What I really don't get is...

[Hez]

I have never murdered anyone let alone 3 children.

How about you?

I refuse to answer this post on the grounds that I may incriminate myself. :floorlaugh:

 

[Ausgirl]

Thanks, those who've said nice things. Really, I hope the 3 are not guilty, because their being so would make a horrible situation even more horrible, and hurt a LOT of people who have trusted them.

Hope is the thing with feathers.. but it can be a dumb cluck, you know?

The important thing for me in this case is the question of who killed those three little boys. I don't care who it is, as long they get what's coming. And my real outrage here is for the fact that the likelihood of ever securing an iron-clad, fair and true conviction is next to nil, thanks to all parties responsible for crappy, corrupt investigations, arrests and trials..

reedus, a good pal of mine once said something that really helped me keep perspective on another case where opinions were very polarised:

"It's hard to see the forest for the trees, when your head is up your arse."

Way to bring me right back down to earth. I'm grateful to have friends like that.

 

[primitivefuture]

I have never murdered anyone let alone 3 children.

How about you?

Is that really necessary?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Cappuccino]

IMO one of the biggest flaws in the investigation was eliminating JKM from enquiries on the basis of his wife's alibi alone. I've seen waaaay to many cases on here where the wife/gf colludes with the man in her life when he wants to molest/rape, even murder.

I wonder if the defense investigators ever looked at him?

 

[UdbCrzy2]

IMO one of the biggest flaws in the investigation was eliminating JKM from enquiries on the basis of his wife's alibi alone. I've seen waaaay to many cases on here where the wife/gf colludes with the man in her life when he wants to molest/rape, even murder.

I wonder if the defense investigators ever looked at him?

Or other family members

 

[UdbCrzy2]

How many days have you spent on death row?

Is that really necessary?

 

[Ausgirl]

Good question, Cappa!

This is why I made a thread for JKM alone.. IMO he shoulda been a -prime- suspect that warranted more than "his wife says he was home, the end".

I know they took hair samples. No blood samples? Why?

He basically passed the poly. And predatory pedos with prior rape convictions and who know a poly is coming thier way, have -never- beaten that test? Not ever? There's a reason polys are not popular as evidence...

Add Barbara's weirdly conflicting statement into the mix.. JKM should have been put through a grinder, and was not, and THAT is shame, in every sense of the word.

And he's just ONE who got a cursory nod to investigation and was cut loose...

 

[Cappuccino]

He didn't even pass the poly. He failed on two questions - do you know who killed the children and do you know what they were tied up with?

 

[Ausgirl]

Cappa, there's so much more I could say on him, but can't as I feel it's stretching TOS here.. but dig a bit into him, and it gets pretty plain as to why I think he never should have been knocked off the list. Not then and not now.

There's other great suspects, too. Better ones than Echols and Misskelley, and so far out of Baldwin's league that it's actually kinda funny, in a morbid way. I do intend to poke about each one in their own threads, in time. I kicked off with JKM, though. Because he's up there. Oh boy, he's up there.

 

[reedus23]

Is that really necessary?

I didn't mean any offense by my rhetorical question. My only point was until we have spent time on death row we have little room to question why someone would forego a trial in exchange for a guaranteed path off of death row.

 

[reedus23]

Cappa, there's so much more I could say on him, but can't as I feel it's stretching TOS here.. but dig a bit into him, and it gets pretty plain as to why I think he never should have been knocked off the list. Not then and not now.

There's other great suspects, too. Better ones than Echols and Misskelley, and so far out of Baldwin's league that it's actually kinda funny, in a morbid way. I do intend to poke about each one in their own threads, in time. I kicked off with JKM, though. Because he's up there. Oh boy, he's up there.

I would love to see that thread resurrected. Lots of good discussion in it.

 

[kyleb]

My only point was until we have spent time on death row we have little room to question why someone would forego a trial in exchange for a guaranteed path off of death row.

If one had to walk a mile in anther's shoes before questioning their decisions, pretty much all of us would be beyond each others reproach. Surely nobody here would be in any potion to question Ellington's acceptance of the Alford pleas, nor Hobbs's reactions to the accusations against him.

 

[Ausgirl]

I would love to see that thread resurrected. Lots of good discussion in it.

Me, too!

 

[GoblinKeeper]

All I know about this whole mess is that no one, I don't care how much you think you know, can be dogmatic about who is guilty and who is innocent. Truth is stranger than fiction, and always will be. There is evidence, but not enough to rule anyone in or out. Someone said absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I would posit that evidence does not lie, but can be made to lie in the hands of a skillful enough manipulator. And heaven knows, we've seen enough of those on both sides of this case. Are the three who have been released guilty or innocent? I don't know. Is anyone guilty? YES... I just can't say who without a shadow of doubt based on what is out there. All I know is that the true West Memphis 3, Christopher Myers, Steve Branch, and Mike Moore, should never be forgotten while the guilt or innocence of others are considered. Just my humble opinion, for what it may be worth. Off my soap box now and back to your regularly scheduled program...

 

[Justiceseeker35]

All I know about this whole mess is that no one, I don't care how much you think you know, can be dogmatic about who is guilty and who is innocent. Truth is stranger than fiction, and always will be. There is evidence, but not enough to rule anyone in or out. Someone said absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I would posit that evidence does not lie, but can be made to lie in the hands of a skillful enough manipulator. And heaven knows, we've seen enough of those on both sides of this case. Are the three who have been released guilty or innocent? I don't know. Is anyone guilty? YES... I just can't say who without a shadow of doubt based on what is out there. All I know is that the true West Memphis 3, Christopher Myers, Steve Branch, and Mike Moore, should never be forgotten while the guilt or innocence of others are considered. Just my humble opinion, for what it may be worth. Off my soap box now and back to your regularly scheduled program...

Here's the problem with the whole thing.
One I strongly believe that JMK's confession was coerced. When you throw that out. The rest of the state's case was based on evidence that was either planted (the knife), (or not proven to be the murder weapon) and on the false testimony of others. Nothing else places either DE or JB at the murder scene and then the state fails to prove its case. Reasonable doubt comes in with the new dna evidence from the hairs and the lack of dna of the three released at the scene. The defense can show an alternate theory of the crime with the hair dna. At that point the state can either have a new trial or release them on an obscure plea which saves face and money.

 

[GoblinKeeper]

Thanks, JusticeSeeker, for the obviously well thought-out response. I agree, it appears that JM's confession was not exactly what it should have been, and that the WMPD were to blame for their breach of protocols in that area, as well as many others. As far as testimonies, there were quite a few false testimonies, a number of non-corrobative testimonies, and others that for one reason or another didn't ring 100% truthful; but that was on both sides of the fence. There is doubt due to the DNA results from the hairs tested and their locations; however, there is the statement of the defense expert who said the DNA evidence is not strong enough on its own to establish TH's guilt. Do I believe that? I'm not sure; not being an expert in anything other than "death by chocolate" desserts, I defer to their opinions. Unfortunately, that seems to be what we have in this case, conflicting opinions on both sides, rather than hard evidence. I would love to see it solved, and the perpetrators/murderers of those three young boys brought to justice. But I am not about to go on a witch hunt for someone else as was done in the first place. Forgive me, but I am neither a supporter nor a non-supporter. I merely want to see justice done for those who suffered and died. If that means the WMPD needs to investigate TH (either for the first time or further), needs to look more closely at places in the neighborhood where the boys could have been killed (I'm not totally convinced the creek they were found in is where they were killed; the lack of mosquito bites seems to me to place them other than in the woods for too long, as the statement was made the mosquitoes were quite numerous), and do a proper examination of the evidence gathered (that hasn't been lost), then so be it. I believe their original investigation wasn't properly handled, and that now it may be too late to get one properly done. Does that mean I've given up hope it will be solved? No; if the case of Maria Ridulph can be solved after 50 years, then this one can be as well. Someone, somewhere, knows the truth. Someone, somewhere, needs to tell it. Once again, back to your originally scheduled programs. Thank you for your time.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Thanks, JusticeSeeker, for the obviously well thought-out response. I agree, it appears that JM's confession was not exactly what it should have been, and that the WMPD were to blame for their breach of protocols in that area, as well as many others. As far as testimonies, there were quite a few false testimonies, a number of non-corrobative testimonies, and others that for one reason or another didn't ring 100% truthful; but that was on both sides of the fence. There is doubt due to the DNA results from the hairs tested and their locations; however, there is the statement of the defense expert who said the DNA evidence is not strong enough on its own to establish TH's guilt. Do I believe that? I'm not sure; not being an expert in anything other than "death by chocolate" desserts, I defer to their opinions. Unfortunately, that seems to be what we have in this case, conflicting opinions on both sides, rather than hard evidence. I would love to see it solved, and the perpetrators/murderers of those three young boys brought to justice. But I am not about to go on a witch hunt for someone else as was done in the first place. Forgive me, but I am neither a supporter nor a non-supporter. I merely want to see justice done for those who suffered and died. If that means the WMPD needs to investigate TH (either for the first time or further), needs to look more closely at places in the neighborhood where the boys could have been killed (I'm not totally convinced the creek they were found in is where they were killed; the lack of mosquito bites seems to me to place them other than in the woods for too long, as the statement was made the mosquitoes were quite numerous), and do a proper examination of the evidence gathered (that hasn't been lost), then so be it. I believe their original investigation wasn't properly handled, and that now it may be too late to get one properly done. Does that mean I've given up hope it will be solved? No; if the case of Maria Ridulph can be solved after 50 years, then this one can be as well. Someone, somewhere, knows the truth. Someone, somewhere, needs to tell it. Once again, back to your originally scheduled programs. Thank you for your time.

BBM

IMO, it's never too late! As was pointed out, old cases are still solved all the time. I even think that the "Jack the Ripper" and "Lizzie Borden" cases can be solved, not to mention "The Black Dahlia" and a slew of others. Maybe I'm the eternal optimist, who knows? As to this case, I agree that the two hairs alone (the "Hobbs" hair and the "Jacoby" hair) are not enough to convict. However, that is more physical evidence than was ever found against the three falsely convicted men, and it is not all of the evidence against TH. Unfortunately, the rest of the evidence against him is circumstantial.

I, too, am still involved in this case to see justice done. IMO, that's the only reason that anyone is still seriously involved. Again, IMO, it's the only reason that makes sense at this point. Since the three men originally found guilty are now free, as I understand things, they cannot be retried for the same crime (double jeopardy). So, further discussion of them as the killers is useless. For them, the real hope is for exoneration, and that requires finding and convicting the real killer/s.

Although TH is my chief suspect, as I've said before, I would look at evidence against anyone, but not hearsay or stupid statements that aren't supported by the facts. I'd love to see this case reopened and properly investigated - by someone other than the wmpd (who don't deserve to be referred to with capital letters). The only way that can happen is if the prosecutor's office (Ellington) or the new AG or Governor orders it. My hope is that those within Arkansas who can will continue to put pressure on those in power. I believe that continuing discussions on this board and others could be helpful to the prosecutors when (I refuse to give up) this case is reopened. I await that day.

 

[GoblinKeeper]

BBM

IMO, it's never too late! As was pointed out, old cases are still solved all the time. I even think that the "Jack the Ripper" and "Lizzie Borden" cases can be solved, not to mention "The Black Dahlia" and a slew of others. Maybe I'm the eternal optimist, who knows? As to this case, I agree that the two hairs alone (the "Hobbs" hair and the "Jacoby" hair) are not enough to convict. However, that is more physical evidence than was ever found against the three falsely convicted men, and it is not all of the evidence against TH. Unfortunately, the rest of the evidence against him is circumstantial.

I, too, am still involved in this case to see justice done. IMO, that's the only reason that anyone is still seriously involved. Again, IMO, it's the only reason that makes sense at this point. Since the three men originally found guilty are now free, as I understand things, they cannot be retried for the same crime (double jeopardy). So, further discussion of them as the killers is useless. For them, the real hope is for exoneration, and that requires finding and convicting the real killer/s.

Although TH is my chief suspect, as I've said before, I would look at evidence against anyone, but not hearsay or stupid statements that aren't supported by the facts. I'd love to see this case reopened and properly investigated - by someone other than the wmpd (who don't deserve to be referred to with capital letters). The only way that can happen is if the prosecutor's office (Ellington) or the new AG or Governor orders it. My hope is that those within Arkansas who can will continue to put pressure on those in power. I believe that continuing discussions on this board and others could be helpful to the prosecutors when (I refuse to give up) this case is reopened. I await that day.

Thank you, CR, for your empassioned post. I feel much the same as you. In fact, if you read my post just a bit more, you'll find I said a proper investigation may be too late. Why? Because with lost evidence, deaths of witnesses and suspects, and refusal to discuss a case by those involved at the legal level, among other items, a proper investigation with everything at hand as it was in the beginning when things went so terribly wrong may not be possible. I also pointed out that a 50-year-old case was solved, that of Maria Ridulph. So I do believe it is possible to solve this case, even with so much missing. As far as circumstantial evidence, if one takes one piece of evidence at a time, then yes, that's unfortunate. But circumstantial evidence is used to build a case, piece by piece, until the preponderance of the evidence points in one direction, which is where an investigation should focus.

Take for example, the Darlie Routier case in Texas. The evidence by itself means little, but when put together, points in one direction. Now, do I believe she is guilty? Not 100%; that is not my place, as I was not an investigator, nor a court official, nor on the jury. Therefore, I believe there could have been another guilty of the crime, or that she had an accomplice, or that she did it. But that would be only my opinion, as it should be. With no eyewitnesses, no confession, it would be hard for others to say so, but a jury found her guilty on the basis of circumstantial evidence, with all pieces linked together in a focused direction.

Now, if there is circumstantial evidence against one or perhaps two individuals, along with physical evidence, could an investigation become focused? Yes! And it should be; whether it leads to TH, his friend DJ, or LGH, JKM, JMB, or even police officials. And before someone blames me for hating police, no I do not. But it should be noted that there were individuals on a drug task force that were extremely corrupt and didn't belong on such. Could they be guilty of something like this? Yes. If they are guilty of theft of drugs, money and materials seized, does that automatically make them murderers? No; but now we enter the "slippery slope" of crime. Eventually there will have to be a coverup, and someone could get hurt or worse. IIRC, a police officer was killed, and two suspects were arrested. Perhaps it was an ordered hit? I don't know; neither does anyone else, apparently, with 100% certainty. Does that seem to have happened here? I do not know (but I do have a theory, a doozy of a theory, so far out there Pluto seems closer). But it wouldn't surprise me one bit.

Again, thank you for your post CR, and I apologize for my long reply. Back off the soapbox and to our originally scheduled programming.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I agree with you 99%, GK! I don't suspect JMB any longer (although I did briefly after watching PL2, until I realized that I was doing the same thing to him that the State did to D, J and J). Furthermore, I would love to hear your theory. I posted mine quite some time ago on this forum. I believe it is called "My Theory." If you're interested and can't find it, I'll see if I can provide a link. Please start a new thread and elucidate your theory! It will give us all something new to discuss.

 

[sloane7777]

I at some point am going to start a thread for my Cousin who was murdered in WM, it was about 10 years before this happened and I have been questioning family, I am more than convinced than ever that they pretty much have a bad case of Barnyfifeism mixed with arrogance, and a touch of underhanded kickbackness ....and when I get this started we will see yet another bungled investigation.