Sunday, April 24, 2005

Why I think the West Memphis 3 are guilty

(This is going to be a long one. Sorry.)

I’ve already written in this post about my change from goofy-haired political activist to slightly-less-goofy-haired writer, and how that has affected my view of the West Memphis 3. One thing I noted in that post is that it is hard to find any websites that lay out the case against the teens. That's what this post is for: an entry level explanation of why people think the three are guilty. Sort of the opposite of the front page of this West Memphis 3 site.

I should point out that, along with this invaluable website, I learned a lot about the case reading the arguments on this website and this website. Even though the discussions on the two boards can sometimes read like a transcript of the Crips/Bloods Summer Picnic, there’s also a lot of information to absorb.

Just in case you've never heard of the West Memphis 3, here's the case in a nutshell: Three young boys were murdered in West Memphis, Arkansas. After a teen named Jessie Misskelley confessed to the crime, he and two other teens, Damien Echols and Jason Baldwin, were found guilty in two separate trials. After an HBO documentary called Paradise Lost was aired which cast doubt on the verdict, a large number of people, including many musicians, began clamoring for their release. The supporters’ claims generally state that Misskelley's confession was coerced and that local authorities focused on Damien Echols due to his creepy "Goth" persona. While the conviction has survived multiple courts and appeals, public support (especially on the Internet) still maintains the trio's innocence.

Parents Just Don’t Understand

Myth: Damien Echols was a "troubled outcast" targeted for his long hair by dumb yokels who thought heavy metal equaled Satanism.

Truth: Damien Echols was seriously mentally ill.

Many supporters like to use the line "This could have happened to any of us," as if the government was going after metal fans and Wiccans with the same vigor they pursued Communism in the ‘50s.

This is an especially attractive myth for people who like to think that a funny hairstyle or black clothing is a valid form of rebellion that the Man needs to quash (“Mabel, I saw a t-shirt today that said ‘Goddess Bless.’ I’m votin’ Green Party from now on.”) But, while lots of people might have been outcasts in high school, but they probably didn't:

*Stay in a mental hospital, where a doctor listed “extreme physical aggression towards others” as one of the problems.
*Threaten to attack their parents.
*Tell a therapist that drinking blood gives them power.
*Suck the blood out of a wound in front of detention officials
*Kill and mutilate a dog (this is supported by police reports from both an eyewitness to the mutilation and someone who found the dog's corpse. A dog's skull was also found in Damien's room after his arrest).
*Receive full disability from the government for mental problems.

And, in the unlikely event that all of that is true about you, guess what: you might be a murder suspect some day. Folks complain that the “rumor mill” convicted Echols before his arrest. Can you wonder why? You don’t need to believe in a vast satanic conspiracy to see the boy ain’t quite right.

Let’s talk about forced confessions, shall we?

The Many Confessions of Jessie Miskelly
No one would argue that Jessie’s conviction kept him from a life of a Rhodes scholar. Nit-picky arguments will break out on occasion on what exactly to label Misskelley: Retarded? Borderline Retarded? I’m going to simplify the whole thing by call him what he definitely is: a dipshit. His lawyer says that Jessie liked to shatter Coke bottles with his fist to show how tough he was. So, dipshit it is.

Was Jessie’s confession coerced? If you define “coercion” the way most people think of it (say, the way they got confessions during the Inquisition), then the answer is a definite “no.” Despite what some sources state, Jessie was not browbeaten for 12 hours without parental consent. He made his first incriminating statement after a few hours in custody, and his father knew exactly where he was.

But, according to a sociologist who testified (mostly out of the jury’s earshot) for Miskelly, these few hours of questioning were enough to make Jessie snap and begin lying to his own detriment. Dr. Richard Ofshe, the sociologist in question, said the police’s questioning techniques helped to get a false confession. Ofshe has published several papers that argue that modern interrogation techniques are psychologically overbearing and should be thrown out. Police, who solve somewhere around 80% of the major crimes they close through confessions, would argue that the relatively small number of false confessions aren’t worth losing the crimes they solve. (I haven’t found any hard data that can say what percentage of confessions are “false,” if anyone out there knows, please leave a comment).

So, the question becomes: how much protection from the law do dipshits deserve?

Jessie, by the way, didn’t confess just once. He confessed twice on tape, once after his conviction. He also confessed to some guards at one point and perhaps even to a friend before his arrest. Jessie, some folks say, is easily led, but during his second confession, you can hear his attorneys pleading with him not to confess. He does so anyway. So, he’s got a little backbone.

The other big problem people have with Jessie’s confession is its discrepancies from facts. This can be a little troubling. But here’s the thing: as we established, Jessie is a dipshit. Not only that, but, according to his second taped confession, Jessie drank enough Evan Williams to make himself sick the night of the murder (a statement with some evidence behind it, I might add). Maybe you’ve never drank Evan Williams. It’s not exactly a sippin’ whiskey. So, let’s perform a test. Drink enough E.W. to make you vomit and then play a game of Memory. How’d you do?

Circumstantial Evidence is Okay

Hard evidence, like a videotape of the crime being committed, is like a prefab house that the prosecutors can just move into right away. Circumstantial evidence is a brick. Sure, you can point at a brick and yell, “That’s not a house,” and you’d be right on, Braniac. But you can still build a house with bricks. Let’s lay some, shall we:

Jessie Misskelley’s many confessions
Damien’s pre-arrest hinting that he’d been involved in the murder
The girls who testified that they heard Damien confess
Jason Baldwin’s jailhouse confession
Damien’s mental illness
Secondary fiber evidence
Two types of blood on Damien’s necklace
Shaky alibis
Jessie’s weeping spells right after the murders
The knife found behind Baldwin’s house

That’s a big pile of bricks. While you might be able to destroy a few of them (I find Baldwin’s “jailhouse confession” to be a little suspect myself), there’s still a lot of evidence pointing to the trio. This is where Occam’s Razor comes into play. You can choose to believe all this evidence is the result of perjurers, corrupt evidence-planting cops, incompetent judges, yokels too dumb to think for themselves, cruel interrogators, coincidence and prejudice. Or you can believe that the West Memphis 3 are guilty. Remember, don’t make assumptions you don’t have to make.

This is not the full story … if you want to learn more, you should by going to the message boards linked to above. But, as WM3 awareness day rolls around, you might be tempted to give some money to the cause. You’d better be sure that your money isn't going to child murders. Are you?


Blogger skinny said...

evan williams and memory is a drinking game waiting to happen.

8:27 AM  
Blogger Dave said...

Would you like to back up the evidence that a dog's skull was found in his room by the cops? I mean to me it sounds like your post is a load of bullshit. And yes I have had friends targeted for things that they didn't do.

2:34 AM  
Blogger The Bookhouse Boy said...

It's common knowledge that a dog's skull was found in Damien's room. Here are a few links to pages that talk about it. And do a little research before you call bullshit, huh?

Thanks for reading.

7:27 AM  
Anonymous sc said...

Hey there,

Have you read "Devil's Knot"? I respect your take on things. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion.

But if you haven't read that book, give it a read.


4:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree with you fully.
People should read the Exhibit 500 on Damien Echols:
before making a decision one way or another. He did a little more than wear black, listen to Metallica and read Steven King.

9:12 AM  
Blogger Charlie said...

Mental Retardation begins at an IQ of 70, Jessie Misskelley has an IQ of 72. He was closer to being a retard than a dipshit. According to Jessie’s defense attorney, Daniel Stidham, Jessie claims that he and his friends were first approached by the police and offered a reward for information about the murders. Jessie was later taken into WMPD for questioning despite the fact that they did not have a written waiver of his Miranda Rights signed by Jessie’s father, a legal requirement when police interview minors.

Examples of incorrect information in Jason's "confession:"

1. Jessie stated that the victims and Jason Baldwin were not at school when in fact they were proven to have been in attendance
2. Jessie stated that the victims were bound with rope when in fact they were bound with their own shoelaces
3. Jessie stated that one boy was choked with a stick when the medical examiners report stated that there was no evidence of strangulation
4. Jessie stated that the boys were anally raped when in fact the medical examiner had found no evidence of this occurring
5. Jessie described the murders as having been conducted at the scene where the bodies were found when in fact the medical examiner had stated that there was no blood found at the scene.

One glaring fact is that jessie got the time of the murders wrong. He said they occured in the morning, it wasnt until the police coached him to believing that they occured at night they he began saying it occured at night - how could he get that sooo wrong????

7:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Excellent article. Thanks for trying to get the REAL truth out there for all of us. Sadly, hundreds of websites exist and are still springing up daily which make the claim of "conviction based on heavy metal and black clothing". It's just not true.

The two movies were incredibly misleading. What people fail to realize is that a film maker can twist facts and fiction into his or her own little creation...whether to sensationalize the movie and make it more interesting, or because of his/her own personal thoughts. These film makers either "chose" to eliminate facts....important ones....or they were too ignorant to research the facts.

Damien Echols DID mutilate the great dane. He DID threaten to cut his mother's throat, on more than ONE occasion. He DID threaten to kill his father and eat him. In fact, he also did it in FRONT of hospital staff. His family put him in a mental hospital because, quote, "they feared that Damien would harm himself or someone else". At another time, they stated that they feared he might hurt "the other children in the home".

The mental health history of Damien Echols is, without a doubt, terrifying. His life consisted of imaginary men, one named "Rosey" who visited him in the night, took him places, and discussed with him how Damien would "make them all pay". Damien believed he was the second Christ, and that he was leaving the earth on Halloween.

The hospital records of Damien, available on the site you linked above, are unbelievable. The "500" is incredibly telling.

The "Woods affidavit", which was given by the doctor hired by the DEFENSE for Damien's appeal, clearly sets it all out - the absolute danger of this young man. You can get there here:

Another EXCELLENT web site in which the case is currently being discussed is

Jessie Miskelley confessed THREE separate times. He actually fought with his lawyers because he insisted he was going to get the complete truth out. They did not want him to testify. He insisted. Lastly, he related the entire horrible incident to sheriff's deputies transporting him to prison AFTER his trial.

His own lawyer insisted on going in to Jessie's cell and trying to talk him out of giving a confession after his trial. His lawyer talked at length with Jessie in private and emerged pale and asking for a Bible.

It is unbelievably sad to me that out of all the websites existing
in support of these three murderers, not one will show the entire truth in the case. Cover ups are extensive, in order for these fans to achieve their goals...freedom for the three killers.

Mysteries surround the DNA testing, which has been "in the works" for years now. Commissioned by the defense in an attempt to get them off, oddly, the DNA has seemed to vanish into thin air. No one knows why it is taking over two years to get back simple DNA testing.

A third movie is in the works. I feel assured that it will be no more truthful with the facts than the last two.

Don't give us lies. Give us the TRUTH.

5:53 PM  
Anonymous Daniel said...

Nice column dude. It's really disgusting how Hollywood numbskulls suddenly decide that they have to do something good for the "common man", and end up lending their good names to ridiculous "causes" like this WM3 crap.

This reminds me of the 9/11 conspiracy junk that people buy into. People are only going to believe what they want to believe I guess.

It's funny, I learned about this case yesterday, reading some crap local punk mag at the carwash. The entire article made no mention whatsoever about the case against these clowns. All it did was talk about which celebrities are endorsing them (Henry Rollins being the main supporter....all I can do is hang my head in shame for that guy".

This kinda reminds me of poor old Tookie Williams. You remember that kind old soul who was falsely imprisoned? I seem to recall watching the news in real-time as he was being executed, sipping a nice cold beer.

Excellent job wrapping up your argument with the brick analogy and the donation comment. Unfortunately, all of the mislead sheep who buy into this case probably have the IQ of a turnip.

8:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


10:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well written and well said.........

Let's push up the Execution Date and the wm3 website and supports (Joke--Bandwagoneers for a cause is more accurate) can move on to save the fishing banks off Puget sound....

4:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good page these 3 are guilty as anything and its good for someone to stand up at let people know why these sick humans are behind bars for ever.

I think it is also good that clowns try and free these murders also as its funny to see them waste time and money when they know as well as any of us that these 3 killed 3 innocent boys.

Keep up the good work.

7:08 PM  
Anonymous Aussie_Diva said...

Interesting reading. Thank you.
The program Paradise lost has just been aired here in Australia, followed by the 'compelling' sequel.
Us Australians are not stupid - the WM3 are GUILTY! No matter how much evidence they did not include in the films.
And in our opinion the WM3 are all where they belong - in jail.

I hope they stay there

4:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have only heard about this case in the past 12 months.After seeing it on a cable tv program in Australia. Both my husband and myself saw Paradise Lost 1 and both had the immediate GUT FEELING that they were guilty. Even after seeing the second edition, reading everything on the wm3 website I am still convinced they're guilty. Damien Echols' arrogance in the beginning was enough for me.

But then It seems that he woke up one morning and thought "hang on, this is it! Death!!"

Well for these three, death, is fitting. They're guilty and justice was served, they should be all on death row.

And as for the media's ridiculous..everyone's on the bandwagon aren't they? I search for ages to find sights that were against the west memphis three....they are few and far between.

A really strange thing I found was that a memorial site, by the Moores, links back to the free the wm3 site....that's insane!

Are there any updates on interviews, given by the parents of the victims, in recent years.

3:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You all are joking right? Seriously, you are joking.... right? Did you read the same things I read? I can not wait until the DNA evidence gets back (it did NOT Disappear). Another thing... this confession... A few years back a local girl here in Virginia came up missing. The police immediately went to the boyfriend and questioned him. He knew nothing of her leaving and told them so... During a 12 hour interview he confessed a number of times to killing her but could not remember how or where. It hit the news, they found the killer!!!! He confessed on tape again to the police. He was charged, and place in jail with no bond. A few weeks passed by.... The girl calls her mother crying. She ran away from home and wanted to come back. She was asking for money for a bus ticket home. Now what is really sad. They held that young man in jail for almost a week after the girl came home, and you didn't hear one apology from the police or prosecutors. True story, when I find the information I will post it here.

2:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Finally! I have been searching for a site that states the other side of this case. I have read all the websites I can about freeing the WM3, I have read The Blood of Innocents, I have watched both movies and I can't for the life of see how anyone could find these 3 boys innocent. I have been trying to gather all the information I can so that I can make up my own mind on how I feel aobut this. Nothing I have read tells me they are innocent. The only thing I will give them is I do have a suspicion that someone else was involved but that does not mean they weren't. I just keep thinking about those 3 innocent little boys that were murdered and 1 mutilated and it makes me sick to my stomach. They ask how could they send someone innocent to death row, but what if they aren't innocent? How would people feel if they knew deep down inside they were supporting murderers?

3:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the West Mephis 3 are soooo innocent then where are they now? OH, that's right still sitting in prison after what? 13-14 years?! The outcome speaks for itself as to whether or not they are innocent. Until their appeals are granted and they produce some mind shattering, convincing evidence they are GUILTY!! Why is there more websites and groups for their support then against them? Easy, the victims and the people that believe their guildty do not need to prove their case its already been done!

4:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

--Jessie Misskelley’s many confessions--

To me, this is the only real reason to think they are guilty. However, this confession was not heard in the Echols/Baldwin trial, so was not a basis for guilt. The second confession was for a plea deal, which is why he wanted to confess despite his lawyer's saying not to. The Evan Williams bottle is intriguing, but was never actually confirmed.

If you go to and look at the confession explanation, it does cast a lot of doubt on the credibility of the confession.

--Damien’s pre-arrest hinting that he’d been involved in the murder
The girls who testified that they heard Damien confess--

I assume these are the same? The softball girls testimony was so unreliable it should not have been allowed in court. The fact that the girls could not say what was said before or after, who else was there, who it was said to, or even how loud he said it, makes me think they just got caught up in the hype and their parents did, too.

--Jason Baldwin’s jailhouse confession--

Michael Carson's (the snitch's) psychiatrist has already come out and said he fed all the info to Michael.

--Damien’s mental illness--

Most of the reports in the Exhibit 500 say Damien was a danger to himself, but not others. He got in a few fights, but that is a far cry from killing someone.

The Exhibit 500 was not introduced at trial until the sentencing phase by the way, so it was not a basis the jury could rely on.

--Secondary fiber evidence--

The fibers did not even come from anything any of the three owned. It came from a bathrobe belonging to one of the mothers, for example. The fibers in question were extremely common.

--Two types of blood on Damien’s necklace--

Damien's necklace was not used at trial, so the jury could not base their guilt upon it. Also, the blood types match Damien and Jason's types. Because the pendant was not used at trial, it is not part of the current DNA testing, and we'll never know whose blood that is.

--Shaky alibis--
I agree with you here, but Damien did have corroboration on many events in his alibi. IMO, it is tough to get the times exact for an ordinary day an entire month later.

--Jessie’s weeping spells right after the murders--

I agree that this was strange. Although Jessie's step mom is the one who reported this, and his dad denied it.

--The knife found behind Baldwin’s house--

The knife was found in a lake behind many trailers. It could not be conclusively matched as the murder weapon. Many knives were collected but none had any evidence linking it to the crime. Nobody could say they had ever seen Jason or Damien with this knife.


The bottom line is, I'm not sure if they did it, but I REALLY do not think they had a fair trial. Certainly, there was not enough evidence to put anyone on death row.

While I agree that circumstantial evidence is often enough to convict someone, in this case even the circumstantial evidence is incredibly weak.

9:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Also, I forgot to add that the SAME JUDGE who handled their trial ALSO HANDLED THEIR STATE APPEALS!!!

That just is not right....

9:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What seems to be happening in these comments is that everyone's still basing the guilt of these three on behavior, and not evidence. That, and the same unreliable confession by a borderline retarded boy.
This is exactly why people have been bothered by the conviction.
I'm willing to listen. Someone please start by explaining some of the confession inconsistencies...

11:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"However, this confession was not heard in the Echols/Baldwin trial, so was not a basis for guilt."

Yes, but let's be honest here, for a change, okay? NO MORE HIDING the TRUTH.

It's not like Jessie didn't try. He tried - really hard - to testify. Matter of fact, he was torn up about it. He was the ONLY one who, at that time, WANTED the truth out. His attorneys were hell bent and determined he would not testify. His father, listening to the attorneys, was hell bent he would not testify. Jessie changed his mind at the last minute about testifying because of a long meeting with his father and his attorneys in jail. His father convinced him, finally, to not testify. They all knew that if he testified, he was damning any and all chances of future freedom for himself. To hell with the truth of the murders - all they cared about was how to get Jessie out of prison later, since he had just been convicted.

"The second confession was for a plea deal, which is why he wanted to confess despite his lawyer's saying not to."

BULLSHIT. See above. Nothing was ever offered to Jessie. It might have been mentioned, but it was clearly understood that without the judge's approval, that could not happen. What WAS promised was that IF he testified, it would NOT BE HELD AGAINST HIM in future appeals.

Let's dispel that lie once and for all. It's a fact that Jessie wanted to testify for the VERY SAME REASONS he wanted to confess. He was guilty, he actually felt some guilt over it, unlike the other two murderers, confessed 5 times - at times, having to fight his lawyers tooth and nail to DO that - and wanted to testify so that the other two would be punished for what they did. He had taken his medicine because he knew he was wrong, and now they had to do what was right.
While I'm sure any temptation that might have helped Jessie's future, which was very bleak at that point, helped influence his eagerness to testify, the fact remains that no deal EXCEPT immunity from his testimony hurting HIM in future appeals existed in fact.

What stopped Jessie was, plain and simple, his father, who was pressured by the attorneys to MAKE Jessie understand. It's clear from documentation what occured.

The Evan Williams bottle is intriguing, but was never actually confirmed.

The hell it wasn't. Another lie. Just like Stidham, you choose to ignore what you don't like.

Stidham said, "you show me this bottle Jessie claims is out there that he broke after the murders, and I'll finally agree that he did it."

That very bottle was seized by both prosecutors AND Stidham (defense attorney), RIGHT WHERE Jessie said it would be - where HE threw it - under an overpass. It was taken to the liquor store, confirmed, confirmed, confirmed...and then all got to witness the incredible double-back act of Stidham...."Did IIIIIII say that????"

Never confirmed? Where YOU been?

If you go to and look at the confession explanation, it does cast a lot of doubt on the credibility of the confession.

I'm sure it does. Jive does quite an incredible job of omitting any and all relevant facts that might hurt the cause he is such a big part of. Let's be clear, here. Jive is a die hard supporter - one of those who refuse to see?

Before recommending a website that is obviously extremely biased, I would think a nice reminder would serve you well. Maybe, just maybe, you'll hear me this time.


Not a diluted version with deleted and covered up facts, as well as lies.

Jive's site? I would not recommend it to anyone reaching for the truth. Stick to the documentation, and avoid someone with an agenda. Be fair to yourself.

"--Damien’s pre-arrest hinting that he’d been involved in the murder
The girls who testified that they heard Damien confess--

I assume these are the same? The softball girls testimony was so unreliable it should not have been allowed in court. The fact that the girls could not say what was said before or after, who else was there, who it was said to, or even how loud he said it, makes me think they just got caught up in the hype and their parents did, too."

Sorry to hear that. Sounds like maybe you have a grudge against the softball girls? Maybe their testimony hurt your agenda, lol?
After all, everyone is lying who is against the three murderers, right? Everyone.

These were little girls. Scared little girls. But you people will find a way to make anyone look underhanded, if it suits your "agenda".

You say "makes me think"....since that's your "opinion", perhaps you should keep your thoughts to yourself, unless you were a juror, or the softball girls yourself. Otherwise, it's speculation, but with your nice, biased "slant" added to it.

"--Damien’s mental illness--

Most of the reports in the Exhibit 500 say Damien was a danger to himself, but not others. He got in a few fights, but that is a far cry from killing someone."

Oh, My, God. Here we go again. Don't try and downplay the 500. All it takes is for any person, ANY PERSON, with a brain, to read Dr. Woods' affidavit, to see that the 500 was extremely relevant to the mental INSANITY of Damien Echols. A danger to himself? Sure, he was. NOT a danger to others? What a crock!!!

Threatened to slit his mother's throat, telling his grandmother at one time he planned to do just that.

Threatened to kill and eat his father.

Parents had him removed and placed in mental hospitals because they "feared for their own safety and the safety of the OTHER CHILDREN in the home".

Damien terrorized little girls - he showed up at night at one child's window, screaming threats as to how he was going to "get her", which completely traumatized her.

Damien was eating packets of Kool Aid to survive, since the end of the world was coming on Halloween, and he - deciding and avowing that HE was the second Christ, that HE was Basaalbath - and his imaginary, but VERY REAL friend Rosey, were going to be the only survivors. Everyone else, as he put it, "would pay".

His imaginary friend Rosey would lick his hand at night.

He would take him on horseback rides at night.

Yea, that's some serious shit, there.

"The Exhibit 500 was not introduced at trial until the sentencing phase by the way, so it was not a basis the jury could rely on."

That's right, but My God, if they had seen that evidence...can you imagine? Too bad the DEFENSE hid that evidence, isn't it? If everyone had known what an insane monster they were dealing with, three little boys would be grown young men right now, with futures ahead of them.

--Secondary fiber evidence--

"The fibers did not even come from anything any of the three owned. It came from a bathrobe belonging to one of the mothers, for example. The fibers in question were extremely common."


--Two types of blood on Damien’s necklace--

"Damien's necklace was not used at trial, so the jury could not base their guilt upon it."

And why was that? Let's not play this "lie and leave out the truth game". I think the public has a good idea of what you're all about already.

Also, the blood types match Damien and Jason's types. Because the pendant was not used at trial, it is not part of the current DNA testing, and we'll never know whose blood that is.

And here we go again. And WHO ELSE'S blood might have that been? Stevie's. One of the murdered children. Makes sense, doesn't it? Why hide it?

Typical - HIDING THE TRUTH. In the words Cochran - STOP THE COVER UP!!!

"--Shaky alibis--
I agree with you here, but Damien did have corroboration on many events in his alibi. IMO, it is tough to get the times exact for an ordinary day an entire month later."

For example, his complete destruction of the timeline given by others as to the visit to the friends of his parents, the evening of the murders? As in, he gave completely different times than his parents as to when they went?

Or do you mean the fact that witnesses saw THREE people at the house of his parents' friends, or the fact that his own stepfather could not remember if he was with them or not? Three people verified by witnesses, the stepfather remembers where they all sat, but doesn't remember Damien being there?

Is THAT what you mean? Or do you mean the way the stories kept changing?

"--Jessie’s weeping spells right after the murders--

I agree that this was strange. Although Jessie's step mom is the one who reported this, and his dad denied it."

Funny thing, that. His dad was the one who kept insisting that he couldn't have done it, but the step mom kept saying that IF he did it, he should pay. Sort of an argument there, remember?

Yea, he was crying all night long, all right.

"--The knife found behind Baldwin’s house--

The knife was found in a lake behind many trailers. It could not be conclusively matched as the murder weapon. Many knives were collected but none had any evidence linking it to the crime. Nobody could say they had ever seen Jason or Damien with this knife."

Nice dodge, but typical. Sigh. I would recommend reading documents yourself, folks. This person does a great job with cover-up, but shamefully, doesn't admit the truth, at all.


"The bottom line is, I'm not sure if they did it, but I REALLY do not think they had a fair trial. Certainly, there was not enough evidence to put anyone on death row."

If that's the way you feel, why lie about all of the above? Think that helps your cause?

While I agree that circumstantial evidence is often enough to convict someone, in this case even the circumstantial evidence is incredibly weak.

Bullshit. It looks weak only if YOU are the one telling the story. Isn't that right?

Stop the lying. Three little boys would really appreciate it.

10:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

im in the middle of reading "devil's knot" right now. its supposed to be unbiased. i used to think that they did it. im not so sure now. there seem to be some corruption in their area. im also really leary about John Mark Beyers. To me, it seems like he could be in on the murders. He has had others around him die mysteriously.

10:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


All I did was give my opinion, and I am being called a liar and accused of "HIDING THE TRUTH!" Guess what, I have no agenda, and everything I said was true. If you can't disprove it, then don't say anything at all. Just saying "BULLSHIT" after every true fact I posted just illustrates the kind of mindset that convicted the WM3 in the first place. Apparently, you are the one with an agenda.

This is a very shaky case. Nearly all the evidence has major holes in it.

1:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And by the way, the Defense did not hide Exhibit 500. It was not allowed at the trial by the judge.

They also did not hide the pendant. The prosecution would've had to sever the Baldwin/Echols trial in order to use it, and they knew they could not convict Jason Baldwin unless he was sitting next to the "satanist" Damien Echols.

Also, the prosecution's own witnesses said that lake knife could not be linked to the crime.

If you dispute my summary of the next-to-worthless fiber evidence, please say why.

In summary, please check your facts before calling me a liar. Thanks.

2:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Last thing:

When I said the Evan Williams bottle was not officially confirmed, I meant that no official comparison has been made between the handle and that of an Evan Williams bottle of that time period. The police took it to a liquor store and thought it looked similar. However, it might have been another type of liquor for all we know, and this was recovered from beneath an overpass where plenty of broken bottles can be found....

I do think it is the most compelling thing they have, which should tell you something.

2:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I totally agree, these 3 ARE guilty. There is a chance, from the bite marks that there may have been another involved. However the WM3 will never say that as is proves their guilt. Echols whole attitute after the murders in the early footage suggest his guilt anyhow, the licking of his lips to the victims parents, echols saying "people will remember me for a long time for this". The confession of miskelly should be enough. It is ridiculous to think that police would deliberately target children to record a false confession for the crime, despite the hysteria at the time.

5:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

about time someone wrote something like this.these 3 are as guilty as hell.
"Mental Retardation begins at an IQ of 70, Jessie Misskelley has an IQ of 72. He was closer to being a retard than a dipshit."

this would explain the inconsistencies in his confession then wouldn`t it? how is a drunk retard expected to be precise about times and details?

it was sickening the way they tried to blame byers on that hbo video.
they had zero evidence on him apart from he was a bit weird.
the same thing they are accusing the prosecution of doing to their "innocent" 3. hypocrites!

i agree a lot of the police work was sloppy but that doesn`t make them innocent.
echols and baldwin deserve to ride the lightning.

6:57 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Most of the reports in the Exhibit 500 say Damien was a danger to himself, but not others"

complete crap,i read just the first 3 pages of it and this is what it includes.

"charges of terroristic threatening and sexual misconduct."
"sucked blood of inmate."
"speaks of rituals,drinking blood,more involved in demonology."
"admits to violence and attempts to enucleate peers eye at school"
"alleged to have chased younger child at school with an ax"

7:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great writing with excellent points.. I am so glad I found this site. I was starting to think my girlfriend and I were the only ones who actually read the information and put two and two together.. The "Supporters" of these baby killers are frustrating..

Thx Again

1:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

YAY, finally another person besides me who believes they did it. I can't believe how many people support them as if they were 100% Innocent, based on the foreword of a docucrama. LOL

7:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

y'all are an embarrassment to justice and human goodness. 3 little boys died in the most terrifying and brutal way I (for one) can imagine, and you don't seem to give a f*ck. DNA evidence = not guilty for echols, baldwin and miskelly. and still you want so badly to believe the justice system works that you will ignore it. just wait for Byars confession and/or plea deal. all of his teeth removed? f*ckin come on. shame on you. asf.

1:58 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You people think because people are in jail that makes them guilty without question, now that's sickening.

1:43 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think that because they did it they are guilty. Echols bragged on tape about being "the West Memphis Boogeyman"and how little kids would check under their beds for Damian. He also said he always knew he would be famous he just didn't know what for.

Even if you write that off to the fact hes a moron,you still have evidence. Misskelly confessed three times even twice after his conviction. He knew details that weren't released.

Byers was an easy target for supporters to pin it on. To turn attention away from the facts. The fact Echols threatened to eat his father alive and wanted to slash his mothers throat,things like that. Byers was just oustpoken and seen by HBO refined folks that they are,as a gun toting redneck. The story is age old in Hollywood. Outsiders Versus Hicks.

8:57 AM  
Blogger Ricky said...

Call me crazy. But I have looked all over the internet for ONE place that the boys claim they are innocent. I can't find one statement where the WM3 claim they are innocent. Where have they actually come out and flat out said "I'm innocent"?

4:39 PM  
Blogger Sheta said...

Amazing how many unthinking morons there are commenting on this post. "I just found this case yesterday...they are so guilty." Critical thinking is in obvious short supply.

Your post starts out so well -- "This is going to be one has looked at the evidence I'm going to present." Then you present no evidence whatsoever, just a list of "facts" that have little, if any, hard evidence to back them up, including at the source.

Way to lead folks to jump to uneducated conclusions.

8:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Even though i personally dont think that they did it,it´s good to have a discussion and not just blindly follow some movie which i DO think doesnt have the objectifiing approach that you could expect from a documentary.But the fact is,if they really did it,there would be evidence.No question about it.
Then comes the question whereas you might ask youreself,yeah but wouldnt there be evidence anyway if it were someone else?
Yeah that actually strikes me as odd,but that could be the fact that
there is not any directed investigation on anyone else other than these three persons.

2:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i heard there were bite marks on the boys. why not just match the marks up to the WM3s teeth impressions.

2:55 PM  
Anonymous David Perry Davis, Esq. said...

Well you "I tink they be guilty" folks out there must be feeling a WEE TAD STUPID with the release of the DNA results.

Hello? The WM3 were not even at the crime scene. Plenty of DNA was recovered, and it this far belongs to: (1) The victims, (2) a step-parent (Terry Hobbs, not likely a suspect), and (3) "as yet unknown person or persons."

Man, if I'd been one of you morons out there saying "They're guilty", I'd be not only a little red-faced about now, I'd be trying to make up for it by donating, volunteering, and, (for Arkansans) making it a voting issue.

8:15 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I second David Perry Davis. How do you feel now that new evidence -- hard evidence, not wild speculation -- points to the stepfather of one of the victims, and the stepfather's friend? Go back and look at your post and evaluate it critically now that there is actual evidence. The standard of proof in criminal cases is beyond a reasonable doubt, not "ocam's razor." And there is a good reason for that. The founding fathers, who were a lot smarter than most people today, were really disturbed by the notion of someone being wrongfully convicted. You don't seem to be bothered by it. Now that you know the facts, aren't you at least a little bit ashamed of yourself for calling a borderline retarded young man a "dipshit"? If anyone should be labeled a dipshit -- besides the blogger -- it should be the cops who took advantage of the kid.

11:15 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

while i am personally quite undecided about this case (and hence not in a comfortable position to donate to the WM3 cause) i do really appreciate the effort you put into this. it certainly injects some objectivity into what admittedly has become a highly one-sided subjective debate.

saying this, as i pointed out, i cant say this articles "wins me over" but it certainly gives me some food for thought. thanks.

5:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Um yeah, i think it would be safe to say that members from are having fun on here trying to voice there "do Good" opinions on everybody, why should us the general public feel bad for saying that they are guilty?

1:34 AM  
Anonymous billdog said...

what a joke, fancy trying to blame the clothes they wore for their conviction, All those ppl saying that they were convicted because of what they wore and listened to heavy Metal music what BULLSHIT, . the ass hole's were guilty.
To all you supporters out
Build a bridge get over it, let the suckers rot in jail.
To all 3 behind bars a message from Australia
" who's ya Daddy Now "


5:10 AM  
Blogger joe said...

to david Perry,
if i was you
Id wake up every morning and kiss the ground beneath you and thank F*** that you actually have a justice system that worked for once.. hehehahahah

5:23 AM  
Anonymous Scott said...

Is it a tretch of the imagination that the stepfather's DNA would be on something linked to the stepson without him kiling the boy to get it there?

The right guys are in prison. And lets face it, if these guys weren'tin jail for this, they'd be in jail for something else.

4:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Finally, someone writes the facts down.

The support behind these perpetrators is a joke - a legion of goth kids and wiccans with a persecution complex so strong that they don't care if their martyrs are child rapists and murderers.

I hope the three of them rot.

3:33 PM  
Anonymous houndowl said...

Great post. I'll just address one point, the errors in Jesse's first confession.

Why would there be such glaring discrepancies in an otherwise true confession? The "Free the WM3" morons think this proves the whole confession is false. Your cheap whiskey/memory loss theory is possible (and entertaining), but Jesse himself later offered a simpler explanation -- he lied about certain details to try to fool the cops.

From the police officer's report of Jesse's 2/4/94 confession during transport to prison: Jessie said he lied about the time and the rope to "trick the police and to see if they were lying."

And from Jesse's 2/17/94 confession:

DAVIS: Ok. Now you said before when the police asked you in their statement and asked you what they were tied up with. And you said they were tied up with rope. Ah..

MISSKELLEY: I made that up.


MISSKELLEY: Tried to get off, you know, get'm off track.

10:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Two things I've not found which I'd like to: 1. a link to transcripts of the confessions; 2. a link to a source for the claim that Miskelly's IQ is actually only 72. Every story I read says that, but where's the actual source documentation of the original claim? I'm sure he's had evaluations in prison, any public record IQ measurements there?

5:26 PM  
Anonymous saturn said...

I've been a follower of this case from the very start, the crimes happened not far from where i live. I have actually sat through a civil case with Judge Burnett while he slept through the whole thing! I have met Joe Calvin, one of the attorneys present during Jessie's 2nd "confession" and Prosecutor Fogleman. So i'm slightly close to some of the key players in the case. I still am not decided as to guilt or innocence. I just want to say something about all you non-supporters. I have browsed several forums the past few days and i have to say, you guys aren't winning anybody over with the crude, uneducated language you use. And i question why you are having to work so hard at defending your stance? After all, these three ARE in prison, aren't they? Anytime anyone tries to disagree with you they are attacked and called everything under the sun. Is that being open minded? I tend to relate to the supporters more, at least there IS more evidence the WM3 WEREN'T there than what the prosecution had. I guess i'm a fence sitter. I have found FAR more close minded people in both camps than i would like. You all go on the forums and sling mud at each other and call names, i think you're all a bunch of idiots. I know several of the jurors in the MIsskelly trial, even those who voted for his innocence. So my words to you are, none of you were there, none of you know what really went down, or what it's really like here in Arkansas. So why not get a life and shut up? If justice has been served, then there is no argument. Are there any intelligent people out there who can look at both sides of this? Like i said, i am a fence sitter, but it would be a great comfort to me to know that if someone confesses that i comitted a crime, it would take more than hearsay, common fibers from the local Wal-mart, sticks, and a cop who loses blood scrapings to convict me. I want SOLID evidence! At least if the chief detective feels his case against me rates "an eleven", prove it!!!! Beyond a reasonable doubt! That's why there are so many supporters and non-supporters, reasonable doubt was not proven!!!! The judge was biased for the prosecution! If your non-supporters are so secure in your beliefs, are you scared of a fair trial? If your "evidence" is so rock solid? I'm almost done, then you can begin calling me "idiot" and call what i type "bullshit", just like this "Farm" person on the forums, who by the way, makes your cause look oh! so ignorant. Just ask yourself, what if it was you someone was pointing the finger at? Wouldn't you want the prosecution to have solid evidence against you? And in the WM3 case, don't you want to be SURE the person/persons who commited this horrible crime are caught?

12:31 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Regardless of innocence or guilt, I would like to see a fair trial not marred by sensationalism (on both sides).

I think that would be something we can all agree on in relation to the case.

5:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Among those arguing for Mr. Echols guilt, several of you site the findings of a forensic psychologist working for the defense team.

Ok, those of you who don't work in Law Enforcement, Corrections or the Criminal Justice system may not be aware of the following but... forensic psychologists are generally not hired to (a) show how sane the defendant is or (b) how crazed a crazy crazed murderer he is. In the case of Mr. Echols we have:

35. Despite his often bizarre and disorganized behavior, Mr. Echols has no history of childhood violence or aggression. To the contrary, he was ostracized by other children and made the butt of jokes. His pronounced apathy and passivity made him a routine target for cruel jokes. He never resisted these humiliating gestures. On one occasion several children told him to suck a rock; he responded without question. Another time he was told to walk down a school hallway without shoes; he did so. He was considered odd, different, separate from his cohort. Instead of gaining a sense of efficacy and esteem through interaction with his peers, Mr. Echols’ social experiences reinforced his sense of being damaged and useless. The lack of connection with caring peers and adults who could see and intervene in his many problems likely contributed to his mounting mental illness.

That is, he was nuts. The defense attorney at his original case could see the writing on the wall and new that not guilty by reason of insanity was the sole way out for his client. Nothing in that entire record indicates the kind of psychopathology capable of resulting in the murders of three children.

Just a convenient white trash kid with black fingernail polish and the convenient name of Damien, and a rube jury willing to buy into the prosecutions coerced confession from a developmentally disabled individual. Wouldn't it be nice if the people who killed three kids had been behind bars for 14 years instead of the three white trash kids who were easy pickin's for the Left Behind crowd.

My job puts me in close contact with the type of human capable of the torture/murder of a child. Damien Echols does not remotely resemble any such offender I've ever known. If he did, a lot more of you would think he was innocent. He'd say all the right things so well you wouldn't notice that he didn't say anything but all the right things--- again and again and again and again. Without blinking a f#cking eye.

11:34 PM  
Blogger Julia from downunder said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

4:59 AM  
Blogger Julia from downunder said...

You Know you can run but you cannot hide...if you have ever read a great crime book written by a communications and or media person (they usually are) it is a given the police always seem to know where the lead is heading. Even the thought a parent/step parent could do anything to a child so horrific is astounding. Even the best of parents with a strict Disciplinarian attitude, I could not see dismembering and child like that...nor the least killing 3 babies. The facts are MISSKELLEY told what happened in his own words maybe they say because he is not the full quid (slow). BUT THE FACT IS he was not coerced in any way shape or form, he gave his statement even after his lawyer asked him not to ... "STIDHAM: Ok, I also told you that giving a statement was against my advise and wishes" (sic). Wearing Black having black hair does not make for a murderer, a murderer does that all on his/her own.......I have a child who loves emo music as they now call it & I tell you, an adorable child who here in Aust has achieved great levels in her chosen sport........and has had the dark hair at one time but got over it.......Damien has for all intensive purpose tried to turn this in a celebrity case, Damien is not a celebrity he is a mother F____R who killed 3 children with his brain dead friends. Why anyone cant see that I have no clue.
Being less than average intelligence does not make for an excuse to murder or for telling the truth or facts as they are, it makes for someone simple who for their own reasons had to tell the truth to be free of it no matter the Consequences. MISSKELLEY is the only one that spoke the truth... and let it be said TURNING THIS INTO A CELEBRITY STYLE CRIME IS DISGRACEFUL BEHAVIOUR..that he Damien the piss ant can write a book - marry a girl who is taking his profits so as he doesn't profit from his crime is a mystery to me, well not a mystery its a very clever manipulation of a situation 'KILL 3 CHILDREN AND GET RICH'..............How dare people point the finger at the parents, how dare they use any of their misgivings or errors along their life's journey against them, that should not be turned around on them........Yes Human Have Flaws that is inevitable we F___K up, but we are not born to KILL!- let it be said even animals only kill to eat.........

7:07 AM  
Anonymous careworker AU said...

The police have botched this case.
They didn't follow any regulations regarding the processing of a crime scene, moving the bodies, not collecting evidence in the correct manner, interrogating an underage, near retarded child without legal consent... the list goes on.

I work with teenagers who have low IQ and/or physical disabilities. I care for 15 year old boy with an IQ of 73 and i would certainly not send him off to the police as a reliable source of testimony.
on more than one occasion he has watched a movie or read a book and took the plot to have happened to him.

If the police did give Jessie "help" in remembering the details of the crime, his imagination may have taken off with that and suddenly he's confessing.

I'm undecided as to who committed the crimes against the children in West Memphis, there is not enough evidence from either party to sway me, if i was part of the jury on this case.

It is a total mess, with on the police to blame.

3:12 PM  
Anonymous Julia said...


4:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

please also look up about the little murdered childs stapfather...dear old daddykins is not out of the frame yet , even though three others are inside !!!!!

12:42 PM  
Anonymous Julia said...

good grief your blind read all the court transcripts, any child will have a parents dna on them especially younger children whos parentes tie their shoe laces, brush their hair and iron and wash their clothing get a grip and read all the court documents!

2:44 PM  
OpenID halfwayhome540 said...

The parents of the victims no longer think the WM3 are guilty.
The same gun-slinging man(I use that term loosely) that was ready to spit and piss on the graves of these 3 innocent boys now admits to not doing research and been given false information.
To call someone with a 72 IQ a dipshit? Touching. With that wit you belong in West Memphis.

10:06 AM  
Anonymous Julia said...

So with all said and done your worried about the word dipshit??? get a life and when you get one get a grip on it oh and a reality check! are you MISSKELLEY"S lawyer? And your wrong, the only person saying that is the parent who participated in a doco which made him out to be just that a dipshit!(just like misskelley) and if he is, he is, who cares?
He obviously done that for money they used him to get those dead eyed people free they used that...the doco wants part 3 doesnt it - when they are free or sent to the death chamber, sure more money in the pocket - you just let me know how much dead eyed damien made on his book, how much he has paid in child support for his child---oh and mmmmm not one has ever ever ever looked into a camera and said i didnt do it, when baldwin was asked do you think damiem could do this, he couldnt lift his head to answer! and mumbled some dipshit (oh sorry) im sure you have the doco watch it, that pissant could not look at the person asking the question....and if he is uneducated and cant read and write yep hes a dipshit, he should have gone to school instead of pissing up drinking whisky and killing children so GFUS -

11:23 AM  
Blogger Gwen said...

Thank you so much for your blog. I was convinced by those HBO specials that they has been wrongfully convicted but your blog prompted me to do my own research. Sure enough, they are monsters.

Now, I wrote my own

8:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I can't decide. I read what the WM3 supporters say and I think they might be innocent. Then I read something like this and I think they might be guilty. I wonder if a new trial would go the way it should or if it would be affected by all the celebrity involvement.

9:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm curious why no one ever mentions Damien's polygraph test and it's results.



















Bill Durham

8:17 AM  
Anonymous Julia From Down Under said...

I agree with you 110% - Dead eyed Damien! More people should read the transcripts instead of basing their decision on the doco which clearly was just a money spinner for its maker - Cheers Bill

3:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have one question. How do all of you feel, now knowing the JURY FOREMAN has been interviewed by the Arkansas Democrat and quoted saying HE told the other jurors about information that the JUDGE wouldn't allow into evidence???? He talked to an attorney outside the case about the trial while it was going on, and told that attorney that "the prosecution had better present something big or it would be up to him to secure a guilty verdict." Until now that attorney would not come forward because he felt it was a part of the attorney-client conversation. The jury did not base its verdict on information that was entered into the case by the court but by what the foreman told them. Until that issue was discussed, there were people that was not ready to say anyone should die for this. The case the state presented wasn't strong enough to convict.

No one ever checked out the black man that was in the restaurant bathroom covered in mud and blood and the funny thing about that is, one of the hairs on the boy's was found to be of "nigroid" origin. All of the fibers and dna found to be that of the parents can be explained away but why was that hair there? The oh-so smart detectives left evidence at the crime scene (sticks that held the children's clothes down in the water), moved the bodies before the medical examiner arrived, and failed to follow any leads that would have went away from the accused.

Jason's "confession" was made to a convicted sex-offender who was looking to make a better deal for his self. Yes that was proven! And the mother of the girls at the softball game has admitted that she and her kids lied for the reward money offered. Jessie was not dealt with the was ANY of you would like for your children handled, should they be involved with anything like this situation. Whether he is a "dipshit" or "retard" (OMG I hope you never have a mentally challenged child or family member)has nothing to do with the fact that he is a minor and an american citizen. He had the right to have an attorney and his parents present. By law the least they should have done was have his father sign a written waiver to permit the law enforcement to discuss this with him. And if everyone is so sure he wasn't coached why was over three hours of the "confession" not even recorded?

All of this are issues that need to be addressed in a NEW TRIAL!!! No one in this country should have to face a future that was decided by a tainted jury, shaky evidence, and biased judge.

Whether these three commited this crimes isn't a question for any of these sites, it was and is for 12 people. But when it came down to that, even it was tainted.

If everyone is so sure that they are guilty, lets give them a new trial and let the state do it's job. The job they should have done right the first time. Let the jury do their job and convict on what is presented and ruled fair. And let the judge do his job and show no bias.

Whether you agree or disagree with the verdict, they DID NOT get a fair trial!! And that is obvious by the comments made by the foreman and his attorney.

And on a personal note, I have a family member that does have mental problems and during the time it has taken to get through this, he has said some violent and scary things, had to be hospitalized for erratic behavior and comments, and tried to hurt himself. He listens to heavy metal music (some of which makes Metallica look like church music) and wears black. But through all of that he was never accused of murder. It's a very frightening thing to know that in this great country, that is all it takes to become a prime suspect in a triple homicide of three boys.

The victims deserve justice. These three little boys deserve to have their killer(s) pay for what was done. How sad is it to know that all this time the wrong men may be paying. What if someone else did this? I dont know for sure they WM3 are innocent but I know NO ONE has proven to me beyond a reasonable doubt that they are guilty.

9:14 AM  
Anonymous Juliafromdownunder said...

Oh yes is always the proverbial black man...........mental problems do not make for a murderer, being slow on the uptake and uneducated does not mean a person has "mental problems" its means they should stay in school & take special ed classes instead of drinking and killing children.........the black man did it yeah right! good grief lucky it wasnt one of your children or youd be paying for their attorney?????

4:20 PM  
Anonymous janice said...

julia, you have got to be kidding me!! "the proverbial black man..." how in the world can you honestly believe that is nothing???

a black man goes into the bojangles muddy and bloody and acting strange enough for bojangles to call the police at the exact time the police are at the parents house taking reports of the 3 boys missing and you think it's "the proverbial black man" ??? come on downunder!! i have always thought, since i heard about this case 7 years ago that someone should be fired for "losing" that blood evidence!! even if to clear the guy!! julia, even you have to look at THAT timeline, and the fact that the bojangles was not far from the crime scene!! oh TRUTH is what you want, explain what a negroid hair was doing at the crime scene? please julia, i love to hear you explain that to me. or are you just going to go back to damien's mental illness? if so save your typing, i've read it all, the boy had problems. he had, okay he had mental problems, i agree. but what he didn't have was any of his long stringy hair at the crime scene. why? jason and damien had long hair and not one peice of their hair fell out, got tangled up, or pulled out? not one of ANY OF THEIR HAIR? and they didn't have people see damien, jason, and jessy all bloody. what is your cover up for that? and also what is your theory on jason? a good kid in school making good grades, loves his family more than himself!! that he would just "go along with damien and viciously murder 3 innocent little boys?? my lord, he has 2 brothers of his own that he got up for school, fed and helped them on their way to school along with himself because his mother worked!!! i guess that is a sure sign of a horrific murderer there!!explain that julia? i don't even care to debate jessy with you, i think it is obvious what went on there and i already know your oppinion and i disagree with you, so i can agree to disagree on that one. but explain to me the rest of the story. that everyone of these kids would do this horrific murder because damien had mental problems??? it does not make sense!! simply put:


do the math julia or explain yourself and this timeline and evidence away? but if all you have to offer is that damien had mental problems, then save it. i read it all too. he had mental problems, but what about jason? where are his mental problems records? THERE ARE NONE. any other explanation, i would love to hear!

