• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Remember the West Memphis 3?

Since I think there's a lot of evidence to indicate that they didn't do it, I'd be interested in the explanation for the statement Ampulla linked to. I can think of a number of reasons how that might have come about, but it would be useful to have the perspective from someone who has studied the case in depth.

Rolfe.
 
Rolfe said:
Since I think there's a lot of evidence to indicate that they didn't do it, I'd be interested in the explanation for the statement Ampulla linked to. I can think of a number of reasons how that might have come about, but it would be useful to have the perspective from someone who has studied the case in depth.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...
I read that also and can throw no light on it, or even imagine a circumstance making it explicable in the context of a false confession.
 
Norfolk Four

Samson said:
I read that also and can throw no light on it, or even imagine a circumstance making it explicable in the context of a false confession.
Click to expand...
I just skimmed the link but did not read it in detail. However, Joe Dick of the Norfolk Four believed his own false confession for a long time afterward, much longer than the other three servicemen (he was probably on board a ship in the harbor at the time of the crime). Both Mr. Dick and Mr. Misskelley are of limited intelligence; therefore, the case of the Norfolk Four may be more relevant than it would be otherwise.
 
Chris_Halkides said:
I just skimmed the link but did not read it in detail. However, Joe Dick of the Norfolk Four believed his own false confession for a long time afterward, much longer than the other three servicemen (he was probably on board a ship in the harbor at the time of the crime). Both Mr. Dick and Mr. Misskelley are of limited intelligence; therefore, the case of the Norfolk Four may be more relevant than it would be otherwise.
Click to expand...

One difference seems to be that Mr Dick realizes he is basically at fault for shafting the other crew members while I do not think Mr. Misskelley understands that. This is from his lawyer discussing the case on the extras on West of Memphis although makes pains to explain that he is not a sociopath just limited awareness. I think Joseph Dick is a bit more functional in that respect.
 
Ampulla of Vater said:
I started looking into this case from the perspective of supporters vs. guilters. I wanted to see if all the hatred surrounding the Knox case is an anomaly or if it is typical. One of the things I came across is this confession:
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/jmfeb.html

If this is accurate, it certainly sheds a different light on what I thought about this case. Misskelley's attorneys were present during this statement. They objected to him giving it, but I don't see how it could be coerced.
Click to expand...

Its not really that hard to see how it was coerced. At the time that statement was made Jessie had been sentenced to spend the rest of his life in prison. From his perspective, doing a deal with the prosecutors to get his sentence reduced in return for testimony against the other two, was his only hope of getting out of prison before he died.

We know the prosecution was enticing him to as well, because they were filmed in Paradise Lost explaining to the victims' parents that they needed Jessie's testimony "real bad", and they would have to offer him reduced prison time in return.

Of course we also know that the prosecution was in no position to make those promises, because once someone has been convicted only the judge can alter the sentence. Once Judge Burnett made that clear to Jessie, there are no more confessions from Jessie.
 
I am reading Devils Knot right now. . . .
Every one of the parents has dirt on them with the exception of Moores
 
Desert Fox said:
I am reading Devils Knot right now. . . .
Every one of the parents has dirt on them with the exception of Moores
Click to expand...

That seems to be the case. Michael Moore appears to be the only victim from an 'intact family' however one defines that term.

What difference does it make? I don't know. Maybe not much.
 
Last edited:
John Jones said:
That seems to be the case. Michael Moore appears to be the only victim from an 'intact family' however one defines that term.

What difference does it make? I don't know. Maybe not much.
Click to expand...

Looks like the police almost ignored the families in their investigation.
Seemed to zero in on a Satanic connection from the beginning and could not tell the difference between Wicca and Satanism.
Seems like a parade of fools all around.

Wish that Mara Leveritt would write an updated version of her book.
 
Last edited:
I want to add something that seems to never get stressed enough in documentaries.
Unless "Devil's Knot" is completely wrong, Judge Burnett is a prosecutor dressed in a set of judge's robes.
He seemed to almost always accept prosecutor motions and almost always deny defense motions. There was a case where would not let a defense witness almost say anything. He also let in witnesses on the prescription of mail order experts in the occult. Allowed the prosecution to try to get Jessie Misskelley to implicate the others in court without the defense attorney being able to speak to his client.
He also had closed door sessions with the prosecution only to discuss the case.

In addition, he is openly contemptful of the field of psychology.
 
Guilty

The WM3 were fortunate to have strong advocates in their corner, but the core arguments for their innocence are unimpressive. If one looks at this case with a critical eye, it becomes apparent that these convicted murderers were the only viable suspects. Sourced fibers, no concrete alibis, Misskelley confessing SEVERAL times over, Echols having a history of mental illness/homicidal ideation, and witnesses placing Echols near the crime scene are just a few of the reasons why the WM3 were convicted of this brutal crime.

http://www.westmemphisthreefacts.com/
 
If they were the only viable suspects I guess that's all the proof we need, right?

Frankly, if that list is the best evidence you can come up with, I'm amazed they were ever convicted in the first place.
 
JTF said:
The WM3 were fortunate to have strong advocates in their corner, but the core arguments for their innocence are unimpressive. If one looks at this case with a critical eye, it becomes apparent that these convicted murderers were the only viable suspects. Sourced fibers, no concrete alibis, Misskelley confessing SEVERAL times over, Echols having a history of mental illness/homicidal ideation, and witnesses placing Echols near the crime scene are just a few of the reasons why the WM3 were convicted of this brutal crime.

http://www.westmemphisthreefacts.com/
Click to expand...

That fiber evidence was 'consistent' with a garment found in Echol's mother's bedroom. Guess where she got that garment? Wal-mart. Wal-*****-mart. I'm sure every trailer park denizen in West Memphis had a garment from Wal-mart in their possession. It's entirely possible, if not likely, that Wal Mart was the only retail establishment within miles of the accused's residences.

Miskelly's clearly coached and coerced confession was retracted at least once more often than it was uttered. It contradicted known facts and was ruled inadmissible in Echols' and Baldwin's trial, but was considered by the jury despite instructions to the contrary.

The witnesses placing them near the crime scene were impeached by a family member of one of those witnesses, and so what? How many other people were 'near' the crime scene on May 5, 1993? The witnesses themselves and everyone looking for the missing children.
 
Last edited:
Desert Fox said:
I want to add something that seems to never get stressed enough in documentaries.
Unless "Devil's Knot" is completely wrong, Judge Burnett is a prosecutor dressed in a set of judge's robes.
He seemed to almost always accept prosecutor motions and almost always deny defense motions. There was a case where would not let a defense witness almost say anything. He also let in witnesses on the prescription of mail order experts in the occult. Allowed the prosecution to try to get Jessie Misskelley to implicate the others in court without the defense attorney being able to speak to his client.
He also had closed door sessions with the prosecution only to discuss the case.

In addition, he is openly contemptful of the field of psychology.
Click to expand...

Don't forget that Judge David 'Bozo' Burnette became the appellate court judge in the case who rejected every appeal the WM3 raised. He would have had to reverse his own judicial rulings in the case, or reject every appeal. Guess what he did?

If he had an ounce of integrity, he would have recused himself, but he didn't. He's one of the true villains in this whole sad, sorry affair.
 
JTF said:
The WM3 were fortunate to have strong advocates in their corner, but the core arguments for their innocence are unimpressive. If one looks at this case with a critical eye, it becomes apparent that these convicted murderers were the only viable suspects. Sourced fibers, no concrete alibis, Misskelley confessing SEVERAL times over, Echols having a history of mental illness/homicidal ideation, and witnesses placing Echols near the crime scene are just a few of the reasons why the WM3 were convicted of this brutal crime.

http://www.westmemphisthreefacts.com/
Click to expand...

I would argue that there are three viable suspects although #3 is not likely
They are
1. Terry Hobbs - most likely but nothing I think is certain - I certain would not convict him on what we have
2. John Mark Byers - I would not discount him even if attention has shifted to Terry Hobbs. Has a pretty shifty past and very well might have killed his wife. Looks like Judge Burnett might have also done some covering for him.
3. "Mr Bojangles" - Sorry but when your cops do an interview of the manager through the drive-through, you fail. The police actually lost the blood evidence as well.

Reading Aaron Hutcheson statements in "Devil's Knot" and how they changed is very interesting.
 
I wanted to show something interesting from that source

After Lorri helped free him from prison, they moved into movie maker Peter Jackson’s apartment in the Tribeca section of New York City. They lived there rent-free until they left NYC in September 2012 and purchased a $290,000 home in Salem, Massachusetts - home of the Salem witch trials. Damien has said he believes that Salem (with its touristy witch supply shops and tarot card readers) is the only place in the world where he fits in. The early 1800s era house where he resides in Salem serves as home base for him to pursue his many current interests.

She is an architect. . . .$290,000 is potentially chump change for an architect and actually for the Salem MA area, $290,000 is a moderate priced home, nothing extravagant.
Here is an example of around that price range
 
JTF said:
The WM3 were fortunate to have strong advocates in their corner, but the core arguments for their innocence are unimpressive. If one looks at this case with a critical eye, it becomes apparent that these convicted murderers were the only viable suspects. Sourced fibers, no concrete alibis, Misskelley confessing SEVERAL times over, Echols having a history of mental illness/homicidal ideation, and witnesses placing Echols near the crime scene are just a few of the reasons why the WM3 were convicted of this brutal crime.

http://www.westmemphisthreefacts.com/
Click to expand...


You know, some accused people are guilty and some are not. Just because one case you are familiar with is in the former category doesn't mean they're all the same.

I think we may have had this conversation before.

Rolfe.
 
Last edited:
Embrace The Documented Record

ROLFE: I'm quite familiar with this case and other high profile murder cases. My post did not suggest that this case and the Jeffrey MacDonald case had any tangible similarities. What I did state was my opinion that there was ample evidence of their guilt and I included several examples of why they were convicted of this horrific crime.

I then posted a link to a website which ignores the assumptions, hype, distortions, and half-truths put forth by advocates for these convicted murderers. To be frank, the rebuttal posts indicated that most, if not all, of the posters have not read this website and/or have given short shrift to the information gathered by the original investigative team.

Examples include the infamous Walmart explanation for the inculpatory fiber evidence and the focus on only one of Miskelley's confessions. These specious arguments are simply fodder for those who have no interest in the hard work put in by this group of dogged investigators and lab technicians.

Those who see an injustice and/or conspiracy around every corner will continue to ignore the totality of the evidence that led to their conviction. They will also embrace every defense CLAIM regarding the "real" killers. No amount of undiluted fact will alter their postion on this case.

Byers, Hobbs, and Mr. Bojangles have joined the likes of John Mark Karr, Helena Stoeckley, Arthur Leigh Allen, and the hitman who shot JFK from the grassy knoll as red herrings in high profile murder cases. For those who have taken the time to read the documented record, the guilt of Echols, Baldwin, and Miskelley is a no-brainer.

http://www.westmemphisthreefacts.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom