Has anyone been following the West Memphis Three?

[John Jones]

AH found it, it was called "in the jury room"
and it aired on ABC in 2004

Got a link?

 

[John Jones]

The girl claimed that Kelly and others had burned all the tapes in the backyard -- and that she witnessed this.

So the absence of evidence is evidence of guilt? This is sadly unsurprising.

 

[zerospeaks]

Here ya go John,
http://abcnewsstore.go.com/webapp/w...productId=2004840&langId=-1&categoryId=100024

Hey did you guys see the P@T episode where they showed prosecutors fudge evidence to get convictions?
They even had a forensic guy admit that forensics was less of a science and more of an interpretation

 

[John Jones]

Here ya go John,
http://abcnewsstore.go.com/webapp/w...productId=2004840&langId=-1&categoryId=100024

Hey did you guys see the P@T episode where they showed prosecutors fudge evidence to get convictions?
They even had a forensic guy admit that forensics was less of a science and more of an interpretation

I'll check it out, but I don't want to derail this discussion.

Thanks,

JJ

 

[zerospeaks]

I'll check it out, but I don't want to derail this discussion.

The conviction seems to be based on the same type of evidence, which I thought was relevant.

 

[John Jones]

The conviction seems to be based on the same type of evidence, which I thought was relevant.

I was trying to be polite.

That link takes me to a place where I can buy a DVD to learn more.

Am I wrong about that?

Any such purchase will have to wait. I'm on a budget.

Can you give us a teaser?

 

[JustPietzche]

So the absence of evidence is evidence of guilt? This is sadly unsurprising.

What's even more sad is the fact that during the opening statement during the trial against Damien Echols and Jason Baldwin, the prosecutor made the following incredible statement:

"Now as the proof develops, there's, I want to tell you in advance, there's going to be a lot of testimony from the Arkansas crime laboratory and some of this evidence is gonna be what we call I guess you call it negative evidence. It doesn't really show a connection to anybody. And there'll be a reason for us putting that on and we'll explain that to you later. But for instance there'll be proof like on the bicycles there aren't any finger prints. On some things that were in the kids pockets, no finger prints. Things like that. And you may wonder why we're putting on evidence of the negative, but we'll explain that to you later."

He blatantly stated that there was no evidence, implied there was a strategy for presenting "negative evidence," but he never did explain it other than to say that they wanted to prove that they looked for such evidence.

Yet they didn't find the two hairs which were tested by the defense.

Another fun fact:
Detective Gary Gitchell told the West Memphis Evening Times a few weeks before Jessie confessed that "in the initial stages (of the investigation), people were calling and confessing. But by what they said, they were eliminated quickly." He said that his officers had "escorted potential witnesses or suspects into the area" to test their statements against elements of the crime the police knew to be true.

Despite the fact that Jessie Misskelley's "confession" had many inconsistencies (such as the time of day he claimed the murders were committed, claiming rope was used to bind the victims instead of shoelace, etc.), they immediately sought search and arrest warrants. They never took him to the crime scene to test his statements.

 

[zerospeaks]

I can't find "in the jury room" anywhere else. The show was a flop, so... that probably explains why.

 

[Piggy]

So the absence of evidence is evidence of guilt? This is sadly unsurprising.

Not only that, but there was no evidence that anything had been burned behind the building -- which there certainly would have been if piles of video tapes had been combusted -- and no reports of any missing woman.

 

[lane99]

...Hey did you guys see the P@T episode where they showed prosecutors fudge evidence to get convictions?...

What's "P@T"?

 

[zerospeaks]

Penn and Teller. They had a show called ******** on showtime.

 

[zerospeaks]

oh thats nice, can't say the name of a show...

 

[John Jones]

I missed it. I don't get Showtime.

 

[zerospeaks]

Thats why FSM made the intertubes.
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTqb6dFBDwI
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oT9RGLxDwPY&feature=related

In this episode they explore the criminal justice system in america. Is it fair?
They also look at Forensic science... is it actually science or opinion?

 

[Jeff Corey]

A pressing is like what the dry cleaners does to a pair of slacks?

No, they piled stones on him until the stones pressed him to death.

 

[lane99]

Penn and Teller. They had a show called ******** on showtime.

Ha, ok. That was my initial thought. But was thinking that would have been an "&", and not an "@"

...Can you give us a teaser?

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=131812&page=1
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=131811&page=2

Interesting show, zerospeaks. You're right, there are some similarities. But, crucial differences, too.

In the Ducic case, you've got him willingly bragging to his friend that he murdered the people, and offering to murder others. Very important situational differences from the "confession" in the WM3 case, I'd say.

 

[zerospeaks]

Ha, ok. That was my initial thought. But was thinking that would have been an "&", and not an "@"

oops. you got me.

"In the Ducic case, you've got him willingly bragging to his friend that he murdered the people, and offering to murder others. Very important situational differences from the "confession" in the WM3 case, I'd say."

I'd argue NEITHER was enough for a conviction if I was on a jury.

 

[John Jones]

oops. you got me.



I'd argue NEITHER was enough for a conviction if I was on a jury.

Echols and Baldwin of the MW3 never confessed, and Miskelly's confession was ruled inadmissable in the formers' trial, yet there is evidence the jurors deliberated Miskelly's confession improperly.

 

[John Jones]

No, they piled stones on him until the stones pressed him to death.

More precisely: If Giles Corey refuse to plead one way or the other to the charges of witchcraft, he couldn't have his property confiscated after an inevitable conviction, so the prosecutors piled stones on his chest to force him to make a plea.

He refused to plea so they kept piling on more stones until they crushed him to death.

Legend has it that his last words were "more weight".