The Most Logical Suspect

[Ausgirl]

Now to Crowley- but I'll move that discussion over to the Occult Motives thread, I think, where that discussion might be more appropriate.

 

[kyleb]

As to the various quibbles people have had in the past -- a/ I'm not here to join or disparage anyone's pet camp, and b/ I think it's all but moot now the WM3 have been released from prison..

I don't want anyone to join any camps, I simply hoped that since you did disparage the prosecution's understanding of Crowley's writings on blood sacrifice, you might at least be willing to do the same regarding Echols' recent claims of where he lived around the time of the murders such the ones shown in the segment of this video which prompted you to change the subject to Crowley. That said, I take it you've yet to do enough cursory homework on the subject of these murders to familiarize yourself with the facts of where Echols actually lived at that time, so here's some notable evidence in that regard, Echols' mental heath records from the day after the murders, Echols' arrest report from just under month after the murders, and Echols' testimony at trial:

15 Q. Okay. Where were you living at the time?
16 A. At the time I was arrested, Broadway Trailer Park.
17 Q. Okay. Well, when you were walking over here --
18 this is the interstate, didn't you -- where, if you
19 could, show me where you lived?
20 A. Right here (indicating), somewhere along in there.
21 Q. So you lived south of Broadway?
22 A. Uh-huh.
23 Q. And what time period was that? When did you quit
24 living south of Broadway?
25 A. When I was arrested.

Here's 2706 South Grove, West Memphis, AR on Google Maps so you can see the address in the documentation is what Echols described as his home at trial for yourself. Give that evidence, and before getting into the matter of Crowley, do you have any doubt that Echols does in fact lie about where he lived at the time of the murders?

 

[Ina Cognito]

Let's start from the crime scene, and work from there.

Who is the most logical suspect? Means, motive, opportunity, and please explain why.

This can be a difficult question to answer due to the differences in time era.

I any case with the murder of a child the parents and other relatives are looked at first simply due to familiarity with the victim, opportunity and access.In this case I think it's significant there were three murders at once but there is really no evidence of more than one perpetrator. The scene was organized IMO and show evidence of mature thinking, so adult. Of course beyond the parents any and all sex offenders within a certain radius would be questioned as well as anyone known to frequent the wooded area. I do not see evidence of a severely mentally ill person in the case (such as a transient with schizophrenia or delusions) the scene was just too organized for that IMO. I also think in compiling a list of suspects you have to look at motives that were possible. Sex? Possibly of course due to nude bodies and Christopher's penis. Revenge? Hm not too likely as they were 8 yr olds and knew other 8 yr olds... Due to the organization (which I feel the WMPD totally missed and misinterpreted at the time of the crime) A more complex motive of cover-up of an accidental injury/death is possible. I'm in the middle of a million things today but without my poring back over the autopsies, didn't one child have more significant head injuries than the others? The possibility of one child being the target of anger that went too far and the others being unfortunate witnesses should have also been explored. What are the chances that a stranger would find those children in those woods at the right time and control them, murder them and leave nothing behind that was found and not be seen leaving? Pretty remote IMO My opinion is it was an adult known to the children, an authority figure that was able to psychologically control them until he (I believe this was a man) was able to physically overpower them.

Sorry if this is disconnected, I keep coming back to it because I'm busy.

 

[Ausgirl]

kyleb, please do read my post again, carefully... I believe I've already addressed your questions there.


As for suspects... starting with the evidence..

There's a few things I'm not really clear on yet (Steve Branch's genital state, the anal dilation in all three, sensibly logical causes for this stuff.. ) but I am having a hard time seeing this as NOT a sexually motivated crime in some regard, even if the boys were not raped.

If the point was to humiliate all three children - that says to me somebody got some kind of sick thrill from hogtying three little boys in identical and extremely vulnerable positions, naked.. That all three kids were utterly terrorised is obvious, but also physically proven by the bitemarks to the interior cheeks and tongue, as well as defensive marks. This goes a bit beyond 'anger', IMO, as a motive. This seems more like somebody really getting off on that terror.

