WM3 are guilty- Evidence.

[Userid]

So where did Jessie ever claim to be at a barbecue? That was your claim, after all...I'll quote your words.



When was Jessies's alibi ever about being at a barbeque during the murders? And when did it change to being at a wrestling match?

And that last is being kind, because we all know he never claimed to be at any wrestling match.

Do you honestly not recall JM's alibi changing? He also had claimed he was "roofing." And you know what else changed: who he actually said committed the crimes with him (he named 2 suspects before DE and JB). Do you honestly need me to fetch you these items? You can go on Callahan's yourself and find them, but I like to think you know them already, considering how often you've posted on the subject.

Are you still on the the semantics kick with "match" and "practice" too? yawn.

Honestly, these games are beyond old by now.

 

[Userid]

Perhaps it will help you if I phrase it in the form of a question: How is it that a person who, according to supporters, is so mentally challenged, so impressionable and so easily manipulated that they were able to be talked into confessing to murdering children not once, but many times - and many of those times while not even in the presence of said manipulators (the police), but that same individual is suddenly NOT able to be manipulated, talked into or convinced to STOP confessing? Is he only able to be manipulated and coerced into doing things that will send him to prison for the rest of his life, but UNABLE to be talked into/coerced/convinced into doing something (ie stop confessing) that would potentially PREVENT him from going to prison for the rest of his life?

If he was so easily manipulated and talked into doing anything - then his own lawyer would have been able to stop him from continuing to confess.

It's brutally simple. I suspect the reason you're being obtuse is because you know damn well that makes no sense, and that the whole "Jessie is so dumb he was coerced into confessing over and over and over again" is absolutely, unequivocally, not true.

I see what you mean, and yes, that is a valid question and makes sense. Why was he so endlessly impressionable among the likes of Gitchell and prosecutors, but completely resolute among the likes of Stidham (his own lawyer) and his own family? Doesn't jive, plain and simple.

 

[dogmatica]

Do you honestly not recall JM's alibi changing? He also had claimed he was "roofing." And you know what else changed: who he actually said committed the crimes with him (he named 2 suspects before DE and JB). Do you honestly need me to fetch you these items? You can go on Callahan's yourself and find them, but I like to think you know them already, considering how often you've posted on the subject.

Are you still on the the semantics kick with "match" and "practice" too? yawn.

Honestly, these games are beyond old by now.

I can't tell if they're "games" or just a complete disconnect with reality. Honestly. I suspect some supporters (most, actually) won't ever be convinced of their guilt - regardless of what proof there is. I think we might be at the stage of full on denial by now, which manifests itself in a refusal to acknowledge even the most basic principles of logic.

 

[dogmatica]

Thank you - perhaps your phrasing will make more sense to supporters. It seemed to be a pretty simple statement to me. Endlessly impressionable to his utter detriment, but 100% resolute and unable to be convinced to save his own *advertiser censored*. It's ridiculous.

 

[dogmatica]

flourish - I take it you have read all the case files and the 500 on Callahan's? I'm not being sarcastic - genuinely wondering.

 

[Coldpizza]

Stop with the personalizing in here or risk the thread getting shut down, or worse.

 

[flourish]

Argh, I'm feeling frustrated. I typed up a whole big post and it disappeared. It wasn't mean, so I'm pretty sure it wasn't moderated away. Ahhhh!!!! I should always copy my long posts into my clipboard first.

Essentially, I would want to read his assessments. Preferably I'd do my own. At the very least an IQ test, and MMPI, and a SIB-r. That would help determine if he has cognitive deficiencies and, if so, in what specific areas, and would help to ascertain his functioning level and if any cognitive issues rose to a level of impacting his ability to participate in activities of daily living. The Calahann site always gives me an error; I'd thought it was removed. I'd love to read more primary sources on this case, though, as I have not had that opportunity.
ETA: an MMPI can expose tendencies toward malingering, and that would likely be helpful information

 

[dogmatica]

Argh, I'm feeling frustrated. I typed up a whole big post and it disappeared. It wasn't mean, so I'm pretty sure it wasn't moderated away. Ahhhh!!!! I should always copy my long posts into my clipboard first.

Essentially, I would want to read his assessments. Preferably I'd do my own. At the very least an IQ test, and MMPI, and a SIB-r. That would help determine if he has cognitive deficiencies and, if so, in what specific areas, and would help to ascertain his functioning level and if any cognitive issues rose to a level of impacting his ability to participate in activities of daily living. The Calahann site always gives me an error; I'd thought it was removed. I'd love to read more primary sources on this case, though, as I have not had that opportunity.
ETA: an MMPI can expose tendencies toward malingering, and that would likely be helpful information

He had 2 significantly different results from 2 IQ tests. But regardless, a person can't be impressionable to the point of admitting to murders they didn't commit one minute, then completely unimpressionable to save their own butt the next. His IQ can't change from one scenario to the next. Of course Misskelley's multiple confessions are only 1 slice of a very large pie. But it's a very important slice nonetheless.

 

[flourish]

IQ tests aren't as reliable or consistent as we might hope. In university we were taught that IQ tests are really good at evaluating one's ability to take an IQ test. Period. I wouldn't necessarily go that far, but they are a tool to be used in conjunction with other assessment tools. And IQ isn't actually static throughout life, although from my understanding the overall picture wouldn't change that much. But like I used to get tested every year in elementary school for the gifted program. In 2nd grade though, I didn't know the capital of Greece or how to manipulate pattern blocks very well so I didn't get into the program that year but I did in 1st grade and 3rd grade. So I'm guessing I was near the cutoff and scored lower that year. But if, as you say, Miskelley's scores were significantly different then that brings up a whole host of questions.. .did the examiners use the same assessment tool both times? Was there a difference in examiners, setting, motivation level, sleep patterns, etc.?
So interesting

 

[dogmatica]

IQ tests aren't as reliable or consistent as we might hope. In university we were taught that IQ tests are really good at evaluating one's ability to take an IQ test. Period. I wouldn't necessarily go that far, but they are a tool to be used in conjunction with other assessment tools. And IQ isn't actually static throughout life, although from my understanding the overall picture wouldn't change that much. But like I used to get tested every year in elementary school for the gifted program. In 2nd grade though, I didn't know the capital of Greece or how to manipulate pattern blocks very well so I didn't get into the program that year but I did in 1st grade and 3rd grade. So I'm guessing I was near the cutoff and scored lower that year. But if, as you say, Miskelley's scores were significantly different then that brings up a whole host of questions.. .did the examiners use the same assessment tool both times? Was there a difference in examiners, setting, motivation level, sleep patterns, etc.?
So interesting

Regardless of the validity of IQ scores, or whether or not JM was just a bit dim or a full on mentally incapacitated dupe, would you not agree that it makes no sense that he was able to be "coerced" into admitting to murdering children, then continued to admit killing children, sans the presence of the people allegedly doing the coercing, but he suddenly is immune to coercion or convincing when it comes to potentially saving his life?

 

[flourish]

Regardless of the validity of IQ scores, or whether or not JM was just a bit dim or a full on mentally incapacitated dupe, would you not agree that it makes no sense that he was able to be "coerced" into admitting to murdering children, then continued to admit killing children, sans the presence of the people allegedly doing the coercing, but he suddenly is immune to coercion or convincing when it comes to potentially saving his life?

It's odd, but I can't say whether or not it makes sense in this case, because a) I've got some homework to do and b) I'd like to read the exact documentation about what you're referring before I try to form an opinion. It is very curious, though, that it seems he confessed numerous times.

 

[dogmatica]

Here's a good read regarding one of Misskelley's confessions to his own lawyer. Check out the comments - supporters try to quash it but they are debunked at every turn.

http://wm3truth.com/index.php/2012/...ys-confession-to-defense-lawyer-june-11-1993/

Why, why, why would Misskelley INSIST on confessing to his own attorney, hand on bible, when said attorney is compelling him with all his might, NOT to, and the police and DA are nowhere to be seen?

 

[dogmatica]

It's odd, but I can't say whether or not it makes sense in this case, because a) I've got some homework to do and b) I'd like to read the exact documentation about what you're referring before I try to form an opinion. It is very curious, though, that it seems he confessed numerous times.

Fair enough. I encourage you to read all the confessions, look at when they happened and under what circumstances. Several were post conviction. Also remember Echols' alibi was decimated on the stand, Baldwin's attorney didn't even attempt to present an alibi, and Misskelley's was taken apart as well. Echols and Misskelley failed polygraphs (supporters will jump on that saying they're inadmissible - take them for what they are) - Baldwin never took one, and Echols' 500 reads like a bio of Hannibal Lecter. He himself admitted to being homicidal and psychopathic. The Psychiatrists reported the same finding.

Also, listen to your gut. Watch Misskelley interact with his family in Paradise Lost. He's actually far more articulate and sharp than you'd ever guess if you read supporter's descriptions of him.

Of course I'm only scratching the surface. It's all there on Callahan's, in the court transcripts, the confessions and the statements from witnesses.

3 people convicted of murder. 3 alibis - blown to bits. That cannot be ignored. None of this can.

 

[Userid]

It's odd, but I can't say whether or not it makes sense in this case, because a) I've got some homework to do and b) I'd like to read the exact documentation about what you're referring before I try to form an opinion. It is very curious, though, that it seems he confessed numerous times.

Not only that, but he confessed to individuals that had no bearing whatsoever on the case, such as the two cops who drove him immediately after his conviction, and a fellow jailhouse inmate. If you want to believe that he was "forced" or gave a false confession the first time he was questioned by police -- okay -- but he freely and by his own accord confessed numerous times after that, in situations where there was absolutely zero arm-twisting involved. The PL docs conveniently leave these facts out of their movies.

 

[dogmatica]

Not only that, but he confessed to individuals that had no bearing whatsoever on the case, such as the two cops who drove him immediately after his conviction, and a fellow jailhouse inmate. If you want to believe that he was "forced" or gave a false confession the first time he was questioned by police -- okay -- but he freely and by his own accord confessed numerous times after that, in situations where there was absolutely zero arm-twisting involved. The PL docs conveniently leave these facts out of their movies.

There's only one reason that would be - he did it and he felt f*cking terrible about it. I think Misskelley is a bad person, but not to the level that Echols and Baldwin are. I think Misskelley felt genuine remorse for what he did. His uncontrollable crying fits in the days after would point to this, as well as his numerous confessions.

 

[Userid]

Let us not forget BL in this whole equation, who pretty much corroborates JM's multiple confessions and then some (who was also conveniently left out of PL).

 

[dogmatica]

Let us not forget BL in this whole equation, who pretty much corroborates JM's multiple confessions and then some (who was also conveniently left out of PL).

Who's BL?

 

[Userid]

http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/b_lucas_interview.html

 

[dogmatica]

http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/b_lucas_interview.html

Ah yes, I know about him. Need to brush up on my initials.

 

[flourish]

Thanks guys I'll check out this stuff as I have time and my phone lets me!