5:08 PM  
Anonymous Julia said...

good grief are you damien's lawyer or you just like to see child murderer's go free?

5:32 PM  
Anonymous Julia said...

And Please stop calling me Julia like you know me? thats very creepy in itself.........I dont have to explain anything to you, I was not in the woods killing little children, the token black man they want to take the blame is a joke its a red herring thrown in as a clutch as straws theory!

5:45 PM  
Anonymous janice said...

yep, that is exactly what i thought. all you have is an oppinion who wants a death warrent attached to it! you can not expain what is hard physical
evidence of someone else who could have actually done it and your answer is as weak as the prosecution's case. AND I INVITE YOU AGAIN, JULIA, TO TELL US??? but as usual my guess is that you would pass on that again. as for calling you julia, you put your name here and i didn't want anyone thinking i was directing my comments to anyone else JULIA, since you seem to be so set on killing these guys with no evidence against them.

2:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


7:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's sad to see three young boys get murdered, but the Memphis 3 are innocent, there is no evidence whatsoever linking these boys to the crime, only rumors, rumors that were spread by the police of Crittenden County. And as for Jessie confessing... he's retarded, he's going to say whatever you want him to say, he doesn't know any better. There are a lot of conflicting statements when the police interviewed the victims family and friends, but the police decided to ignore them. Earlier on in this case the police had made up their minds on who they were going to go after and that was after Damien and his so called cult. Judge Burnett was clearly making decisions on what was the best interest for the prosecutor's when the case went to trial, its ridiculous!!
How could anyone get convicted for a crime with no evidence against them, with only a so called witness?? It's like saying,I witnessed you killing someone even though you didn't, and getting charged for the murder even though there were no physical evidence against you. It's freakin crazy!!
Whoever thinks these boys are guilty is blinded by Satan! The police of Crittenden County, the prosecutor's, and the Judge are the Devil's themselves!!! These people will have their own judgement day and when that day comes they better be prepared because it's going to be a lot worse than what they're doing to these boys.

4:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment is for Julia....since it says Julia by ur comment....Janice has a point. What is ur evidence against the memphis 3?? Nothin!!!Nothin!!! Just because someone has a mental illness that doesn't mean they are the killer. Where is your evidence?? Your only evidence is a so called confession by Jessie, which was clearly coerced by the investigator's who have no ethics!!In all of the question's that were asked of Jessie, the investigator's always lead Jessie into the answers and if his answers didn't match up to the crime the investigator's would fix his answers to make it seem right.
Get ur facts straight before calling someone a murderer!!

4:27 PM  
Anonymous Julia said...

First of all everyone who can read and has a brain is entitled to an opinion, second of all I have an opinion and i blogged it, 3rd of all GET A LIFE! and put your name here if you want to make this personal dont hide behind anon.

4:32 PM  
Anonymous janice said...

julia seems to be sooo conflicted on her "personal" aspect of things. first she calls me creepy for using her name on here then attacks another for not using their name to "make it personal" (what? as if she knows them?--by her OWN words) tells them they are "hiding behind anon" so are you creepy julia? all you do is use useless words to back up what you say, i have not seen one point besides you decided that they are all guilty because damien had mental problems. i wasn't going to debate jessy with you but i guess i will make my point on that one too although i know you don't have any answers just snotty opinions of mental problems. if you don't think his confession was coerced then tell me how, after hours of interogation not taped, then they finally think they have jessy ready to say what they NEED him to say so they turn the tape on and he still messes it up? they are ON TAPE correcting him! they had all that time to fix his story and he still couldn't get it right. i don't know about you, but if my friend said come on lets horribly murder these 3 kids, i myself would back out and think hmm.. i need to rethink this friendship thing. 99 percent of the population would. but according to you, you seem to think that one would say, hmmm.. well he does have mental problems so okay, lets go for it!! nonsense!one more time julia, i invite you to tell me IN FACTS why you insist on "blogging" your opinion of guilty? just be honest. it is because you WANT to. you have nothing or your snotty butt would have put it on here already. gosh everyone goes on here has detailed facts about their problems with the case and all you can say is "oh you must like child killers" your a joke.

12:26 PM  
Anonymous Julie said...

The WM3 ARE guilty!!!

1:36 PM  
Anonymous janice said...

So sad....if only you knew the facts of this case you would feel pretty bad that you said that Julie. I bet the person/people that really did kill these boys are reading the crap you print with an evil smile on their face knowing you like them being free and that with people like you they will get to keep their freedom most likely with plans on doing it again. Everyone needs to watch their children because there are child killers on the loose.

5:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You might want to get all the facts before saying how sad it is.

Let's clear some facts up:

Jessie not only confessed once, he confessed three times. The last one post-conviction where he stated he mislead the police with misinformation. It's also where he stated that he felt so bad he got a friend to get him a bottle of whiskey and described to his attorney and prosecution where he broke that bottle. Guess what? They went and found that exact brand of whiskey bottle broken exactly where Jessie said it would be.

Juror number four, the foreman aka Arnold, has never once stated he convinced the jury using Jessie's statement. In the interview Arnold states he believes that it might have been brought up, but then discarded because Judge Burnett told them to. As for his discussion with the attorney, you have no idea what is in the sealed affidavit. So it's pure conjecture and listening to the media. Let's say he did though, according to Arnold himself (in same interview) he spoke to the attorney regarding what possible questions could come up in voir doir. Since he wasn't on the jury yet, it's a moot point.

The negroid hair (not nigroid) could have been easily transferred from the ground. Your time line isn't quite right either. The same officer that took the report from Bojangles is the same officer that went to the parents.

As for the WMPD not following any other leads. That's absolutely ridiculous, please go read the case files. More people were interviewed and polygraphed than I've ever seen in a case.

Jason's confession was not made to a sex offender, Michael Carson was a juvenille offender same as Jason. Hence why they were housed in the same detention center. He had been in trouble with the law for burglary and falsifying his identity. Now he was in a mental facility as well for alcohol and substance abuse. Please prove to me with documentation that he was looking to make a better deal for himself. He not only stated that he would refuse a deal with the police, but he stated the same in open court.

The softball girls, and there were two with different mothers have not recanted nor have their mothers said they lied to get the reward money. Once again please prove this. The only thing that has been said is that they thought he might have just been bragging or boasting. (what innocent person brags about killing three boys?)
Jessie wasn't just picked up off the street or even from his home. The detectives found Jessie Sr. at his work, and Jessie Sr went and got Jessie to go with the police.
His father gave verbal permission. Then later when they wanted to do the polygraph, the detectives went back and got a signed release form to do so with Jessie Jr with them. Back then in the early 1990's the police did not record all of the interrogations, no one felt it was necessary.

Just so you know, I'm all for a new trial, but this is something most people don't think about. Now the jurors will even be more informed. Now it's possible all three of Jessie's statements will be admitted, and the prosecution I'm sure will test more evidence for DNA than the defense did. (See the defense got to choose what they tested. Which by the way, why haven't we heard the results for all the tests?)

The jury did their job. There was no jury misconduct in Jessie's trial, and no proof of it in Damien/Jason's. Hence why the Ark Supreme Court denied them.

Here are some things for you to explain:

Why do three innocent boys all confess in one form or another?

Why does Damien's necklace have one of the victims blood on it?

Although the fibers found are common, two fibers are similar to those found in two of the defendants homes?

The whiskey bottle.

Why Jessie blames Jason for Christopher Byers mutilation when Damien was the more obvious one.

As a matter of fact, why blame Damien and Jason at all? (when in fact he says this in the first few minutes of being talked to.)

Why does Jessie continue to claim his guilt even to his attorney's until his dad has a "long" talk with him?

Or the biggest one of all, why did Jessie confess and even clear up some inconsistencies during his statement after he was convicted. This statement was in the presence of his attorney's and against their advice. Yet Jessie clearly states, he wants to do it. So "something can be done about it".

8:52 AM  
Blogger Justdontknow122 said...

I have heard both sides and I am still uncertain as to what I actually believe and while I respect everyone's opinions I don't believe that there is enough evidence to sentence Damien Echols to death.

I also believe that Jessie Misskelley's confession seems a bit shady. Now we have all tied on a few too many and may have regretted situations we put ourselves in but let's be honest you have to be near comatose and near death not to remember what you've done the night before when drinking. ESPECIALLY if you've participated in committing the murder of 3 little boys!!!

I believe, IF the WM3 are guilty, by Jessie's inaccuracy of how the murders occurred he may not have even been present when they were acted out. He may just have come along at the end and not reported them or did anything to stop them. With an IQ of 72 and no real accurate confession of what occurred at the murder scene by all legal rights and by laws this confession should have been thrown out of court and there should have been no life sentence for Jessie. IF the WM3 are guilty and he knew of the murders and didn't report them or was present and didn't do anything to stop them then he does hold considerable responsibility but not the same responsibility of Jason Baldwin or Damien Echols.

Now back to Damien Echols if he actually is mentally ill as you repeatedly claim him to be, then guilty or not, shouldn't he be in a mental institution and not where he is today on Death Row.

The fact remains that there is just too much uncertainty and reasonable doubt in this case to not have allowed a new trial for DNA evidence. I think it's appalling that courts are sentencing a man to death and will not even be CERTAIN that it is a correct decision. Bite evidence and DNA should absolutely be introduced. Especially today with the advanced forensic technology. If they match Damien Echols, Jessie Misskelley and Jason Baldwin then the sentences should of course stand as is. But if evidence is not heard then this is a miscarriage of justice.

Are they guilty or are the courts too scared to allow evidence in that would show the incompetence of the police department and the DA's office and deal with the law suits that would surely follow if they were incorrect?!?!?!?! I personally don't know the answer but I can sleep at night....can they?

2:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


You have to remember it wasn't just one confession, it was three. Although the first one was inaccurate in some instances, he also stated things only someone there would know. Such as the cut along the face of one of the boys, the scratches behind the ears, just to name a few. These facts were not publicized. Even Jessie cleared up some of the inaccuracies in his post-conviction statement. As for him getting drunk, it was after the murders not during.

Damien's mental illness does not constitute legally insane. So he is still legally responsible for his actions.

There is no conclusive DNA evidence. There are two hairs so far as anyone knows. One that is similar to one of the step-fathers and one to a family friend. Not conclusively theirs. Both hairs can be explained by secondary transfer. The bite mark if you talking about the one suggested in the documentary, has already been proven to not exist. The new theory is animal predation, however the autopsies disprove this theory as well, since you don't bruise or bleed after death.

The courts aren't scared at all, hence why the DNA testing was allowed. So far no evidence has been revealed that takes away from the convictions.

Would you if you were innocent confess or brag about killing three boys? I don't think so, yet all three confessed in one form or another, with Jessie and Damien doing it more than once.

8:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


2:17 PM  
Anonymous janice said...

okay anonymous, i will first start with i do like your style. i like the fact base written answers and questions, besides the your little comment on the misspelling of the word negroid i was pretty happy with the way your reply was to me (not that you would care, just that attacking is not the best forum--it causes everyone to attack back, so thanks)

first of all can you show me where i can read the interview of the juror foreman? i was not the one who said the foreman said anything to the news paper, it was the person before me who is anon too who said that. i would really like to read it though because its like everthing else, two people read it and two different oppinions. and if what anon says is true it is pretty corrupt also.

as for my timeline on the black man in bojangles, i was correct in saying that at the same time the police were at the parents house taking reports for the missing boys the black man was at bojangles acting strange enough for them to call the police. i know the same police, i think it was a woman, but i am only going by memory here because i don't have anything in front of me, went from the parents house to the bojangles to take the report of the black man. you don't find that timeline odd at all? you don't find the negroid hair at the crime scene odd knowing a bloody black man was reported at the time the boys were reported missing? i'm pretty sure that the police didn't even go back to bojangles that same night, didn't they go through the drive-through to take the report? then they went back after the boys were found the next day? if i am not right i would be glad to know. i do not want to mislead anyone. and you still think a secondary transfer is good enough for you? what happened to the negroid hair? what happened to the blood the police took from bojangles? the police are allowed to just say "we lost it" oh well too bad?? thats it? you honestly find nothing wrong with that? are you an "oh weller" also? i'm not saying that to be crappy but what is your answer to that? 3 teenages 2 with stringy long hair have much more hair to fall out or pull out or something at the crime scene than one black man? i believe they do, do you?

don't worry i will get to jessy.

but first lets go back to the hutchensons, aaron and vicky. remember them? they were such a great part of the prosecutions case? they tried and tried to get little aaron to stick to one story and if i am right the first one he gave was that one of the boys was talking to a black man at the school or something?? please correct me if i am wrong. they messed with that kid so much he has problems today! and the mother, well she i guess needed some reward money and the police let her play detective, now was that not a bunch of crap?? she says today that she regrets lying so much and that the police were going to charge her with the stealing etc. i can show you that one. i have read that myself. she is the only reason jessy was even brought on the radar correct? she was trying to get out of trouble herself and her son was friends with those poor little boys so she saw an oppertunity in jessy to bail herself out right? or no?

the softball girls, i will have to look that one up, i did hear something about them recanting and they were interested in the reward money, but i am not sure on that. i really never thought that way anyway. i thought for those girls to say what they said it is my oppinion that they were awed by the situation. everyone knew they were looking at damien for this, it was not a secret and be honest, little girls and gossip go a long way. my oppinion is they probably got to gossiping about him, and there he was--wow-- the big mean evil damien. i am a girl myself. at that age i would be scared, thrilled, and even make me feel like a somebody to be in that spot. as crazy as that sounds it is very possible. just sit back and think about it for a moment.

as for jessy and his all three confessions, none of them would ever have even happened had the first one not been coerced we would not even be in this situation. how could the detectives spend so much time to get jessy's story right and then to go on tape and he still gets it wrong? why are they correcting him on tape?? it seems like he wants to please everyone. if he realllllly wanted to get it right then why didn't he testify at jason and damien's trial??? he said NO! he had already been convicted, weren't they going to make a deal with him and he would be a lot better off today had he testified?? for the last confession, the one after he was convicted, i think that is the easiest one to figure out. look at his history. he did not have many friends, he had a history of being a "bad ass" remember him with the coke bottles that he wouldn't back down from anyone? that was his way of coping with his life and his almost retardation. he wouldn't testify on these guys that according to all were not close friends but he will tell the guys on the way to prision he did it----i wonder why? could it be that he knew he was going to prison and wanted people to think he was a bad ass?? it all kind of goes back to who he is don't you think? or do you honestly think he wants to clear the air? but he won't testify but he wants to clear the air? think about it for a moment.

the whiskey bottle he said he felt bad and drank and they found the bottle under the bridge or something like that. that is just a tanker. nothing to it. when did he drink it? how many cars and trucks are on that road. secondary. or maybe he did just that went and drank down there. is that the only physical eveidence you have? these kids roamed this neighborhood and i'm not hearing much about him being a wonderful citizen and in chruch every sunday, so he very well may have drank down there many times.
did the bottle have blood on it?

and there is not dna evidence of any of the kid's blood on any necklace. give me a brake. you know as well as i do that the necklace you are talking about is the one that had damien's blood on it and (gosh i wished i had this in front of me!!!) i believe jason's. the dna done on that was matching to jason and stevie? right? if not tell me. if they had that smoking gun dna evidence none of us would be even talking much more about it. i can't beleive i have sat here at work and wrote this long. i will have to look back over again what else you want me to answer and i will.

for now will you please tell me how it all adds up to you?

4:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

you seem to think this is about you know one is attacking you janice get a grip on reality this is a forum of discussions no one gives a tiny rats ass what you think..............hey good luck with the baby sitting hope you get 3 nice young blokes to mind your kids..................

7:47 PM  
Anonymous janice said...

i don't seem to think anything is about me. i am appalled that 3 teenagers were convicted of murder with no evidence to back it up. good lord in heaven 2 of the boy's parents are already saying they think the police made a mistake!! this murder case alone has made me understand that you better get an attorney no matter what the circumstances are if the police are involved. i was wondering if anyone knows how many prosecutors take on a case and decide the detectives don't have enough evidence and go out and do their own investigation to come up with some more evidence?? (ie. the supposed secret search behind jason's trailor in the lake) with a big fat photo of a diver with a knife. wow how lucky can one get? it stinks so bad of corruption. nothing is right here. this happened in 1993 and here we are in 2008 STILL SCREAMING OUT THAT SOMETHING IS NOT RIGHT HERE! the arkansas government will not do anything about it because they know a big fat lawsuit is on the way. pride that they are wrong. just give them a new trial for crying out loud! add in all jessy's confessions and everything else they have then lets see what the outcome is. they would look so much better if they just said okay, we might want to take another look at the case so we don't have kids locked up if they are innocent. but no! they have to be right no matter whos lives are ruined as long as they are not in jail then they are fine with it. that is just to dam scary to have these kind of people in charge. remember gitchell on a scale of 1 to 10 "it's an eleven" he just needs to be slapped in the face for point blank lying...

1:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


2:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


If you take each little bit of evidence separately then it tends to lend to innocence somewhat. However, once you start adding all of it up, it lends much more easily towards guilt.

Jessie and his confessions, the defense and their experts have said it looks to be a classic case of a coerced confession. However, if you read Jessie's own comments about how nice and didn't threaten him, etc... it negates that whole theory. In addition, the experts were only talking about the first confession. This doesn't include the other two confessions.

Explain how Jessie knew about that the boys were pulled by the ears, as the autopsy reports clearly showed and the Dr. Perriti stated showed in his opinion forced oral sex (exactly as Jessie described). Also explain how Jessie knew that one of the boys was cut along the jaw. As he states Jason cut him and Damien slicked the blood off. Two very clear and distinct examples of Jessie knowing things he shouldn't have about the crime. These injuries were not reported in the newspaper before the trial. The newspaper reported them being beat up, tied up, and sexually assaulted (not how mind you) and one had a jaw injury (not cut mind you just stated injury) and that one was sexually mutilated. None of these statements in the newspaper attested any injury to any boy. Yet Jessie does and correctly.

Damien's necklace: It was found to have blood on it consistent with Jason and one of the victims. Not Damien's. I would love to see them test this for DNA, but the defense chose not too... wonder why? I do.

I don't think the prosecution would have a issue with a retrial with all the evidence being submitted. However, our justice system doesn't work that way. The defense needs to come up with something that proves their innocence, as our justice system takes the juries opinion first, it's what our justice system is based on. I'm not sure the defense would be so eager, if all the evidence is allowed. Most people see one confession and convict, with three confessions, you honestly think they will find them innocent? We can go round and round on the evidence and still people will believe in their innocence or guilt. When all is said and done though, it's the courts that will decide. At this point in time, I see the courts deciding in their guilt. The only thing that might get them a new trial is a legal loophole. So far that has even fallen short.

10:56 AM  
Anonymous janice said...


you seem to be very informed on a lot of this..... interesting... you sure do hold a lot respect for jessie's coerced confession. you only put down that he confessed 3 times. why don't you put in your blogs that the only reason for this is that jessie was illegally ambushed by the prosecutors after his conviction?

they offered him a deal! the blood on the necklace--really?---

i am shocked that you choose to be so misleading. you don't put where you get any of your information. i have asked you several questions and you don't answer them. i don't understand why? where did you get your info on the corrupt juror??

you know, i am not a lawyer nor do i have any law knowlege but something stinks really bad here. now this is just a quesion for you. i honestly don't know the answer to this. how is it that the same judge keeps getting to rule on his own judgements in the first place? it seems like everything i read it is judge burnett who has re-denied all his own terrible rulings in the trials. to me that such a duh moment--of course he would deny them again. it was his own ruling!! and as we can all clearly see NO LAW MAN IN ARKANSAS WILL ADMIT TO BEING WRONG. why won't you comment on vicky and aaron? you asked me why they didn't test the dna on the necklace, in my opinion it wouldn't be good enough for a new trial. if it came back not have stevie's blood on it then what would that prove in a new trial? it was never introduced into evidnece. all the procecutors would have to say is thats okay, we won't use it, and if the defense tries to use the fact that is didn't have stevie's blood on it then they look silly. all the prosecutor would have to do is say "so what. we didn't introduce it so we are not disputing that fact" so that is why they didn't i would suppose they would go for something more damming ie. the hair at the crime scene, which they did and it came back to terry hobbs and jacob jacoby? (not sure if that is the other guys name) but terry was stevie's step dad and the other guy was his friend. that is pretty interesting don't you think?? i would be more inclined to go with secondary on that hair then i would on the negroid hair just because stevie could have easily picked it up from his own house. in any case, jessie was at the police station for almost 12 hours and only 20 mins of it was taped. and even that was corrected by the detectives. why?? and of course, the biggie--with the deal on the table and he was already convicted why didn't he testify at damien and jason's trial? you did say he wanted to clear the air right? well i can't think of a better forum for that. oh and you also left out that the prosecutors were buying him cigs and told him they would set it up so he could see his girlfriend and spend some "alone" time. wink wink.

nice text book law going on right there!

4:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


4:15 PM  
Anonymous janice said...

with so many anons going on here i have a hard time telling you all apart--------i must say on your crawl space and hole stuff that you sound just like someone i would be looking for in just such a case as this. it is sooo easy to hide on here isn't it. what a coward. but then again what would you expect from someone who would defend such crap. nothing ever changes.....

12:40 PM  
Anonymous beth said...

this case is much like the jon benet case: dna evidence not matching the victim or the defendents on a body part. i do tend to believe, as any sane person would, that thei dna (especially if they was "screwin' 'em and stuff") WOULD be on the bodies.

that said, i wish the defence would test EVERYTHING so i wouldn't continue to wonder about the other hairs.

glad to find some nons here. with so many people putting their photos on the wm3 wall i couldn't find much unbiased info.

11:11 PM  
Anonymous beth said...

i wrote that too quickly


11:12 PM  
Anonymous janice said...


there really are not many sites that support the wm3 being in prison. i personally feel very compelled about this case because it is sooo unfair that these boys are locked up with no evidence. the only thing they have is the confessions. that is it. jessie is bordeline mentally retarded and with all the pressure he could not stand up to it. they really just need to give them a new trial with a new judge because these same people are never going to admit they are wrong. they didn't have enough evidence going in. that is clear by the prosecutor going out on his own to find something on jason. they did not have one thing on jason so the prosecutor went out to a dump lake behind jason's trailor park in a "secret" search and low and behold on the front page of the newspaper is a picture of a diver with a big fat knife! they could not even prove it was involed in the crime and used it anyway. in normal cases the prosecutors send the case back and tell them- nope - get me something more and i will look at it again. but it seems like these guys wanted to be heros at the cost of other people's lives. that is sooo clear when gitchell says the case is an "eleven" on a scale of 1 to 10 and he smiles like he has just solved the whole worlds problems. it is sick. if these kids would have been any member of ANY of these guy's family (detectives judges etc) there is no way they would be in prison. i undestand what a horrible crime it is, at first i thought they did it just because they were convicted of it. when i got done watching the trials on paradise lost i almost fell on the floor in disbelief. i kept waiting for the evidence to come out and show that they did it so i could feel good that they got these monsters off the street and these horrible teens got what they deserved and the only thing i got was a gut wrenching awful feeling that something is not right here. the only thing that has put any kind of light to this is that these guys allowed them to tape all this or all we would have is 3 really poor (money wise) teens just saying they were framed and we would all just ignore it because after all they were convicted. this is the United States of America, we can't just sit back and let this happen. it is just a case of egos and lawsuits. my son was 8 when i first saw paradise lost so it kind of emotionally got to me. i realllllly wanted these teens to have done it so i knew the monters were off the street and feel better about my boy being safer in the world. now i look at him and tell him that if he is ever involved with the police to call me no matter if it is only a traffic stop. i don't trust the law anymore and it is an awful feeling. sometimes i wished i had never even heard about this case and just live in fairy tale land but reality is reality.

1:06 PM  
Anonymous janice said...

by the way, to anon who asked about the testing and necklace, why don't the state just test everything if they have nothing to hide? the defense has to beg everyone for money to test so they must be selective - the state don't. what a shame that the state wouldn't give any money for these teens to defend theirselves. wow imagine that. poor to the point of wayyyy below poverty and the state barely let them have attorneys and bulked on paying them! it is kind of like little me going heads up against the irs. my resouces vs. theirs. who will win?? lol!! errr just so frustrating!!

2:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

what doesn't sit well with me is the fact that damien failed the polygraph. he was the only one they interviewed that failed. combine that with him saying, "i'll tell you all about it if you let me talk to my mom."
i don't know. it's just creepy.

still, i do think they deserve new trials and i absolutely don't believe in the death penalty at all. i guess right now i'm just a fence sitter. even though i did donate money to them once without my knowledge when i went to an art show.

11:10 PM  
Anonymous janice said...

i know i have a comment for everyone, sorry-- but in thinking about the polygraph, who even knows if damien did flunk it? they lie soooo much. but lets just say it was right and it showed decepetion, polygraphs are not allowed in court because they are not reliable, you can be nervous while taking it and it fails you or you can be the guy that did it and take a few pills to calm you and you pass. then there is the examiners that argue over the polygraph being right or wrong. you just never know. as for damien saying he wanted to talk to his mom and then he would tell them everything --to me-- was his way of getting a break from them, i'm sorry but i really do think that because in an interview with damien, i think it was on larry king, but i'm not sure. i did watch it myself tho, he was asked why he wasn't mad at jessie for getting him into this mess and he said he couldn't be mad at jessie because he knows what they put him through and he has a strong mind. he said they probably tricked him because they tried everything in the book to get him (damien) to confess. it kind of goes back to the anon guy that says "if you look at the evidence one by one then it doesn't look good but if you look at it as a whole then it all makes sense" which it doesn't by the way. if you want to use that tatic then use it on the state too, except if you look at all thier lies and deceptions through this case as a whole or one by one it stinks either way.

1:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

one person fails out of all of them? that's just too weird. carson also PASSED the test.

why does damien's mother only talk to him once a year? why was it such a big deal that jessie's dad showed up to his own son's hearing. things that make ya go hmm.

supporters will make excuses for every single thing, every single witness. come on! if damien wasn't so charasmatic and looked like jason, none of you would give a shit.

11:24 PM  
Blogger Stacie said...

I grew up in West Memphis and moved shortly after the trial. I knew the boys accused of the crime. Weird? Yes. Strange? Yes. Murderers? I'm not so sure.

I've riden my bike in RobinHood Hills a million times, and I'll tell you, the mosquitos are horrible. Why didn't the victims have mosquito bites? They were murdered pretty violently. Where did all the blood go? How was one boy's penis mutilated in such a way that it almost looked like perfect precision, and do in the dark of the woods?

I have seen the movies, and I have read the books. I knew many of the search and rescue team, and my family was friends with the lead prosecutor and his wife.

I know all of the background, but one thing I know better than anything is I know West Memphis. This town can be a scary place if you are not "from" there; if you don't "fit" in.

If you get on the "shit" list once, it's over for you.

I am not certain of anyone's guilt or innocence, but I have alot of questions that remain unanswered.

After the trial, we sold our home, and moved. We lived a block from all of the victims. I played in those woods for years. It hit way too close to home, and I no longer felt safe.

I hope whoever did this answers for it on judgment day, but I tend to think more about the victims now days than I do anyone else. All three of them would be about 25 years old. Maybe graduating from college, maybe starting a family. Who knows.

I never go back to West Memphis anymore. I am haunted by the apartments that I used to live in that are right in front of the creek where the boys were found. I am haunted by the restaurant where the mysterious "bloody man" asked to use the restroom the night the boys went missing. I am haunted by the entire ordeal.

No one knows what happened in those woods that night. We are all just a bunch of spectators. Odviously more people of sure of their guilt than the supposed "yokle" police officers, and incompetent prosecutors. The Arkansas Supreme Court has upheld their convictions, and no one on that panel is from West Memphis.

If they are innocent, I hope they find it out before it's too late. If not, then they are right where they belong.

Stevie, Michael, and Christopher

1:00 AM  
Anonymous allison said...

well said, stacie. i didn't realize that the supreme court upheld the convictions and no one from west memphis was on the panel.

i do feel they at most deserve a new trial before damien's execution. but there are so many people that deserve new trials. these boys aren't the only ones. they just got lucky.

everytime damien is asked if he killed the boys, he blinks like crazy, indicating deception. something just doesn't sit right with me. he writes in his journal about gaining power and then when asked why the killer probably did it he said as a thrill kill and to feel powerful. come on. he was a sick kid

also - just read jason baldwin's journal entry about how he nearly strangled his brother & how he wanted to go as an abortion doctor for halloween.
yeah - sounds like a perfectly normal person to me. i've gotten in fights with my family, even tried to punch my dad, but never STRANGLED anyone!

10:32 AM  
Anonymous sandra said...

also, when i watched the documentaries, i never once immediately felt they were innocent, like so many people out there with persecutory delusions. and i was goth as hell in high school. all my friends wore black and listened to metallica. and i'm from a small town and didn't fit in. my friend was almost beat up by a group of "white hat jocks" and we had to run to an old ladies house and call the police.

i know what it's like to be targeted but it's definitely not going to make me rally for someone's innocence because they went through the same thing. i was actually shocked that after the documentaries, this whole free the 3 thing started. i couldn't believe that there were that many people out there who REALLY thought without a doubt that they were innocent. people just want to jump on the damn bandwagon and have a cause.

10:40 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's Dec. '08 and I don't know if anyone still reads or has added to this blog in a while. However, I saw the paradise lost movie again recently and started checking on the progress of the case and low and behold it's still going strong. After a few days of reading everything new on the case I still can't find anything that says they didn't do it. Sure Misskelly supposedly has a low IQ. But why people seem to want to picture him as a sweet guy like Simple Jack in Tropic Thunder I don't know. I see no evidence of him having this type of personality in the case evidence. In fact the opposite is true. I think a lot of people are casting MissKelley in a light based on a preconceived notion and not on how he is or was. Same goes with Echols. The evidence doesn't show a young man that just had an unpopular view of religion or people thought was weird with his black clothes and heavy metal music. Everybody reading this can relate to being an outcast and different and being made fun of. But how many of you were in and out of mental institutions, on 100% disability because of it, threatened people and generally terrified everyone you came in contact with? And I don't mean scared people with your dress, but really scared people because there was clearly something bad wrong with your behavior? Read about the VA Tech shooter, no one was surprised Cho did what he did either. Seems like a lot of people are using their own experiences to relate to Echols rather than giving him the personality it appears he actually possesses. Baldwin is a strange case to me. If he could have refuted Misskelley’s placing him at the scene he would have been a free man. Of course that goes for Echols too. I really haven’t gotten a very good sense of his personality but at the very least it's clear he was like a brother to Echols and how many of your friends share none of your opinions or ideas? A couple more items I'd like to discuss since I'm in a typing mood. The evidence. Really there are 3 kinds of evidence in this case. #1 evidence they did it. #2 evidence they didn't do it. #3 inconclusive evidence. People seem to ask why there is no conclusive physical evidence they did it? Well, why isn't there conclusive evidence someone else did it either? The reason is simple. That's how real life works. There are weird inconsistencies in any case. No criminal case anywhere is 100% free of inconsistencies. You'll find unexplained items, lost evidence, contaminated evidence, things that don't fit. I can’t explain how a piece of paper disappeared from my desk, much less why the victims didn’t have mosquito bites. That's why there is reasonable doubt, not all doubt. If you had to prove something beyond all doubt, no one would ever get convicted of anything. Vincent Bugliosi does a great job explaining this in many of his books. The reason WM3 are in jail is not the physical evidence. It's what did or didn't come out of all 3 of their mouths. Say MissKelley wasn't there; say he made a false confession. Why then when Echols and Baldwin were confronted with this confession couldn't they dismiss his accusations? It's a pretty easy thing. You know, the old "I wasn't there, I was here and I can prove it" thing. Why does Echols flunk a polygraph that could have exonerated him and then make incriminating statements right afterward which were enough to convict him on their own? Why did he then and still today continue to be caught in inconsistencies and lies? People, if you were confronted with crimes like this you didn't commit, especially if it was on false confession, you’d make sure to set the record straight and it would be pretty easy to exonerate you. As it was for scores of other people in this case. Would you lie on the stand repeatedly in a capitol murder case if you were innocent? Would you take the stand in your defense if you didn't do it? Just try and keep me off the stand if I'm innocent. Back on physical evidence for a moment. Why didn't the supposed teeth marks work? Because it's not conclusive they are teeth marks. Why didn't they investigate Mark Byers? He was, there is no conclusive evidence he was involved. Why don't they give them a new trial based on hairs from Terry Hobs and friend? Because it's inconclusive grasping at straws. Like we've established every case has unusual items and the hairs are explainable. For example, perhaps they didn't tie the boys with their own laces but with each other's laces and it's a parent so hair isn’t unusual. To get these people out you’re going to have to have a real smoking gun and not just straws. Plus explain why their body language just reeks of guilty to a lot of people, why so much of Jesse's story rang true right down to the broken bottle, where they were when the murders were committed if not at the crime scene, and the incriminating words, and lies that have and continue to cross lips. At the very least someone explain away Echols polygraph and the stuff he said afterwards. If you the reader were innocent, would you say something like that?

8:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yep I agree they reek of guilty with their dead eyes...the doco was certainly a money maker they want to cast doubt they want more money! There are always going to those that cast doubt on the facts as presented including those who think 9/11 was a USA govt project (as if) and that MM was murdered by JFK it makes for great fodder and it JUST MAKES MONEY!

8:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


i couldn't agree more. you're spot on.

"i always knew i was going to influence the world. now i'll be like the west memphis boogeyman. oh.. damien might be under my bed."

JESUS CHRIST people. come on. the right people are in jail.

10:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I said it before and I'll say it again -- if Damien Echols wasn't so handsome no one would give two shits about this case.

People just want to have a cause to which they can attach themselves. PERIOD.

10:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

you think that creepy dead eyed man is handsome, really? he is a little like marilyn manson to me, off tap , ugly , creepy...... yeah good looking??? he has a black heart and soul anyway and nothing can change that!

10:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And your right as well they do they simply need some cause to attach themselves too, shame they arnt out fighting to save starving children their energy could be put to much better use than trying to save the dead eye brigade........

10:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

oh come on janice, yes you janice, janice janice who loves to hear her own voice, come try to rip us a new a hole, janice, hey janice janice, oh and call people by their names like ur besties, hey janice, yes janice, yeah we can all read ur bullshit janice, need a baby sitter janice hey janice???

10:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I believe he is guilty but from a 25 yr old female standpoint, he is very good looking. And a lot of people on youtube and message boards always talk about it. And there was no doubt that Kathy Bakkan wanted to do him.

10:46 PM  
Anonymous janice said...

i'd suck his dick

10:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

lol lol yeah just me probably i find johnny depp , jude law, brad pitt (before he hooked up with sluts guts) i guess sometimes you have to see past that hey.... i always thought of dead eye d as a fat freak with a bowl cut lol lol i just cant get that picture out of my mind.........lolol but the celebrity status has bought him fame and people can find that attractive in it self, na i dont mean you,i just mean Kathy lmfao and janice youd suck anyone dick you need to learn to read instead of giving head!

10:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anyone know about this Evan Williams bottle? I remember hearing it was only the neck, which seems like such a stretch to me. Did they actually find a bottle that had the Evan Williams sticker on it?

These kids are so guilty.

Also, just finished reading the autopsy reports and one shoe string used to tie up Moore was black and the other was white... you know what that means. It was probably Stevie's shoelace & that's how Hobbs was on it. Duh....

How can that Lorri Davis chick really believe these people are innocent. Her husband freaking failed the lie detector test and played with his HAIR when he was found guilty.

WHAT?! Come on lady.

11:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

On the evan williams bottle. Even if it was just the neck most liquor bottles are unique and very few if any look exactly alike. It's part of their marketing. Someone stop by a liquor store and check out various evan williams bottles and see if it can be distinguished by the neck only. Janice, do you really believe Damien is actually innocent? Or are you just drawn to him and want him to be innocent? -Kevin

7:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What I find weird about this tho is like... Jessie wasn't even friends with these guys, right? Why was he even brought in in the first place?

1:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm sorry but there's no fucking way in HELL that you could beat up those kids THAT BADLY and not have ANY bruises or cuts on your body. Damien Echols had photographs taken of himself like three days after the murders and he had NO SCRATCHES. Nothing.

That's weird.

1:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Wednesday, February 16

Pre-trial hearing. Val Price alleges that Aaron Hutcheson has made statements implicating Mark Byers in the murders. Co-counsel Scott Davidson asks to see the HBO documentary crew's film of John Mark Byers where he describes being tied up, sodomized and thrown in a ditch at the age of 18 or 19. Judge Burnett denies the request.

Um. That's pretty damning!

2:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The person who wrote about Damien's lack of cuts and bruises is not thinking logically. This is not adults fighting adults. He was an 18yr old grown man and these were 8 year old 2nd graders. He could easily beat them severely without injuring himself or even breaking a sweat. If your an 18 yr old or above male, look at class of 2nd graders. How much a chance would they have especially with 2 other adults helping? If you had any athletic ability at all you could beat up and entire class of 20 or 30. My little brother is 6 years younger not 10 as in this case and when he was 8 and me 14 he wouldn't even try to fight me. The best he could hope to do was curl and a ball or flee... Use some common sense. You have anything else?

4:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Common sense shows you that he'd VERY likely have at LEAST some bruises on his hands FROM HITTING SOMEONE THAT HARD.

5:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah, don't give me that bullshit. One of the kid's skulls was fractured. Don't fucking tell me that you could do that without breaking a sweat or at least superficially bruising your hand.

Anyone have any info on the alibis? Were they not brought up at trial?

5:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Skull fractures with a fist? Weren't there sticks and knife handles involved?

6:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

FFS.............children who are scared and vulnerable do not fight back these children as previously said would curl up and cringe. Find another cause try raising money for hungry or orphaned children, these 3 A holes dont deserve your time and or energy...........

6:45 PM  
Anonymous maria said...

was there brain matter or blood on the sticks? dna? anything?

7:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"If one does as God does, one will become God-like."


"Why do you think the murders occurred, Damien?"

"The person probably wanted power."

7:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

11:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No DNA or blood on sticks. In fact there is no conclusive physical evidence that anyone did it. However, someone did because you've got 3 dead boys. The case has never been about physical evidence but rather about confessions and behavior evidence which is all you need to convict. The premise is innocent people act innocent and guilty people act guilty. Misskelley confessed 3 times (twice after he was convicted) and though he does have some inconsistances in his confessions big items like who was there with him and what they did not change. If it was a false confession, 3 people named should be able to account for their whereabouts at the time of the murder. Or even 1 of the 3 proving there whereabouts would have been enough. Damien had a history of serious mental illness including threats against his own family, flunked a polygraph and then made incriminating statements afterwards. He was overheard by multiple persons claiming he committed the murders and was trapped on the stand and proven to be lying multiple times when testifying in his defense. I submit and innocent person does not do these things. Jason Baldwin confessed at jail that he was involved and the guy he confessed to (carson) passed a polygraph about what he heard Jason say. Then Baldwin didn't testify in his own offense. While legally he doesn't have to, any prosecutor will tell you that innocent people always testify because they have nothing to hide. They also don't lie on the stand. Watch Baldwins answer in the HBO video when they ask him what he'd like to say to the victims parents.

5:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What incriminating statements did Damien make?

And just so you know, cover-ups DO HAPPEN and prosecutors often cover up evidence to secure a verdict. It happens every day. You're naive if you don't realize this.

Go to Wikipedia "death row" and look at all the people exonerated!

3:26 PM  
Anonymous sam said...

And polygraphs aren't allowed in court anyway, so your using it to show hsi guilt is preposterous. PHYSICAL EVIDENCE is what this case is all about. And there is none. Just a lot of scared parents who wanted a conviction.

Are you familiar with the Zodiac case? Hell, there's a shitload more evidence against Arthur Leigh Allen than any of these three! And he wasn't even convicted!

3:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And I really don't think they would push for the DNA tests if they weren't innocent. I mean they even pushed for the DNA to be preserved! HELLO MCFLY.

3:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Damiens polygraph with an example of his incriminating statements is reproduced in this blog upstream about 1/2 way. If you can't be bothered to read why blog? You should at least know what your guy said and did before agreeing to help set a convicted murder free. As of 2007 polygraphs are admissable in courts in 19 states. Defense lawyers spend a lot of time and money trying to keep them out for obvious reasons. While not absolutely conclusive they are accurate to the point police use them to exonerate suspects and to check sex offenders after they are paroled. I saw a episode of mythbusters where they did everything they could think of to beat one or get it to read false but couldn't do it. If you flunk one you've got problems and a lot of explaining to do. By the way McFly, they have nothing to lose by having the DNA preserved and tested. If DNA ever conclusively proves they did it, it doesn't hurt them because they're already in jail. If one day someone comes up with a stray hair off an officers boot from a post office clerk or where a fisherman pissed the week before, then it can only help them. They sit in jail convicted just throwing darts praying something will stick and get them out on a technicality. Wanting out of jail just proves jail sucks not that they’re innocent.

5:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh, right, THOSE incriminating statements. The problem is they aren't incriminating at all, asswipe. They're normal words coming from an 18 year old with hardcore manic depression. I think it's pretty normal to say you're afraid of the electric chair.... ?

Anyway, please explain to me how there is foreign DNA on the penis of Stevie Branch that doesn't match the victims or defendants? This is precisely the kind of thing that cleared the Ramsey family, but people keep wanting to point the finger at them too.

As for the polygraph, false positives and vice versa happen ALL the time.

There is little scientific evidence to support the reliability of polygraphs.[16][17] Despite claims of 90% - 95% reliability, critics charge that rather than a "test", the method amounts to an inherently unstandardizable interrogation technique whose accuracy cannot be established. A 1997 survey of 421 psychologists estimated the test's average accuracy at about 61%, a little better than chance.[18] Critics also argue that even given high estimates of the polygraph's accuracy a significant number of subjects (e.g. 10% given a 90% accuracy) will appear to be lying, and would unfairly suffer the consequences of "failing" the polygraph. In the 1998 Supreme Court case, United States v. Scheffer, the majority stated that “There is simply no consensus that polygraph evidence is reliable” and “Unlike other expert witnesses who testify about factual matters outside the jurors' knowledge, such as the analysis of fingerprints, ballistics, or DNA found at a crime scene, a polygraph expert can supply the jury only with another opinion...”.[19] Also, in 2005 the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals stated that “polygraphy did not enjoy general acceptance from the scientific community”.[20] Charles Honts, a psychology professor at Boise State University, states that polygraph interrogations give a high rate of false positives on innocent people.[21] In 2001 William G. Iacono, Distinguished McKnight University Professor of Psychology and Neuroscience and Director, Clinical Science and Psychopathology Research Training Program at the University of Minnesota, published a paper titled “Forensic “Lie Detection": Procedures Without Scientific Basis” in the peer reviewed Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice. He concluded that
Although the CQT [Control Question Test] may be useful as an investigative aid and tool to induce confessions, it does not pass muster as a scientifically credible test. CQT theory is based on naive, implausible assumptions indicating (a) that it is biased against innocent individuals and (b) that it can be beaten simply by artificially augmenting responses to control questions. Although it is not possible to adequately assess the error rate of the CQT, both of these conclusions are supported by published research findings in the best social science journals (Honts et al., 1994; Horvath, 1977; Kleinmuntz & Szucko, 1984; Patrick & Iacono, 1991). Although defense attorneys often attempt to have the results of friendly CQTs admitted as evidence in court, there is no evidence supporting their validity and ample reason to doubt it. Members of scientific organizations who have the requisite background to evaluate the CQT are overwhelmingly skeptical of the claims made by polygraph proponents. [22]
Polygraph tests have also been criticized for failing to trap known spies such as double-agent Aldrich Ames, who passed two polygraph tests while spying for the Soviet Union.[23][24] Other spies who passed the polygraph include Karl Koecher,[25] Ana Belen Montes,[26] and Leandro Aragoncillo.[27] Pseudoscience debunker Bob Park said, "The polygraph, in fact, has ruined careers, but never uncovered a single spy."[28] Polygraph examination and background checks also failed to detect Nada Nadim Prouty, who was not a spy but was convicted for improperly obtaining US citizenship and using it to obtain a restricted position at the FBI.[29]
Prolonged polygraph examinations are sometimes used as a tool by which confessions are extracted from a defendant, as in the case of Richard Miller, who was persuaded to confess largely by polygraph results combined with appeals from a religious leader.[30]

6:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Brilliantly stated. Polygraphs are trash.

6:57 PM  
Anonymous Jerry said...

Retired officer here. Polygraphs are used more as an interrogation tool. Subjects are led to believe the polygraph will give an accurate reading so they usually just confess.

7:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Asswipe" = calling people names do not help your credibility and I submit those and other statements he made are not normal to an innocent person 18yr old maniac depressive or not. How much latitude do you expect people to give this guy just so he can be innocent? He nailed his coffin quite literally with his own mouth. Alot of other people in this case were interrogated and they didn't have these issues. As stated before, polygraphs are not perfect but when performed by a qualified examiner cast instant suspicion. Here's another internet quote showing the prosecutions side-

"How accurate is a polygraph?
While the polygraph technique is highly accurate, it is not infallible and errors can occur. According to the American Polygraph Association over 250 studies have been conducted on the accuracy of polygraph testing during the past 25 years. Recent research reveals that the accuracy of the new computerized polygraph stytem is close to 100%.
Most errors occur with inexperienced polygraph examiners. Just as one doctor can look at an x-ray, and not see a problem, while the next, more experienced doctor can, so it goes with polygraph charts.
Occationaly you will hear reports from those who fear the polygraph may not be accurate. The APA answers them with this:
One of the problems in discussing accuracy figures and the differences between the statistics quoted by proponents and opponents of the polygraph technique is the way that the figures are calculated. At the risk of over simplification, critics, who often don't understand polygraph testing, classify inconclusive test results as errors. In the real life setting an inconclusive result simply means that the examiner is unable to render a definite diagnosis. In such cases a second examination is usually conducted at a later date. To illustrate how the inclusion of inconclusive test results can distort accuracy figures, consider the following example: If 10 polygraph examinations are administered and the examiner is correct in 7 decisions, wrong in 1 and has 2 inconclusive test results, we calculate the accuracy rate as 87.5% (8 definitive results, 7 of which were correct.) Critics of the polygraph technique would calculate the accuracy rate in this example as 70%, (10 examinations with 7 correct decisions.) Since those who use polygraph testing do not consider inconclusive test results as negative, and do not hold them against the examinee, to consider them as errors is clearly misleading and certainly skews the figures."

I wasn't aware of any Ramsey style DNA on Steve Branch and I've read a great deal on the case. Please provide the link. Also, please explain why Misskelley put 3 people at the crime scene himself included and none of the 3 had a credible alibi to prove even one of them wasn't there?

7:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

None of the three had a credible alibi? I just listened to three interviews from Damien's family and the daughter of a family friend. He and Domini were picked up from the laundrymat. Domini went home. He went with his family to visit family friends and watched 90210. At 7PM. They stayed a half hour.

Maybe you should actually read up on the case instead of continuing your witch hunt.

11:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Listen. I though these three were guilty from day one. My IQ is way over 72 and I could tell that the documentaries were horribly biased. I think for some time, that alone made me angry and left me assuming their guilt.

However, based on the new DNA evidence, I'm seriously doubting they are guilty. It is well-known that Stevie's penis has abrasions on it indicative of chronic masturbation by himself or someone else. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure it was done by someone else. Even Chris Byers. His mother told his school she thought he was being sexually molested. It's no coincidence that both the boys showed symptoms of this. It really makes me wonder if the boys were being molested by one of the fathers. Since they viewed him as an authority figure, I doubt they would tell their parents about it.

To the person who wanted proof of the DNA on Stevie, here.

"New technology, expected to be available soon, will be used to test genetic material found on Steve Branch’s penis, Fedor said. The amount found was too minute for current methods of identifying DNA, he added."

Also, it's a pretty well-known fact that with crimes like these, it's usually one of the parents. And don't forget that Terry Hobbs broke into an old lady's house and tried to rape her. And don't forget that John Mark Byers has made statements that at court on of Terry's niece's took the stand and admitted that Terry had molested her.

1:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


1:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Folks. This is all inconclusive grasping at straws evidence. You can conjecture all you want, but these SOB's did it until conclusively proven otherwise which isn't going to happen because they did it. Find another hobby.

5:15 PM  
Anonymous janice said...

i have not been here in a while and i thought there would be some stuff that was not good. thanks to you anon for your polygraph info, i thought so. i watched an interview online that had lori davis saying EXACTLY WHAT I THOUGHT-- THAT JESSIE CONFESSED OR TRIED TO IN ORDER TO GET THE REWARD MONEY TO BUY A NEW TRUCK! for a long time no one had brought that up and it was always in the back of my mind. wow. funny how people think. also remember there is soooooo much that points away from than too. i have to read more of the blogs to understand better what everyone is saying about terry and rape and so on. i want to look into that alot. gosh i soooo just want a new trial. just present the evidence. please......

5:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

sooo just soo fuck off janice

6:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Grasping at straws my ASS. It's fucking common sense.

12:54 PM  
Anonymous janice said...

hey anon, i think you need some help buddy boy!!! lol your such a punk i bet your just apple of your family's eye--yek

5:19 PM  
Anonymous jessie ain`t a retard said...

with jessie`s iq of 72,i remember watching the hbo thing where his lawyer explains to jessie before he goes in for the iq test that if he does bad on the test they won`t be able to give him the death peanlty.
anyone think that may have influenced jessie`s performance?
and the thing i keep coming back to is why would jessie confess 3 times,including twice AFTER he was convicted.
can any of the wm3 supporters show any other cases of false confessions where the defendant has confessed before and AFTER they have been convicted?
even with his lawyer telling him not too.

6:55 AM  
Anonymous jessie ain`t a retard said...

jessie`s lawyer says to jessie before his iq test "no one`s going to call you dumb or stupid,but if the court determines that you are operating below average,then there`s a possibility that the state won`t be able to impose the death penalty on you,do you understand".
jessie then replies yes.

7:16 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

it really doesn't matter what jessie did anyway. his dna wasn't at the scene. jason's dna wasn't at the scene. damien's dna wasn't at the scene.

the end.

11:15 AM  
Anonymous janice said...

that was sooo well put, i am almost in awe!

if there is one thing i am going to find out when i get to the pearlys is what in the wide world happened to these three little boys.

2:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I find the belief that DNA of the three convicted should be at the crime scene to be strange. The bodies were found submerged in water, which has a tendency to wash away evidence. It would be more surprising if DNA were found on the bodies, as is now supposedly the case. DNA is not some wonderful and magical item that is immune to the laws of physics. It washes away just like anything else does. As to the presence of the negroid hair, there have been cases where failure to properly clean a body bag has left trace evidence that was transferred to a new body. John Douglas mentions such a case in one of his books, and how it threw an investigation off track because people were unduly focused on it. As to the Bojangles gentleman, the possibility of an organized crime scene (which this obviously was due to the disposal process, especially how the boy's clothes were also held underwater in addition to their bodies) points away from such an obviously disorganized culprit. Logic is very obvious on this case, the three in jail are guilty. All the attempts to exonerate them have failed despite the burden to do so being comparatively low, as evidenced by the number of cases where convicted men are exonerated. With all the money thrown at this case by celebrity supporters, the fact that no evidence has yet been found demonstrating the boys' innocence is very telling. As a person who works with people with disabilities, it is obvious that those in favor of Misskelly's confession being coerced do not understand the differentation between a measured IQ of 72 and mental retardation. Even 2 points lower, which is extremely significant at that level, would only put him into the category of Mild Mental Retardation, a far cry away from what people think of when the term "retarded" is used. A person with Mild Mental Retardation is very capable of functioning in society and should be able to perform all the functions that this implies. There is no evidence that his IQ would have made him more susceptible to a false confession, nor is there an indication that he was fed the pertinent information that proved that he did it. The Supreme Court has ruled that you cannot execute a person with Mental Retardation, but Jessie is not covered by this because he does not have Mental Retardation. He is simply less intelligent than an average person. Working with many wonderful people with disabilities, it saddens me to see people use a low IQ as some sort of defense for a murderer.

2:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree being dumb doesnt make a good excuse for murder at all, and the assumption that a parents dna was found on those children (on a shoe i believe) is just stupid, any parent who ties a childs shoe laces or brushes a childs hair or even dresses them is bound to leave dna on that child....hear hear its nice to see someone with a valid point of view!

3:42 PM  
Blogger stopchildabuse said...

Thanks for your blog posts.

We have information on ritual abuse and the cover up of crimes against children at

8:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The hair was not found on Stevie's shoelace. The hair was found tied into Michael Moore's ligature.

12:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So another parent murdered those children? stevie's dad?......that kid could have been playing with it, WTF seriously parents do inhumane things to children all the time, look at casey anthony and I could bang on here for ever about how parents can be a childs worst enemy, But seriously think about the whole situation, a parent hunted down his/her child then murdered 2 others just because they were there? its just so out of character, yeah a parent might drag a kid home in anger , yeah a parent might slap that kid on the ass in anger........but to hunt down and kill a child and 2 other children for no valid reason does not make one ounce of sense. These kids were hog tied and violated beyond belief and again as in a way that was so violent only someone with no regard to life could do (read up, most parents whom harm children or even a wife, partner ect ect always wrap them in a blanket or cover up their face or face them down AN ACT OF "THEY LOVED THEM ONCE") and done by 3 fucking animals, yes 3 fucking animals who are making a living off it, I am sure they regret it, I am even sure they have convinced themselves they didnt do it, but god knows and know matter the outcome, I hope all that comes to them is evil, Karma is a bitch ...........

3:46 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And God Bless Those Parents who are subject too sites like "free the west memphis three"...they dont deserve that nor do they deserve to keep having to be subject to these assholes trying to be free or make a living/paying for lawyers on line selling fucking bracelets, photographs, t shirts and the like, while they suffer. It should not be allowed and it must cause them so much anguish and grief beyond anyone's comprehension........ my heart goes out to them. Any one who has written a book, or in any way like those other assholes who made that one eyed documentary in hope of scoring big bukcs when the execution goes down karma will come to them, I really believe that, karma will come back to them.

3:55 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Only people that should matter here is those 3 little boys whos lives were taken way to early.

3:57 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

First up..............why dont you have a legit email address listed here for contact instead of a yahoo contact that straight away on any significant contact source would mean your hiding so ...........

second of all honestly how the fuck can you keep posting all this bullshit when parents are out there subject to this on a daily basis and forever in grief because of it

third, so how can you sell items t shirts, photos, bracelets, good grief.....................................would you like to see this happening if anyone you loved was murdered, hey sure if they are freed knock your self out but in the interem how the fuck can you look at yourselves in the mirror

yeah i know you think you have some kind of justification, well karma is a bitch............... if not today , maybe not tomorrow, but some day karma will hit you in the face , just remember why!

you assholes raising money off someone who is still guilty (yes they are and thats fact)

you fucking assholes!

(yeah i sent this to the free wm3 I hate them you too can email them at )

4:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

F this and F that. Bitch, asshole, asshole.

You're really making a promising theory.

9:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

oooops sorry i got a bit passionate ..............

9:03 PM  
Anonymous said...

The extreme abuse survey - Child Sexual Abuse findings
describes crimes
HAND-OUT for Karriker, Wanda. (2008, April). Child Sexual Abuse and Beyond: Findings From a Series of International Extreme Abuse Surveys. Paper presented at the Fourteenth Annual Northern California Child Sexual Abuse Awareness Conference: Sacramento, CA. Karriker, Wanda. (2008, April).

Selected Responses from the EAS

My memories of abuse include incest. 1122 70%
I had memories of incest before I sought therapy/counseling. 985 64%
I was ritually abused in a satanic cult.* 986 55%
I had memories of ritual abuse before I sought therapy/counseling. 977 48%
Secret government-sponsored mind control experiments were
performed on me as a child. 1000 26%
I have been diagnosed with dissociative identity disorder (DID or MPD). 1007 65%
I am a therapist/counselor/clergy for RA/MC survivors. 965 10%
*Of the 257 EAS respondents who reported that secret mind control experiments were used on them as children, 69% (177) reported having been abused in a satanic cult. Of the 543 respondents who reported that they had been abused in a satanic cult, 33% (179) reported having been used in secret mind control experiments as children.

9:13 PM  
Anonymous said...

Satanic ritual abuse exists all over the world. There have been reports, journal articles, web pages and criminal convictions of these horrific crimes against children and adults.

There has also been an attempted cover up of these crimes by child pornographers, those with pro-pedophilia philosophies and those defending child molesters in the public or legal arena

List of Satanic Ritual Abuse references -

Lists of legal cases:

Believe the children (1997). “Conviction List: Ritual Child Abuse”.

The Satanism and Ritual Abuse Archive contains 92 cases as of February 12, 2008.

Web pages proving the existence of ritual abuse:

Noblitt, PhD, J. R. - An Empirical Look at the Ritual Abuse Controversy (2007)

9:14 PM  
Anonymous said...

Book on Ritual Abuse

Johnson Davis, Anne “Hell Minus One: My Story of Deliverance From Satanic Ritual Abuse and My Journey to Freedom” Transcript Bulletin Publishing - ISBN 978-0-9788348-0-7 - 2008 “Anne’s parents confessed their atrocities—both in writing and verbally—to clergymen, and to detectives from the Utah Attorney General’s Office. Anne’s suppressed memories, which erupted when she was in her mid-30s, were fully substantiated by her mother and stepfather….The book’s foreword was written by Lt. Detective Matt Jacobson, who was the lead investigator with the Utah Attorney General’s Office on Anne’s case in 1995.”

Hell Minus One - signed verified confessions of satanic ritual abuse - Anne’s parents confessed their atrocities - both in writing and verbally.

9:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

what is this blood on the necklace thing?

9:17 PM  
Anonymous said...

Other organizations with data proving the worldwide existence of satanic ritual abuse

A Nation Betrayed - The Chilling True Story of Secret Cold War Experiments Performed on our Children and Other Innocent People by Carol Rutz

9:17 PM  
Anonymous said...

Bottoms, Shaver and Goodman in their 1993 study to evaluate ritual abuse claims found that in 2,292 alleged ritual abuse cases, 15% of the perpetrators in adult cases and 30% of the perpetrators in child cases confessed to the abuse. Data from Brown, Scheflin and Hammond (1998).”Memory, Trauma Treatment, And the Law” (W. W. Norton) ISBN 0-393-70254-5 (p.62) Bottoms, B. Shaver, P. & Goodman, G. (1993) Profile of ritual abuse and religion related abuse allegations in the United States. Updated findings provided via personal communication from B. Bottoms. Cited in K.C. Faller (1994), Ritual Abuse; A Review of the research. The American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children Advisor , 7, 1, 19-27

On Page 170 (first edition), of Cult and Ritual Abuse - Noblitt and Perskin(Praeger, 1995) states “One of the best sources of evaluative research on ritual abuse is the article “Ritual Abuse: A Review of Research” by Kathleen Coulborn Faller (1994)….in a survey of 2,709 members of the American Psychological Association, it was found that 30 percent of these professionals had seen cases of ritual or religion-related abuse (Bottoms, Shaver & Goodman, 1991). Of those psychologists who have seen cases of ritual abuse, 93 percent believed that the reported harm took place and 93 percent believed that the alleged ritualism occurred. This is a remarkable finding. Mental health professionals are known to be divergent in their thinking and frequently do not agree with one another regarding questions of the diagnosis and etiology of psychiatric problems…this level of concurrence in a large national sample of psychologists…would be impressive….the similar research of Nancy Perry (1992) which further supports (the previous findings)…Perry also conducted a national survey of therapists who work with clients with dissociative disorders and she found that 88 percent of the 1,185 respondents indicated ”belief in ritual abuse, involving mind control and programming” (p.3).”

9:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Stop posting all that ritual abuse shit, this case isn't even about that. These kids weren't even Satanists!!!

9:25 PM  
Anonymous smartnews said...

Some believe they were.

Death Penalty Recommended for Teen-Ager - NYT - 3/20/94

"A witness said two of the 8-year-olds were raped and one was castrated. Prosecutors presented evidence suggesting Mr. Echols was a devil worshipper and the younger teen-ager (Baldwin) his loyal follower."

Youth Is Convicted In Slaying of 3 Boys In an Arkansas City - NYT - 2/5/94

"Mr. Misskelley told the police in two tape-recorded interviews that he had watched as his two friends beat the boys, raped two of them and castrated one. The prosecution said the slayings might have been part of a Satanic ritual."

5:04 PM  
Anonymous smartnews said...

Understanding ritual trauma: A comparison of findings from three online surveys

Handout for Karriker, Wanda. (2008, November). Understanding ritual trauma: A comparison of findings from three online surveys. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation, Chicago, IL.

Ritual abuse diagnosis research

excerpt from a chapter in: Lacter, E. & Lehman, K. (2008).Guidelines to Differential Diagnosis between Schizophrenia and Ritual Abuse/Mind Control Traumatic Stress. In J.R. Noblitt & P. Perskin (Eds.), Ritual Abuse in the Twenty-first Century: Psychological, Forensic, Social and Political Considerations, pp. 85-154. Bandon, Oregon: Robert D. Reed Publishers.

Wanda Karriker Torture-based mind control as a global phenomenon: Preliminary data from the 2007 series of Extreme Abuse Surveys. In Torture-based mind control: Empirical research, programmer methods, effects and treatment. Workshop conducted at the 13th International Conference on Violence, Abuse and Trauma, San Diego, CA.

5:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Smart News" you are not thinking logically and obviously know nothing about this case, so stop embarrassing yourself.

None of the boys were raped. No DNA, ripping or tearing was found on or inside their genitals.

Please read the autopsy report and stop wasting our time. Geesh. Makes me think you might be a perverted Satanist... you sure read up on a lot of this stuff in your free time...........

10:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Has anyone ever looked at Damien's Amazon "wishlist" ? How do inmates even get to do a "wishlist" ? Surely they can't use the internet... can they? So confused.

Anyway, he claims to be this big time Buddhist, so naturally I was expecting some meditation books or dharma books, maybe a little Kerouac... no.

Every single fucking book he wants is either related to Halloween or Tarot. Although the only books I read lately are about murder and serial killers, so what does that say about me?

Anyway, I'd like an answer to this wish list thing. Anyone have any idea?

11:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the 3 of them have it set up its a joke hey! you can also hook up with them on face book or one of those go to they sell t shirts, bracelets, ect ect to raise money for them???? some bands even supported them and made an album, a hole dead eyed damien wrote a book you can buy........yes is incredible all whilst still at this point guilty! (hey i read crime books 2, thing is some things are so shocking you have to read them to see what makes people tick because you are just simply astounded) lots of info on this site but keep in mind it is the free them site so .....

11:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

He also got married whilst in prison, 3 children are in the ground and he got married GO FIGURE, here in oz there is a law now that no convincted crim can profit in any way from their crime.........those poor parents, hence my foul mouthed letter to the supporters of the wm3, and again all i apologise for that i do get a little passionate at times and mmmmmmm sorry!

11:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

that letter was sent to the site, it was not intented for anyone on here except to read, again sorry i just despise them so badly!

11:45 PM  
Anonymous smartnews said...

I believe the comments of the NY Times over the comments and personal attacks of "anonymous."

The NYT states they may have been Satanists and the children were raped. Why is "anonymous" defending child molesters and murderers?

Death Penalty Recommended for Teen-Ager - NYT - 3/20/94

"A witness said two of the 8-year-olds were raped and one was castrated. Prosecutors presented evidence suggesting Mr. Echols was a devil worshipper and the younger teen-ager (Baldwin) his loyal follower."

Youth Is Convicted In Slaying of 3 Boys In an Arkansas City - NYT - 2/5/94

"Mr. Misskelley told the police in two tape-recorded interviews that he had watched as his two friends beat the boys, raped two of them and castrated one. The prosecution said the slayings might have been part of a Satanic ritual."

6:15 PM  
Anonymous smartnews said...

Sounds like this might be another cover up of a child rape case by those trying to exonerate the guilty.

Like this one:

McMartin Preschool Case - What Really Happened and the Coverup

1) McMartin Preschool Revisited

2) Ray Buckey’s Press Corps and the Tunnels of McMartin

3) Cult and Ritual Abuse - It’s History, Anthropology, and Recent Discovery in Contemporary America - Indictment movie

4) Chronology of the McMartin Preschool Abuse Trials

5) Archaeological Investigations of the McMartin Preschool Site

6) Why Cults Terrorize and Kill Children - Eberle’s

7) Denying ritual abuse of children

8) Interview of Jackie MacGauley

9) The Dark Tunnels of McMartin

10) Investigative Issues in Ritual Abuse Cases

11) Paul and Shirley Eberle: A Strange Pair of Experts

6:18 PM  
Anonymous smartnews said...

False allegations of child sexual abuse by children are rare

“allegations made by child victims match closely with confessions of pedophiles”

“The evidence indicates that very few (children) lied originally.”

“children tend to minimize and deny abuse, not exaggerate or over-report such incidents”

How often do children’s reports of abuse turn out to be false? Research has consistently shown that false allegations of child sexual abuse by children are rare. Jones and McGraw examined 576 consecutive referrals of child sexual abuse to the Denver Department of Social Services, and categorized the reports as either reliable or fictitious. In only 1% of the total cases were children judged to have advanced a fictitious allegation. Jones, D. P. H., and J. M. McGraw: Reliable and Fictitious Accounts of Sexual Abuse to Children. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2, 27-45, 1987. In a more recent study, investigators reviewed case notes of all child sexual abuse reports to the Denver Department of Social Services over 12 months. Of the 551 cases reviewed, there were only 14 (2.5%) instances of erroneous concerns about abuse emanating from children. These consisted of three cases of allegations made in collusion with a parent, three cases where an innocent event was misinterpreted as sexual abuse and eight cases (1.5%) of false allegations of sexual abuse. Oates, R. K., D.P. Jones, D. Denson, A. Sirotnak, N. Gary, and R.D. Krugman: Erroneous Concerns about Child Sexual Abuse. Child Abuse & Neglect 24:149-57, 2000….Children Tend to Understate Rather than Overstate the Extent of Any Abuse Experienced - Research with children whose sexual abuse has been proven has shown that children tend to minimize and deny abuse, not exaggerate or over-report such incidents.

6:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

smart news, will you stop posting statistics they mean nothing here, keep to the point and stop posting your bullshit

6:24 PM  
Anonymous smartnews said...

Since this is a case of child rape and murder, these statistics are important. Stop trying to cover up the facts about child rape by swearing and attacking others.

7:35 PM  
Anonymous smartnews said...

Confessions of a Whistle-Blower: Lessons Learned by Anna C. Salter - Ethics & Behavior, Volume 8, Issue 2 June 1998 , pages 115 - 124 Abstract - In 1988I began a report on the accuracy of expert testimony in child sexual abuse cases utilizing Ralph Underwager and Hollida Wakefield as a case study.

“The argument between the field of child sexual abuse and the backlash against survivors is not an academic debate between two well meaning groups equally invested in ascertaining truth. It is not an academic debate at all; it is a political fight.” P. 121

“What wins political fights is organization and stamina and a refusal to be intimidated.” P. 122

7:36 PM  
Anonymous smartnews said...

verification of the accuracy of the book “Michelle Remembers“ by Michelle Smith and Lawrence Pazder, MD from the book “A NOTE FROM THE PUBLISHER” pages xi - xiii”

“Dr. Pazder’s credentials are impressive. He obtained his M.D. from the University of Alberta in 1961; his diploma in tropical medicine from the University Liverpool in 1962; and in 1968, his specialist certificate in psychiatry and his diploma in psychological medicine from McGill University. In 1971, he was made a fellow of Canada’s Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons. He is a member of three Canadian professional associations and of the American Psychiatric Association as well. He practiced medicine in West Africa and has participated in medical task forces and health organizations. He has been chairman of the Mental Health Committee of the Health Planning Council for British Columbia. A member of the staff of two hospitals in Victoria, British Columbia -the Royal Jubilee and the Victoria General-he is in private practice with a group of five psychiatrists. His professional papers include a study of the long-term effects of stress upon concentration-camp victims.

Two experienced interviewers journeyed to Victoria and talked to Dr. Pazder’s colleagues, to the priests and the bishop who became involvedin the case, to doctors who treated Michelle Smith when she was a child, to relatives and friends. From local newspaper, clergy, and police sources they learned that reports of Satanism in Victoria are not infrequent and that Satanism has apparently existed there for many years. Satanism in Western Canada flourished in many areas with activities far more ominous than some of the innocuous groups now found in parts of the United States who claim some connection with Satanism.

The source material was scrutinized. The many thousands of pages of transcript of the tape recordings that Dr. Pazder and Michelle Smith made of their psychiatric sessions were read and digested; they became the basis of this book. The tapes themselves were listened to in good measure, and the videotapes made of some of his sessions were viewed. Both the audio and video are powerfully convincing. It is nearly unthinkable that the protracted agony they record could have been fabricated.”

Thomas B. Congdon, Jr New York April 22, 1980

7:37 PM  
Anonymous smartnews said...

Fells Acres - Amirault Case

Letters to the Editor: The Real Darkness Is Child Abuse WALL STREET JOURNAL (J) 02/24/95


As the chief prosecutor of both of the Amirault cases I am writing to prevent the public from being misled into believing that an injustice occurred as Dorothy Rabinowitz alleges in her Jan. 30 editorial-page piece “A Darkness in Massachusetts.”

Her suggestion that the convictions were based on “some of the most fantastic claims ever presented” presumptuously ignores the reality of the cases. The three Amiraults — Gerald, Violet and Cheryl - were convicted after two trials before different judges and juries almost one year apart. They were represented by able and well-known defense counsel. The convictions were upheld after review by state and federal appellate courts. The McMartin case in California was the result of a botched legal system and Kelly Michaels’s conviction was overturned because of legal errors. Contrary to Ms. Rabinowitz’s implication, the Amirault convictions were neither of these.

Studies show, as did testimony from a nationally recognized pediatric gynecologist, that most sexually molested young children have absolutely normal physical examinations. However, in Amirault, the majority of the female children who testified had some relevant physical findings, as did several female children involved in the investigation who did not participate in the trial. The findings included labial adhesions and hymenal scarring of the sort present in avery small percentage of non-sexually abused children.

Ms. Rabinowitz’s article is a superficial, one-sided look at a case handled extensively and carefully by the legal system. The victims and their families in these cases have been irrevocably harmed by what was done to them by the Amiraults. Every argument raised by Ms. Rabinowitz was ably presented by the defense at the trials. The juries, by their verdicts, rejected these arguments. Justice was done.

see for actual case evidence

“All nine children testified in a broadly consistent way…The children testified to numerous instances of sexual abuse. Some of the children testified that they were photographed during this abuse, describing a big camera with wires, a red button, and pictures which came out of the camera. The children testified that the defendant threatened them and told them that their families would be harmed if they told anyone about the abuse….The Commonwealth also presented a pediatric gynecologist and pediatrician who examined five of the girls who testified…She made findings consistent with abuse in four of the girls.”

Amirault’s accusers reveal their faces, and their pain Boston Herald - Boston, Mass. - Peter Gelzinis - Aug 7, 2001

Mass. Victims Fight Commutation Plea By Leslie Miller, Associated Press Writer


CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (AP) - Victims in the Fells Acres child abuse case broke down Thursday as they described their pain publicly for the first time in hopes of keeping the last person convicted in the case behind bars. Victims urged her to keep Amirault in prison. “During counseling meetings as a child, I would speak of a tall man touching me and taking pictures of me,” Phaedra Hopkins, 20, said at an emotional news conference. “So many times, Mr. Amirault hovered over me, touched me and hurt me and committed many disgusting acts of abuse.” Those children, now adults, stood by their testimony Thursday.

“This family raped me, molested me and totally ruined my life,’’said Jennifer Bennett, who was 3 1/2 years old when she started at Fells Acres. “We weren’t coaxed. We weren’t lying. We’re telling the truth and we always will,” said Bennett, 22. “I was there. None of you were there. We weren’t coaxed, nor were we ever ever ever brainwashed.”Brian Martinello, 21, said he was sexually abused by Amirault. His mother, Barbara Standke, claims her son came home from the day care with sores on his genitals and other people’s underwear. “I think it’s an absolute disgrace to let anyone out of prison for such a disgusting crime,” Martinello said.

7:38 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ummm no there are not, this blog is about why i think the west memphis 3 are guilty , nothing to do with your statistics, remove them or i will report them

post your crap somewhere else,

7:39 PM  
Anonymous smartnews said...

Paul Ingram - Thurston County Washington Case

Seattle Post-Intelligencer - June 8, 1996 - News, Pg. B1 - Son of Deputy Says He Was Sexually Abused ; Dramatic Report in Testimony to Clemency Panel -: Rachel Zimmerman P-I Capitol Bureau - Olympia


The son of Paul Ingram, a former Thurston County deputy sheriff who confessed to raping his daughters during nightmarish satanic rituals but later recanted, said for the first time yesterday that he was physically and sexually abused by his father for eight years. Chad Ingram, 27, told the state Pardons and Clemency Board that his father, who is serving 20 years in prison after pleading guilty to six counts of third-degree rape - crimes he now says never happened - said he was abused by his father from ages 4 to 12. “He would put himself on top of me and I would perform oral sex on him,” Chad Ingram said.

Thurston County Sheriff Gary Edwards, though the case never went to trial, it was subject to intense judicial scrutiny, “all the way up to the Ninth Circuit.” Edwards added, “This case was not perfect but it had complete judicial review. “Paul Ingram did commit these crimes; he plead guilty to these crimes. I have no problem shaving in the morning. I can look myself in the mirror.”

The Facade of Scientific Documentation: A Case Study of Richard Ofshe’s Analysis of the Paul Ingram Case” by Karen Olio and William Cornell. APA’s journal “Psychology, Public Policy, and Law,” (1998, Vol. 4, No. 4, 1182-1197) “The case of Paul Ingram, a man who pleaded guilty to sexually abusing his daughters, has received widespread media attention. Richard Ofshe (1992, 1994) set forth a narrative of the case which included his account of an experiment to test the veracity of Ingram’s confessions and concluded that the inadvertent use of hypnosis during Ingram’s interrogation resulted in the creation of pseudomemories that convinced Ingram of his guilt. On the basis of an examination of the original source documents, the authors discusses the errors of fact, methodological flaws, and confounding factors in Ofshe’s rendering of this case of alleged child abuse. They also cite examples of the extent to which Ofshe’s imperfect narrative of this case and pseudoscientific conclusions have been uncritically accepted and repeated in the literature…”

Harvard Society for Law & Public Policy, Inc. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy - Spring, 1999 - 22 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y 523 The Guilty and the “Innocent”: an Examination of Alleged Cases of Wrongful Conviction from False Confessions by Paul G. Cassell -”According to the authors (Leo and Ofsche), in twenty-nine of these cases the false confession resulted in the wrongful conviction of an innocent person.” “examines nine of these twenty-nine cases in detail. Based on review of original trial court records and other similar sources, the part concludes that each of these nine persons were, in all likelihood, entirely guilty of the crimes charged against them.”"Leo and Ofshe rely in large measure on secondary sources for the descriptions of the evidence against the defendants in their collection….For many cases, court records are available only in the local courthouses where the trial took place, while media accounts are often readily accessible in computerized databases. Relying on secondary sources, however, poses the risk of inaccurate recounting of the evidence. Examining primary sources for the cases in Leo and Ofshe’s collection reveals that this is a very real problem.” “The problems with the subjective determination of “innocence” in the Leo-Ofshe collection, like similar problems elsewhere, suggests that reliance on second-hand sources combined with understandable enthusiasm for the enterprise of discovering miscarriages may produce more such cases than really exist.” “Only a relative handful of Leo and Ofshe’s cases would satisfy the criterion of undisputed wrongful conviction.”

7:39 PM  
Anonymous smartnews said...

Wenatchee, Washington Case

information from articles :

At the trial, one girl showed “definite medical signs of sexual abuse” while “it could not be ruled out for two others.

In 1996, a consultant, retired Bellevue Police Chief D.P. Van Blaricom, hired by a city insurer who looked into how the Wenatchee police ran the child abuse investigations stated that the cases were handled properly. A U.S. Department of Justice investigation also found that there was no evidence of civil rights violations.

Cops Win Wash. State Sex Ring Case - June 29, 1998 - Aviva L. Brandt AP Online - Seattle “A jury on Monday rejected claims of police misconduct brought by four people who say they were falsely accused of child rape and molestation. After deliberating for more than five days, the King County Superior Court panel decided that the central Washington town of Wenatchee, the town’s police officials and three members of the Douglas County sheriff’s department did not violate the civil rights of the four, who said they were falsely accused in 1994-95. Douglas County Sheriff Dan LaRoche said the verdict allows police to keep investigating sex abuse and molestation cases without fear of lawsuits.

Debate Rages Over Wenatchee Sex-Ring Allegations - November 6, 1995- Aviva L. Brandt, Associated Press Writer - Wenatchee, Wash.


A line divides this town. On one side are those who believe dozens of children were raped and molested over seven years by adults in two loosely organized sex rings. On the other are those who assert a rogue cop and obsessed social workers created a whirlpool of sexual hysteria- coaxing children into accusations and bullying bewildered, poorly educated adults into confessions. Gov. Mike Lowry, petitioned by critics who believe the case is a witch hunt, has asked for a Justice Department review and is awaiting a decision from U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno. Authorities say as many as 50 children were forced to have sex with adults since 1988 - sometimes alone, sometimes in groups. In the last year, 28 adults have been charged with child rape and sexual abuse. Five have been convicted, 10 have pleaded guilty.

“Every female victim had physical evidence of sexual abuse and the majority of the males did,” Smith said. “Clearly it’s pretty good evidence to show that this is occurring.”

Douglas County Prosecutor Steve Clem sounded frustrated when asked about allegations that his office hasn’t bothered to look for the truth. “The defense attorneys are using what I’m sure … some day in the future will be called the O.J. defense, where they sling mud, make wild accusations and see conspiracies all around them,” he said.” There’s physical evidence consistent with the stories they (the children) tell. There’s more than one person talking about the very same things going on,” said Tim Abbey, a regional supervisor with the state Child Protective Services. “And there are a lot of confessions, and many times they’re confessing to more than the kids said happened.”

7:40 PM  
Anonymous smartnews said...

I disagree. The statistics are important as the attempt to overturn the convictions has been repeated several times by organizations and others defending pedophiles. The trend is clear. There is a cover up of child rape crimes occuring.

7:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

listen you stupid A hole, go put your stats on a relevant blog or site or whatever, these 3 have not been charged with rape or sexual abuse to a girl or any anyone else at this point, you havnt read one thing on this case, so the bullshit your putting on here is irrelevant remove it or i will report your site to the usa authorities for spam abuse, and to your server, remove your stats .............

7:55 PM  
Anonymous smartnews said...

stop harassing and attacking others

BTW, it is impossible for anyone to remove the information from this site.

And perhaps your posts should be removed for swearing, threatening and attacking others.

8:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

listen you A Hole, i havnt attacked anyone i posted a letter i sent to the supporters of the wm3.. take your freaky little stats and post about sexual abuse items somewhere relevant

8:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Q: Who the fuck would support a proven mental patient that cuts off little kids dicks???

A: American Liberals.

Congratulations on the new president America! now go google 'Obama', Bill Ayers and 'Weathermen'.

You stupid cunts.

10:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Congratulations on being a crude, illiterate, clueless moron. It really helps your case. Really. I've listened to everything you said because you stated it in such a clear, concise, and totally unsophomoric manner.

9:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Im sorry but Aussie-Diva is welcome to have her own opinion but shouldnt ever generalise and assume that Australia agrees with her views...because i've got news, WE DON'T.
It has been years since i first watched the documentaries on the WM3 and i can tell you what i still believe the three are innocent...

I wonder what the writer of this page's oppinion is on how now both a mother of the victim and Christopher Byers step-father have changed their viewpoint and now seek for the release of the WM3...

10:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ummm this site is 'WHY I THINK THE WM3 ARE GUILTY" and yeah everyone is entitled to their opinion and if you think the doco isnt a litle one sided since they are going to make a shit load of money out of it by being controversial then ur welcome to think that, and were you get the idea anyone said all ozzies think they are guilty well again, learn to read!

11:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why do you keep posting this shit? (smartnews) Anyway, I was once an outraged supporter until I actually started reading the REAL court transcripts,documents,etc. As for Jesse Miskelleys confession,the First time I thought "that sounds fishy" the SECOND time he confessed that was it.I didn't even need to read his THIRD confession after that.

So you supporters say Jesse is retarded and made it up,blah blah

Jesse is NOT retarded.Period. His three confessions were over a one year period and he never strays from the facts. Yea in the 1st he doesn't seem to know the time of day,that bothered me. After listening more and the other 2 confessions,I would bet 100 bucks that Jesse does not even know what time "noon" is.

Not to get off track but it reminded me of the Haleigh Cummings 911 call when the operator asked Misty Croslin "What is your numeric address?" Misty's response was "What is numeric?" Shes not retarded,maybe a little slow.

And if he really was retarded,how can he remember details of the case if he was not there.Over the course of his confessions you can see how he pretty much sticks to the same story. I dont think a retard would have such a good memory from information he was just told by police. They are guily as fuck and I only thank God I didn't donate to the cause of releasing these sick fucking animals! WM3 ROT YOU SCUMFUCK!

3:12 PM  
Anonymous smartnews said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

6:30 PM  
Blogger The Bookhouse Boy said...

Sorry everyone, but I'm tired of getting spam emails from this thread. I'm closing up comments on this long dead blog. Thanks for reading!

Jordan Harper

6:44 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home