Merged Remember the West Memphis 3?

Rolfe said:
(I notice Lane99 has been studiously avoiding the Lockerbie thread since he announced that while the evidence probably wasn't sufficient to convict, the accused must be guilty because the intelligence services would have had evidence against him they couldn't bring to court. Care to come back and debate that in the right thread, Lane?)
Click to expand...

The Iowa turret exploded because of a love triangle, just trust us.
 
getting started on Misskelley's alibi

Link to a discussion board with comments on his alibi here. Link to a newspaper article (possibly the one mentioned in the first link) here.
EDT
From the second link: "Witness James 'Jim' McNease, a diesel mechanic and owner of the repair shop where the senior Misskelley works, testified he talked to the younger Misskelley the night the 8-year-olds disappeared. Misskelley was getting ready to go to Dyess to wrestle.

Outside the courtroom after his testimony, McNease said Misskelley was carrying a black mask like the ones worn by professional stage wrestlers that night. There are others on the defense's witness list who may testify later that they went wrestling with Misskelley."

However, some of the testimony of the alibi witnesses was apparently countered in cross-examination. Link here.
 
Last edited:
Rolfe said:
We've had Mojoe make this remark, and Stilicho and lane99 also post blanket assertions of obvious guilt and "Echols groupies" and other insulting comments, but as for actual evidence to back up these assertions, or even a coherent presentation of the case for guilt....

Still crickets.

You know I'm quite tired of this pattern of behaviour on this and other threads, and it's often the same people doing it too. Any conviction is defended as self-evidently sound without addressing any of the points made by those who believe a miscarrige of justice occurred. These people are castigated as "groupies" and other sneering terms.

And it goes on and on repeatedly, with the usual culprits popping up again and again and then disappearing without even the slightest effort to substantiate their position with either evidence or logic, and indeed not the slightest effort to address the points made by other posters.

I don't have any particular vested interest in this case. I wouldn't know Damian Echols if I met him in the street (I only ever saw one picture of him and the other accused, and in that he had his hand over his face). I would be perfectly content to believe them guilty if someone were to post some actual evidence or a coherent argument for guilt.

My position is that only one side has made a lucid case for their point of view, and that case is pretty compelling. I've heard nothing but sneers and unsubstantiated assertions from the other side. So until I hear anything better, yeah, call me a groupie if you like.

(I notice Lane99 has been studiously avoiding the Lockerbie thread since he announced that while the evidence probably wasn't sufficient to convict, the accused must be guilty because the intelligence services would have had evidence against him they couldn't bring to court. Care to come back and debate that in the right thread, Lane?)

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

Actually I gave a link which quotes trial transcripts and interviews. Misskelly was not at a wrestling match on the night of the murders. When I asked for a link showing differently or a link to the supposed pictures I got nothing. If you interpret the trial transcripts differently then me thats fine but don't say I didn't provide anything. I feel it was the opposite.
 
world wrestling wanna be's

mojoe,

It was not a wrestling match in the sense of a school-sponsored event. From what I can gather, it was some young men trying to emulate WWF-style wrestling. Apparently, it was a regular thing. The links I provided allude to this, but more detail would be helpful.
 
Rolfe said:
Is this some sort of performance art?

Rolef.
Click to expand...

What I am arguing is that some people think that because an authority states something, it must be true. In the West Memphis Three, the cops think that they are guilty therefore they are guilty.
 
USS Iowa explosion

Desert Fox said:
The Iowa turret exploded because of a love triangle, just trust us.
Click to expand...
IIRC, one theory about the explosion aboard the battleship Iowa was that it was a seaman's suicide over possibly unrequited love for another seaman. Some naval investigators were asking a few of the USS Iowa survivors about certain members of the crew and were told that they were "friends of Dorothy." The investigators made a note to the effect, "find out who Dorothy is." An alternate theory about the explosion was that when explosive powder was stored in hot barges under hot conditions, it became less stable. IIUC Sandia National Laboratories looked into the explosion and thought that the problem was overram. The navy's own investigative service came under sharp criticism for its handling of the case. I am far from an expert on this catastrophe and apologize for any misstatements I might have made, but I hope this helps put it into context.
 
Last edited:
Chris_Halkides said:
IIRC, one theory about the explosion aboard the battleship Iowa was that it was a seaman's suicide over possibly unrequited love for another seaman. Some naval investigators were asking a few of the USS Iowa survivors about certain members of the crew and were told that they were "friends of Dorothy." The investigators made a note to the effect, "find out who Dorothy is." An alternate theory about the explosion was that when explosive powder was stored in hot barges under hot conditions, it became less stable. IIUC Sandia National Laboratories looked into the explosion and thought that the problem was overram. The navy's own investigative service came under sharp criticism for its handling of the case. I am far from an expert on this catastrophe and apologize for any misstatements I might have made, but I hope this helps put it into context.
Click to expand...
From my knowledge this is a good summary. The US Navy pushed the suicide theory to avoid having to confront the possibility of problems with the ammunition, which were later shown to be the most likely cause of the explosion.

I believe however that Desert Fox was being sarcastic towards people accepting official explanations uncritically.
 
catsmate1 said:
From my knowledge this is a good summary. The US Navy pushed the suicide theory to avoid having to confront the possibility of problems with the ammunition, which were later shown to be the most likely cause of the explosion.

I believe however that Desert Fox was being sarcastic towards people accepting official explanations uncritically.
Click to expand...

What I was trying to do and apparently failing
 
the original investigation went off the rails IMO

catsmate1 said:
I believe however that Desert Fox was being sarcastic towards people accepting official explanations uncritically.
Click to expand...
catsmate,

I agree about Desert Fox's post. It seems to me that Rolfe was unfamiliar with this incident, and I wanted to provide some context
 
Thank you, that is correct. I had absolutely no idea what DF was referring to, or even that the word "Iowa" referred to a ship. It therefore came over to me as an exercise in surrealism.

Now that the context has been explained I see it was a perfectly sensible post, and indeed quite witty.

Rolfe.
 
Last edited:
Rolfe said:
Thank you, that is correct. I had absolutely no idea what DF was referring to, or even that the word "Iowa" referred to a ship. It therefore came over to me as an exercise in surrealism.

Now that the context has been explained I see it was a perfectly sensible post, and indeed quite witty.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

It was also me being both a dumb American and a dumb ex navy person (I had a friend who was in turret one when turret two exploded) and did not think that you would not have the required connections.

There is just so much similarities among disparate cases where people are either put on trial or defacto trial.
 
Last edited:
I wanted to bring up something I consider amusing with this case from the documentary movie West of Memphis
Frank J. Peretti (the forensics expert) holds up a book from Vincent Di Maio to argue his point. . . .The defense then brings Vincent Di Maio himself to basically argue "He is nuts"
 
Chris_Halkides said:
mojoe,

It was not a wrestling match in the sense of a school-sponsored event. From what I can gather, it was some young men trying to emulate WWF-style wrestling. Apparently, it was a regular thing. The links I provided allude to this, but more detail would be helpful.
Click to expand...

West of Memphis has a bit of this including what looks like a sign in sheet.
Had what looked like at least half a dozen witnesses that put him there as well.
While I know witnesses can be wrong, the prosecution really had nothing on the other side.
 
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.
 
An earlier statement from Mr. Misskelley

I am skeptical of statement analysis. However, there are some useful tidbits of information here, even if one rejects it wholesale. Apparently the first statement Mr. Miskelley made to police was at a much earlier date, June 3, 1993, and it was a very long interrogation.
 
Last edited:
Chris_Halkides said:
I am skeptical of statement analysis. However, there are some useful tidbits of information here, even if one rejects it wholesale. Apparently the first statement Mr. Miskelley made to police was at a much earlier date, June 3, 1993, and it was a very long interrogation.
Click to expand...


I've heard three figures tossed-around for that first interrogation: 12 hours, 8 hours, and 4 hours. The west memphis cops only recorded around 40 minutes, and there was clearly coaching going on. Miskelly named three different times of day for the murders, and the cops only took the one that matched their scenario. He got key fact after key fact wrong.
 
John Jones said:
I've heard three figures tossed-around for that first interrogation: 12 hours, 8 hours, and 4 hours. The west memphis cops only recorded around 40 minutes, and there was clearly coaching going on. Miskelly named three different times of day for the murders, and the cops only took the one that matched their scenario. He got key fact after key fact wrong.
Click to expand...

Reminds me very much of the confessions of the Norfolk Four. As well, Joe Dick was of limited intelligence while not as bad as Miskelly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom