West Memphis Three: Damien Echols Jessie Miskelley and Jason Baldwin Released
Jonesboro, AR- In a statement released Thursday, new judge David N. Laser announced an unscheduled hearing in the case of The West Memphis Three.
Damien Echols, Charles “Jason” Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley have been incarcerated for 18 years for the murders of Stevie Branch, Michael Moore, and Chris Byers.
Speaking on the condition of anonymity to www.blinkoncrime.com, a source connected to the West Memphis Police Department has confirmed that Damien Echols and Jason Baldwin have already been released from the Arkansas Department of Corrections; Misskelley has not.
Echols, Baldwin and Misskelley, along with their families, and the families of the victims, are expected to attend today’s hearing.
Check back to www.blinkoncrime.com for this developing story.
Related Posts
Related Posts:
453 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Also… Steve Jones and Jerry Driver singled out Damien because they considered him suspicious. When a murder happens, you tell the police who you consider supsicious and/or capable of committing such a crime. It was their duty as Damien’s probation officers, as citizens, and as human beings. Read the Exhibit 500 on Damien’s mental health (or lack thereof, more like it) and the levels of violence he exhibited. Read it (or re-read it, if you’ve read it already), and tell me that, if you’d been in their place, you wouldn’t talk to the police about this guy. Seriously?
Lucy, you are making very strong points, and btw welcome to BOC.
I would just like to say very respectfully, my “house” is pretty strict in the “address the post not the poster” philosophy, with which you definitely have “chops.”
Your new, and I know you would not be aware, so I mention it, because I think you would appreciate that heads up. You know your stuff, from your perspective, absolutely.
Critical thinkers at work, can only ever result in a positive charge, imo.
B
things i remember from hurricanes,: our neighborhood was covered with ripped and torn shingles ,off of roofs ,we could hear them tearing off and see them flying around outside,the next days we picked up shingles.when your power goes off ,being reserved about how often you open the refridge,saves the coldness ,longer.stay safe,everyone .can you hear it howling, yet?
Blink as always is giving of herself. Looking out for the elderly neighbors across the street as well as her own family in this storm environment.
Get well Blink and be safe. We can wait for the other installment of this case.
Mom3.0
This time we will agree to disagree regarding the possible perps in this crime. You, as always, make some very valid points. Your generation is often much more lenient regarding behavior of young people than mine.
You have to remember that I spent eight years beginning in 2000 teaching music in middle school and high school. I was able to observe on a daily basis how some chose not to conform in dress as well as general behavior. Did that make them bad people or potentially bad people? Not necessarily. However, there were a number of them that were so mentally handicapped, that they could not survive without a great amount of help.
The three convicted in this case were plagued by mental issues of one type or another. Damien was on meds that could change his behavior. The range of behaviors according to the PDR is from lethargy to intense activity to intense anger. In addition, this was a med that had a warning about alcohol and its effect.
All of them did not finish high school although Damien did read all sorts of literature. He probably was the most educated of the lot. Was his thinking normal? In my opinion, not at all.
It isn’t necessarily the actual music of Metallica, it is some of the lyrics and the presentation that bothers me. You will have to accept that I am a classical musician who happens to like a wide genera of other music. Even the beatles, whom I thought were terrible musicans, could write songs that when properly arranged were beautiful and catchy.
I do agree with you about the investigation and the handling of the crime scene and the original court cases. The whole thing was just a mess. We have to ask ourselves how many times had these dectives worked a murder case of this type? The probable correct answer is never.
ATG-
Your sentiment is so appreciated it is almost whimsical- I can picture the details of your experience, and for that I say bravo. You have a gift that makes a reader sit up straight without sounding preachy good sir, that is rare.
It is not everyday a classically trained musician thinks the Beatles sucked, for the most part, LOL.
I may be punchy from not feeling fab, or antsy due to the impending hurticane, but that line was hilarious.
My neighbors are the kindest, most concerned and giving couple, ever. They are well into their 80′s and last year when Mr. Blink was traveling and I had to shovel our driveway on my own ( it is a big ass driveway which we replaced last year so we cannot use the snowblower- who the hell thought THAT was a good idea, but anyway..) I called Mrs. Neighbor and asked if Mr. Neighbor would like me to spruce theirs up ( he had used his snowblower earlier, but it drifted shut.). She said, o my dear, Mr. Neighbor was watching you out the front window for the last hour, he said, that girl knows how to shovel a driveway properly.
So no, he would never allow you to do that, it’s a man thing, lol.
They also have the best last name- E V E R .
Now on topic- LE made mistakes, the prosecutor made mistakes, yes.
Do I think they were egregious enough to change the outcome? No.
Many seem to forget, there is evidence in this case tying these three to this crime, and their is partial DNA profiles that do NOT exclude them. Part of the issue was the testing technology.
B
Dear Blink,
OT, but please remind friends and neighbors using generators during this hurricane, not to place them INSIDE their homes, closed garages, near open doors or outside an open window where fumes can enter the house.
I know this “safety tip” is obvious to most, but some may not be aware of the danger if they have never used a generator. In my area of the country we are very familiar with hurricanes and generators. But people still die because they do not know how to properly use them.Most people when purchasing a generator are not thinking about “reading the manual” when a hurricane is on the way, lol.
Also some people are scared the generator may be stolen, but trust me when I say, because a generator is so loud, you WILL know when it suddenly turns off…Also, find an electrician to hook it up to your house!
Anyway, stay safe and prayers to those in the path of this storm.
Great idea cartfly, thanks!
B
I think Mom3.0 hit on an important issue.
How much the celebrities knew about the case is a good question to ask. A person hears the word ‘injustice’ and for reasons of their own, they choose to jump on the band wagon. But let’s face it, celebrity involvement can impact/influence the masses. I wouldn’t go as far as saying it’s what got them out of jail. That’s pretty much been covered by Blink.
Personally, I think Natalie Maines did this for PR reasons. Ever since her public comment about President Bush, she has been shunned by the music community as well as fans and grassroots alike. I wouldn’t bet my life on it, but it wouldn’t surprise me either that jumping into a cause she thought was an obvious miscarriage of justice wouldn’t exactly hurt her image. Admitting she doesn’t know the facts weakens her status as an advocate. JMHO
I agree wrt Pasdar. The other sisters are in the studio recording without her; I have a friend in the nashville scene. It is a shame, I think she is very, very talented.
It is my belief that celebrities DO bear a burden higher than private citizens in their PUBLIC opinions. I also think it is a balance as parents and people to point out to our children that rock stars’s opinions if considered because of their celebrity, should NOT be a factor in forming one’s own thoughts. Case in point- I doubt I am getting any Christmas or Chanukah cards from any of the WM3 sponsors, and I did what was asked of me.
I am also what I will call old school in my political beliefs as they relate to criticism of our president.
I DO NOT want to have a political discussion on this, I am simply stating my “creedo” in this regard, which I freely acknowledge is not always shared by folks I love and respect.
The day the President of this great country I love, that my Poppa and my Daddy served, takes office, whether I supported them with my vote or not, deserves my respect for their office. It is just my thing.
The Clinton era was rough, admittedly.
B
PS….everyone who’s affected by the hurricane’s path, be safe! I have y’all in my prayers <3 <3 <3
While the Step father Byers seems to be big, loud and ready to explode, he has also shown deep emotion for his family and if anybody lost a child to a murder like that I think it`s perfectly human to display hatred and anger towards the perpetrators.
From what I have read so far there is only circumstancial evidence against the West Memphis 3, Miskelley confessions aside…
There was never enough evidence to convict these people beyond a reasonable doubt and certainly not enough to sentence someone to death.
Damien Echols had the mentality to do terrible things and seems to have the ability to manipulate, is very articulate and terrifyingly reminds me of Ted Bundy. I have a feeling he is a homosexual and probably suffered violent sexual abuse at a young age. He will in all probability kill again.
Al-
Hello.
I wasnt talking about Morgans love of Metallica specifically- I was talking about some misinformed peoples opinions regarding Morgans taste in music and her concert attire that night ect. ect, I was talking about the basis for which many came up with their own scenarios of what could have happened to Morgan and why.-
Al- you must have missed this whole articleof Blinks, which she wrote covering some peoples warped opinions on Morgan and her murder:
http://blinkoncrime.com/2010/03/30/morgan-harrington-murder-protest-group-to-preach-hate-at-virginia-tech/
This Church said that Morgan’s killer was sent by God and that (pp)
she was probably a devil worshiper because she was wearing all black, that it is true because at least one of the bands that night were satanists, and there was an “altar” being built because there were rocks ect on the bridge where she was last seen, along with alot of other disgusting lies.
Thankfully they did not “protest” but even so, their words and beliefs hurt the Harringtons, and some seemed to agree with the churchs stance-at least in part.
In addition to this Church Al- I have myself ran into countless misinformed people who questioned Morgan Harringtons beliefs and her character based upon her going to the concert & her attire-not only Metallica but most of the bands she was into,. Pantera- ect. Many of Morgans supporters even questioned the bands and types of music she listened to as satanic and demented.
Al, I never said a persons beliefs should not be a factor-what I said was -they were definitely a factor in this triple murder investigation-a major part of the investigation and compiling of the evidence, along with clothing and books and taste in music ect.
Al- I appreciate you taking the time to post your feelings, hope I better clarified my points.
Lucy- me again… IRT the mishandling and the mistakes not seriously undermining the case, and thereby a new trial, I disagree. Heck the evidence Blink has brought to light the bag, and the POSSIBLE murder weopon if nothing else,IMO shoews LE did not do their jobs thoroughly.
Why would Veder and Depp and so many others fund the defense, and DNA testing and the like, if they did not wish to have another trial? This time- a trial- in which they could present the evidence they believe proves the 3′s innocence? That makes no sense. Of course they celebrated the 3′s release Lucy- they believe rightly or wrongly that the 3 are innocent- and were kept in prison for 18 years based on faulty police work and hearsay ect.
As for WM3 supporters- it is my understanding, that many feel this plea is not justice- and they too wish ALL the evidence and lack thereof- ect was presented in a new trial- As it is now, there will always be doubts over guilt or innocence- and whether there was a rush to judgment or whether or not the right perps were apprehended.
Lucy, you wrote in part:
“However, Vedder and Maines were obviously not interested in another trial and determining the truth. For them, the trial was just a necessary evil to get the WM3 out of prison”
Again, You do not know what Veder or any one else was interested in…nor do you know if they looked upon the trial as a necessary evil.
In my younger days Lucy I might have answered your post with a quote from an Anthrax song “talking to you is like clapping with one hand” but since I am not- I will say we will have to agree to disagree.
As always all Just my opinion.
I appreciate your willingness to share your thoughts and opinions Lucy, and even though I disagree, I hope you will continue to speak up. without debate how will we ever get to the truth?
Peace
To all of you in the storms path just a quick note to let you know that I have you in my thoughts and prayers, after watching the coverage on this storm tonite I’d say it’s safe to say the whole country has you in their thoughts and prayers as well.
FWIW, as of right now I still am not convinced that the WM3 are guilty of this crime, having said that though I will add that I am open to evidence that would prove them guilty and am still trying to find more information while I wait for this storm to pass and Blink to get her 2nd part on her blog.
Mom have you read Stidman’s synopsis? I have said before it’s hard to tell who’s “truth” is really THE truth and I wonder if you are having the same trouble trying to figure that out as well!
“he is also the one that went to Damiens home with another officer and conducted that questionnaire- and asked about the cult and why Damien felt someone would do this ect ect- all without Damiens parents in the room”
Damien was over 18.
“BTW I disagree with others that say that these murders had to be committed by 3 people not one- any number of people could have killed these 3 little boys including just one”
Yeah, I agree, it’s certainly possible. But I do think it’d be somewhat risky, one could’ve gotten away and alerted someone. And I think the scene would likely have been messier. Also, there were 3 different types of knots used, which supports the theory of (at least) 3 killers. Although it’s not conclusive, of course.
DeeJaye,
Misskelley’s IQ is normal. Low, but normal. Even if we take that oft-cited test result as gospel, he’s still within the normal range. And there are very strong indications his IQ is actually higher than that test result – before the test he was told the result being lower could be extremely important for his fate. A high malingering index was reported, meaning he very likely was indeed deliberately trying to make his score lower. Not to mention that Misskelley was someone who lived a normal life, moved about completely independently, worked, hung out with his peers (some of which he considered to be “dumb”), juggled girlfriends, enjoyed getting drunk, high and laid.
He’s capable of relating a narrative, corrects people quickly and on various occasions, recognises and uses sarcasm, uses metaphors and comparisons successfully, quickly and effortlessly. He’s also got either a perfectly decent memory or a relatively vivid imagination. Even people who believe he was being coached have to admit that would mean he memorized all that info very well. And those who believe he pulled it out of thin air, have to admit that would mean he has not only a relatively vivid imagination but also the capability to quickly put it into words. Neither option fits in with him having a mental retardation.
Anyway, people should check out his “Bible confession”. http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/img2/jm_2_8_94_statement.html
Or look at him interacting with his family. I’m not a professional, but I’ve worked with people with special needs as a volunteer for many years now. The difference between even the high-functioning ones among them and Misskelley is stark.
In PL 2, I watched Stidham tell him in his cell, that his test results were directly related to him be tried as a juvenile. There is NO question that result was necessary.
B
Love the Clinton comment, B.
By the way, have you ever considered doing a tv series or documentaries after the fact re: cases you cover? (Or have you been approached by anyone?) I know you like to keep your identity somewhat private, but possibly you wouldn’t have to actually appear?
Funny you should ask..
I am not prepared to make an announcement, but we are kibbitzing, and by me choosing that term, you can deduct the serious
B
“Heck the evidence Blink has brought to light the bag, and the POSSIBLE murder weopon if nothing else,IMO shoews LE did not do their jobs thoroughly”
I never said they did as thorough a job as they should have. I said I believe that, despite that, there was enough to convince the WM3. Having the plastic bag and the (possible) weapon as evidence would’ve been beyond wonderful. But, IMO (now remember what you kept saying about opinions), even without it, they had enough.
“Why would Veder and Depp and so many others fund the defense, and DNA testing and the like, if they did not wish to have another trial?”
I told you this already. Because they viewed the trial as a means to an end. It was never about the trial and about re-examining the facts. They just thought a trial would be a necessary step on the way to freedom. Now with this shady deal, it wasn’t. And just as I always suspected, they don’t give a damn.
“Of course they celebrated the 3′s release Lucy- they believe rightly or wrongly that the 3 are innocent- and were kept in prison for 18 years based on faulty police work and hearsay”
If Vedder has truly studied the case thouroughly (I won’t even mention Maines, because she’s a joke; or Rollins, because he’s always been a poseurish prat), he must be aware that: 1. there is plenty of circumstantial evidence to suggest the 3 are guilty 2. Damien is a dangerous, deranged, violent asshole, even if (purely hypothetically speaking) he didn’t commit the crime 3. There is NO exculpatory evidence. None. 4. The WM3 have lied repeatedly throughout the last 18 years, from their sham alibis to what they had for breakfast. Echols barely ever tells the truth; and it’s all there – in the transcripts, on camera (PL 1, PL 2, Larry King, every other interview he’s done), in his silly book, etc etc. – for all to see.
If Vedder simply thought they’re innocent, I’d simply think he’s extremely naive. But Vedder not only thinks that, but is ready to completely overlook facts 1-4 and embrace these violent, lying assholes as his friends. Speaks volumes about Vedder. Come to think of it, the fact that he didn’t have a problem with Maines not educating herself about the case whatsoever (assuming he’s educated himself on it, ofc) speaks volumes too. They worked on this propaganda alongside each other, and he was happy to let her use her money and influence without making an informed decision, based purely on a documentary that he (again, if he is indeed that familiar with the case himself) must’ve known is heavily edited and biased.
“In my younger days Lucy I might have answered your post with a quote from an Anthrax song “talking to you is like clapping with one hand” but since I am not- I will say we will have to agree to disagree.
As always all Just my opinion.
I appreciate your willingness to share your thoughts and opinions Lucy, and even though I disagree, I hope you will continue to speak up. without debate how will we ever get to the truth?”
I appreciate the debate too. Well, your first sentence here makes me laugh, and I think you should either say what what you want to say without that corny old opening line, or just not say it at all. But still, this has so far been a much more mature debate than most I see online about the WM3.
re Lucy says:
August 26, 2011 at 4:32 pm
Lucy- where ever & whomever you got that info from is over generalizing.
How can you say that Damien beliefs, satanism and the mistaken belief/evidence that these were ritualistic killings ect were not presented as evidence no9r used to single damien out, at the same time you bring proof that it was in fact a MAJOR part of the case/trial?
Just because there was several people that came forward to talk about animal sacrifices-(no proof hear say) and witch gatherings(no proof hearsay) and orgies and chanting and fires ect(no proof hearsay) and “satanic” graffiti( just your typical cover-art symbols and names- from bands like Slayer and Motley Crue and Black Sabbath and Testament ect ect-) and damiens proposed possibly “satanic” writings-
(song lyrics from Metallica and Pink Floyd ect ect and excerpts from Shakespeare ect)
http://www.callahan.8k.com/wm3/dereport.html
along with Damiens library history of checking out books on witch trials and the occult ect) does NOT mean that he was a practicing anything- let alone a possible murderer.
It is true that Damien had a juvenile record- all of the offenses were directly related to his first love- as was his “fight” as was his suicide attempt and his subsequent admission to a care facility and his probabtion. It is true that Damien made threats- but is also true that he never carried out these threats. Except in the instance of- Shane D. a boy who he believed stole away his first love, Deanna. It is not true however that this “fight” showed extreme anything except for stupidity and lack of coping skills- and I might add Shane D. himself was a “dabbler” in wicca ect- but ofcourse his “dabbling” knowledge was used to prove damien was in a “cult” and that bisexual behavior was concerned part of Satanic rituals- and I might add that Shane D- also stated that Damien and his followers were really no different then those that took his side in the turmoil and if dammien was such a bad azz then why did he not go ahead with his threats ect? instead he went to class when the bell rang like a good little boy.
http://www.callahan.8k.com/wm3/shadi.html
Damien was on meds true- he had issues true- he was a dabbler true- but none of this is proof of his involvement in these murders.
It is true that Damien was compared to Ted Bundy ect- but it is also true that Ted Bundy didnt willingly or unwillingly go for mental health treatment, nor was he on meds or probation… that is until after the murders.
It is true Damien considered himself a Wiccan- but it is also the truth that none of this means anything -it was all just foder for rumor and fear and hate.
For every “expert” that is sited there can be found another expert that holds just as valuable a countering evaluation/opinion.
I am not sure what the point of that post was Lucy, as it IMO seemed to only underscore the points I have been trying to make.
AJMO
*oops, my 2nd sentence should’ve said “enough evidence to CONVICT the WM3″, not “convince”
cbickel- hey thanks for offering your response to my research regarding the rebar ect. to answer your question- yes, i am having trouble wading through the info ect in this case. That callahan site is awesome but not user friendly as Blink stated. i am not sure if i read the Stidman stuff or not LOL- do you have a link?
Thanks for sharing your thoughts ragdoll.
IRT to the 3 different knots- First I am not positive if there were 3 difeffernt knots- some say 2…but regardless as horrible as it is to think about , it could also point to the murderer having had the “free” boys tie one another before the actual murders occured.
I too have personal experience with working with children with special needs, as BLink knows from my participation in the Caylee threads… infact it was the focus of more than one of the courses I took in college as well as some of my first work in the educational system. Any parent with a child with special needs knows that testing is not a foolproof finding- just ask anyone that has been subjected to varying diagnoses as well as trying to obtain SSI ect- opinions are like _ everyone has one- that why we all get second and third opinions when visiting our doctors.
AJMO
JMO
Agreed Mom 3.o, and I absolutely defer to your expertise in the area-
With the exception that-
Would you agree, that absent an earlier finding of “special needs or learning challenges” it becomes suspect that a 16 year old accused of a crime, whose atty tells him his future is riding on a different adjudication, comes up with a result like that with a high degree of malingering?
B
I found this site a few day’s ago: http://www.jivepuppi.com/court_filing_10_07.html
It IS a pro-defense related site, but there is still a lot of good info on it….maps of the neighborhood,.. etc.
There is also a lot of info on what the defenses argument is if you scroll down a bit on the homepage. Most interesting to me was the section on “New Forensic Evidence”
Lucy-
I know you will understand, that I am NOT going to post anything remotely critical or hostile of another poster. I have read your posts with great interest, and frankly, great respect because your research clearly supports your perspective.
That said, it is my rules here, that we do that respectfully to each other, you can note that some of my longest readers and contributors may not even agree with me- true advocacy does not allow us to make it about “us.” This case is as passionate and evoking as any I have ever covered, and I get that.
It is my way to protect the critical thinking savant’s here in their advocacy.
Y’all can caterwall into the sunset about different per view, I welcome that, I simply ask that we do not go after each other in a personal way.
Thank you for being open-
B
“a major part of the investigation and compiling of the evidence, along with clothing and books and taste in music ect.”
Mom, I think it’s clear why compiling and studying a suspects books (and writings) is a perfectly justified, natural course of action. They can tell you a lot about a suspect’s personality and state of mind. Is there potential for misinterpretation, prejudice, to play a part in deciding which of this stuff is significant, indicative and/or suspicious. Sure, there is. What do you suggest we do about it? Not pay any attention to suspects’ psyches and personalities, just out of prevention?
As for the compiling of clothes, I’ve seen supporters claim all of WM3′s black clothes was seized purely because it was black and indicative of them being satanists/metalheads/Stephen King fans/what have you. In fact, seizing all their black clothes was just part of the search warrant for the search of their homes conducted with the intention of comparing fibers to what was found at the scene. The search warrant also included fibers of other colors, as well as paint, plastic, and wax of different colors.
Stepping in here, ahead of my coverage in this case-
1. There are NUMEROUS items of clothing belonging to Echols that went missing after the murders- they are at least 1 if not 3 black trenchcoats enter alia, at least one leather bracelet, but likely 2, a studded belt he was known to wear, not seen on him post May 5, 1993.
The candle wax, as we will discuss, is a match.
This is like the quintessential jury discussion, abbreviated, like the CSI effect- at what point do we consider the totality of circumstantial evidence vs. the inculpatory, and the absence of a reasonable and substantive alternative, resulting in the exclusion of reasonable doubt.
B
B
Excuse me, Blink, but I’m honestly not sure what you’re referring to?
Is it this sentence?
“Well, your first sentence here makes me laugh, and I think you should either say what what you want to say without that corny old opening line, or just not say it at all”
If so, that was in response to Mom3.0 saying: “In my younger days Lucy I might have answered your post with a quote from an Anthrax song “talking to you is like clapping with one hand” but since I am not- I will say we will have to agree to disagree”, which I thought was no big deal, but still a bit unwarranted. I don’t see how I overstepped any line here or anywhere else. Or made this about “us” and “them”.
If, on the other hand, you’rereferring to my saying the debate btwn Mom and I has been more mature than most I’ve seen about this case, that was in now way an attempt to make this about “us” and “them”. I was merely stating facts – people tend to feel strongly about this case, and there’s a lot of ugliness in discussions about it.
Ok, you know what, I stand corrected. I am ok with admitting that I may occasionally overstep in an abundance of caution in such a passionate issue.
Carry On.
B
Thank you, Blink, much appreciated. I was a bit confused over what specifically you were referring to, but I fully understand why you’re careful =) I agree that it’s important to be cautious in discussions, especially delicate ones like this one.
Blink I have been NOTHING but respectful of Lucy and her opinions infact I have went over and beyond in keeping it civil and not personal-
I have no idea what Lucy wrote- but judging from her passionate posts I can only imagine-
The quote from Anthrax was not a slight- it was an excerpt from a song that deals with people arguing- and talking in circles and not being open to others thoughts- never being swayed in their opinions regardless – a song basically saying – agree to disagree..
Blink, you want to know what I find funny? The fact that I am not advocating for one side or the other in this case- I do not know whether or not these men are guilty- what I do know is that I seem to be one of the few that is willing to play devils advocate- pardon the pun-
I am finding the position I am in to be very uncomfortable- I would much rather be on the popular side, your side Blink – but right now I havent been able to find my way to that port.
I do not understand why a difference in opinions, which is backed up with facts should be cause for personal attacks or for anyone to be critical of any poster directly.
Or why you seem to be apologetic in your long held rules…perhaps I am being over sensitive- if so I apoligize
AJMO
I have decided you and Lucy are fraternal twins, lol.
I am cracking up right now, because the problem is/was- me.
I share your discomfort, albeit based on a discomfort.
Carry On
B
Okay Blink – disregard last comment- i appreciate you being overly cautious and having read lucy’s comment – i can now see why you were being apologetic in protecting a dissenting opinion- You had me worried there for a minute Blink- i thought- oh man Blink is finally fed up with my mouth and is apologizing for her rules that protect us all, especially me- more times than i can remember LOL
Phew- major misunderstanding.
Luv ya- and your rules.
LOL.
B
Blink you asked:
Would you agree, that absent an earlier finding of “special needs or learning challenges” it becomes suspect that a 16 year old accused of a crime, whose atty tells him his future is riding on a different adjudication, comes up with a result like that with a high degree of malingering?
B
—
Blink yes I would agree- and I find alot of the shenanigans of the defense susoect- as do i find those of the prosecution and the witnesses and family members of defendants and LE ect suspect.
It is very hard to sort through the BS that surrounds this case to get to the truth of what happened- and I am not only talking about the murders but the coverage of this case, and the trial and investigation ect.
Truth is I do not know what I believe- but right now- I am only offering other possible answers in opposition to those that would equal guilt- or in this case- Misskelly faking his testing.
So yes I do agree his testing and its findings are questionable- but I also agree that his confession should have never carried the weight that it did- in his nor the others trials. JMO
The first confession I completely agree as to it being, floabt, it’s case in chief. I do believe, based on the confession post conviction, that both confessions are valid and supported by the evidence.
On the issue of his inability to give a confession, provided we agree he is not mentally challenged, don’t we then have to agree it cannot be disregarded?
B
Mom3.0., most of that post consists of quotes, including the prosecutor’s closing argument. So let’s just ignore the poster’s commentary and focus on what was said at the trial. The point the prosecutor’s making is that the satanic stuff and Damien’s beliefs were talked about not to provoke a “moral panic” in the jury, but to help establish Damien’s character. Nobody argued that Damien was a genuine Satanist, but it is obvious that amish-mash of different elements of Satanism played an important part in his psyche and behaviour at the time. Damien said so himself. Nobody’s saying his interpretation of Satanism is accurate, and nobody’s trying to prove that. He’s taking bits and pieces and interpreting them in his own way and overimposing them on his psychological issues and delusions.
Damien’s strange, suspicious and worrying comments and actions happened to have a Satanic bent, but it was not the “Satanic” part that was the point. It was the “strange, worrying, and suspicious” part that was the point.Those comments and actions would’ve been mentioned regardless of whether they had a Satanic angle to them. He just happened to exhibit his worrying, suspicious strangeness through comments with a Satanic flavor. I personally think that’s unfortunate, and wish he’d exhibited his psychological issues through some other sort of fascination, because everyone gets skeptical when they hear the word “Satanic”. But there was just NO way around mentioning the Satanist-influenced stuff when talking about Damien Echols. He simply talked about it so much. It was a huge part of who he was at the time. One look at his medical history will corroborate that.
His medical history was a huge part of this too. It couldn’t be brought up in court. Exhibit 500 is huge in its meaning, when analyzing this case. It provides enormous insight into Echols, and the prosecution had to somehow make sure the jury gets a feeling of what Echols was all about, and let them know he was not just some run-of-the-mill neighborhood kid. (Though he also made that somewhat obvious with his callous and bizarre behavior during trial.) Anyway, this demanded lots of establishing of his character. The Satanic stuff was character evidence, not Satanic Panic. As the prosecutor’s closing argument above shows, the prosecution went out of their way to make it very clear that Satanism was not the underlying cause of anything here. It was just that Damien’s deranged behavior was packaged in bits and pieces of it.
wow. Every time I hit refresh there was more to read! Please don’t stop! Keep em coming!!!
I agree IRT the first confession-
I am not at the point where I can agree with you regarding his other confessions- I do not know whether or not he had inside knowledge or if he was aware of info because of rumors or LE’s leading questioning or info from his trials ect- I just dont know Blink-
As much as it pains me to say this I still am not sure if Misskelly is boderline mentally challenged or not. Although I do agree that the findings are suspect. He was tested earlier once in ’83 and then again for social security benefits IIRC and his range varied from in the upper 60′s to 74 then 88…
I do not know if his later confessions should be disregarded Blink- unfortunately they are suspect in my eyes too…
But I am willing to acknowledge that I could be wrong – and I am looking to be swayed. Hope that counts for something
AJMO
Mom 3.0- ADVOCACY counts for everything in my book, whether you are swayed or not. I respect your standing your ground sans more compelling info.
I cannot remember if you watched the PL series, I and II, but if you have not, I re-watched II yesterday.
Miskelley is interviewed about his confession, and if I was not convinced already he was there, I was all over again.
He says people cant kill nobody and not leave no evidence, no fingerprints, I don’t care if your a genius or nothing like that, you just cant up and kill people like that and not leave nothing.
Not once does he say, I didn’t do it, I wasn’t there. We weren’t there.
Bothers me.
B
Blink
Thanks for the compliment. I am glad that I was able to give you a laugh. Feeling bad and being anxious about the storm is not a good combination. I think you will be far enough away from the bay that storm surge will not affect you. The heavy rain will probably flood the creeks and Delaware river.
Your research is much more than mine. However, when I began to look at the quality of work, pictures, crime scene security, how measuring devices were improperly used to show scale and size, I was certain that so many mistakes were made it would be difficult to prove who the perps were. The transcripts of the dectives work and the fact that they did not use tape or video 100 percent of the time is disturbing.
There is one thing that stands out in my mind. These little boys could have overpowered a man had there only been one. They were not strangers to the woods and the woods were small. Therefore, two should have been able to get away unless there were two or more perps.
When I say little boys, I mean they were small for their age.
Where were we in 1993 in regard to scientific analysis in respect to DNA? How well were the crime scene people trained in regards to what to look for and how to handle it when found? Probably not very well.
There were numerous mistakes made, but I dont think it was just on the part of LE, although the bulk of the responsibility lies there, I agree. I cringe when I read some of the transcripts and the less than artful way people were questioned and the missed opportunities of same. The lack of follow up on the ice axe comes to mind- speaking to some insiders I do not have permission to quote on the record, where flat out shocked.
They also believe emphatically, that our discovery of that oversight, is the reason Baldwin had his change of heart. You can imagine how I struggle with the irony of that. In 2011 we have come a long way in terms of DNA testing with degraded samples, but it is my understanding that the bulk of samples re-tested under today’s standards were largely attributable to the victims, or presented only partial findings, which technically are not usable as evidence. That said, I am certain that re-testing of some of those items would have been conducted by the state of Arkansas in the event of a new trial.
I also wish to say that although some serious evidence collection mistakes were made, I know it did not undermine the intention of LE on the scene. There was really no such thing as CST teams in that area, at that time.
B
“I have decided you and Lucy are fraternal twins, lol”
Ha, I was just thinking that!!
Ragdoll…
“I wouldn’t go as far as saying it’s what got them out of jail.”
I believe Sinofsky and Berlinger are the reason they’re out. It seems that before the Sinofsky, Berlinger and HBO involvement and all that came with it, Echols seemed to be pretty reconciled with his fate, whatever it was going to be. He wouldn’t have appealed a bazillion times, over almost 2 decades, if they hadn’t stepped in. Not sure what Baldwin would’ve done. I never quite know how to read him. Well, except for the evil and extremely violent part, of course. In any case, Sinofsky’s statement (or was it Berlinger?)that 5 min after meeting them S&B somehow just decided they were completely innocent makes me feel profoundly sick about about the whole affair.
I have to agree with Lucy here, and Ellington so much as confirmed this. REGARDLESS of how one feels about their innocence or guilt, money from “media” was also responsible for ultimately for Casey Anthony’s acquittal, and many of you are quite certain of her guilt.
Point is, as I discussed with Dana the other evening, checkbook journalism is a significant problem.
B
Lucy- I went back and read all of your comments- the ones that were still in moderation when the later ones, which I already addressed had been posted.
I dont want to leave you hanging-
You wrote:
Mom3.0, you repeat time after time that you don’t have to agree with my opinion, when I never asked you to do any such thing. I simply corrected the misinformation that their choices in music and clothing were significant factors. And if you can’t see the difference between the potential significance of listening to Metallica and the potential significance of idolizing Aleister Crowley in a case like this… Well, either you’re not very familiar with Crowley, or you’re being completely irrational. His fascination with Crowley was a perfectly legitimate angle of investigation/prosecution.—-
First, I spoke about you stating your opinions as fact- you corrected “misinformation based on your opinions not fact- and I was trying to be respectful of your right to your opinions at the same time underscoring the undeniable fact that they are MERELY your opinions which I said I do not agree with- My point was neither of our opinions equate to FACTS.
Lucy, You keep stating that their being metalheads; their choices in music and clothing and reading material ect were not significant in this case- at the same time you keep touting their music and hobbies and choice of beliefs (in WICCA not Satanism or Devil worshiping)- as relevant in this case-
ex- “And if you can’t see the difference between the potential significance of listening to Metallica and the potential significance of idolizing Aleister Crowley in a case like this… Well, either you’re not very familiar with Crowley, or you’re being completely irrational. His fascination with Crowley was a perfectly legitimate angle of investigation/prosecution.”
This whole debate started because you couldnt understand the relevance of my thoughts regarding tastes in music beliefs ect being an undeniable factor in this case.
I’m not sure, maybe I am misreading but you seem to be debating your own stances.
I am neither irrational nor am I unfamiliar with Metallica or Alister Crowley. Lucy, Damiens fascination with Alister Crowley is no more indicative of relevancy or legitimacy in this case, as his like of Stephen King ect was- Most people who like Metal make it a point to read up on Alister Crowley-, not because they are devil worshipers or murderers but because Ozzy Osbourne wrote a song about him, in which he questions him and his beliefs, and some would say even chastises him.
You went on:
“And to me, Vedder/Maines/Depp/Waits/Rollins/etc., have done a terrible thing. I honestly don’t see why you feel the need to ask me why. Because I am firmly convinced in Echols, Baldwin and Misskelley’s guilt, of course. And because I think they pose a danger to society, especially the first two. Since we disagree on that, I don’t see how you can’t understand it’s only logical for us to disagree about celebrity involvement in the case.”
Again you are entitled to your opinion- but so I am- so I do not see why you seem to take offense to my questioning why you believe what you do.. I understand that YOU are convinced of their guilt – but I and others are not- and clearly these celebrities believe they are innocent- what makes your opinion the be all end all Lucy? What makes you the holder of the right opinion?
It is logical that we disagree with celebrity involvement- not just in this case, but in any case- FTR, I have seen Blink speak openly and commend celebrities for their outspoken opinions on guilt and their advocacy in other cases- such as Morgans and Caylees. IMO any celebrity has the same rights as we do-although I agree that their thoughts may hold more weight- IMO they can say what they please to advocate in any way they see fit- even when I do not agree with their stances.
I would think Blink still feels the same, although she does caution that any advocate educate themselves on the facts and issues before speaking out.—
You later wrote:
He was the very definition of the type “satanist” who has traditionally committed violent crime – the psychotic, drug addled self-styled teen dabbler from a dysfunctional family who had issues of obtaining power over others.
Echols and his gas-huffing, anti-social, heavy metal “devil worshiper” pals did this crime – make no mistake about it.
They were out there in those woods stoned and drunk when the kids came by, they started bullying and humiliating them and in a frenzy, the brutality escalated into savage murder – just as Misskelley described, and just as the evidence clearly shows.
The simple fact is, There was no motive. They did it just to see what it was like, and they bragged about it to anyone who would listen.—–
Lucy IMO your bias is showing. “Echols and his gas-huffing, anti-social, heavy metal “devil worshiper” pals did this crime – make no mistake about it.”
Even if I agree that Echols fit the bill, so did others in that town- and none of them were singled out by their parole officers or LE.
The rest is YOUR opinion only- you do not know what the motive was any more than the prosecution did. Just because Misskelly gave a confession which basically lessened his own culpability and pointed to DE and JB doing most of the dirty deeds- does not make it a fact or evidence beyond a reasonable doubt- the same as his claim that they were drinking beer or smoking joints or that they ate dogs or had orgies or that a man with a brief case showed a pic of the victims and told DE to murder those innocent little boys, which BTW, would be a motive supplied by JM right?
The closing arguments prove that their attire was a major point in the trial Lucy – as Fogelman stated-(pp) look at them sitting over their looking like choir boys (not in black or concert shirts,ect) they look like typical kids- but we all know this is an act and they are not typical kids- they may not be satanists but…. they are capable of committing these terrible murders….
“This was offered as character evidence?” Seriously?
You wrote that Jones and Driver singled damien out because they were suspicious- So you finally agree that Damien was singled out & in their minds Damien stuck out like a sore thumb?
Why was Jones out in those woods acting as if he was part of the case?? Why was he so sure the murders were ritualistic in nature, when he only saw one little boy pulled from the water?- Why was he the only one that saw that little shoe iat the start? Why did he go and speak with Damien and conduct questioning? Excuse me if I am wrong, but isnt it a conflict of interest? and wasnt it wrong for him to step in was he a detective- an investigator, a trained CSI tech?? NO-and why didnt he testify at trial? He was at the scene He questioned damien- He talked to Misskelly- he or Driver saw all three together with long coats and “staffs” He was well aware of the supposed cult behavior and activity in the area- They were the first to single out Damien. Youre telling me that out of all the juvenile offenders and “cult” activity in the area- and with all of their “confidential informants/insiders” ect that these two covered- they didnt think anyone else was suspicious & it never crossed their mind that anyone other than damien was capable of these murders?
I did read the 500 pages Lucy – and I reread it- and it was full of contradicting assessments, evaluations, info ect.- as Blink herself pointed out- As I have stated numerous times before, my opinion is that Damien may have had issues- but he was willing to work on these issues he was getting help-he was on medication, and he never acted on his threats- and although I agree that he was suicidal at one time I do not see evidence of his homicidal tendencies. A threat given in the heat of the moment by a teenager crying out for help is not proof that they would ever carry out the threat, nor is it sure-fire evidence of their propensity to commit murder… the same as a suicide attempt may not be a “real” attempt or show evidence of actually wanting to die- but is instead a cry for help. Having a history of juvenile issues mental or criminal ect does not necessarily mean that you grow up to be a criminal or crazy murderer- that is one reason why juvenile records are sealed-
AJMO
Mom….here is the link
http://web.archive.org/web/20070718073440/http://www.wm3.org/live/caseintroduction/synopsis_dan.php
Blink I don’t think you oversteppeed anything, I think the tone of Lucy’s posts probably got your attention. She reminds me of how Lea Conners wrote as News-at-five. A little fiesty if you know what I mean. I think Mom see’s it for what it is and just gives it back is all.
The problem I have is the fact that this case was FUBAR from the get go, once something is this messed up it’s almost impossible to fix because everything is “suspect”. By that I mean the “facts” and evidence LE has, what the defense team has said or laid out as “fact”.
There is this thing called reasonable doubt that gets me everytime. Is there resonable doubt in this case? For me it’s all over the place.
Well, cbikel, I respectfully disagree. I am, as you called it, “feisty”. About the case, not about Mom3.0. I’ve got nothing for Mom, but respect, and I believe my comments reflect that. My one comment that could be construed as personal came as a reaction to a comment from Mom3.0 that could be construed as personal. Not that I think there is anything to be gained from further dissection of this already resolved situation. Of course you have have the right to write about anything you want, including my writing style. And, as I said, I’m not looking to derail this thread. So don’t take this the wrong way. I just felt I had the right to react to your assertions about my posts, especially that there’s something to “see for what it is” in my comments. I’m not deceptive in any way, and with my comments, what you see is what you get.
On the topic of reasonable doubt… I believe that, even without Misskelley’s numerous confessions, once you compile all the evidence in one place and look at it at the same time, there is no reasonable doubt. To explain all that away, there’d have to have been an incredible amount of coincidences happening in this case. One would have to believe the WM3 to be the unluckiest fellows alive, for everything to align like it did, in my opinion.
One of the things that I hope to underscore in my 3rd installment, is that under Arkansas law, this case REQUIRES a jury to consider CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence and evaluate it as in, one could not form a hypothesis that it could have been perpetrated under any other reasonable scenario other than the charges by the defendants.
I have not been able to come up with ANY scenario, based on the totality of the evidence, that proves out, outside of these three, at that ditch, period. Regardless of whether one thinks that there was or was not enough evidence to convict them, arrest them or whatever, there is not one other scenario that proves out, imo. The fact that it could not have been anyone else, or any other method, has great weight.
B
I know nobody wants to
Of course I admit Damien stuck out. But not in the way a metalhead or a goth does. He stuck out in the same way a particular segment of murderers often does. He was a violent offender (multiple), who kept attacking people, and kept talking about wanting to kill and/or hurt people. I’m not sure I understand why you think something like that should not have been relevant to the investigation?
“Youre telling me that out of all the juvenile offenders and “cult” activity in the area- and with all of their “confidential informants/insiders” ect that these two covered- they didnt think anyone else was suspicious & it never crossed their mind that anyone other than damien was capable of these murders?”
They believed Damien was the far most likely. And, according to Exhibit 500, their belief wasn’t based on prejudice.
“I did read the 500 pages Lucy – and I reread it- and it was full of contradicting assessments, evaluations, info ect.”
The evaluations in Exhibit 500 come from different mental institutions. Not every expert comes to the absolute same conclusion about all aspects of a patient’s behavior. What they all do agree on is that he’s extremely violent and far from being well. He needed help. Instead, his parents just sent him back to Arkansas.
You attribute much his significance to his music and clothes. I think this should be a discussion on the relevance of Damien’s beliefs, not music and clothes. It’s been a while since I’ve read the transcripts, but can you show me something from them, where the police, and especially the prosecution, attribute much significance to Damien’s clothes and/or music, let alone base the whole case on them. I honestly think you’re conflating subculture with dangerous beliefs and behavior, in Damien’s case. But I fully admit it’s possible I’ve forgotten something, and there truly is undue attention paid to his fashion and music tastes. I’d like to study such a transcript from Callahan’s, if so.
“The closing arguments prove that their attire was a major point in the trial Lucy – as Fogelman stated-(pp) look at them sitting over their looking like choir boys (not in black or concert shirts,ect) they look like typical kids- but we all know this is an act and they are not typical kids- they may not be satanists but…. they are capable of committing these terrible murders”
Behavior, not attire.
“Echols and his … heavy metal “devil worshiper” pals”
I have repeatedly stated (as has the prosecution) that I don’t believe Damien was actually a devil worshipper, and so has the prosection. Not to even mention his friends.
On the topic of Crowley, yes, he was a showman, and not to be taken all that seriously. But Damien obviously did, since it’s clear he had a fascination with him. Damien’s “the younger and more innocent the victim is the more power” comment during the investigation is straight out of Crowley’s work. Now, Crowley’s writing was often not straight-forward and literal, but Damien testified at the stand that HE believed Crowley believed in sacrificing children. This is not about what Crowley actually was, but about what Damien thought Crowley was. And yes, many people read up on Crowley, but Damien is the one who chose to bring up Crowley-influenced statements in conversations with the investigators. He was the one who then, on the stand, denied being very familiar with Crowley, only for Crowley’s name to be discovered in Damien’s papers written together with Damien, Jason, and Damien’s son’s names. It’s not because of his Crowley fascination that Damien is suspicious. Quite the opposite. It’s because of what and when Damien chose to say during the investigation that his Crowley fascination is suspicious. There was absolutely no reason not to bring it up in court.
I guess I am not clear why just because different sources did not agree on Damien’s “diagnosis”, that it means he was not a dangerous kid. He threatened people, stole the gun out of an officer’s holster, stomped a dog to death and kept it’s skull, attacked a kid at school, started fires in school and I believe the garage behind his Dad’s trailer, and practiced self mutilation. His own parents DID NOT allow him back in their house after his last hospitalization because THEY feared him, and FEARED he would harm someone if he did.
Damien is not some poor misunderstood teen when this happens, on paper, his own Dr predicted it.
B
“First, I spoke about you stating your opinions as fact- you corrected “misinformation based on your opinions not fact- and I was trying to be respectful of your right to your opinions at the same time underscoring the undeniable fact that they are MERELY your opinions which I said I do not agree with- My point was neither of our opinions equate to FACTS.”
It is my opinion that what I was correcting IS misinformation, and that it being misinformation is a fact. That is the conclusion I’ve come to afer studying the case and logically interpreting the facts of it. That is what I firmly believe. Nobody has to agree with me. There are many things I believe to be a fact, that others don’t, and vice versa. I think it might be the word “opinion” that’s causing a misunderstanding here? I can replace it with “belief”, “conviction” or “position”, if that’s the case. In any case, it is something that I personally believe firmly to be a fact.
” Lucy IMO your bias is showing. “Echols and his gas-huffing, anti-social, heavy metal “devil worshiper” pals did this crime – make no mistake about it.” ”
I’m a (formerly heavy) drinker, who loves heavy metal, though punk and hardcore are way more up my alley. I’m a huge fan of death punk and horror rock bands. I dress in a non-mainstream way, and have for most of my life. I adore black clothes, ripped clothes, almost always wear combat boots, own a black trench coat, and for a relatively long period of my life had half of my head shaved (just like Damien). I have many, many metalheads and goths friens (some of who have disappointed me with their uncritical belief in WM3′s inncence, but that’s off-topic). I can’t say I have many Wiccans or pagans among my close friends, only acquaintances, but I’d certainly be as open to them as I’d be anyone else. I don’t see where a bias could be coming from.
Can’t say I’ve huffed gas, though. But, no, I don’t think gas huffers are murderers. In Damien’s particular case though, huffing gas and heavy drinking IS important, since his medical records make it clear that he himself believed intoxication significantly exacerbated his aggression levels and delusions. (And, indeed, Jessie claims, and the Evan Williams bottle supports his claim, that there was alcohol involved in the murders.) Of course, that couldn’t be used at the trial, since his medical records were not allowed, but Jerry Driver and Steve Jones did not know that when articulating their suspicions at the beginning of the investigation.
Anyway, being violent, deranged, and constantly threatening people doesn’t automatically mean you’ll kill. It DOES mean it would be foolish of the police not to look into the possibility. And it does mean that if it turns out there is actual evidence against you, your behavior (not your juvenile records) will be brought up in court. One may disagree with the way things are done, and believe behavior should count for nothing. But that’s just not the way it’s done, and it makes no sense to single out this particular murder case for it.
Sorry if I offended you Lucy, that was surely not my intent. FWIW Lea Conners is one of my favorite posters on Blink’s blog.
While I have no clue what Blink’s part two is and after reading the disclaimer (for lack of a better word) about Arkansas Law regarding circumstantial evidence and how it applies in this case, I am still confused about the blood…where is it? What about the impressions that look alot like rebar…is that explained anywhere and if it is can I please have a link?
There are other things that bother me as well, Misskelley’s rope vs the shoe strings, why there is nothing on paper, video or tape regarding the hours leading up to his confession. The knife that it only took divers an hour to find in a lake…was it really a lake or just a pond?
That’s just some of the questions that I have…and while I enjoy reading other people’s opinions in the end it’s still opinion and conjecture to me.
I have to say these are some of the most fact based discussions I have ever seen on any discussion forum. As for behavior I do believe in the following old adage, “if it looks like a duck, quakes like a duck, and does not work for AFLAC, it is mostly likely a duck.” I see no reason to waste time and the lose of precious time investigating geese, chickens, and hoot owls in order to appear fair minded. I will add that were I one of the ducks in this case I would completely understand why my clan was being scrutinized. I understand a level of paranoia in groups who have been singled out for discrimination or exclusion but that does not excuse bad behavior and the protection of such behavior out of clannishness.
This is just my own personal opinion but I believe that many artists consider themselves anti-establishment and at one time or another have felt their talents set them outside mainstream thinking. Hence they tend to gravitate towards causes they perceive to be persecution of people like themselves. I had a discussion with a co-worker who lived in London. I asked her why so much musical talent came from such a small population by world standards. She stated that in her opinion the UK was more accepting toward people who choose to be different and stand out. In other words their society is not as ‘macho’ as ours so playing music and other artistic endeavors were not looked down upon.
Al- I appreciate the compliment to the readers and contributors here, I completely agree. I find it so respectful of critical thinkers who care enough to be advocates in this way.
Thank you.
B
cbickel- thank you for your post- very much appreciated.
I agree reasonable doubt is all over this case, and unfortunately LE did mishandle this case and the crime scene and all the evidence-
So I agree everything is suspect.
CB-I appreciate you also mentioning the “Tone” of the posts-
Blink, No I have not watched them- but I have read peoples comments – about them being propaganda ect..
Lucy I have tried very hard to address each of your points, questions & opinions, although you do not seem to address many of my questions and points & opinions.
You have stated you very firmly hold onto your opinion/conviction of their guilt- but you have not given me a reason to follow suit, and I am clearly wanting to be swayed. I am trying to understand why you believe what you do, so I can get to the truth of their guilt-
Although I agree cases based on circumstantial evidence CAN prove guilt, I also believe that any REASONABLE doubt outweighs the circumstantial evidence- especially when that evidence has been mishandled, lost or never collected.
As far as I was able to find – there is one person that said DE stomped a dog to death- one person, sure there are alot of rumors surrounding this supposed incident- and many people including Jones and Driver saying animal sacrificing was going on, but I have not seen the evidence to support this “fact” Rumors were flowing though-for instance that DE wore the intestines of the stomped dog around his neck- but I am unable to find proof that this incident occurred- also, I am unable to find proof that Damien killed numerous cats or dogs or had their skulls in his room- as far as I am aware he did have one dog skull- which he says he found already deceased.
The 500 pgs are not just from different hospitals, they contain many different counselors ect speaking about the same incidences and behaviors ect-each give a different opinion regarding Damien AND the incidences- and they each give a different perspective on his writings and poems ect- – at least one complimented him and told him to keep it up.
He did make threats- he was in fights- although only the one with SD is documented- as I linked above- He did start fires- one was from throwing something at a light bulb- hardly a gasoline raging inferno-
I am not trying to minimize Damiens behaviors. I am simply stating that these incidences in most high schools and towns would not get most teachers or principals ect even working up a sweat.
He was suspended and expelled- he was hospitalized and given treatment and meds- he responded well to treatment. Problems addressed.
Lucy, you keep talking about evidence to prove he wasnt guilty- when you and the prosecution IMO have not provided evidence of his guilt, and certainly NOT beyond a REASONABLE doubt.
For someone with such a nontrendy style in music and attire- I am aghast that you seem to be so opinionated on peoples beliefs and music and attire.
Its a good thing you werent friends with DE like Jason was, who knows you could have found yourself in a pretty awful situation.
I will have to agree to disaree on the weight of his music,attire, reading materials, room decorations ect and his beliefs- No matter what evidence I supply it will never be enough to sway you- as I have already discussed alot of this already- and so have you- It all boils down to how we view the testimony/evidence I guess.
His beliefs were not satanic and I dont care if he quoted The devil himself. It doesnt mean he murdered these little boys. He prided himself on his knowledge and this included his knowledge on the occult. His questionnaire was his answers to what he thought about the perps- The reason his P/officer and LE came to him was under the guise of getting his knowledgeable opinions inorder to catch the real killers- He answered them truthfully from what knowledge he had- and this became his great manifesto of the whys and wheres of his sacrificial murder.
Lucy- you seem to know this case inside and out- and nomatter what facts or opinions I bring you will still hold strong to your convictions.I take the time to point out the inconstancy in your posts IRT your stances, beliefs and points, and you simply poo poo away the inconsistencies. I am not going to work my butt off providing you with links ect when clearly you seem unable to view things from a different perspective.
Doing the same thing over and over and hoping for a different result is insanity.
I respect your convictions and I hope to read more of your posts-hopefully more facts are presented, and then someday I will be able to be convinced of their guilt-beyond a reasonable doubt-
AJMO
Mom 3.0- I have a hypothetical question to ask you if you don’t mind indulging me.
If further or new DNA testing was able to produce full profiles tying Echols to this crime, how would that change your asessements of his psychological issues leading up to the crime?
I am trying to understand, from a learning perspective because I value your opinions, how you appear to consider that issue as “managed” or dealt with through meds or treatment and not as an escalation or precursor? Why did his own parents absolutely attempt to hide this?
Not to put to fine a point on the matter, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris had significantly less issues/incidents than Echols, in fact, it was the reverse. Signs that there were real threats were placated, not followed up on, and the rest is history. I hope I am articulating this correctly
B
Opps, first ‘time’ should have been ‘effort’
Lucy says:
August 27, 2011 at 10:45 am
Anyway, being violent, deranged, and constantly threatening people doesn’t automatically mean you’ll kill. It DOES mean it would be foolish of the police not to look into the possibility.
___________________
With much respect, IMO, the above portion of your comment describes many more than merely Damien, who are involved in this “mess” of a case. I can well imagine that LE, in particular, is glad to be done with it, and will not relish having to investigate any of it any further, should any one of the Memphis Three or their representatives wish to pursue that matter of their alleged innocence. There’s not a “sane”, credible, reliant soul in the bunch, imho, To me, they all remain suspect: The WM3, Mark Byers, Jacoby and Hobbs.
I neglected to add Mr. Bojangles and the 20ish year old white dude who climbed out of the manhole, IIRC.
Last week I was on a sales call drawing up a contract on my computer. It was running slow & I’m sure your won’t be surprised when I say I can’t stand awkward silence! So I asks the blonde lady in her 40′s what we favorite song was so I could put it on pandora. I had no idea what the song was but it was hea v v y metal. I was shocked!
So really, you can’t judge a book by it’s cover.
I am an Arkansasan, born raised and LOVE the razorbacks. TGF- Longhorn’s?
Anyhow, I have family in WM area so this case has always bee important to me.
I honestly have no idea what is true/false.
I wasn’t finished writing that post…don’t know how it sent. TBContinued
Off topic but, it’s being reported that Irene’s slamming New England with 80 mph sustained winds and higher, 100 mph, gusts. It’s also being reported that at the slow rate of speed this storm is moving, these conditions will continue for at least 12 more hours. I join all in wishing you and your family well, Blink. Hang in. The sun always rises in the morning.
I dont think it has made it there yet, and especially at those winds, but it may be a “model”.
Our weather just started, Princeton area, and I dont know if we are on hyper alert, but I can tell you it is bizarre. The wind shifts in this front change in a minute. I can feel the beating rain on one side of our house in one minute, and it shifts quickly, we are alledgedly a few hours away from the big stuff.
B
-snipped-
DO NOT want to have a political discussion on this, I am simply stating my “creedo” in this regard, which I freely acknowledge is not always shared by folks I love and respect.
B.
B, I hope my comment didn’t come across as a political statement. I am the first to admit that’s territory I will NEVER cross. I’ve never seen any good come out of those kinds of conversations. Besides, I’m politically challenged. I struggle at seeing the big picture. I ‘think’ Canada is a little left wing. No excuse for being ignorant, but I admit it! I look at one’s heart and how their agenda will help people. It’s foolish, really. I am who I am.
I appreciate you touching on Miss Maines talent. I am and always will be a Dixie Chicks fan. Her voice is distinct and unique. That kind of gift always catches my attention. When our son was born, all we listend to was DC’s cd ‘Home’ and the Boss’s ‘The Rising’. My husband and I were adamant that music would be a huge part of his life.
You grasped the point I was trying to make much more eloquently. In most cases, it’s dangerous to put people on pedastals (there are exceptions…our parents, grandparents, etc). I remember holding a pastor of my church in very high regard. Long story short, something inside me told me to ‘guard my heart’. I learned a few years later he had an affair. I pray for him and his family and understand, more than ever, that we all make bad choices. Most of us yearn to go back in time, to right our wrongs. If we did, would we be the people we are right now? As Anne Shirley’s(Anne of Green Gables) ‘kindred spirit’ teacher remarked to her…’tomorrow is always fresh, with no mistakes in it’.
I’m guilty of a politician joke now and then….3 politicians walked into a bar….a Tory, a Liberal and an NDP…. But that’s as far as I’d ever go.
My most humblest apologies for crossing a sacred line of yours, B. Thank you for possessing the grace to bring up a touchy subject with gentle candor <3
You absolutely did not, I was referring to Ms. Pasdar, sorry if I was obtuse.
B
Like it or not, the main stream of society operates on a relatively fixed set of behaviors and values. These, of course, change gradually over time.
Those that push the envelope of behavior are always going to be looked at in a different way. This includes education or lack thereof, manner of dress and social behavior.
Those that abuse drugs including alcohol often do this to remove the inhibitions they feel in restraining their behavior. This behavior often starts out for one reason and culminates in another.
We may as well admit that there are many children born into families that have mental and social behavior problems. These families do not look at their offspring and care for them in the same way as normal families do.
Society of today does not interact through churches and good charity organizations as it once did. Instead, we as a people have allowed government agencies to take over that chore.
My wife and I have long ago come to the conclusion that when we are dismayed or have a difficult time with people it is for only one reason. IT IS THEIR BEHAVIOR.
In the final analysis, it was the known behavior of the WM3 that made LE look at them as the probable perps. From there, LE took the steps to try and attach evidence and motive to build a case.
Because a group of celebraties became interested some 18 years later and for whatever reasons decided to spend their money to try and get what they hoped was better justice for those convicted, we are holding this discussion in an effort to understand the real truth.
Most of us have many manifestations of our own behavior that is based on our life experiences and education. I for one, can dress in a pair of jeans with my pointy-toed cowboy boots and western shirt and mingle with those that choose that lifestyle, Or, I can put on a tux and go sit-in with a symphony orchestra or a concert band or stand in front and conduct. Or, I can put on a five hundred dollar suit and a pair of two hundred dollar shoes and all the other things to dress like an executive and mingle and work with management people.
Having done all those behaviors and more, we all tend to dress and behave in various manners. Young people are not able to do that.
Sometimes they fumble around in an effort to find what they perceive to be an interesting and meaningful behavior. Sometimes young people choose dangerous behaviors that cost them their lives. Some embrace evil for whatever reason and leave the rest of society to figure out why.
All of this because of Lucy’s last paragraph in her post at 10:45 A.M
I think I need to applaud you for teaching tolerance, and I think I need to point out that some folks are not as “forward thinking” and possibly not raised to utilize alternative resources of any kind.
I remember a sleepover at my friends where we went to mass the next day, and when my Mom asked me how it went, I told her I decided that I would never be catholic because they could not figure out they could say the same things sitting as they did kneeling. I felt God heard them in any position so they were not that smart, and that burny smelly stuff was all over my clothes. LOL.
I was fortunate in that I was raised as a child of “faith”, although I admit at the time, starting in the tweens, I thought it was a pita. My parents said, if you feel that way, we are not going to make you attend service every Sunday, but it is still our family day, and then you can help plan it.
I was in charge of lunch, for which I made and packed pancakes. Yep, you heard that right, cold pancakes, with the syrup poured all over the top under saran wrap, big platter.
My sisters, nicknames Ketchup and Mustard, poured more syrup over them and gobbled them up; they thought I was, well, the cool big sis for the day. My parents ate them, without a wince, and told me they were delicious, but I was off lunch duty because I used the stove when they were not home.
BEST DAY EVER. My point is, spirituality is very important, and if you are not teaching your child about “themselves and the power of faith”, you cannot expect that they will not look to outside resources, both good and bad, to figure that out.
On the subject of faith, I believe strongly that our children follow our guidance, but ultimately, figure out what is best for their soul, on their own. It might be the only thing as an uber anal Mom, I do not run the risk of alienation for my “hands on-ness”.
B
@ Lucy says:
August 27, 2011 at 10:45 am
Anyway, being violent, deranged, and constantly threatening people doesn’t automatically mean you’ll kill. It DOES mean it would be foolish of the police not to look into the possibility.
I’m in complete agreement with this opinion. Yes, it is judgemental. However, I give LE a pass to use their instincts and knowledge of community to determine POI’s. WM3 were already known to local police. It isn’t exactly shocking they’d question someone who may have knowledge or opinions on who committed the murders. I think it’s a common paradigm within investigations of serious crimes.
I cant help but consider this sentiment when I analyze so many of these cases. I know this will seem extreme, but Jett Duncan had a concealed juvenile history, and everyone gave him the pass.
B
I don’t recall these boys being harrassed by police prior to the murders. They were certainly watched and rightfully so.
Dr. Pepper
Yes, I often cheer for the longhorns. I have roots in Arkansas as well, so sometimes I cheer for the Razorbacks.
The West Memphis of today is different from that of forty years ago. It has become sort of a bedroom community for Memphis. Of course, the building of the interstate highways (40 and 55) brought some changes.
I have worked on projects at El Dorado, Fordyce, North Little Rock, Arkansas City and Helena to name a few. If you are near North Little Rock (actually Lonoke)and drive I-40 you can see a bulk terminal for gasoline with a truck rack for Shell oil. This was done in 1969. It may not be Shell today as they build and sell properties to other companies.
I am basing my posts and opinions on the facts of this case and on my own knowledge, experiences, research ect, the same as everyoneelse.
-I have worked with kids of all types and with all manner of diagnosis- of all ages. I have been privy to horrible confidential information documenting past behaviors horrible abuse and neglect, scary diagnoses- past criminal activity ect ect.
I have been trained in de-escalation techniques and self defense techniques as well as take down techniques, and all that entails. I have heard all manner of threats and have viewed all manner of threatening behaviors ect. I have experienced the best in kids and the worst-
Based on my experience, Damien’s “history” whether it is 1 pg or 500 does not even begin to measure on the scale of propensity to commit murder/exhibiting homicidal tendencies.
Again this does not mean that he most definitely didnt commit these murders- he may have- My point is the evidence I have seen so far does not meet the burden beyond a reasonable doubt.
I am not trying to convince anyone of the WM3 innocence or guilt-
In fact I am trying to get to the truth, whatever that may be- I am trying, just as I always have to separate the fact from the fiction, rumors from solid info, and biases from well-founded reasoning.
Having a past history is not evidence that he committed these crimes nor is a confession by someoneelse stating that he was the culprit.
Blink, I understand your needing to ask the question and I do understand your point.
I never said the situation was managed, Im sorry if it seemed so, what I was trying to convey- I guess not as well as I would have liked, is that Damien was in treatment and he was on meds and he was responding well to the treatment.
His “history” was becoming just that- history.
You asked hypothetically- If I was shown dna evidence w/ full profiles that Damien was at the crime scene- how would that change my perspectives on his history- Well ofcourse my perceptions would change-I would have to say that is much more than circumstantial evidence- and ofcourse I would state that I would, like everyone, think something along the lines of “Why didnt someone see the signs?”
KIM that hindsight is 20/20. Next I would say- Damien at the time of the 500pgs was seeking help- he was following his Dr.’s orders and there must have been a whole lot of info that wasnt in those pages.
In my experience, kids do not escalate that fast from acting out and committing crimes directly related to a love situation- (running away ect) or scratching/gouging someone’s face in a fight or lighting fires in chemistry ect., or making threats but not acting on them, to triple murder-at least not murder in which they do not know the victims or do not feel victimized by them, and not when it isnt domestic in nature…
I am not saying that damiens history could not be a precursor to an escalation in behavior- someday, or that day, even violence in the form of murder. What I am saying is, it is not undeniable evidence that it was a precursor to these murders- anymore than it should have been used as evidence in court to show that he was the murderer of Christopher, Stevie or Michael.
Which ofcourse it wasnt-
Ted Bundy didnt have 500 pgs but he was a serial killer- having a juvenile history does not mean someone will be the next Ted Bundy any more than having A’s in school and being the next- up and coming young republican lawyer makes you NOT a murderer. For his counselor or Dr. to say that was wrong and asinine-
Blink- I hear what you are saying about Dylan and Eric- but that is a whole other case, with its own set of facts and evidence.
I have learned to treat each kid individually and separate each incidence and behavior ect from their histories and files and diagnosis- they are not their histories- although ofcourse you never totally disregard anyones history.
Two kids with basically the same issues and meds and diagnosis and backgrounds are NOT the same and just when you think you have figured them out and can anticipate their actions ect- theyll surprise you- often times in a good way- This goes for kids without problems as well.
So in closing- yes Blink, it would change my perceptions How could it not? I am not a prisoner of my opinions or convictions. I can be swayed with facts and evidence, as well as hindsight.
There are none so blind, as they who will not see
AJMO
Blink just mentioned the hidden juvenile records of Jeff Duncan.
This is sometning that we as a society need to address. Hiding records of young people over the age of twelve IMO is handicapping LE and society in general. I don’t believe in giving those records a special consideration. By the time you are twelve, you know the difference between right and wrong and should be held accountable for your acts.
“Lucy I have tried very hard to address each of your points, questions & opinions, although you do not seem to address many of my questions and points & opinions.”
I have quoted you multiple times and proceeded to give what I consider focused replies to the points you raised. We both post long comments, so there are probably some points you mentioned that I didn’t reply to, but I did try to cover as much ground with my replies as possible without making my comments crazy long-winded and/or unreadable.
“You have stated you very firmly hold onto your opinion/conviction of their guilt- but you have not given me a reason to follow suit, and I am clearly wanting to be swayed. I am trying to understand why you believe what you do, so I can get to the truth of their guilt-”
Well, in my opinion I presented some very good arguments. But, of course, it’s only expected I’d consider my own arguments based on my own beliefs good. You don’t find them good, and disagree with them. To make a long story short, it seems I can’t sway you, no matter whether you want it or not. And you can’t sway me either. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.
“I take the time to point out the inconstancy in your posts IRT your stances, beliefs and points, and you simply poo poo away the inconsistencies.”
I feel the same way – about inconsistencies in your posts (as I perceive them), and my pointing them out, and the, as you put it, poo-pooing. As I said above, we’ll just have to agree to disagree. Justthe way it is – no need for long discussions on why and how we disagree. We just need to accept it.
“I am not going to work my butt off providing you with links ect when clearly you seem unable to view things from a different perspective.”
Again, feel the same way. I don’t think either of us is somehow wrong for not seeing the other’s points. We can’t force ourselves to see something differently than we do, or to buy something we just don’t buy. And there’s no need for us to. Only thing we CAN do is make sure we come into a discussion with an open mind, and not let anything cloud our logic.
“Doing the same thing over and over and hoping for a different result is insanity.”
Totally agreed.
“I respect your convictions”
Cheers.
“and I hope to read more of your posts-hopefully more facts are presented, and then someday I will be able to be convinced of their guilt-beyond a reasonable doubt-”
You might, or you might not. I’m okay with both. Anyway, I think Blink has a much better chance of convincing you in the upcoming parts of the series than I do. Let’s see. Gotta admit I’m a bit curious as to the outcome.
Brief comment while we still have power: It never has been, nor is it now my goal , to change anyone’s opinion on a case- that discredits my integrity, and of course, is not objective.
As difficult and almost unabsorbable as it may sound, sometimes, I have had to learn that the lesson finds the master, and I believe that in this case.
B
I watched both documentaries (though I was a little distracted at the end of the second), and throughout my opinion swung back and forth. The profiler stated that they were not looking at animal mutilation or a skilled degloving when it came to Chris Byers – that it was an act of rage. Based on what was going on in the WM3’s lives, I’d guess there was plenty of rage to go around, so rage or personal cause doesn’t exclude them for me. And during the interviews, I thought Echols and Baldwin sounded particularly rehearsed (Baldwin always appeared on the verge of a smile), and Misskelley – when he’s going on about how there was no blood, and how not even a genius could kill like that and not leave any blood? I had the disturbing impression that he was pleased with himself and patting himself on the back at the same time for being able to pull this off. And the Jerry Driver statements on the Callahan site that were linked to earlier are interesting, too. I don’t think there are Satanists in WM, but that doesn’t mean there weren’t some teens looking for an opportunity to be creepy and badass (sorry!). Most teens who take on occult views are just “trying on” something new, trying to figure out who they are. I think Damien Echols knew very well who he was, and used the occultism as a way to persuade weaker personalities to commit the atrocities he fantasized about.
As for the fiber evidence – although not absolutely conclusive that the fibers came from Damien’s or Jason’s shirts, I think microscopic similarity is pretty suspicious. But what about the fibers from Terry Hobbs and his friend, which ended up in the laces/knot on Michael Moore? Do we know if each boy was tied with his own shoelaces, or did the perpetrator/s mix and match (maybe that’s on the Callahan site – I haven’t been able to make my way through all the documents yet), which might explain that? And if the crime did occur mostly as Misskelley described, what was his motivation for refusing to testify against Echols and Baldwin in hopes of a lighter sentence? Would his family’s good opinion mean more to him than his freedom? I’m very interested to see what Mom3.0 will say about the rebar, too, but is it inconceivable that the WM3 came across a broken off piece and used it in the crime?
If only there weren’t so many – uhh – interesting personalities to be considered. Mark Byers in particular is volatile and contradictory (at least in the film), and maybe it’s his illness, but wow, what a character… The WM3 might have murdered those little boys, but I don’t think they were the only ones in WM capable of such an act… Looking forward to Blink’s next installment.