomes: if Rainey wasn't approached until after 9 pm, why does Jessie's arrest documentation indicate that his arrest occurred at 2:44 pm when that was actually the time that the recorded statement began? Additionally, given Jessie's limited mental capacity (which some people, including kyleb in all probability, fail to acknowledge), it is understandable that he would bow to the pressure in a shorter time. However, as the police log indicates, IMO, it doesn't appear that Jessie was actually placed into a cell until some time after 9 pm, which means that, from the time of initial contact (10 am) until actual incarceration for the crime was between 11 and 12 hours. Hope that helps.

Honestly, the reason I'm open is because police do engage in that corrupt **** so I would never put it past the wmpd.

 

[kyleb]

IIRC, Jessie was taken into custody at around 10 am on June 3, 1993. His arrest warrant states that he was arrested at 2:44 pm.

Rather, Misskelley was voluntarily with police until he was arrested at 2:44 PM, after he confessed. He even road with Sgt. Allen "as a unsecured passenger in the front seat" to get this polygraph release form signed by his father at 11:15 according to the time log CR alludes to.

Jessie's initial statement was recorded starting at 2:44 pm, which is why the arrest record states that time.

Which is why claims that he was interrogated for 12 hours, or even in custody that long before confessing are flatly absurd.

It is accurate to say that Jessie was "in custody" for almost 12 hours

Rather, Misskelley was in custody from from the moment he was arrested until he gave his Alford plea nearly two decades latter.

Additionally, given Jessie's limited mental capacity (which some people, including kyleb in all probability, fail to acknowledge)

I've acknowledged Misskelley's mental deficiencies many times on this forum alone, and have yet to come across anyone who doesn't. Furthermore, the fact that CR responded directly bellow [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9968640#post9968640"]this post[/ame] where I referred to Miskeskelley as a half-wit demonstrates how lightly her claims of "all probability" should be taken, and [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9966168#post9966168"]here's a thread[/ame] which shows her and many others refusal to acknowledge a very simple matter of fact.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

From the time Misskelley was picked up (about 10 am) until he was "officially" incarcerated (about 9:30 pm) was about 12 hours. From the time he was picked up, Jessie was not free to go in his eyes. IMO, that means he was in "police custody" for that length of time. All of this is immaterial and is just another red herring that is often drug across the path by those intent on believing the State's convoluted theory of the crime. I'll concede that Jessie was not "interrogated" for 12 hours. I don't care if it was 12 minutes, the fact is that his statement was not his own. He was "coached" by his interrogators, a practice that is not illegal but IMO certainly unethical and often leads to false confessions, as it did in this case. I fail to see the relevance of this information at this point in time, however. Can we please move on?

West of Memphis (which is the topic of this thread) is being shown this month on Starz for anyone who hasn't yet seen this documentary.

 

[reedus23]

Sure, never mind the fact that Misskelley hasn't claimed anything of the sort, not in his interviews discussing the circumstances of his initial confession with Wilkins, Ofshe, nor otherwise. The fact that such things have happened in other cases is sufficient for imagining they happened in this one, evidence be damned, eh? :facepalm:

Continue to bury your head in the sand if it suits your argument best. Bottom line is LE didn't have what they needed first time the tape was running and magically got what they needed to an extent when they came back in. That would be enough for me to draw an inference. And yes, you can say it's not a reasonable inference but we will just disagree there.

As for your last comment, I guess my response would be to ask you if LACK of evidence be damned, he? :facepalm:

 

[reedus23]

From the time Misskelley was picked up (about 10 am) until he was "officially" incarcerated (about 9:30 pm) was about 12 hours. From the time he was picked up, Jessie was not free to go in his eyes. IMO, that means he was in "police custody" for that length of time. All of this is immaterial and is just another red herring that is often drug across the path by those intent on believing the State's convoluted theory of the crime. I'll concede that Jessie was not "interrogated" for 12 hours. I don't care if it was 12 minutes, the fact is that his statement was not his own. He was "coached" by his interrogators, a practice that is not illegal but IMO certainly unethical and often leads to false confessions, as it did in this case. I fail to see the relevance of this information at this point in time, however. Can we please move on?

West of Memphis (which is the topic of this thread) is being shown this month on Starz for anyone who hasn't yet seen this documentary.

I can only imagine how pissed the WMPD was when the Judge wouldn't originally issue arrest warrants. I can only imagine how they were going to "fix" that problem. And no, I'm not saying they decided to beat anyone with phone books but I also have little doubt that heavy pressure was brought to bear on JM to fix "his" screw ups with time before they turned the recorder back on.