Summary of Damien's Mental Health History

[Compassionate Reader]

They pled guilty!

Baldwin and Echols each pleaded guilty to three counts of first-degree murder. Misskelley pleaded guilty to one count of first-degree murder and two counts of second-degree murder.

Whether they did it or not, they are convicted murderers.

I think the point is that, once the SIS term is over, the slate is wiped clean. The original convictions were set aside on August 19, 2011. The penalty imposed following the Alford pleas was time served (which had to be addressed as it was a fact) plus a 10-year SIS. If a SIS in AR works like it does in the rest of the civilized world, upon its completion the convictions will be erased. As was mentioned earlier, maybe that was the whole point. It allowed Arkansas to "save face" as well as money but allowed for real freedom (after ten years) for the three falsely convicted men.

As to Damien's mental health issues, if his diagnosis is bipolar disorder (which isn't really spelled out but merely implied), that is a condition that can be successfully treated by medication. I venture to say that just about everyone knows someone who has been thus diagnosed. I know I do. They are not murderers. If the ambiguity of the diagnosis was because they really didn't know what to say as to his condition, but just knew that "the boy ain't right" then we're dealing with something else altogether.

As I have said before, many times "mental health professionals" will do a favor to an indigent teen by pronouncing such an ambiguous diagnosis so the teen (and his family) will be eligible for the "crazy check" that Damien has discussed in Life After Death and Almost Home. I know this because former students have talked about it. Yes, it's unethical, but, in some cases, it has literally saved lives. The same is true about short-term admission to a mental hospital as happened to Damien on several occasions. Some people will doubt what I'm saying, but I swear it's the truth!

So, again, it all comes down to one thing: did Damien (and friends) kill Christopher, Michael and Steven? Again, there is no evidence to support this notion only innuendo and abused grapefruits! They were "throw away" kids that were handy to LE when the real killer was, shall we say "unavailable," to the prosecution. The question that we should all be asking is why the real killer has never been properly investigated. If I'm wrong and the three did the deed, what harm will come from a proper investigation in order to set the issue to rest? That's one reason the State accepted the Alford pleas - to set the issue at rest. It didn't work because those who know the truth refuse to just go away, as Ellington desired.

So, why not properly investigate this crime? I believe that everyone agrees that the original investigation was sloppy. Let's do it right and find the truth! What's wrong with that? The Arkansas State Supreme Court rejected the prosecution's argument that looking at all the evidence would damage closure. Let's look at everything and get it right this time!

 

[kyleb]

you keep mentioning these amorphous groups of "lots of people" to me.

Let me help clarify that for you a bit by way of example from Echols' response to being asked "how did you get pinpointed as one of the killers":

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leEtbjm2uHI#t=270s"]Damien Echols - Hex, Lies and Videotape Part 2 of 3 - YouTube[/ame]

That's one of the things that... we've come up with a lot of information now that we didn't have back then. In essence what it comes down to is the way I looked, You know this was a very small town in 1993, and I didn't fit in. The way I dressed, the music I listened too, the books that I read, it stood out and it made me a target. It made people fearful. You know, now they refer to what I was back then as goth, that's the word they use now. Back then I'd never even heard the word, I just wore what I liked, listened to what I liked, things like that.

Do you see how Echols is utterly failing to come to terms with the evidence which resulted in his arrest and conviction there, and not even coming anywhere close to even acknowledging the reasons he was a viable suspect from the start?

 

[Mrs G Norris]

You know that's interesting, because by memory the look sported by Jason was very common throughout the 80's, and Damien's so called goth look was pretty damn common from the late 80's on, so were their readings and Wiccan beliefs actually, his look is no where near as individualistic or radical as he'd like to believe.

Try again Damien .. You weren't arrested because you wore black, had home made tattoos or read books on Wicca.

We all did.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Double post ..

 

[claudicici]

so tell me Mrs.Norris,why then was Damien arrested exactly?
There is nothing that connects him or Jason to the crime aside from Jessie's confession and the perceived "satanic" connection?
What exactly connects the 3 to the crime aside from the stereotype?
I,myself ,used scare tactics as a defensive mechanism when I was a teen.I refuse to see a mental illness described in the exhibit 500 ;just a means for the defense to escape the death penalty.

 

[kyleb]

so tell me Mrs.Norris,why then was Damien arrested exactly?

Prior to Misskelley's confession, Echols was reported by Narlene Hollingsworth has having been near the scene of the murders, covered in mud as someone who'd just hidden the bodies would be, and and William Winford Jones came forward at his mother's insistence with a detailed story Echols confessing to him.

 

[Pensfan]

I think the point is that, once the SIS term is over, the slate is wiped clean. The original convictions were set aside on August 19, 2011. The penalty imposed following the Alford pleas was time served (which had to be addressed as it was a fact) plus a 10-year SIS. If a SIS in AR works like it does in the rest of the civilized world, upon its completion the convictions will be erased. As was mentioned earlier, maybe that was the whole point. It allowed Arkansas to "save face" as well as money but allowed for real freedom (after ten years) for the three falsely convicted men.

As to Damien's mental health issues, if his diagnosis is bipolar disorder (which isn't really spelled out but merely implied), that is a condition that can be successfully treated by medication. I venture to say that just about everyone knows someone who has been thus diagnosed. I know I do. They are not murderers. If the ambiguity of the diagnosis was because they really didn't know what to say as to his condition, but just knew that "the boy ain't right" then we're dealing with something else altogether.

As I have said before, many times "mental health professionals" will do a favor to an indigent teen by pronouncing such an ambiguous diagnosis so the teen (and his family) will be eligible for the "crazy check" that Damien has discussed in Life After Death and Almost Home. I know this because former students have talked about it. Yes, it's unethical, but, in some cases, it has literally saved lives. The same is true about short-term admission to a mental hospital as happened to Damien on several occasions. Some people will doubt what I'm saying, but I swear it's the truth!

So, again, it all comes down to one thing: did Damien (and friends) kill Christopher, Michael and Steven? Again, there is no evidence to support this notion only innuendo and abused grapefruits! They were "throw away" kids that were handy to LE when the real killer was, shall we say "unavailable," to the prosecution. The question that we should all be asking is why the real killer has never been properly investigated. If I'm wrong and the three did the deed, what harm will come from a proper investigation in order to set the issue to rest? That's one reason the State accepted the Alford pleas - to set the issue at rest. It didn't work because those who know the truth refuse to just go away, as Ellington desired.

So, why not properly investigate this crime? I believe that everyone agrees that the original investigation was sloppy. Let's do it right and find the truth! What's wrong with that? The Arkansas State Supreme Court rejected the prosecution's argument that looking at all the evidence would damage closure. Let's look at everything and get it right this time!

Yes, let's get it right. I've been a licensed mental health professional for 35 years. Damien Echols was diagnosed as bipolar AND schizophrenic. He was diagnosed by a DOUBLE BOARD CERTIFIED PSYCHIATRIST/NEUROLOGIST. It is completely irrational to believe that this double board certified physician would risk losing his medical license, lawsuits, and his SIXTEEN years of college/medical school/residency just to give Damien an ambiguous incorrect diagnosis. In my professional opinion, having schizophrenia and bipolar disorder is the worst combination of all mental health dysfunctions. It is a very BAD combination.

I've NEVER seen a mental health professional give any child an ambiguous serious diagnosis. A mental health diagnosis is similar to being branded with the scarlet letter. It could negatively affect a child's life forever. Of all the taboo practices in the field of medicine, giving a child a serious mental health diagnosis is the worst. Health providers are extremely reluctant to give children a serious mental health diagnosis unless they meet all the diagnostic criteria.

Pensfan
verified psychiatric mental health nurse

 

[gheckso]

Again I ask. do you think a person diagnosed with such a condition and subjected to conditions of death row for 18 years be able to, as it appears, adapt to the outside world as Damien appears to have. I.e. has a job, gives speeches, travels etc etc.
I would have thought a person with bipolar and schizophrenia would hardly leave the house or even worse, would have comitted suicide.

 

[MissJ]

Who really knows HOW DE has adapted to anything? Maybe his wife? I have seen DE and wife on TV. Both have an odd affect. She appears anxious. His affect is flat. They show no affection for each other. Just what I've observed. JMO.

 

[MissJ]

DE could be heavily medicated. We have no way of knowing. JMO

 

[Ausgirl]

Yes, let's get it right. I've been a licensed mental health professional for 35 years. Damien Echols was diagnosed as bipolar AND schizophrenic. He was diagnosed by a DOUBLE BOARD CERTIFIED PSYCHIATRIST/NEUROLOGIST. It is completely irrational to believe that this double board certified physician would risk losing his medical license, lawsuits, and his SIXTEEN years of college/medical school/residency just to give Damien an ambiguous incorrect diagnosis. In my professional opinion, having schizophrenia and bipolar disorder is the worst combination of all mental health dysfunctions. It is a very BAD combination.

I've NEVER seen a mental health professional give any child an ambiguous serious diagnosis. A mental health diagnosis is similar to being branded with the scarlet letter. It could negatively affect a child's life forever. Of all the taboo practices in the field of medicine, giving a child a serious mental health diagnosis is the worst. Health providers are extremely reluctant to give children a serious mental health diagnosis unless they meet all the diagnostic criteria.

Pensfan
verified psychiatric mental health nurse

Pensfan, you must know by now that I respect the heck out of you and your opinions, both personal and professional. I absolutely see your point here, and am not refuting it totally, but I feel I need to point out that psychiatrists are not infallible.

My mother was misdiagnosed, and then seriously over-medicated with the wrong drugs for many years - I believe her psychiatrist, rather than admitting error, just kept assuming that because the drugs weren't working when he believed they ought to work, it was simply a matter of dosage and kept upping it until.. well, let's just say that didn't work out very well, for any of us. The situation was eventually corrected by another doctor.

Another mental health professional tried to diagnose ME with schizophrenia, due to my family history and the fact that sometimes when searching for the right words, I tilt my head as if 'hearing' them as I formulate my sentences - so she thought I was having auditory hallucinations. OH - and after I spoke about wanting to nurture my inner child? She made notes (which I have copies of) to the effect that I was 'seeing children in the room'. Yeah.. wrong. Just.. very wrong. :facepalm:

Sorry if that's just TMI, here - and I do realize not all professionals are like these ones that my family and I had the misfortune of dealing with. But just by way of giving examples that there is room for both over-diagnosis and error.

I am not at all disputing that Echols had some serious issues going on, in all aspects of himself and that the doctors making the reports were probably quite right.

But IIRC one of his reports notes Echols doing much the same head tilting thing that I do.. and that person noted down that this was evidence of delusions or hallucination or something, because of it, also, so that sort of struck a nerve for me as maybe being a bit kneejerk (and thus possibly very incorrect), as it was in my own case.

I think it would be useful to overview the entire wad of reports and look at what agrees and what conflicts and make some lists of who said what, but.. oh look, my much more fun life is calling me. Maybe next week, I might just do that.

 

[kyleb]

I feel I need to point out that psychiatrists are not infallible.

I doubt Pesfan was suggesting anything of the sort, and rather speaking with respect to the details of Echols' mental heath history in particular, such as these noted in the affidavit defense expert and forensic psychiatrist Dr. George Woods:

Psychological Testing

80a Mr. Echols has been evaluated on three separate occasions by three different psychologists, each of whom administered a battery of tests. A prominent feature of each evaluation was the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), which was administered on June 8, 1992; September 2, 1992; and February 20, 1994. The independent test results were quite consistent; all revealed valid profiles and strong indications of depression, mania, severe anxiety, delusions and psychosis.

81a Test results for the June 8, 1992, MMPI reflected elevations on scores of psychotic thinking, including hallucinations, paranoid ideation, and delusions, as well as severe anxiety and other related emotional disturbances. The suggested diagnoses were schizophrenia, disorganized type; and bipolar disorder, manic. Individual responses on this test revealed that Mr. Echols was afraid of losing his mind, had bizarre thoughts, and had very peculiar experiences. Three months later, on September 2, 1992, a second MMPI was administered. The test results very closely paralleled the findings of the earlier MMPI. Shortly before Mr. Echols’ trial began in 1994, he was administered the MMPI a third time for the purpose of identifying mitigating evidence. Like the other two, this MMPI revealed psychotic thought processes consistent with schizophrenia. Specific indicators of a thought disorder included mental confusion, persecutory ideas, acute anxiety, and depressed suicidal idealization.

Two of those MMPI results are in Exhibit 500 for everyone to read at their leisure, pages 151-155 and 199-209, along with plenty of other corroborating documentation with which one can better inform themselves.

 

[gitana1]

Actually he has no conviction.

I think the point is that, once the SIS term is over, the slate is wiped clean. The original convictions were set aside on August 19, 2011. The penalty imposed following the Alford pleas was time served (which had to be addressed as it was a fact) plus a 10-year SIS. If a SIS in AR works like it does in the rest of the civilized world, upon its completion the convictions will be erased. As was mentioned earlier, maybe that was the whole point. It allowed Arkansas to "save face" as well as money but allowed for real freedom (after ten years) for the three falsely convicted men.

As to Damien's mental health issues, if his diagnosis is bipolar disorder (which isn't really spelled out but merely implied), that is a condition that can be successfully treated by medication. I venture to say that just about everyone knows someone who has been thus diagnosed. I know I do. They are not murderers. If the ambiguity of the diagnosis was because they really didn't know what to say as to his condition, but just knew that "the boy ain't right" then we're dealing with something else altogether.

As I have said before, many times "mental health professionals" will do a favor to an indigent teen by pronouncing such an ambiguous diagnosis so the teen (and his family) will be eligible for the "crazy check" that Damien has discussed in Life After Death and Almost Home. I know this because former students have talked about it. Yes, it's unethical, but, in some cases, it has literally saved lives. The same is true about short-term admission to a mental hospital as happened to Damien on several occasions. Some people will doubt what I'm saying, but I swear it's the truth!

So, again, it all comes down to one thing: did Damien (and friends) kill Christopher, Michael and Steven? Again, there is no evidence to support this notion only innuendo and abused grapefruits! They were "throw away" kids that were handy to LE when the real killer was, shall we say "unavailable," to the prosecution. The question that we should all be asking is why the real killer has never been properly investigated. If I'm wrong and the three did the deed, what harm will come from a proper investigation in order to set the issue to rest? That's one reason the State accepted the Alford pleas - to set the issue at rest. It didn't work because those who know the truth refuse to just go away, as Ellington desired.

So, why not properly investigate this crime? I believe that everyone agrees that the original investigation was sloppy. Let's do it right and find the truth! What's wrong with that? The Arkansas State Supreme Court rejected the prosecution's argument that looking at all the evidence would damage closure. Let's look at everything and get it right this time!

Let me clarify:

These guys were convicted of murder and those convictions will never be erased. I'm not sure where these misconceptions come from. In the United States, convictions are never "erased". Even an expungement doesn't erase a conviction and there exists no mechanism in the United States to automatically erase a conviction at all, let alone after a period of time. These three will always be convicted felons, unable to vote or own firearms.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Let me clarify:

These guys were convicted of murder and those convictions will never be erased. I'm not sure where these misconceptions come from. In the United States, convictions are never "erased". Even an expungement doesn't erase a conviction and there exists no mechanism in the United States to automatically erase a conviction at all, let alone after a period of time. These three will always be convicted felons, unable to vote or own firearms.

What if they are eventually overturned?

 

[gitana1]

What if they are eventually overturned?

At this point, there is no mechanism available that I can think of to overturn their convictions. Under Arkansas state law, you can only appeal a conviction, when you have pled guilty or nolo contendere, if it was a conditional plea, conditioned on the outcome of an appeal already in progress, on certain, specific grounds only: https://courts.arkansas.gov/rules-and-administrative-orders/rules-of-appellate-procedure—criminal

Writs do not apply because they are no longer in prison.

The only thing that can happen is the governor can pardon them. But that has little effect as, due to the nature of the criminal convictions, there would be no expungement of their convictions, which do not act to destroy the criminal file anyhow:

Once the Governor grants you a pardon, the Governor will notify the court that sentenced you and the court will issue an order expunging the records relating to your pardoned conviction.1[18]A pardon does not expunge records of a sex offense, an offense where the victim was under[19], or an offense that resulted in death or serious physical injury.18
However, a pardon will release you of the duty to continue registering as a sex offender if you have been doing so because of the conviction. [20]

Keep in mind that to have a record “expunged” in Arkansas simply means it will be sealed and treated as confidential; it does not mean physical destruction of the file.[21] Nevertheless, once “expunged,” the only people who can access your sealed conviction records are you, your attorney, a criminal justice agency (if you are seeking employment with them), a court and a prosecuting attorney in a future criminal proceeding.[22] This limited access means that, once expunged, your pardoned conviction is no longer open to the general public to see. http://www.pardon411.com/wiki/Arkansas_Pardon_Information

See also,
http://law.justia.com/codes/arkansas/2010/title-16/subtitle-6/chapter-90/subchapter-6/16-90-605

I frankly don't understand the continued, cyclical arguing about this case. The sides are entrenched and nothing will change the other person's opinion. All the facts of this case have been debated ad nauseum and combed over with a fine tooth comb. It's really over. Their convictions will never be overturned. It is unlikely that these guys will ever be able to acheive a pardon without new evidence and even then, a pardon will have little effect on their lives, except as regards the principal of the thing, because they will still be convicted murderers and be barred from many jobs. This case is over.

I'm excited to hear how they do post conviction and how they hopefully thrive out of prison. (Disclaimer: I believe they are stone-cold innocent). But other than that, I don't understand debating this case at this point with people with entrenched positions. I just came and posted because I was made aware of some misconceptions floating around. But, I guess if you all are having fun, have at it!!! To each his own!

 

[Compassionate Reader]

What if they are eventually overturned?

Of course, if the convictions of August 19, 2012, are overturned, that will wipe out everything. Why else do we have an appeals process if not to correct errors? The 1994 convictions were overturned (set aside) on August 19, 2012, so anything is possible. However, the way I understand Arkansas law, when the SIS term is complete, the three falsely-convicted men will be able to honestly say that they don't have any felony convictions.

That was one of the purposes for creating the SIS legislation as I understand it - to allow those who successfully complete their SIS term to get on with their lives without any hindrances that might occur if they have to disclose a felony conviction. It was an effort to help rehabilitate released prisoners and make them productive members of society. Granted, a SIS is generally not imposed for a Class Y felony - just another reason, IMO, to believe that the Court knew that Damien, Jason and Jessie are innocent and did its best to right a previous wrong. Maybe they will never be able to vote or own a firearm, I don't know, but from what I've read of Arkansas law, they will not have to disclose a felony conviction upon successful completion of the SIS term.

 

[gitana1]

Of course, if the convictions of August 19, 2012, are overturned, that will wipe out everything. Why else do we have an appeals process if not to correct errors? The 1994 convictions were overturned (set aside) on August 19, 2012, so anything is possible. However, the way I understand Arkansas law, when the SIS term is complete, the three falsely-convicted men will be able to honestly say that they don't have any felony convictions.

That was one of the purposes for creating the SIS legislation as I understand it - to allow those who successfully complete their SIS term to get on with their lives without any hindrances that might occur if they have to disclose a felony conviction. It was an effort to help rehabilitate released prisoners and make them productive members of society. Granted, a SIS is generally not imposed for a Class Y felony - just another reason, IMO, to believe that the Court knew that Damien, Jason and Jessie are innocent and did its best to right a previous wrong. Maybe they will never be able to vote or own a firearm, I don't know, but from what I've read of Arkansas law, they will not have to disclose a felony conviction upon successful completion of the SIS term.

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Please see my response, above. Their convictions will never be overturned. And you are misunderstanding the suspended sentences in this case. They were sentenced to time served plus a suspended sentence. If they had only been sentenced to a suspended sentence, then they may have been able to expunge the conviction and not lawfully disclose their conviction, if it was a different kind of conviction. Expungement in Arkansas does not cover murder or crimes in which the victim was under 18. Both of which apply here. But even if it did, they have a sentence of time served AND a suspended sentence. Finally, expungement does NOT destroy their case file in Arkansas and they would absolutely have to disclose their conviction if they wanted any kind of government job or job working with children or the disabled or the elderly.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

If true, then it's even more reason to get the convictions overturned. That should erase this terrible injustice! The convictions will be necessarily overturned when the real killer is properly investigated, tried and convicted for these murders. Then, and only then, will this case be solved and Ellington will have his wish - we will go away!

 

[MissJ]

A word of caution about accusing medical professionals of unethical conduct; medical professionals who make their living with a license may sue for libel or slander if comments are made that harm their reputation and cannot be proven as true.

 

[Ausgirl]

I'm actually more concerned with the issue of real justice for the victims.

That's why I think it's important to keep any and all discussion going. Allowing this case to fizzle out now the circus has died down is a slap to the memory of those dead kids. I mean, who are really the important people in this case?

Sure, some of it's rehash and annoying quibbles. But it's perhaps better than no interest at all.

(and there's still some decent - and for the most part polite, too! - conversation to be had, I must add)