Merged Remember the West Memphis 3?

[DragonLady]

There are several witnesses who attest to both Baldwin and Echols striving to suck blood wherever they saw it.

Which isn't evidence of being murderers.

One said Echols at one cult meeting held forth with the Wicked One in a quasi parody of a Christian service.

What cult? Who is the "Wicked One" and why would a cult parody a Christian service? Who are the other members of this cult? What do they have to say?

He is a proud Aleister Crowley follower satanist, who counts Marilyn Manson amongst his fans.

So what? Crowley wasn't a Satanist; he was a ceremonial magician -an entirely different animal. It's rather like the difference between killing a dog, and killing three little boys. We can strongly disapprove of both, but one is not at all like the other.

I have no idea what Marilyn Manson has to do with any of this? Unless of course...you believe that his music is proof of evil doing?

You're denying these people exist even though they rub your faces in it.

No. I'm denying the correlation/causation relationship that so many people have used to rationalize demonizing those who practice their freedom of religion.

True, there is a big difference between someone who digs Black Sabbath and the whole metal scene and someone who takes the dark side seriously.

I can't even guess. Please explain what is the difference?

When I heard Jimmy Page of Led Zeppelin was a satanist, I had trouble believing the guy was serious. But he was and is.

Again, so what? Is he accused of murdering the boys?

You only have to look at the murder and what was done to the victims to understand that the perps want you to know it was an act of evil abomination.

Okay; I can buy that. But what does that have to do with Satanism, ceremonial magicians, or musicians?

It seems the contents of the stomach decayed and and couldn't be used as evidence.

That was convenient, wasn't it?

Misskelley's own father gave his written consent for Misskelley to make a statement

Do you imagine having a father willing to throw him to the wolves might have accounted for some of his odd behaviors?

 

[Rolfe]

A lot of people have been sounding off to a lot of media sources about this case. A fair bit of what has been said is as credible and plausible as the daycare satanic panic nonsense. Parroting that sort of stuff as if it actually happened isn't an argument, not even if it's prefaced with "Fact!"

This is a case which has been through the courts. These are the good ones to discuss because there are actual primary documents in the public domain to read and present in evidence. It's really quite startling how little of Vixen's asserted evidence has any support in the verifiable documentation of the case.

And yes, thinking about how I could pull the intestines out of a dead dog through its anus, with only a knife to work with, and no, I don't think I could. But really, this is getting back to the same place as Avery must have murdered Halbach because he threw a kitten on a fire once in the past. It's a complete non-sequitur.

 

[Vixen]

Which isn't evidence of being murderers.



What cult? Who is the "Wicked One" and why would a cult parody a Christian service? Who are the other members of this cult? What do they have to say?



So what? Crowley wasn't a Satanist; he was a ceremonial magician -an entirely different animal. It's rather like the difference between killing a dog, and killing three little boys. We can strongly disapprove of both, but one is not at all like the other.

I have no idea what Marilyn Manson has to do with any of this? Unless of course...you believe that his music is proof of evil doing?



No. I'm denying the correlation/causation relationship that so many people have used to rationalize demonizing those who practice their freedom of religion.



I can't even guess. Please explain what is the difference?



Again, so what? Is he accused of murdering the boys?



Okay; I can buy that. But what does that have to do with Satanism, ceremonial magicians, or musicians?



That was convenient, wasn't it?



Do you imagine having a father willing to throw him to the wolves might have accounted for some of his odd behaviors?

Stop changing the context. No one said that being a satanist is proof they are the killers. The matter was explained to you as you expressed disbelief that the three had any such beliefs, or that it could possibly be a motive.

Aleister Crowley was a satanist of the most depraved sort. Advocated sacrificing babies.

Stop being obtuse and evasive.

 

[Vixen]

A lot of people have been sounding off to a lot of media sources about this case. A fair bit of what has been said is as credible and plausible as the daycare satanic panic nonsense. Parroting that sort of stuff as if it actually happened isn't an argument, not even if it's prefaced with "Fact!"

This is a case which has been through the courts. These are the good ones to discuss because there are actual primary documents in the public domain to read and present in evidence. It's really quite startling how little of Vixen's asserted evidence has any support in the verifiable documentation of the case.

And yes, thinking about how I could pull the intestines out of a dead dog through its anus, with only a knife to work with, and no, I don't think I could. But really, this is getting back to the same place as Avery must have murdered Halbach because he threw a kitten on a fire once in the past. It's a complete non-sequitur.

Then you have tunnel vision, as cruelty to animals is a strong leit motif in known sadistic killers.

Ted Bundy mutilated dogs. Echols kept a collection of cats', dogs' and birds' skulls, and no, he was not interested in the natural sciences; his obession was and is the occult. Graham Young experimented in killing animals at a young age.

Avery throwing a kitten on the fire, gives you a clear indication of his psychopathic nature. No, it doesn't 'prove' anything.

However, it doesn't surprise us he went on to do the same with an innocent respectable young lady whom he had stalked and enticed to visit his junkyard. Another depraved degenerate. Another probable product of incest looking at his dysmorphic face.

So his bleeding heart liberal lawyers bring out a soft focus documentary along the lines of the WM3 one, and gosh! it worked. People actually believe the documentary tells them all they need to know. Including, 'the ex-boyfriend' is who the police should have looked at.

It makes much of the prosecutor having been disciplined for being a sex pest to some young lady, which had nothing at all to do with the case. That's a non sequitur.

So, Damien Echols helping to produce two documentaries about the WM3 finds himself innocent.

Well, well.

 

[Rolfe]

I'm getting tired of this gish gallop of non sequiturs. Maybe when I return to the thread we'll have been shown some actual evidence linking the teenagers to the crime.

Or maybe not.

 

[luchog]

So what? Crowley wasn't a Satanist; he was a ceremonial magician -an entirely different animal.

To religious fanatics, it's all the same animal. Satanism, Wicca, ceremonial magic, even a lot of fluffy-bunny New Age nonsense like crystal waving and horoscopes. It's all satanic and evil and barely a step above human sacrifice.

 

[John Jones]

I'm getting tired of this gish gallop of non sequiturs. Maybe when I return to the thread we'll have been shown some actual evidence linking the teenagers to the crime.

Or maybe not.

Agreed.

 

[Matthew Best]

That's Echols' and Baldwin's own straw man. They claim the police picked on them because they liked Metallica. Er, hello? Metallica by then were selling 70m records a year and are as mainstream as Andy Williams!!!

Do you just make everything up?

In other words, citation for the above highlighted fantasy.

 

[Rolfe]

I googled. Metallica were formed in 1981.

Metallica ranks as one of the most commercially successful bands of all time, having sold over 120 million records worldwide.

So that's 120 million records in total over more than 35 years. So never going to have sold 70 million in any one year.

 

[kookbreaker]

I googled. Metallica were formed in 1981.




So that's 120 million records in total over more than 35 years. So never going to have sold 70 million in any one year.

Even more accurate would be:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallica_discography

Wherin their self-titled album released in 1991 shows 16 million copies sold, which would be their peak sales year.

 

[Vixen]

Even more accurate would be:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallica_discography

Wherin their self-titled album released in 1991 shows 16 million copies sold, which would be their peak sales year.

Soz, it should have read 70m sold worldwide as of the time of the trial (not per annum).

Are people still trying to push the line, 'Police picked on the WM3 because they listened to Metallica'?

 

[Strawberry]

Soz, it should have read 70m sold worldwide as of the time of the trial (not per annum).

Are people still trying to push the line, 'Police picked on the WM3 because they listened to Metallica'?

No, they're pushing the 'Vixen can't get her facts right' line. And succeeding.

Any sign of that lab report showing urine in the childrens stomachs yet? No, I thought not.

 

[Vixen]

No, they're pushing the 'Vixen can't get her facts right' line. And succeeding.

Any sign of that lab report showing urine in the childrens stomachs yet? No, I thought not.

Did you not see the Dr Perretti citation, above?


Any moment now, the argument is going to be, 'the three boys must have killed themselves' or, 'the murders must have happened all by themselves', 'there is no proof anybody did it, it could have been snapper turtles'.

 

[Strawberry]

Did you not see the Dr Perretti citation, above?


Any moment now, the argument is going to be, 'the three boys must have killed themselves' or, 'the murders must have happened all by themselves', 'there is no proof anybody did it, it could have been snapper turtles'.

There is no Peretti citation above about urine in the stomachs. All you've done is post a link to a reddit thread which quotes the Gitchell letter claiming Peretti mentioned urine in the stomachs. Did Peretti take the extraordinary decision not to record this anywhere, and not to record the tests he carried out to establish the presence of urine either?

If not, you should be able to find a record of it before I find a link with Dr Peretti denying that there was urine in the children's stomachs. What do you reckon?

 

[Vixen]

There is no Peretti citation above about urine in the stomachs. All you've done is post a link to a reddit thread which quotes the Gitchell letter claiming Peretti mentioned urine in the stomachs. Did Peretti take the extraordinary decision not to record this anywhere, and not to record the tests he carried out to establish the presence of urine either?

If not, you should be able to find a record of it before I find a link with Dr Peretti denying that there was urine in the children's stomachs. What do you reckon?

Did you miss the part about the stomach samples decaying and becoming unusable?

The point you've missed is that Echols mentioned the urine in the boys' mouths (10 May), some sixteen days before Dr Peretti mentioned it.

Don't tell us, his probation officer told him all about that, as well.

 

[Strawberry]

Did you miss the part about the stomach samples decaying and becoming unusable?

The point you've missed is that Echols mentioned the urine in the boys' mouths (10 May), some sixteen days before Dr Peretti mentioned it.

Don't tell us, his probation officer told him all about that, as well.

The stomach contents being decayed an unusable by the time the defense applied for DNA tests has no bearing on whether urine was found to be in the boys stomachs by the medical examiner who performed their autopsies.

Unless you produce evidence that there was urine in the boys stomachs, Echols mentioning it is meaningless in establishing guilt.

I've told you from the start that Echols claimed Steve Jones told him there was urine in the boys mouths on May 7th, and that he made that claim in front of Lt Sudbury, who was a witness to the conversation between Jones and Echols.

Now how about that link to evidence that there was urine present in the boys stomachs, making any headway yet?

 

[Rolfe]

I was thinking of making a list of all the false and unsubstantiated things Vixen has posted as "Fact!" in her short sojourn in this thread, from the urine in the stomachs to the elimination of "Mr. Bojangles" as a suspect, but sod it, life's too short.

 

[John Jones]

Did you not see the Dr Perretti citation, above?


Any moment now, the argument is going to be, 'the three boys must have killed themselves' or, 'the murders must have happened all by themselves', 'there is no proof anybody did it, it could have been snapper turtles'.

Two straw man arguments in one post. This is probably going to be my last reply to you.

 

[Matthew Best]

I was thinking of making a list of all the false and unsubstantiated things Vixen has posted as "Fact!" in her short sojourn in this thread, from the urine in the stomachs to the elimination of "Mr. Bojangles" as a suspect, but sod it, life's too short.

I think there may be a post length limit that might be exceeded.

 

[Vixen]

I was thinking of making a list of all the false and unsubstantiated things Vixen has posted as "Fact!" in her short sojourn in this thread, from the urine in the stomachs to the elimination of "Mr. Bojangles" as a suspect, but sod it, life's too short.

Yes, completely ignore Misskelley's - one of the murderers - detailed, accurate and frank confession, made entirely voluntarily, with his father's consent, and against the wishes of his attorneys.

It's your prerogative, but perhaps you should be less taken in by documentaries made by defence attorneys. It's interesting that the public prefer to believe a tv programme than a properly ordered court of law.

You're in good company. There are plenty of people who believe soap opera characters are real and even that common criminals, for example, Ronnie Biggs, are folk heroes.