That all three were tied precisely the same way suggests the possibility to me that this binding served some purpose for the killer above and beyond mere victim control. That position, the same one inflicted on all three victims, held some sort of significance to the killer and I do not think it was by chance that the binding created a visual and physical aspect of utter vulnerability and humiliation.

It wasn't clumsy, either, so he's either thought about it a lot or he's done it before.

I realise there's a ton of expert and professional documentation and opinion on all this, and I have read a lot of it, and a lot of other opinions besides, but this is what it looks like, to me.

I do think this killer has a history of violence, and perhaps is known to indulge in an interest in bondage and/or torture techniques. I think he knew full well already how to control his victims. He'd be known to humiliate others and enjoy it.

I agree there is a strong element of 'punishment' about this crime, but I am not discounting either a direct or subverted sexual element to the killer's motive, even if that was as indirect as 'punishment' for some perceived sexual wrong.

I think the people closest to this killer (which isn't necessarily family or spouse..) would recognise some of the elements of this crime, for those reasons, even if they were in a very different context.

Just thoughts, opinions very subject to change. The killer of these little boys is still out there, somewhere, and keeping that level of sickness hidden for all these years would surely be a chore. Somebody knows something.. so I think keeping up discussions, keeping the crime current, is so very important. Especially now the media and trial stuff has died down, along with the furore of discussion.

 

[kyleb]

kyleb, please do read my post again, carefully... I believe I've already addressed your questions there.

I have read your posts carefully, and nothing in them actually answers the question of if you have any doubt that Echols actually lived in West Memphis at the time of the murders, let alone the question of if any such doubts have been dispelled by the evidence I presented in my previous post.

 

[Ausgirl]

I have read your posts carefully, and nothing in them actually answers the question of if you have any doubt that Echols actually lived in West Memphis at the time of the murders, let alone the question of if any such doubts have been dispelled by the evidence I presented in my previous post.

What you actually -asked- me was for my opinion on others' opinions of this matter.

For reasons that may or may not prove obvious to you, I am declining to respond to this request. I was attempting to do so subtly. Ah, well.

What I have to say on the subject of Echols' dwelling place, I have indeed stated in the posts above.

 

[Ausgirl]

James Kenny Martin?? Anyone? There's a laundry list of good reasons this man ought to have been a prime suspect.. so why wasn't he? Why isn't he now? Has he been excluded in some way I haven't discovered yet? TIA for any info.

http://www.jivepuppi.com/jivepuppi_jkm.html

- convicted predatory child rapist known to visit the area (apparently to boink ex wife of Officer Joe McCafferty..)

- dodgy alibi given by the mother of the kids (boy and girl) he molested for years on end..

- injected himself into the investigation as a 'consultant' on pedo behaviour

- failed important polygraph questions

- had prior contact with at least one of the victims

- long criminal history

Disturbing, disturbing stuff...

Sudbury: What kind of person are we dealing with then?
Martin: There are guys out there. There are knicker, who are just child knickerphiliac, child molester knickerphiliacs, who just, you know, they have a strong belief of not enough sex. I've met some of those guys. I mean we are talking, these are guys who just, they like to kill their victims while performing sex with them. [Martin interview, May 19, 1993]

Martin failed two polygraph questions, specifically: Do you know what was used to tie up those three boys? and, Do you know who killed those three boys? Perhaps more telling than the fact that Martin failed these two questions is his rationale for failing them. According to notes on the polygraph sheet: "In the post test interview, the subject said he thinks shoe laces were used to tie the boys because logic tells him that the killer would use something already there."

