Merged Remember the West Memphis 3?

[John Jones]

There is enough evidence to have the conviction overturned (the tainted juror is enough for that) and a new trial. . . .In a new trial, you then return to a presumption of innocence.

I absolutely agree. The jury misconduct was enough to warrant a new trial, which Arkansas knew they couldn't win. Baldwin was the hold-out, but he took the Alford deal because "they are trying to kill Damien".

This whole WM3 Satanic Panic thing is a tragedy.

 

[luchog]

I don't know if Byers was the killer, I don't know if Hobbs is the killer, and I don't know if it is somebody else. We are almost certain to never know who committed the crimes. I am just arguing that I do not think Byers can be excluded.

Byers can be excluded; and was excluded. If you haven't seen West of Memphis, I strongly recommend doing so. They make a very compelling case, based on DNA and other physical evidence, as well as a considerable amount of circumstantial evidence, that Hobbs was the killer. A very large number of people close to the family also believe that Hobbs murdered the boys.

Either way, all of the DNA evidence points strongly away from the three. The fact that the courts refused to consider not only the new evidence; but the prosecutorial misconduct and egregious procedural errors says a lot about the sheer corruption of the Arkansas judicial system.

 

[Desert Fox]

Byers can be excluded; and was excluded. If you haven't seen West of Memphis, I strongly recommend doing so. They make a very compelling case, based on DNA and other physical evidence, as well as a considerable amount of circumstantial evidence, that Hobbs was the killer. A very large number of people close to the family also believe that Hobbs murdered the boys.

Either way, all of the DNA evidence points strongly away from the three. The fact that the courts refused to consider not only the new evidence; but the prosecutorial misconduct and egregious procedural errors says a lot about the sheer corruption of the Arkansas judicial system.

There is a lot of weird stuff in Byers' life and I think it is a bad idea to completely exclude him as a possible suspect. I know it is actually older than West of Memphis but you might want to read "Devil's Knot." Now, I am not saying that he is guilty but he is a person of interest in by book. Unless something concrete is actually found for his guilt, that is the most he will ever be however.

 

[Samson]

Byers can be excluded; and was excluded. If you haven't seen West of Memphis, I strongly recommend doing so. They make a very compelling case, based on DNA and other physical evidence, as well as a considerable amount of circumstantial evidence, that Hobbs was the killer. A very large number of people close to the family also believe that Hobbs murdered the boys.

Either way, all of the DNA evidence points strongly away from the three. The fact that the courts refused to consider not only the new evidence; but the prosecutorial misconduct and egregious procedural errors says a lot about the sheer corruption of the Arkansas judicial system.

I posted this link earlier on the thread on background to the movie

here it is again.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz-film-festival/news/article.cfm?c_id=1500937&objectid=10820250

 

[Desert Fox]

I posted this link earlier on the thread on background to the movie

here it is again.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz-film-festival/news/article.cfm?c_id=1500937&objectid=10820250

Hopefully I can at least mention it without invoking somebody's wrath but her documentary "Deliver us from evil" is also excellent.

 

[luchog]

There is a lot of weird stuff in Byers' life and I think it is a bad idea to completely exclude him as a possible suspect. I know it is actually older than West of Memphis but you might want to read "Devil's Knot." Now, I am not saying that he is guilty but he is a person of interest in by book. Unless something concrete is actually found for his guilt, that is the most he will ever be however.

Devil's Knot is not one of the better-researched documentaries; and it makes the same mistake that the police did, deciding on a culprit and manipulating the evidence to fit. Not as egregiously, admittedly As I recall, Byers had a solid alibi, and there's no physical evidence that places him at the scene, unlike Hobbs. The knife turned out to be a red herring; and there is nothing else substantial. On the other hand, a hair with Hobbs' DNA was found tied into the knot in the ropes binding on of the boys, positively linking him to the scene. There is a considerable amount of other circumstantial evidence putting him there as well.

 

[John Jones]

Devil's Knot is not one of the better-researched documentaries; and it makes the same mistake that the police did, deciding on a culprit and manipulating the evidence to fit. Not as egregiously, admittedly As I recall, Byers had a solid alibi, and there's no physical evidence that places him at the scene, unlike Hobbs. The knife turned out to be a red herring; and there is nothing else substantial. On the other hand, a hair with Hobbs' DNA was found tied into the knot in the ropes binding on of the boys, positively linking him to the scene. There is a considerable amount of other circumstantial evidence putting him there as well.

The victims were tied with shoe strings, not ropes^*. And the hair with mtDNA consistent with Hobbs, but none of the WM3 was found tangled in shoestrings of one of the victims, but not Hobbs' own stepson.

Let's try to be factually correct. I've seen all the WM3 films, but I also lived a few miles across the river from where it took place, and have devoured every bit of information I have been able to get my hands on these last 22 years.

