Question about Terry Hobbs

[Cappuccino]

Sending the wrong three people to prison and letting a triple child killer go free is one of the sickest things I have ever witnessed, so I guess we'll both just have to live with it.

 

[I Must Break You]

Twice convicted triple-murderers Damien, Jessie and Jason tortured and killed three young boys and you will never be able to make that fact go away. You won't be able to make the fact that each of them confessed to different people go away, and you won't be able to hide from the multiple statements of guilt from each of the murderers. You won't be able to hide from the overwhelming amount of evidence of their guilt, no matter how many times you scream the pop-culture lie of "there is no evidence".

Dedicating ones life to trying to vindicate three child murderers is truly one of the sickest things I have ever witnessed.

If there is an overwhelming amount of evidence then why did the prosecution let them out? That sure doesn't make sense.

By the way don't b.s. people here, some are very well versed in this case and know there is no evidence outside of Jessie's flawed confessions implicating the three.

 

[Pensfan]

If there is an overwhelming amount of evidence then why did the prosecution let them out? That sure doesn't make sense.

By the way don't b.s. people here, some are very well versed in this case and know there is no evidence outside of Jessie's flawed confessions implicating the three.

How is this for evidence? All three confessed.

Jessie confessed numerous times (five) even when his lawyer tried to get him to not confess.

Jason confessed to Michael Carson. Mr. Carson passed a polygraph on this. Mr. Carson was already released from the "detention center" when he told LE about Jason's confession. Mr. Carson had nothing to gain by telling LE about Jason's confession.

Damien confessed that he was filled with more than just anger. He was filled with rage and when this happens, the only solution was to hurt someone and sometimes, he does "blow up". From the medical record:
Reveals a history of abuse as he talked of how he was treated as a child. Denies that this has influenced him stating “I just put it all inside.” Describes this as more than just anger — like rage. Sometimes he does “blow up”. Relates that when this happens the only solution is to “hurt someone”. Damien reports being told at the hospital that he could be another “Charles Manson or Ted Bundy”. When questioned on his feelings he states “I know I’m going to influence the world — people will remember me.”

Damien confessed to William Winford Jones.
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/wwj.html

Damien confessed to Ken Watkins.
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/kenw2.html

 

[Cappuccino]

Jason confessed to Michael Carson. Mr. Carson passed a polygraph on this

Michael Carson made an uncorroborated claim that Jason confessed to him. And don't get me started on polygraphs, FFS. Vicki Hutchinson passed one too, do you think she was telling the truth? Come to think of it, Jessie Misskelley passed one denying any involvement in the murders. Was Jessie telling the truth?

William Jones recanted his testimony before the trials, so its either dishonest or ignorant of you to post a link to his police interview. As for Ken Watkins, I urge everybody to click on that link and read the "confession". Anybody who thinks that statement is evidence on which to send someone to Death Row should never, ever sit on a jury, or even leave their house again.

 

[I Must Break You]

Michael Carson made an uncorroborated claim that Jason confessed to him. And don't get me started on polygraphs, FFS. Vicki Hutchinson passed one too, do you think she was telling the truth? Come to think of it, Jessie Misskelley passed one denying any involvement in the murders. Was Jessie telling the truth?

William Jones recanted his testimony before the trials, so its either dishonest or ignorant of you to post a link to his police interview. As for Ken Watkins, I urge everybody to click on that link and read the "confession". Anybody who thinks that statement is evidence on which to send someone to Death Row should never, ever sit on a jury, or even leave their house again.

Exactly, I think we all know the circumstances with Michael Carson claim and it's more than enough to mark that one as extremely unreliable. Also if you want my experience with polygraph you can find it on "My view did a 180" or whatever thread. Was more than enough for me to completely dismiss anything having to do with a polygraph, sorry.

Hit the nail on the head with Jones and Watkins as well. So yup nothing but some flawed JM confessions as I said earlier.

 

[SheBoss]

Michael Carson made an uncorroborated claim that Jason confessed to him. And don't get me started on polygraphs, FFS. Vicki Hutchinson passed one too, do you think she was telling the truth? Come to think of it, Jessie Misskelley passed one denying any involvement in the murders. Was Jessie telling the truth?

William Jones recanted his testimony before the trials, so its either dishonest or ignorant of you to post a link to his police interview. As for Ken Watkins, I urge everybody to click on that link and read the "confession". Anybody who thinks that statement is evidence on which to send someone to Death Row should never, ever sit on a jury, or even leave their house again.

OK - I just read the statement from Watkins (well, both actually). I couldn't really understand anything he was saying. I did get that when they were crossing the bridge to Wal-Mart, Damien said that he was there and did something drastic so no one would ever make fun of him again. Then I think Watkins changed it a little bit and said that Damien said he and a couple of friends were there when the little boys got killed. Why can't someone just say what happened in narrative form? All these statements are close to the same. The police ask something, then the witness says something, then before the statement is over, they've added or enhanced their statement. Just say what you saw or heard in the first place!! Grrrr... Sorry, rant over.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Yes, all the State has against the WMFree is JM's flawed statements. What real evidence is there? There is mtDNA highly indicative of the presence of either Terry Hobbs or David Jacoby at the discovery ditch. I go with Terry Hobbs as he admits to being in and out of the woods all night long.

What else? There are two footprints coming out of the discovery ditch that have been ruled not to belong to any of the WMFree but are consistent with Terry Hobbs' shoe size. There is also a partial print, hand or foot is not known, that is at this point still unidentified, but is not from the WMFree.

Now we have recently learned that Terry Hobbs was not at work, as he claimed, on May 5, 1993. We don't know where he was, and he's not talking.Although this doesn't prove that he committed the murders, it does prove that he is a liar.

We have testimony that he was abusive to his first and second wives and his natural son by his first wife as well as his step son and natural daughter by his second wife. We have testimony that he was sexually abusive to a neighbor who tried to report his abuse of his first wife and child. We have his violent action (shooting) of his then brother-in-law some time after the murders.

We have strange behavior on the part of said Terry Hobbs: leaving town within two weeks of the murders because Pam wouldn't "just get over" Stevie's death, quitting his job because his co workers and customers were too sympathetic, refusal to give his DNA for testing and blockage of the use of the DNA on file with the WMPD. There's more, but that's way more than the State had on the WMFree. Terry Hobbs is a proven liar, so you can't believe his profession of innocence.

 

[SheBoss]

We've just learned that he wasn't as work? Is this brand new, or have I just not gotten to that in my research?

Like you, it don't think it proves anything, other than he's a liar.

Also, I read (in one of the stories Gitana1 posted, I think) that TH has now said that he will never discuss this case again. He considers it closed, just as the prosecution does. Convenient, isn't it?

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Yes, all the State has against the WMFree is JM's flawed statements. What real evidence is there? There is mtDNA highly indicative of the presence of either Terry Hobbs or David Jacoby at the discovery ditch. I go with Terry Hobbs as he admits to being in and out of the woods all night long.

What else? There are two footprints coming out of the discovery ditch that have been ruled not to belong to any of the WMFree but are consistent with Terry Hobbs' shoe size. There is also a partial print, hand or foot is not known, that is at this point still unidentified, but is not from the WMFree.

Now we have recently learned that Terry Hobbs was not at work, as he claimed, on May 5, 1993. We don't know where he was, and he's not talking.Although this doesn't prove that he committed the murders, it does prove that he is a liar.

We have testimony that he was abusive to his first and second wives and his natural son by his first wife as well as his step son and natural daughter by his second wife. We have testimony that he was sexually abusive to a neighbor who tried to report his abuse of his first wife and child. We have his violent action (shooting) of his then brother-in-law some time after the murders.

We have strange behavior on the part of said Terry Hobbs: leaving town within two weeks of the murders because Pam wouldn't "just get over" Stevie's death, quitting his job because his co workers and customers were too sympathetic, refusal to give his DNA for testing and blockage of the use of the DNA on file with the WMPD. There's more, but that's way more than the State had on the WMFree. Terry Hobbs is a proven liar, so you can't believe his profession of innocence.

Agreed. But none of the above proves his guilt either. I wouldn't call Terry Hobbs a stellar human being (not by any stretch of the imagination), but I'm sure not ready to label the man a murderer.
One witch-hunt was plenty for me.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

With Terry I don't see it as a witch hunt because there is physical evidence. There is means, motive and opportunity. I don't want to see a railroad job. I just want to see the WMPD do their jobs and investigate Terry Hobbs as they should have done back in '93. Parents and step parents should have been cleared. Even Gitchell said that in his Pasdar deposition. Hobbs was never cleared and until he is, justice has not been served. There will always be questions about his involvement unless he is thoroughly investigated and either charged or cleared. Failure to do so looks highly suspicious IMO.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

With Terry I don't see it as a witch hunt because there is physical evidence. There is means, motive and opportunity. I don't want to see a railroad job. I just want to see the WMPD do their jobs and investigate Terry Hobbs as they should have done back in '93. Parents and step parents should have been cleared. Even Gitchell said that in his Pasdar deposition. Hobbs was never cleared and until he is, justice has not been served. There will always be questions about his involvement unless he is thoroughly investigated and either charged or cleared. Failure to do so looks highly suspicious IMO.

ONE hair in a knot of a ligature found on a boy who frequented the home of Terry and Pam Hobbs. I have very long hair...do you know how many places one of my hairs has turned up? In my husbands work boots, on his keyboard at work (I've never been in his office), in a christmas package I sent my sister in Va. I've even found them in a Phoebee's nest on a light fixture on our back porch. I don't find it a stretch to think that it's possible that a single hair from Terry Hobbs found it's way to the shoelace of a boy who had been in his home. Sorry, I just don't.

I agree with you that Terry Hobbs should have been investigated properly in 1993. Same goes for Mark Byers, Bojangles, etc. etc. But they weren't. And proving a case against someone 18 years after the fact, on evidence that is scant, or lost, or degraded, or simply never retrieved...that's a mighty tall order, Reader.

JMO

 

[Cappuccino]

I have very long hair...do you know how many places one of my hairs has turned up?

Terry Hobbs didn't have long hair.

Besides, while one hair is obviously not enough to accuse anybody, its still more than was ever found belonging to the three who were convicted for it. And how to explain the Jacoby hair? None of the victims were in his house, or in contact with him, that day.

 

[justthinkin]

The post mentions the youth of two of the affiants, yet I'm sure that you, like other non-supporters, believe the testimony of the "softball girls" who were about the same ages at the time they testified as to a conversation that they merely eavesdropped upon and did not hear in its entirety or, due to their lack of life experience, understand the sarcasm exhibited in said conversation.

Bottom line, Damien, Jason and Jessie did not kill Christopher, Michael and Stevie. IMO it is much more likely that the killer is Terry Hobbs. I hope and pray that some day, hopefully soon, this will be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. If he had any care or concern for his former step son (which he doesn't), he would confess.

The falsely incarcerated young men are trying to get on with their lives. The supporters, with their help, are trying to clear their names. The non-supporters are threatening the three recently-freed men and trying to keep crap about them circulating. Well, "the dogs bark, but the caravan moves on!"

You bet we believe the Medford girls. After all, Damien said in his first interview with Larry King, that he probably did say he killed the three little boys and was going to kill 2 more, etc., but that he was only joking.

What does that mean? It means he perjured himself during his trial when he denied making that statement. It also means he backed up what the Medford girls said.

Damien Echols is a murderer and a liar.

As for the Ballard,Moyer testimonies, the mom said this.

Moyer: "My backyard backs up to a bayou and there is a ditch that runs along the bayou. I did not like it when children played in my backyard (there was no fence around my backyard in 1993) because I was always worried that some child would get hurt."


If the children were in her yard on the 5th, she would've had WMPD out there the next morning, as soon as she learned the 3 boys were missing, searching the bayou and ditch in her backyard to see if they'd accidentally drowned there, and due to her always worrying some child would get hurt back there.

I think Moyer/Ballards were simply mistaken about the date they saw the boys in their yard. Dana Moore's testimony as well as that of others conflicts with the Moyer/Ballard statements.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

ONE hair in a knot of a ligature found on a boy who frequented the home of Terry and Pam Hobbs. I have very long hair...do you know how many places one of my hairs has turned up? In my husbands work boots, on his keyboard at work (I've never been in his office), in a christmas package I sent my sister in Va. I've even found them in a Phoebee's nest on a light fixture on our back porch. I don't find it a stretch to think that it's possible that a single hair from Terry Hobbs found it's way to the shoelace of a boy who had been in his home. Sorry, I just don't.

I agree with you that Terry Hobbs should have been investigated properly in 1993. Same goes for Mark Byers, Bojangles, etc. etc. But they weren't. And proving a case against someone 18 years after the fact, on evidence that is scant, or lost, or degraded, or simply never retrieved...that's a mighty tall order, Reader.

JMO

Two of the WMFree also had very long hair at the time of the murders. Why was none of their hair there? With the struggle that Jessie described, one of the others should have lost at least one hair IMO. And, IMO the Jacoby hair is a lot more damning than Terry's own. The little boys didn't frequent the Jacoby house.

Also, did you know that the ligature hair (attributed to Hobbs) was a beard hair (which I believe got into the lace when he tried to bite it into two pieces)? The hair attributed to Jacoby is thought to have been a pubic hair. Suppose that, while at the Jacoby's "playing guitars," Terry goes into the bathroom. One of Jacoby's pubic hairs is on the floor, and Terry picks it up on his shoe. After he has carried the bodies from the manhole to the discovery ditch, his shoes are muddy. He begins to scrape the mud off onto the tree stump and also scrapes off the Jacoby hair. This is the opinion of another poster on the Blackboard, but it makes sense to me, too.

Please remember that there is more than the hairs. As to other physical evidence, there are footprints that are consistent with the size shoe that Terry Hobbs wears. Then, there's a ton of circumstantial evidence - far more than was presented against the WMFree. Additionally, some items are still being tested, and the results may prove very informative.

I'm not saying it's going to be easy, but I believe it's possible. Remember the three most important things necessary for an attorney to prove to a jury that a suspect is a murderer: means, motive and opportunity. (Although motive is not legally necessary, most juries want to hear it, which is why the State in the trials of the WMFree came up with the lame Satanic/cult ritual killing BS.)

The means for an adult to kill three eight year olds is pretty much a given. An adult is stronger and can easily overpower them. I realize that the same would be true of three teenagers. However, I don't believe the teens committed these murders. Besides, since almost anyone in West Memphis over the age of 12 would have the means to kill the boys, means alone is simply not enough.

The motive for Terry Hobbs is IMO one of two things:

1) He got very angry with Stevie for disobeying him and started out to discipline him. It got out of hand, and he accidentally killed him. Michael and Christopher, as witnesses to the crime, had to be eliminated.

2) He took an opportunity to "get rid" of Stevie of whom he was always resentful. He felt that Stevie was a roadblock to his total control over Pam. He waited until he knew the three boys were alone (which might partially explain the absence from work) and struck. His reasoning was that, if he just killed Stevie, attention might focus on him. By killing all three, it would lessen suspicion on him.

(Personally, I believe it was #1, but #2 is a remote possibility, IMO.)

What would be the motive for the WMFree? A thrill kill? The problem with that motive is that thrill killers are more prone to display their handiwork than hide it. These bodies were hidden, and, if the most graphic of the injuries were from animal predation, the other injuries to the bodies are simply not indicative of a thrill kill scenario.

As to opportunity, the opportunity to kill the three IMO occurred during the gap around 6:30 to 7:15. During this time, Terry stated that he was searching with Jacoby. However, Jacoby contradicts Hobbs' statements, affirming that he was not with Hobbs during the aforementioned time frame. Later, Pam mentions that Terry disappears for about an hour around 10 pm. This is a time during which he could have tried to redress Stevie (after Pam's report to the police that he was last wearing jeans) and instead ended up undressing all three boys. Finally, when everyone else had fallen into an exhausted sleep, say around 4 or 5 am, he goes back and moves the bodies from the manhole to the discovery ditch.

The WMFree all had alibis. Some people choose not to believe that they were with friends and family, but I believe they were. If Jessie's story (which is what the State hangs their hat on almost exclusively) is to be believed, they had about a one hour window (6:30 to 7:30) to walk from Marion to West Memphis, commit the murders, clean up the scene and for Jessie to walk back to Marion to be picked up to go to Dyess to practice wrestling. The walk from Lakeshore to the RHH woods is about one and two-thirds miles. It seems that people who walk for exercise walk about a mile in fifteen minutes.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070831101934AA8MnZT

These boys would not have been speeding along or walking for exercise. However, for the benefit of discussion, let's say that they were walking a fifteen minute mile. That means that a round trip from Lakeshore to the RHH woods would take one hour and twenty minutes. Even if some of Jessie's witnesses' times were off by a bit, there's no time for the murders and the clean up.

As I said, as far as the case against Terry Hobbs, it's much more than a hair, or even two hairs. It's a whole story that makes sense and that cannot be refuted by sworn testimony. In the end, I believe Terry's lies will eventually be his downfall, including the lie about being at work on May 5, 1993. Something just tells me that this nugget of information will not help Terry's protestations of innocence.

 

[Cappuccino]

Another thing to bear in mind when assessing the strength of the case against Terry Hobbs - if a witness puts you at the vicinity of a crime scene, or in the company with a murder victims on the night of their murder, that on its own is not enough to arrest you. But if you contradict their story and say you were somewhere else, that IS enough for an arrest warrant, even in some cases when your alibi backs you up, (eg, if your alibi is your mother).