(from link given above)

http://www.tbi.state.tn.us/sorint/sor_Details.aspx?htid=00466399

^ classification: violent

http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/jmartinstatement.html

^ some extremely sick and graphic statements to police (I get the feeling he was enjoying t5elling them, ugh)

 

[kyleb]

James Kenny Martin was a likely suspect, and here you can find him listed among four other such individuals:

1. TW
On May 11, 1993, a file was found in Phoenix, Arizona. In this file was a WMPH map and copies of articles about the WMPH murders, along with notes in regard to the murders.
Investigation revealed that this file belonged to TW, a Phoenix resident. Approximately 10 years before TW had been investigated by the Phoenix PD for molesting several young boys. WMPD investigated.
2. RC
On May 9, 1993, WMPD received a letter from a person in regard to a strange man who lived in an apartment near the scene of the murders. This man drilled holes through the wall into the bedroom of the apartment next to his so he watch his neighbor. The man had kept copies of newspaper articles in regard to the WMPH murders.
This man had moved from Norwich, NY. A few years before a 12 year old boy had been murdered in Ithaca NY (appx. 1 hour from Norwich). The boy had been found nude and bound, hand and foot.
WMPD checked and cleared.
3. MF
In May 1993, WMPD received a call from a mother whose son had been approached by MF a couple of years before. MF fold son he was a sex killer. MF talked to police and told them he was a white witch and had a coven or group of witches who met.
WMPD checked out and cleared.
4. JKM
On May 10, 1993 JKM came to attention of WMPD. JKM was a convicted child molester who had served time in the Colorado penitentiary system. JKM was released in 1991. As early as August of 1991 Ark. DHS received a letter from Miss.DHS in regard to suspicions of abuse by JKM toward children in his care. JKM had been repeatedly raped while he was held in jail on another offense.
WMPD investigated JKM and found no evidence to implicate this suspect.
5. WJ
WMPD received information in regard to WJ who was paroled from San Quentin approximately 1 year prior to the murders. This information came in shortly after the murders.
This suspect was in prison for brutal sexual offenses. He admitted to numerous incidents where he had drugged victims and castrated them while he was overseas. In 1989, a staff psychologist at San Quentin wrote in regard to WJ:

He has a persistent pre-occupation with castration and peotomy . . . . The severity of his sexual pathology is “severe” in that it not only acknowledges that he experiences intense fantasies and urges to experience sexual sadism, but also that he intends to repeatedly act upon these fantasies . . . .

WMPD investigated and cleared.

I recommend reading the whole letter as there's plenty of other good information in it, but that's the portion relevant to this thread.

Has he been excluded in some way I haven't discovered yet?

Speaking as far as the actual murder investigation, and criminal investigations in general, other suspects were ultimately excluded by uncovering the evidence which proves who committed the crimes beyond any reasonable doubt.

 

[reedus23]

There's a few things I'm not really clear on yet (Steve Branch's genital state, the anal dilation in all three, sensibly logical causes for this stuff.. ) but I am having a hard time seeing this as NOT a sexually motivated crime in some regard, even if the boys were not raped.

There is no evidence that the boys were raped. There has been absolutely no one (at least as far as I remember from reading the testimony) that said that within a reasonable degree of medical certainty, they were penetrated in any way. I think the boys being nude was more about exhibiting control and humiliating the victims. It also inhibits their willingness to try to flee. Now, the perp might get some sexual satisfaction out of the control and humiliation he exerted. So in that sense I could agree with a sexual motivation.

If the point was to humiliate all three children - that says to me somebody got some kind of sick thrill from hogtying three little boys in identical and extremely vulnerable positions, naked.. That all three kids were utterly terrorised is obvious, but also physically proven by the bitemarks to the interior cheeks and tongue, as well as defensive marks. This goes a bit beyond 'anger', IMO, as a motive. This seems more like somebody really getting off on that terror.

Would agree that the person seems to have enjoyed the sense of power and the fear/humiliation he was able to exert.

That all three were tied precisely the same way suggests the possibility to me that this binding served some purpose for the killer above and beyond mere victim control. That position, the same one inflicted on all three victims, held some sort of significance to the killer and I do not think it was by chance that the binding created a visual and physical aspect of utter vulnerability and humiliation.