^*ETA: The ropes versus shoestrings detail is not a nit-pick. It's a critical fault in Miskelly's coerced confession. The West Memphis cops coached Miskelly.

 

[John Jones]

There is a lot of weird stuff in Byers' life and I think it is a bad idea to completely exclude him as a possible suspect. I know it is actually older than West of Memphis but you might want to read "Devil's Knot." Now, I am not saying that he is guilty but he is a person of interest in by book. Unless something concrete is actually found for his guilt, that is the most he will ever be however.

John Mark Byers is an obvious suspect for just about any crime in Eastern Arkansas at that time. Given the quality of justice in that state, I'm surprised he didn't wind-up on death row himself.

That doesn't mean that I think John Mark Myers did it, but he was as suspicious as anybody in the spring/summer of 1993. Even more so.

 

[Desert Fox]

John Mark Byers is an obvious suspect for just about any crime in Eastern Arkansas at that time. Given the quality of justice in that state, I'm surprised he didn't wind-up on death row himself.

That doesn't mean that I think John Mark Myers did it, but he was as suspicious as anybody in the spring/summer of 1993. Even more so.

If somebody asks me "Do you think he is guilty," my answer is just "I don't know." I am unwilling to definitely state that he is innocent. There is nothing that I would convict him of if I was in a jury.

 

[John Jones]

If somebody asks me "Do you think he is guilty," my answer is just "I don't know."[...].

I would give that same answer about almost anybody in the WM3 case, except for the Law Enforcement and Judicial System in the state of Arkansas.

My uncle was vice mayor there for a number of years, so I'm not unfamiliar with West Memphis politics.

 

[psychoticstate]

I followed this case since 1994 and never believed the WM3 to be guilty. Even if you question their innocence, there was simply not enough evidence for guilty verdicts, much less a death penalty conviction.

I met Damien Echols and his wife Lorri last summer at a book talk/signing. Their discussion moved many to tears. They were both frank and open, answering any question posed to them. Damien spoke about his years in prison, having to sleep on a concrete bed for years and the resulting arthritis and other health conditions, including issues with his vision, he's suffered with.

When I met him, I was struck with a sense of calm or zen (for lack of better description) that I have never had before. He was gracious and both he and his wife were appreciative of the kind words I shared about their book.

For me, this case remains one of the worst miscarriages of justice in our country's history.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

If somebody asks me "Do you think he is guilty," my answer is just "I don't know." I am unwilling to definitely state that he is innocent. There is nothing that I would convict him of if I was in a jury.

I can't say Hobbs is innocent, but to me the crime looks like a sexual homicide, and the perp may have had no connection to the victims.

I could see it as someone who realized the kids were in the woods when he saw the bicycles, and perhaps had met them before, and knew them well enough to get them under control somehow. Maybe he left the area shortly after the murders and avoided the investigation entirely. Maybe it was Mr. Bojangles.

 

[Desert Fox]

I can't say Hobbs is innocent, but to me the crime looks like a sexual homicide, and the perp may have had no connection to the victims.

I could see it as someone who realized the kids were in the woods when he saw the bicycles, and perhaps had met them before, and knew them well enough to get them under control somehow. Maybe he left the area shortly after the murders and avoided the investigation entirely. Maybe it was Mr. Bojangles.

I guess my position is that I am unwilling to rule out Hobbs, Byers, or Mr Bojangles. My thoughts is that we simply do not have, and never will have, the evidence to convict anybody.

I was watching an episode of "Cold Justice" and the former prosecutor told one of the police officers just to put a case to bed. That is how I feel here. Just exonerate the three defendants and leave it at that. Sometimes a crime will always remain a mystery.

That said, there is the argument that John Douglas believes that it is a personal cause homicide which (if he is right) leads us to a family member being the most likely person involved.

 

[psychoticstate]

That said, there is the argument that John Douglas believes that it is a personal cause homicide which (if he is right) leads us to a family member being the most likely person involved.

I agree with Douglas. I don't believe the murders were planned and I don't believe there was a sexual connotation to them. I think someone (likely Hobbs) lashed out at one child and killing the other two were necessary.

 

[Desert Fox]

I agree with Douglas. I don't believe the murders were planned and I don't believe there was a sexual connotation to them. I think someone (likely Hobbs) lashed out at one child and killing the other two were necessary.

The trouble is that I don't think there is enough evidence for even reasonable suspicion let alone surpass reasonable doubt.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

I guess my position is that I am unwilling to rule out Hobbs, Byers, or Mr Bojangles. My thoughts is that we simply do not have, and never will have, the evidence to convict anybody.

I was watching an episode of "Cold Justice" and the former prosecutor told one of the police officers just to put a case to bed. That is how I feel here. Just exonerate the three defendants and leave it at that. Sometimes a crime will always remain a mystery.

That said, there is the argument that John Douglas believes that it is a personal cause homicide which (if he is right) leads us to a family member being the most likely person involved.

Yes, I have always hoped someday I might have a chance to discuss this case with Douglas.

I think of another Hobbs - Jerry Hobbs, who was charged with the murder of his daughter and her playmate. Police started with an enraged parent theory, similar to the one Douglas has laid out in the WM3 case. Jerry Hobbs, a violent alcoholic who had just gotten out of prison, was plausible. But, there was semen on (not inside) the body of one of the victims, which was eventually linked to a sexual predator. Jerry Hobbs is innocent.

In the WM3 case, the bodies were dumped in water, degrading the forensic evidence. But the overall crime looks very similar, to my mind. Why would an enraged parent remove the victims' clothing? Douglas came up with a theory that Hobbs caught the boys in some kind of sex play, which is possible, but it is speculation. I think sexual homicide by a predator/stranger is the straightest line between the dots.

I agree it is unlikely the case will ever be solved at this point. It is enough to conclude that whoever did it, it was not the WM3.

 

[Desert Fox]

I agree it is unlikely the case will ever be solved at this point. It is enough to conclude that whoever did it, it was not the WM3.

The only way it could ever be solved is if somebody steps forward and states "I did it" and describes exactly how it was done step by step. Only way I can see that is if they feel an attack of guilt and want to clear the three who are still technically convicted of the crime.

 

[psychoticstate]

In the WM3 case, the bodies were dumped in water, degrading the forensic evidence. But the overall crime looks very similar, to my mind. Why would an enraged parent remove the victims' clothing? Douglas came up with a theory that Hobbs caught the boys in some kind of sex play, which is possible, but it is speculation. I think sexual homicide by a predator/stranger is the straightest line between the dots.

I agree it is unlikely the case will ever be solved at this point. It is enough to conclude that whoever did it, it was not the WM3.

One of the documentaries on this case mentioned that Hobbs may have been molesting Stevie. His own biological daughter accused him of molesting her while she was growing up, during a time when Stevie was alive and they were living in the same house.

It could be possible that Hobbs attempted something with Stevie that evening or one of the other boys who may have threatened to tell.

I'm not sure why the clothing was stripped from the bodies other than to get rid of evidence. I would imagine the clothing was bloodstained and would likely have had fiber, hair and other type of evidence attached to it.

With the disposal of the bodies in the water, could it be not only to wash away evidence but to hope that animals/wildlife/insects may have helped to destroy the bodies? If that was your plan, I would imagine the removal of clothing may have helped that along.

The only way it could ever be solved is if somebody steps forward and states "I did it" and describes exactly how it was done step by step. Only way I can see that is if they feel an attack of guilt and want to clear the three who are still technically convicted of the crime.

True. I don't think that is ever going to happen though. The only person I could see ever possibly doing something like that would be someone like Jacoby, if he knows something and if he had a terminal illness or something like that.

 

[Strawberry]

Yes, I have always hoped someday I might have a chance to discuss this case with Douglas.

I think of another Hobbs - Jerry Hobbs, who was charged with the murder of his daughter and her playmate. Police started with an enraged parent theory, similar to the one Douglas has laid out in the WM3 case. Jerry Hobbs, a violent alcoholic who had just gotten out of prison, was plausible. But, there was semen on (not inside) the body of one of the victims, which was eventually linked to a sexual predator. Jerry Hobbs is innocent.

In the WM3 case, the bodies were dumped in water, degrading the forensic evidence. But the overall crime looks very similar, to my mind. Why would an enraged parent remove the victims' clothing? Douglas came up with a theory that Hobbs caught the boys in some kind of sex play, which is possible, but it is speculation. I think sexual homicide by a predator/stranger is the straightest line between the dots.

I agree it is unlikely the case will ever be solved at this point. It is enough to conclude that whoever did it, it was not the WM3.

I don't believe it was a sexually motivated crime. There was no evidence of sexual trauma on any of the children, and water wouldn't wash away that type of physical evidence if it had been there. I think its more likely that the children were either made to strip in order to keep control over them, or stripped after death to make the crime look like something it wasn't.

However, I do agree with you that the crime is unlikely to ever be solved, especially as the authorities are in deep denial about the mess they made of it.

 

[Tiktaalik]

The thing that strikes me is that the clothing must have been removed BEFORE the kids were tied up, since they, or at least one of them, was tied hand-to-foot, which would make it difficult to remove clothing. It could have been cut off, of course, but the simplest explanation is that the clothing was removed first. That, and the hog-tying, has always bothered me. It's not both hands to both feet, it's same-side hand to same-side foot.