WM3 are guilty- Evidence.

[flourish]

With that line of thinking nobody can "know" anything. So we don't "know" Ted Bundy, Richard Ramirez, Hitler, Stalin, Dahmer, etc etc etc committed the atrocities they were proven guilty of? Then we, as the human race, don't "know" anything. That's ridiculous. The ONLY reason there is controversy over this case is because HBO, along with Berlinger and Sinofsky made a "documentary" that was on TV and in theaters and purposely and willingly lied and left out incredibly important details to make the WM3 look like they were "railroaded". Anyone who has seen the "doc" and then has gone on to research the case independently knows damn well they left out scads of incriminating evidence, manipulated the hell out of the truth and the viewers and twisted facts to fit their agenda and their narrative - which was to make a controversial movie (it's just that - it ain't a documentary) that would garner huge attention and, more importantly, make money.

If you don't believe people can "know" the truth regarding criminal cases, then you must not believe in the Justice System, guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, proof and evidence. In that case, I don't see much point in any of this.

If 24 jurors found them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt - and you simply dismiss this - why do we have trials at all??

Regarding "mentally disabled" not being synonymous with "dumb" - exactly. I agree 100%. Supporters waffle back and forth as to what Misskelley is to fit their narrative at any given point of the debate.

Beyond a reasonable doubt isn't the same as knowing first hand. I never indicated nobody can ever know anything, just that it's unreasonable to claim knowledge when really you're just convinced beyond any doubt. Good points though and offered good food for thought.

 

[flourish]

So the only things you know to be true are things you've witnessed first hand, in person. In that case - how do we even know those 3 little boys were actually murdered at all?

I believe beyond a reasonable doubt that they were.

 

[flourish]

Dear Flourish,

So good to see you on this thread.

Unfortunately many posters have left this thread because they were not able to post without having their ideas attacked. Some of the posters believed in the innocence of Damien, Jessie and Jason and some believed in their guilt. We were, at one time, able to have civil discussions and they were respectful of one another. It has not been that way for a long time, unfortunately.

It truly is unfortunate because not one of us knows for sure who did it because we were not there!

I am on numerous threads where there exists considerate and compassionate discussion, and I am aware that you are on these other threads as well. I always look forward to your posts - they are not only insightful but full of compassion and consideration of others' views.

This particular thread no longer works because there is no consideration at all for others' viewpoints. It is extremely negative and I have steered away from it because of this hostility. It no longer serves its purpose which is a disgrace to the memories of the little boys who deserve justice.

There will never be justice found or other discoveries made on this thread and sadly that can never help find justice for these three little boys, Stevie, Chris and Michael.

There is only one site which is unbiased and contains thousands of documents from court transcript to interviews, etc.

This is the only place I learned from and made my own observations. Here is the site:

http://callahan.mysite.com/

Aww you edited. Thank you for the kind words. I realize this may be very frustrating for people who are convinced one way or another. I consider how I might react (and have) when people state they think the jury was right with Casey Anthony. It's difficult to be kind and reasonable sometimes. But I recognize offering information to those who want it is a better tactic than just insisting.

 

[dogmatica]

Beyond a reasonable doubt isn't the same as knowing first hand. I never indicated nobody can ever know anything, just that it's unreasonable to claim knowledge when really you're just convinced beyond any doubt. Good points though and offered good food for thought.

I never claimed to know anything first hand. But people are capable of examining the evidence and coming to a conclusion. That they are guilty is not simply my opinion. In the American Justice System - which is the authority on finding the truth in criminal cases - they are, in fact, guilty. Maybe we're getting into semantics here. People can use the word "know", without having witnessed something in person. I "know" the earth is not flat, even though I've never walked the entire thing to see whether I fall off the edge or not. But again - I think we're arguing semantics here.

I'm curious to hear your opinion after you've dug into Callahan's.

 

[flourish]

He's so dumb, so "mentally disabled" that he can be coerced into confessing over and over to a crime he didn't commit, but he's not so dumb that he would get details of a drunken night incorrect? Cherry pickin' all over the place.

Regarding "mentally disabled" not being synonymous with "dumb" - exactly. I agree 100%. Supporters waffle back and forth as to what Misskelley is to fit their narrative at any given point of the debate.

RSBM
Oookkkkaaay.

I should probably just accept that this isn't typical WS thread(s) and that as disappointing as it is, it is what it is. I appreciate all the links.

 

[Userid]

And how do you respond to others' viewpoints on say, Sandy Hook? That it didn't happen. Or the Holocaust - that it didn't happen. Or 9/11? If we allow and embrace every viewpoint, the world is in even bigger trouble than it is now. How about people who have the viewpoint that all Jews or African American should be eradicated?

Not all viewpoints deserve credence or deference. And events do not have to be witnessed first hand and in person in order for them to have occurred, or for mankind to accept that they occurred. If that were the case, nobody would be convicted of any crime unless the judge and jury were there and saw it happen.

It's also somewhat ironic that, not too long ago, it was nons/fencies who were given zero consideration. If you've studied the case long enough, and you even hinted at the possibility of the WM3 being guilty, you were met with hostility/rudeness that was 10 times stronger than anything on display currently -- even if you initiated the conversation with respect and caution. Now, it seems like supporters are the ones that feel ostracized. This is because the amount of supporters who existed before the WM3 were released via the Alford plea have both lost interest in the case and "disappeared," since they all but accomplished their main objective/passion of freeing the WM3. Unfortunately, the majority of these people weren't as concerned with finding the truth and justice for the 3 victims than they were for the WM3 -- I'm not necessarily chastising them for this stance, but it would have been great if the majority of these people (celebrities included) were as motivated for the victims as they were for the WM3. I suppose I just wish that people could have equally identified with the three children as much as they did with the three outcast teens; maybe we'd be closer to finding out who committed this crime, definitively.

 

[dogmatica]

RSBM
Oookkkkaaay.

I should probably just accept that this isn't typical WS thread(s) and that as disappointing as it is, it is what it is. I appreciate all the links.

Yes, the "mentally disabled" - in quotes is from supporters. That's my point - they run the gambit. One minute he's "mentally disabled", then he's "dumb". You are misunderstanding my point. My point is that he is a not very bright person. I do NOT believe he is "mentally disabled" or "borderline retarded". I am NOT equating "dumb" with "mentally disabled".

 

[dogmatica]

It's also somewhat ironic that, not too long ago, it was nons/fencies who were given zero consideration. If you've studied the case long enough, and you even hinted at the possibility of the WM3 being guilty, you were met with hostility/rudeness that was 10 times stronger than anything on display currently -- even if you initiated the conversation with respect and caution. Now, it seems like supporters are the ones that feel ostracized. This is because the amount of supporters who existed before the WM3 were released via the Alford plea have both lost interest in the case and "disappeared," since they all but accomplished their main objective/passion of freeing the WM3. Unfortunately, the majority of these people weren't as concerned with finding the truth and justice for the 3 victims than they were for the WM3 -- I'm not necessarily chastising them for this stance, but it would have been great if the majority of these people (celebrities included) were as motivated for the victims as they were for the WM3. I suppose I just wish that people could have equally identified with the three children as much as they did with the three outcast teens; maybe we'd be closer to finding out who committed this crime, definitively.

Oh man - that's for sure. Nons were (and still are - at least in the public eye) a minority on these kinds of forums. I remember cautiously going into some of those supporter forums and just asking some questions that maybe hinted that I though they were guilty - I was crucified, and even threatened.

 

[flourish]

Yes, the "mentally disabled" - in quotes is from supporters. That's my point - they run the gambit. One minute he's "mentally disabled", then he's "dumb". You are misunderstanding my point. My point is that he is a not very bright person. I do NOT believe he is "mentally disabled" or "borderline retarded". I am NOT equating "dumb" with "mentally disabled".

Thank you for the clarification, dog ✌

 

[flourish]

but it would have been great if the majority of these people (celebrities included) were as motivated for the victims as they were for the WM3.

RSBM

Ain't that the truth! Regardless of the guilt or innocence of the three older boys, they have their lives still. Come on, Johnny Depp, get some private investigators on this!

You'd think they'd want to find the real killers (if they exist) if for no other reason than to bolster their claims. Makes a person wonder if they truly believe in their innocence after all.

 

[dogmatica]

Thank you for the clarification, dog ✌

No prob!

 

[Troyce]

Has anyone looked further into Charles Hester, the janitor that worked at the school at the time? Christopher has said to his mother after been out for a while, & came back with muddy shoes, that he had been playing with 'Charles.' Chris had mentioned Charles more than once to her, but she didn't know who he was, assuming it was a child. One time he came home with dinosaur eggs, & said that the janitor gave them to him. There is speculation that the boys went to Robin Hood hills to meet up with someone they knew.

 

[Userid]

^ Not a bad thought. He was interviewed by the police and said he had left the school in April before the murders. Said he knew MM and CB but not SB. There are reports on Callahan's about him where he describes some run-in's with MM in particular.

 

[Troyce]

I did a little more digging regarding Steve Branch's inprint on his thigh that had a unique pattern. It was thought it came from steps inside a manhole, & a local sleuth had physically visited manholes in the area to measure the sizing. Although, the patterns on the steps were very similar to Branch's imprint, the width was not. The manhole that is closest to the boy's school, not only has the same design on the steps leading down the manhole, the sizing is exact. Could we determine that at least the boys may have been playing/been held down in that particular manhole? It was also after school when the boys disappeared & we all know how deserted a schoolyard can be as the hours move on. This also may fit into the theory that the boys were moved to thier found location.

 

[dogmatica]

I did a little more digging regarding Steve Branch's inprint on his thigh that had a unique pattern. It was thought it came from steps inside a manhole, & a local sleuth had physically visited manholes in the area to measure the sizing. Although, the patterns on the steps were very similar to Branch's imprint, the width was not. The manhole that is closest to the boy's school, not only has the same design on the steps leading down the manhole, the sizing is exact. Could we determine that at least the boys may have been playing/been held down in that particular manhole? It was also after school when the boys disappeared & we all know how deserted a schoolyard can be as the hours move on. This also may fit into the theory that the boys were moved to thier found location.

The manhole theory is an old one. The boys were killed at the location they were discovered, as per Misskelley's numerous confessions.

 

[Userid]

I did a little more digging regarding Steve Branch's inprint on his thigh that had a unique pattern. It was thought it came from steps inside a manhole, & a local sleuth had physically visited manholes in the area to measure the sizing. Although, the patterns on the steps were very similar to Branch's imprint, the width was not. The manhole that is closest to the boy's school, not only has the same design on the steps leading down the manhole, the sizing is exact. Could we determine that at least the boys may have been playing/been held down in that particular manhole? It was also after school when the boys disappeared & we all know how deserted a schoolyard can be as the hours move on. This also may fit into the theory that the boys were moved to thier found location.

Yes, I've heard of this; I remember being very interested in it when I first heard it, but it's lost its luster now for me. The main problem for me, is that, in order for a step-rung to have made this mark, that would have to mean that SB's entire leg was somehow lodged within the rung itself (all the way up to his upper thigh) -- essentially leaving his entire body dangling. The mark is located on his inner and upper thigh. It just doesn't make a lot of sense, with where the mark is located and also where the steps are located within the manhole. For one thing, if his leg somehow was miraculously lodged in one of these rungs (where his foot would have had to enter first), there would scrapes/markings on the outer side of his body where that same leg would have no doubt made contact with the wall.

CB had somewhat of a similar marking on his leg -- the pattern wasn't as identifiable, but nonetheless, it was on his upper-inner thigh also. I don't believe this is coincidence in considering that both boys had injuries to their private areas. What I think, is that some sort of iron/steel rod was used to force/hold open their legs.

 

[Troyce]

Assuming that SB wasn't stepping, there could be a possibility he may have been dragged?
OR, he could also have misstepped or slipped on the rung while exploring or playing? It depends on how he was stepping. I think most boys would be looking down as they step, which could expain the angle of the body/leg as it slipped behind the rung. This may coincide with where the marks are on the leg. 8yr olds have very thin legs & it's possible for a leg to get lodged.

That being said, it's telling that both boys have similar marks & this creates even more questions & may quash the idea.

The similarities of scratch marks look very close with the outside of the manhole's concrete surround. It was not paved smooth, but with distinct raised concrete lines. Again, possibly being dragged along, or slipping while playing?This being said, these marks could have possibly accured earlier on in the evening, while the boys were playing, not necessarily when the crimes were being committed.
It may tell part of the story of where the boys were that day.

 

[Userid]

^ Well, sure -- but it's also just as possible that he acquired that mark days or a week before the actual murder. It could be totally unrelated.

That particular re-bar mark wouldn't be made by "dragging." That mark would have to be made by prolonged force or one forceful strike; I lean toward prolonged force. Prolonged force would not occur during dragging.

 

[Troyce]

Let me rephrase...my thought was that if he was dragged/pushed down into the manhole, SB leg may have gotten stuck on the rebar on the way down, with force. His leg would then have to be dislodged. Your point on the timings is a curious one. I wonder if there was forensics done re: timing.

 

[Troyce]

Don't think I'm trying to distract from the guilt of the WM3, in pondering these questions. I like to stay neutral because as many people have, I leaned softly towards thier innocence, & then softly towards guilt. I want to remain neutral & keep perspective.