I would agree that there is a meaning to the way they were restrained. If it was solely for the purposes of restraint, there were a lot of other options. There was a reason they were restrained as they were.

It wasn't clumsy, either, so he's either thought about it a lot or he's done it before.

The biggest thing this tells me is that it makes it more likely that it was an adult. I don't necessarily think they thought this particular crime out beforehand, but they may have thought about humiliating and controlling others in a more general sense.

I do think this killer has a history of violence, and perhaps is known to indulge in an interest in bondage and/or torture techniques. I think he knew full well already how to control his victims. He'd be known to humiliate others and enjoy it.

While I wouldn't be surprised to see the perp having an interest in bondage, I'm leery of tossing it out there for fear that all people who indulge in that lifestyle would become suspect, much as those who showed an interest in alternative religions become suspect. I'd definitely say he is a controlling and manipulative person and had probably exhibited these tendencies in some fashion.

I agree there is a strong element of 'punishment' about this crime, but I am not discounting either a direct or subverted sexual element to the killer's motive, even if that was as indirect as 'punishment' for some perceived sexual wrong.

I think punishment may have been an impetus that started the chain of events but punishment quickly gave way to control and humiliation.

 

[reedus23]

James Kenny Martin?? Anyone? There's a laundry list of good reasons this man ought to have been a prime suspect.. so why wasn't he? Why isn't he now? Has he been excluded in some way I haven't discovered yet? TIA for any info.

http://www.jivepuppi.com/jivepuppi_jkm.html

- convicted predatory child rapist known to visit the area (apparently to boink ex wife of Officer Joe McCafferty..)

- dodgy alibi given by the mother of the kids (boy and girl) he molested for years on end..

- injected himself into the investigation as a 'consultant' on pedo behaviour

- failed important polygraph questions

- had prior contact with at least one of the victims

- long criminal history

Disturbing, disturbing stuff...

Sudbury: What kind of person are we dealing with then?
Martin: There are guys out there. There are knicker, who are just child knickerphiliac, child molester knickerphiliacs, who just, you know, they have a strong belief of not enough sex. I've met some of those guys. I mean we are talking, these are guys who just, they like to kill their victims while performing sex with them. [Martin interview, May 19, 1993]

Martin failed two polygraph questions, specifically: Do you know what was used to tie up those three boys? and, Do you know who killed those three boys? Perhaps more telling than the fact that Martin failed these two questions is his rationale for failing them. According to notes on the polygraph sheet: "In the post test interview, the subject said he thinks shoe laces were used to tie the boys because logic tells him that the killer would use something already there."

(from link given above)

http://www.tbi.state.tn.us/sorint/sor_Details.aspx?htid=00466399

^ classification: violent

http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/jmartinstatement.html

^ some extremely sick and graphic statements to police (I get the feeling he was enjoying t5elling them, ugh)

I know when I was reading through all the hard data first, reading this guys interview made the hairs stand up on the back of my neck. I'd have to go find my notes, but it seems to me that one of the things I noted on him was he claimed Barbara told him about the kids being missing between 5:00 and 6:00 on that Wednesday. That seems to me to be an awfully early time frame for him to know that. I realize Barbara lived in the area, so it's possible but they never follow up with him on it.

The other thing I remember noting about him was that he picked out Hobbs based on his behavior as one he'd be looking at. I remember noting that, if Martin isn't guilty, would he be able to pick out another perp just based on knowing tendencies/behavior.

The only other thing I can remember noting about him is that there was no real investigation to rule him out. They did talk to Barbara, whose times didn't jive with his times, but nothing was really followed up on it. I didn't see where they confirmed his work status at either job. Maybe they did it and I missed it or it's not public. There's a 2 sentence note about his wife saying he was with her until he left for work until 10, but no real questioning of her to determine if this was true. I just remember thinking, where is any follow up or hard questioning on this guy but then again, I found that to be the case with a lot of suspects. It's almost like they just wrote memos saying "This guy isn't a suspect because we say he's not a suspect." That's no answer.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

IIRC, James Kenney Martin has an alibi. Possibly, it's a shaky one (or a false one). IMO, what happened is that, although Martin was initially considered, once the wmpd got "Damien tunnel vision" (which occurred very early on in the investigation), they simply "forgot" about Martin. IMO, it is very possible that Martin was involved if there was a sexual nature to the crime. I'm simply unable to state with any degree of certainty that such a sexual nature existed.

IMO, the manner in which the boys were tied was not for restraint but for transport, since it mimics the manner in which a dead hog is tied in a slaughterhouse. I have seen a video (it's somewhere on Cally's, but for the life of me I can never find it quickly) that illustrates the ease with which a conscious person could move when bound as the bodies were. So, I don't believe that the bindings were for restraint.

As to the bodies being found nude, I would agree that, on the surface, that might indicate a sexual element to the crime. However, as I am a big proponent of The Manhole Theory (or something similar thereto), my thoughts are slightly different. When the killer (who I believe to be Hobbs) came back to move the bodies from the manhole (or other secret location) to the discovery ditch, he also had to remove Steven's red shorts since Pam had described Steven as having on jeans when he disappeared. When he tried to redress Steven in the jeans, he encountered difficulty. It was simply easier to strip all three boys (so Steven wasn't "different") than to redress Steven. If you recall, Steven's jeans were found right-side out while the other two boys' jeans were found inside out. Also, Steven's jeans were somewhat cleaner than the jeans of the other two.

I believe the murders began as a punishment to Steven for disobeying when called home at about 6:30 pm. The punishment went too far, and Christopher and Michael, being witnesses, were killed in cold blood. I believe the crime happened in the woods, somewhere very near the manhole (or other secret location) where the bodies were hidden until they were moved between the hours of 3 am and 6 am on May 6, 1993. I believe that it is possible that others helped Hobbs in some way. That could be Jacoby or Lucas and Hollingsworth. I just don't know. However, if Martin's alibi can be broken, I can easily see his involvement, but with Hobbs involved as well. All of this is, of course, my opinion.

 

[Ausgirl]

Oh my stars - how is a man who likes to cut penises off his victims --out on PAROLE-- at all???

Anyway, yes, there's lots of other suspects...

I think 'investigated and cleared' needs to be taken lightly, given that I've read the extent of that follow up on Martin, for example, and it was negligible to say the least.

I find Martin quite interesting in that, despite having no personal connection to the victims and being a known and convicted molester, he voluntarily inserted himself into the investigation. And then went on to very obviously use the situation as an excuse to slyly brag about/relive his former crimes -- to the police.

It;s also bizarre that he was sleeping with the ex wife an investigating officer.

 

[kyleb]

Oh my stars - how is a man who likes to cut penises off his victims --out on PAROLE-- at all???

I don't know much about William Edward Johns, but people who've done such awful things being released is hardly a rare occurrence. After all, they've got to make room for all the people they bust for selling pot and such somehow. As for Johns, who was released in 1992 after he'd served 18 years in prison, hopefully psychologists were reasonably certain they got him over his fixation on genital mutilation, or at least his desires act out that fixation against the will of others before the courts decided to parole him. Best I've been able to tell he hasn't reoffended since then, and perhaps he runs a body modification shop somewhere these days if he's even still alive.

Anyway, yes, there's lots of other suspects...

Rather, there's lots of people who've been deceived by the three who committed the murders into believing such nonsense, and surely at least a few who get some sick pleasure from joining in on the deception. This isn't rightly a rare occurrence either, here are two classic examples:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqmthnrG-2A"]Ted Bundy - Female Fans - Documentary - YouTube[/ame][ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvrpP1Qz-u4"]The Charles Manson Family Helter Skelter trial girls on the corner Interviewed Backporch Tapes - YouTube[/ame]

 

[reedus23]

OT - I didn't want to start a whole new thread just for this, so I thought I'd ask here. Having only read up on this case for the past year or so, the one thing I never took too many notes on or paid attention to were which celebrities supported the WM3. Anyways, I'm watching The Lovely Bones for the first time and had to rewind it. When the dad starts calling into LE with a list of potential suspects, their names were Driver, Gitchell, Davis and Peretti. Just a coincidence or is there a connection between the movie and a supporter?

 

[UdbCrzy2]

OT - I didn't want to start a whole new thread just for this, so I thought I'd ask here. Having only read up on this case for the past year or so, the one thing I never took too many notes on or paid attention to were which celebrities supported the WM3. Anyways, I'm watching The Lovely Bones for the first time and had to rewind it. When the dad starts calling into LE with a list of potential suspects, their names were Driver, Gitchell, Davis and Peretti. Just a coincidence or is there a connection between the movie and a supporter?

Peter Jackson the director is a supporter

 

[primitivefuture]

OT - I didn't want to start a whole new thread just for this, so I thought I'd ask here. Having only read up on this case for the past year or so, the one thing I never took too many notes on or paid attention to were which celebrities supported the WM3. Anyways, I'm watching The Lovely Bones for the first time and had to rewind it. When the dad starts calling into LE with a list of potential suspects, their names were Driver, Gitchell, Davis and Peretti. Just a coincidence or is there a connection between the movie and a supporter?

Isn't Lovely Bones a Peter Jackson movie? It has to be intentional. That's wild! What a smartass. Ha.

As far as celebrity supporters...off the top of my head, Patti Smith, Henry Rollins, Johnny Depp, Natalie Maines, Eddie Vedder, Peter Jackson, Winona Ryder, and the South Park creators. I'm sure there are more i'm forgetting. Obviously their support helped the Three's cause monetarily. On the other hand, it slightly hinders the supporters' because I can't count how many times I've heard non-supporters say that people only believe in their innocence because a pack of celebrities told them to.

One more thing, I remember being blown away years ago when I saw an episode of Dawson's Creek where Pacey hijacked an airport loud speaker to give some sappy speech to his love interest and finished up with "FREE THE WEST MEMPHIS THREE!"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Compassionate Reader]

That's a pretty comprehensive list of supporters. I know of one more that I hesitate to mention (because the nons will get all out of joint), but Marilyn Manson is also a supporter. Also, Margaret Cho. Can't think of any more right now, but will post if I do!

ETA: How could we forget Metallica?!

 

[primitivefuture]

That's a pretty comprehensive list of supporters. I know of one more that I hesitate to mention (because the nons will get all out of joint), but Marilyn Manson is also a supporter. Also, Margaret Cho. Can't think of any more right now, but will post if I do!

ETA: How could we forget Metallica?!

Duh, I forgot Metallica. Also, strangely, Mandy Moore.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ina Cognito]

OT - I didn't want to start a whole new thread just for this, so I thought I'd ask here. Having only read up on this case for the past year or so, the one thing I never took too many notes on or paid attention to were which celebrities supported the WM3. Anyways, I'm watching The Lovely Bones for the first time and had to rewind it. When the dad starts calling into LE with a list of potential suspects, their names were Driver, Gitchell, Davis and Peretti. Just a coincidence or is there a connection between the movie and a supporter?

Didn't Jerry Driver get nailed with Grand Theft in Florida? lol I never noticed that in the movie. Great movie by the way, it always affects me when I watch it.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Didn't Jerry Driver get nailed with Grand Theft in Florida? lol I never noticed that in the movie. Great movie by the way, it always affects me when I watch it.

I think it was something more along the lines of extortion. Something I recently read said that the crime was committed in Arkansas but he was incarcerated in Florida. I don't know which is true.