In Hobbs' case, we have three witnesses who put him with all three victims, he contradicts them and says he was with Jacoby, and Jacoby fails to back him up. Let's face it, if the WMPD had interviewed Hobbs in 1993, checked his alibi and canvassed the neighbourhood, (and this is all basic police work), they would have had enough to arrest him then.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Terry Hobbs didn't have long hair.

Besides, while one hair is obviously not enough to accuse anybody, its still more than was ever found belonging to the three who were convicted for it. And how to explain the Jacoby hair? None of the victims were in his house, or in contact with him, that day.

Long hair, short hair, the point is still valid. As for Jacoby, he was out searching the woods with Hobbs. Matter of record.

Look, I'm not saying Hobbs did or didn't do it...I'm simply saying that I'm not prepared to label the man a murderer based on flimsy evidence for which there could be any number of innocent explanations. If others want to do that, they are free to do so. But they'll probably have to deal with me playing devil's advocate. Because, in truth, I'd rather see a murderer walk free than to see an innocent man in jail.

All MOO

ETA: And since several people continue to point out that one hair is far more evidence than was ever presented against the WM3, let me just say that you'll get no argument from me on that score. But that's really not an argument for Terry Hobbs' guilt or anyone elses, imo. Justice shouldn't be based on scorecards.

 

[jaleigh]

Twice convicted triple-murderers Damien, Jessie and Jason tortured and killed three young boys and you will never be able to make that fact go away. You won't be able to make the fact that each of them confessed to different people go away, and you won't be able to hide from the multiple statements of guilt from each of the murderers. You won't be able to hide from the overwhelming amount of evidence of their guilt, no matter how many times you scream the pop-culture lie of "there is no evidence".

Dedicating ones life to trying to vindicate three child murderers is truly one of the sickest things I have ever witnessed.

BBm-is that a personal attack?


The boys imo were convicted after a rumor fueled witch hunt. A witch hunt against kids that wore black and listened to hard rock. The town was grief filled and fearful, making the townsfolk anxious to hang the horrible crime on someone. The jurors found 3 innocent kids guilty of murders they didn't commit.

Pop culture claims? bs

What about true claims and facts?

There was no evidence that tied the crimes to the WM3.

The WM3 were not convicted twice. They were unlawfully found guilty by a jury of prejudiced jurors.

The WM3 agreed to an Alford plea to escape further imprisonment.

all mo

 

[jaleigh]

You bet we believe the Medford girls. After all, Damien said in his first interview with Larry King, that he probably did say he killed the three little boys and was going to kill 2 more, etc., but that he was only joking.

What does that mean? It means he perjured himself during his trial when he denied making that statement. It also means he backed up what the Medford girls said.

Damien Echols is a murderer and a liar.

I believe it's a proper forum rule to add in one's opinionfollowing such a statement.

mo

 

[Cappuccino]

Long hair, short hair, the point is still valid. As for Jacoby, he was out searching the woods with Hobbs. Matter of record.

Look, I'm not saying Hobbs did or didn't do it...I'm simply saying that I'm not prepared to label the man a murderer based on flimsy evidence for which there could be any number of innocent explanations. If others want to do that, they are free to do so. But they'll probably have to deal with me playing devil's advocate. Because, in truth, I'd rather see a murderer walk free than to see an innocent man in jail.

All MOO

ETA: And since several people continue to point out that one hair is far more evidence than was ever presented against the WM3, let me just say that you'll get no argument from me on that score. But that's really not an argument for Terry Hobbs' guilt or anyone elses, imo. Justice shouldn't be based on scorecards.

I'm all for someone playing Devil's Advocate, (although that may be an unfortunate phrase to use in connection with this case :crazy. Theories that are never challenged are rarely worth much, IMO, so I'd welcome a D***** Advocate.

However...

As for Jacoby, he was out searching the woods with Hobbs. Matter of record.

Jacoby is on record as saying that he was never at the discovery site.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

I'm all for someone playing Devil's Advocate, (although that may be an unfortunate phrase to use in connection with this case :crazy. Theories that are never challenged are rarely worth much, IMO, so I'd welcome a D***** Advocate.

However...



Jacoby is on record as saying that he was never at the discovery site.

Okay fine...I put Jacoby's hair on that tree. Happy now? :crazy: