The West Memphis Series Part II: Guilty By Plea And Have Been Set Free
Jonesboro, AR- In a shocking development, four days following the first installment of the West Memphis Three on www.blinkoncrime.com, on August 19, 2011 Damien Echols, Charles Jason Baldwin and Jessie Miskelley, through an Alford plea, were convicted of three counts of first degree murder following an agreement made by Prosecutor Scott Ellington and their respective defense attorneys for the murders of eight year old boys James Michael Moore, Christopher Byers ( Murray) and Stevie Branch.
Judge David N. Laser agreed to and imposed suspended sentences for time served to Echols, Miskelley and Baldwin; all were released and immediately declared their innocence during the ensuing press conference.
In Part I of our series, we touched briefly on the development of new evidence and possible murder weapon, the blue handled- mountain ice axe, which inexplicably was never presented at trial. It had been admitted into evidence after being retrieved from its owner, following it’s return by Jason Baldwin’s, younger brother Mathew.
Requests to confirm whether or not the ice axe was maintained in evidence at West Memphis Police Department were non-responsive at the time of this publication. Part II continues first with what the jury never heard. A podcast of my interview on the case following the release of the WM3 can be found here.
Premature Illumination
One of the larger points of contention in the murders was the lack of blood evidence at the scene. The lack of blood or blood spatter at the scene with such gruesome injuries spawned the defense theory the ditch was a dump site or secondary crime scene. This was largely due to the fact that the jury would never hear about the results of luminol tests; it was suppressed by motion of the defense In both trials.
Luminol enhanced chemiluminesence (LCL) technology in 1993 was geared toward examining items of evidence in a lab under black light for optimum photographic results, or its secondary application for use in an enclosed environment which can be manually darkened and a portable black light ( we now call this an alternative light source or ALS) brought to the scene.
LCL when sprayed onto a surface containing remnants of blood, or more specifically the iron in blood, will create a glowing reaction when iron, invisible to the naked eye, is present.
In 1993 under Arkansas law, Luminol testing was considered new, novel, and not accepted as scientific evidence.
While the methods for collection, testing and controls have advanced significantly since 1993 and LCL testing is widely used in criminal case work, analysis of the findings in the instant case flatly dispute the notion that there was no blood associated with the crime scene along the ditch bank of Robin Hood Hills.
Contrary to the misconception that there was no evidence of blood at the scene, the results of two consecutive days of luminol tests at the scene were enlightening.
As Kermit Channell and Donald Smith, from the Arkansas crime lab could not bring the “outside in” they were forced to set up shop in the woods along the banks of the ditch. Also present for testing both days were WMPD Detectives Mike Allen, Tony Anderson and Bryn Ridge.
Donald Smith’s report below in it’s entirety below, The other reports can be found here.
STATE CRIME LABORATORY
P.O. Box 5274
Number 3 Natural Resources Drive
Little Rock, Arkansas 72215
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
Investigating Officer / Agency / Address
Sgt. Mike Allen
West Memphis Police Department
100 Court Street
West Memphis, AR 72301
Laboratory Case Number: 93-05717
Date Received in Lab: 05/07/93
How Evidence Received: M E / Matthew Elliott
Agency Case Number:
Suspect (s):
Victim (s):
Steve Edward Branch
Date of Report; 06/10/93
FIELD INVESTIGATION. WEST MEMPHIS TRIPLE HOMICIDE. MAY 12 and
MAY 13. 1993 LUMINOL:
This analyst and Kermit Channell, Serologist responded to request to perform luminol on
a potential crime scene area on May 12, 1993. We left that afternoon, arriving in West
Memphis at approximately 6:30 P.M., proceeding to the Police Department.
Officers Tony Anderson, Brian Ridge, and Mike Allen accompanied Kermit and myself
to a swampy area in the northern edge of West Memphis where the victims were found.
A general survey of the area in the daylight hours was conducted. Approaching darkness
fresh solutions of luminol reagent were prepared. When the area became dark, using
flashlights for light support, the part returned to the area and proceeded to spray and
locate areas of luminol light emission activity, a presumptive test for the presence of
trace quantities of blood. The following observations were noted:
(1) At a trail along a stream bed an approximately 11 foot high bluff overlooking the
stream positive reactions were noted on either side of a tree with more reaction noted to
the right side of the tree, facing the stream bed.
(2) An Area with used plastic sheeting west of the trail and the bluff gave more positive
reactions were noted.
(3) At the west bank of the stream bed, to the right of some trees, an area gave positive
reaction. It was explained by the Police Department that this was where two of the
victims were placed when they were recovered from the stream bed.
(4) In the stream bed, below the described (at one time) water line, positive luminol tests
indicated where one of the victims was found in the water as related by the West
Memphis Police Department.
(5) On the east bank of the stream bed were a pile of sticks and a depression in the soil
where luminol tests showed a concentrated area of positive reaction.
[PAGE 2]
(6) North of this point luminol tests gave positive reaction to a large area of
concentration (described by West Memphis Police Department where the third victims
was placed upon recovery from the water).
(7) North of the point #6 near some tree roots, another large area of concentration of the
luminol reaction was noted.
(8) Trace amounts of positive luminol reaction was noted on the slope west of the area
where two of the victims were recovered and placed. (reference area #3). The areas north
and south of where the third victims had been placed (5) and (6) were unaccountable
known activity by the Memphis Police Department or rescue / recovery operations.
From these areas of noted luminol reactions for the presumptive presence of trace
amounts of blood the following opinion is rendered:
The traces of presumed blood detected along the trail (2), and at the bluff (1), and one the
slope (8) appear to be transfer of blood by the rescue and recovery teams.
Reaction in the areas where the recovered victims were placed is the apparent result of
trace blood transfer from the victims (3) and (6).
The area below the water level on the west side of the stream was accounted as where
trace amounts of the victimís blood diffused into the mud in the stream bed.
The areas (5) and (7) indicate activity prior to recovery of the victims and relate to
activity to the victims when perhaps they were being attacked.
It should be noted that the luminol testing was performed some days after the discovery
of the victims and at least one rainfall had occurred. There were no visible signs or
indication of blood at any of the locations that we investigated.
[PAGE 3]
Upon the group returning that night to the police headquarters Inspector Gitchell and his
staff were advised of our findings. It is our opinion the crime had taken place where the
bodies of the victims were recovered. Inspector Gitchell was further advised of the
inability to document the luminol reaction of the evening because of the light leaks from
stars and the back scattered light from West Memphis. To document the luminescence
Inspector Gitchell was advised that we would have to place tenting over the areas of
interest and to block out all stray light possible.
The luminescence requires near total darkness to document luminol reactions in the open
field.
It was decided that Kermit and I should stay over the next day perform the tests again
and photograph them.
The morning of May 13, Inspector Gitchell provided us with equipment, supplies and
manpower needed to document the areas of positive luminol reaction. A test with plastic
covering over the canvas was erected and photographs were taken of the positive areas
noted of the previous evening again with fresh luminol application.
Because of the limitations due to some light leakage, physical activity in the area
destroying some of the reaction, the weather conditions of some light rain the night
before and the originally low concentration levels in the areas on the bluff (area #1), along
the trail (area #2), where the victims were placed (area #3), and the area in the stream bed
where the body was recovered (area #4) and the area above the recovery area (area #8)
we were not able to document photography as we observed these areas the evening of
May 12.
The tented area over the areas where the victim’s body was placed (#6) and the
questioned area (#5), subdued the light to a degree that a less than perfect photograph
could be obtained. These photographs still documented the areas of interest, showing
luminol reaction in respective areas. These photographs were without the benefit of flash
painting application to reference the areas photographed. A still photo of the questioned
area from the original camera tripod location does reference the questioned area. The
photographs were processed revealing the luminol reaction at areas where the victim was
place (#6) and the questioned area (#5)
[PAGE 4]
The tent was moved and photographs were taken of the questioned area by the tree root (#7). Photographs of the areas (#4, #5 and #6) with surveyor flags mounted were taken to reference those areas tested and photographed. All photographs were left with Inspector Gitchell.
[signed] Donald E. Smith, Criminalist
Soil samples were submitted on May 14, 1993, but for unknown reasons not tested until 4 months later, and did not react to the luminol.
The result was considered inconclusive as it was not likely to detect blood from a four month old soil sample in the first place.
Although the luminol reaction results were not admissible in the trials, for analysis purposes, it tells an irrefutable story. The obvious counter-argument could only be that investigators were new to the technique, some of the initial testing was unable to be photographed, or to any conspiracies, that detectives simply made up results for some purpose.
However, as none of the investigators present had the autopsy results prior to the testing, and most certainly did not have Jessie Miskelley’s “account” to draw from, outside of the known injuries and other more circumstantial evidence in this case, these findings certainly further support there were multiple perpetrators in this crime- and that it all went down right there.
In 1998, Damien Echols filed a Rule 37 hearing for causes of incompetent counsel and due to his “actual innocence.” Jessie Miskelley lost his appeal to overturn his conviction also in 1998, but It was not until 2008 that Baldwin and Miskelley filed their Rule 37 petitions. For purposes of evaluation, I am including affidavits , exhibits and testimony excerpts from some of the expert witnesses at all three hearings and subsequent related appearance spanning from 1998- 2008.
Brent Turvey, of Knowledge Solutions, LLC trained under renowned blood spatter expert Dr. Henry Lee, did not consider any of the luminal reports when hired by Dan Stidham in 1998 for his expert opinion in his representation of Jessie Miskelley requesting a new trial. Turvey’s report found (here) was largely the impetus for future defense experts for all three defendants to “weigh in”.
While Turvey’s work was largely unsupported once his infamous “bitemark” was debunked and he bought into the “Baldwin knife” which has since been abandoned by all subsequent defense experts, as the first guy up at bat so to speak, his testimony demonstrated the burgeoning direction to the CSI Effect the West Memphis Three would take toward their ultimate freedom.
I explore Turvey’s initial observations taken directly from his report, in the beginning of each unique victim’s autopsy segment, followed by updated relevant expert information and my subsequent analysis.
Autopsy By Coroner- Autopsy By Proxy
In the interest of brevity, I intend to focus on the dissenting views of the experts, and I stipulate that in no report that I have reviewed, was there evidence of sodomy or object penetration of any of the boys.
While I believe Dr. Perretti’s prior experience with cases that involved same did form his opinion on the possibility as it relates to some of the injuries, I do not believe that such testimony should have been permitted at trial, nor would it be permitted today.
Memphis Triple Homicide May 5, 1993
James M. Moore #ME-329-93
Steve E. Branch #ME-330-93
Chris M. Byers #ME-331-93
LOCATION: On May 6th, 1993, all three victims were found, bound wrist to ankle with shoe laces, in the water of a drainage ditch, in a heavily wooded area called the Robin Hood hills, behind the Blue Beacon Truck Wash in West Memphis, Arkansas. An equivocal forensic examination of all available crime scene and autopsy photos, crime scene video, investigator’s reports, witness statements, family statements, autopsy reports and numerous other sources to be listed as referenced in the endnote section of this report. The purpose of this preliminary examination was to competently assess the nature of the interactions between the victims and their environments as it contributed to their deaths as indicated by available forensic evidence, and the documentation regarding that evidence.
James M. Moore
James Michael Moore autopsy found here.
The following forensic information is taken directly from the official autopsy report filed by Dr. Frank J. Peretti of the Arkansas State Crime Lab, Medical Examiner Division, dated 5-7-93, Case No. ME-329-93 and/ or from The official coroner’s report filed by Kent Hale, Crittenden County Coroner, dated 5-6-97.
The purpose of this section is not to present an all inclusive, detailed account and explanation of every piece of information in these reports, but rather to explore these reports, with the corresponding photos, for consistency, possible omissions, and to review injuries or patterns that this examiner deemed to be significant to the case.
Wound Pattern Analysis
This victim received more traumatic head injuries than any of the other victims in this case. Dr. Peretti states that defense wounds were present on the victim’s hands. These wounds were very few, indicating that victim was incapacitated quickly after the attack began. So the nature of these head injuries, and the limited defensive type wounds, combine to indicate sudden, forceful, and repeated blows that resulted in abraded contusions, multiple lacerations, and multiple skull fractures.
There is an unexplained directional pattern abrasion just below the victim’s right anterior shoulder area.
This unexplained injury does not correspond with any of the physical evidence collected at the location that victim was discovered. It is furthermore inconsistent with any of the naturally occurring elements that exist in that environment. The best conclusion that this examiner can reach is that this pattern abrasion was created by forceful, directional contact with something that was not found at that crime scene, whether it be a weapon, a surface or something else capable of creating that pattern.
The shoelace ligatures used to restrain this victim did not leave deep furrows, and also did not leave abrasions. This indicates that the victim was not struggling while the ligatures were in place. This indicates further that the victim was very much unconscious when the ligatures were affixed to his wrists and ankles.
We know that the victim drowned, that is to say that hemorrhagic edema fluid was present in the victim’s lungs, indicating that the victim was breathing when he was placed into the 2ft of water in the drainage ditch at Robin Hood Hills.
Together, these facts suggest that the purpose of the ligatures in this victim’s case was to keep the victim from moving around or being able to swim should he regain consciousness once he had been thrown into the water. It is this examiners opinion that the assailant in this case demonstrated all manner of awareness and cognizance at this location. The assailant knew that this victim was not dead when they threw this victim into the water, and that the ligatures would assist to complete the act of deliberate homicide should the victim become conscious.
Lack Of Injuries
When compared to the other two victims in this case, who were found at the same location, bound nude with shoelace ligatures in the same fashion, the most striking discrepancy is the lack of injuries suffered by this victim. In the crime scene and autopsy photos made available to this examiner, there were no readily discernible bite marks visible, the genitals have not been visibly disturbed or molested, and there are no discernible stab wounds. This lack of attention is very telling, and will be discussed in the Offender Characteristics section of this report. There is also, again, a lack of mosquito bites to this victim, which, as mentioned earlier, suggests that he received his injuries elsewhere first. This because the injuries took time to inflict, time during which many mosquito bites would have been received, even after death.
Analysis: I find the statement that he had the least amount of injuries, yet the most severe head injuries in dire conflict, as he died from multiple injuries, and drowning. The fractures to his head and lacerations to his left and front right skull were enough to cause his death within minutes on their own, and there can be no doubt that he received them while he was already unconscious because of the lack of injury at the ligature sites. There is very little hemorrhage involvement with the open lacerations, and all lacerations were abraded; one with a dovetail and upside down L producing an ovid fracture. In Jesse Miskelley’s confessions, he says one of them was moving as he was put in the water while he was leaving. I believe the reason he never mentioned that Michael Moore was beat about the head with an instrument of some kind is because he never saw that. Michael was located in the ditch just below the oak with the exposed root that had the luminol result “shaped like a V”, which would be consistent with him struggling to get out of that water, on that bank, with a cast off or blood spatter pattern consistent with someone beating him toward the bank and in front of that tree.
Mosquito bites: Only females take a blood meal, so that potentially reduces the population by 50%, and at no time will they bite a deceased person. They are attracted mostly by carbon dioxide, released from a breathing person. Both Dr. Haskell and Dr. Goff agreed to this ultimately.
What is further curious to me, is that while Turvey was hired by Miskelley, who confessed at least three times by the date of the generation of this report, does he not note the obvious discrepancy for the placement of Mike Moore upstream, or that he was found on his right side with the left side surfacing when in effect dislodged by Det. Mike Allen. Moore was also hogtied differently, with different knots than the other 2 victims, with ONE black shoelace. There is a reason that Turvey was not given Miskelley’s updated confession following his conviction, and instructed to disprove it; he would not have been able to.
Steven Edward Branch
Stevie Branch autopsy found here.
Wound Pattern Analysis
There are numerous violent, traumatic injuries to this victim’s face and head, as well as numerous superficial scratches, abrasions, and contusions noted throughout the rest of his body. Dr. Peretti, however, does not note the presence of extensive defensive wounds.
This indicates a violent, overpowering attack on this victim that he was unable to put up resistance against. The constellation of wounds are very similar to those inflicted on James Moore, however they are much more intense and include the victim’s face.
This level of attention paid to the victim’s face, in terms of depersonalization and rage, is indicative of familiarity and that will be explored later on in this report.
Furthermore, there is the existence of patterned injuries all over this victim’s face that could be bite marks. Since the ME may have missed this crucial evidence, other areas of his body may show bite mark evidence as well. The autopsy photos of this victim supplied to this examiner were not of sufficient quality to make an absolute determination of any kind, and would require a thorough examination by a qualified forensic odontologist for an informed, conclusive analysis. [note: Dr. Thomas David, board certified forensic odontologist, has confirmed the wound as a human adult bitemark and excluded Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley as the offender using bite impressions obtained from the men in prison] Bite mark evidence is very important in any criminal case because it demonstrates behavior and lends itself to individuation. It can reveal to an examiner who committed the act, because bite marks can be as unique as fingerprints. And, once established, it also reveals the act itself; biting.
Another unidentified pattern compression abrasion can be found on the back of Steve Branch’s head. The source of this injury caused a 3? inch fracture at the base of the skull with multiple extension fractures that terminate in the foramen magnum (that’s the hole at the base of the skull where the spinal cord connects to the brain). Upon close examination, this pattern injury is consistent with compression made from footwear. Again, without better photos supplied to the examiner showing a variety of angles, it’s very difficult to make a positive identification of any kind. But the pattern is consistent with a footwear impression, and would require a footwear impression expert to analyze and make an informed, competent determination.
The shoelace ligatures used to restrain this victim did leave deep furrows, and also did leave patterned abrasions on both the wrists and ankles. This indicates that the victim was struggling while the ligatures were in place. This indicates further that the victim was very much conscious before or after the ligatures were affixed to his wrists and ankles. We know that the victim drowned, that is to say that hemorrhagic edema fluid was present in the victim’s lungs, as well as in the victim’s mouth, indicating that the victim was breathing when he was placed into the 2ft of water in the drainage ditch at Robin Hood Hills.
Together, these facts, again, suggest that the purpose of the ligatures in this victim’s case was to keep the victim from moving around or being able to swim should he regain consciousness once he had been thrown into the water. It is this examiner’s opinion that the assailant in this case demonstrated all manner of awareness and cognizance at this location. The assailant knew that this victim was not dead when they threw this victim into the water, and that the ligatures would assist to complete the act of deliberate homicide should the victim become conscious.
Lack Of Injuries
There is again a lack of evidence to support any sort of strangulation. Dr. Peretti states that his examination of the neck of this victim revealed no injuries, and the photos that this examiner has seen support that conclusion.
Analysis: He missed the wound to Stevie Branch’s penis entirely. While not contained in his formal autopsy report, it was proven during the trial that Dr. Peretti’s colleague was called into evaluate what Turvey was calling “bite marks” and was ruled out. The fact that bite impressions did not match Echols, Baldwin or Miskelley was in no way exculpatory, and I will save you the bite by some animal with a rough tounge report nonsense I had to read .
The 3” fracture at the base of the skull, which “spiderwebbed” into subsequent fractures, also very likely severed his spinal cord, so one must assume this injury was also quite perimortem.
Steve ‘s left face was found to be abraded on the entire left side, and is consistent with someone either stomping on right side of his neck and fracturing it, with an obvious boot print, if the left side of the face was on the ground.
The gouging wounds- likely had to be inflicted following the fracture due to the lack of hemorrhage in comparison to the severity of the wound, and all experts agreed the injury was likely perimortem. So the question becomes- why?
Seems like a very important question, second only to what caused the trauma, based on the constellation of terminal injuries already inflicted on him. Wouldn’t the only thing left to do at that point be to submerge him?
It is my theory- therein lies the problem. Byers was put in the ditch first, and we know he was already deceased, therefore, he sinks. Stevie Branch is placed in the water next to him, and he either begins moving or floats and the suspects thinks he is still alive, and uses an implement to force him into the ditch bottom until he succumbs and stays submerged. I will leave out the specifics of the gouging wound as to why I think that resulted in the usage of the other end of the ice axe on Michael Moore. The luminol result, found in the ditch bed itself, after it was drained, slightly downstream from Byers and Branch, but still upstream from Moore could also support this theory. We know that Byers had already bled out, but Branch was still alive when he was put into the water and the only significant bleeding wound on his person capable of leaving blood evidence in the bottom of the ditch to survive it simply being washed away in the creek, there is a high degree of probability he bled directly into the dirt. He was found face down.
Christopher Byers
Christopher Byers autopsy found here.
It should be noted that this victim’s injuries were the most extensive, most violent, and most overtly sexual of the all the victims in this case. The nature and extent of this victim’s wounds indicate that the assailant spent the most time with this victim.
Additionally, this victim’s toxicology report revealed non-therapeutic levels of carbamazepine in the blood. All of these differences are very important, and will be explored in the later sections of this report.
Wound Pattern Analysis
There are numerous violent, traumatic injuries to this victim’s head, specifically to the base of the skull. There was also evidence of the violent emasculation of the victim’s sex organs, extensive lacerations and bruising to the victim’s buttocks, as well as numerous superficial scratches, abrasions, and contusions noted throughout the rest of his body. Dr. Peretti also noted that there were numerous healed injuries of varying nature on this victim. Dr. Peretti, however, did not note the presence of defensive wounds.
Again, this indicates a violent, overpowering attack on this victim that he was unable to put up resistance against. The general constellation of wounds to this victim is more advanced, more extensive, more overtly sexually oriented and includes the use of a knife.
This knife was used not only to inflict multiple stabbing and cutting injuries to the victim’s inner thighs and genital area, it was used in the emasculation process. There is, unmentioned in either the ME’s or Coroner’s reports, what appears to be a clear impression of the knife handle on the right side of the large gaping defect left behind after the removal of the victims penis, scrotal sac, and testes. This was impression was created when the knife was thrust full length into the victim by the assailant, during the process of emasculation. This indicates forceful, violent thrusts. The nature of this emasculation, as indicated by these wounds, is neither skilled nor practiced. It was a rageful, careless, but purposeful act carried out in anger.
It is the opinion of this examiner that this injury would have resulted in massive, uncontrollable blood-loss, from which the victim could not have survived without immediate medical attention.
It should also be pointed out that the nature of the stab wounds inflicted on the victim’s genital area, separate from those received during the emasculation process, show marked irregular configuration and pulling of the skin. This indicates that either the knife was being twisted as the assailant stabbed the victim, or that the victim was moving as the blade was withdrawn.
The second set of injuries is described as five superficial cutting wounds on the left buttock (pictured on the left in this photo at the right). It should be noted that these injuries are actually lacerations, as indicated by the bridging between the open tissue, and the irregular edges. Both indicators are apparent upon close examination of the photographs. It is the opinion of this examiner that this set of injuries is most consistent with the parental whipping given to Chris Byers by Mark Byers. It is further the opinion of this examiner that after having received this set of injuries, which tore open the skin and would have resulted in some severe bleeding, the victim would have been unable to walk or ride a bicycle without incredible pain and discomfort.
The third set of injuries is the multiple linear superficial interrupted cuts on the right buttock region (pictured in the photo above on the right). These injuries are not consistent with having been made by a belt as they are cuts. The edges are not irregular, and the cuts are interrupted, again indicating movement by the victim or the assailant during the attack.
Furthermore, there is the existence of bruised ovoid compression injuries all over this victim’s inner thigh that could be suction type bite marks. Since the ME may have missed this crucial evidence, other areas of his body may show bite mark evidence as well. The autopsy photos of this victim supplied to this examiner were not of sufficient quality to make an absolute determination of any kind, and would require a thorough examination by a qualified forensic odontologist for an informed, conclusive analysis.
Bite mark evidence is very important in any criminal case because it demonstrates behavior and lends itself to individuation. It can reveal to an examiner who committed the act, because bite marks can be as unique as fingerprints and positively identify a suspect. And, once established, it also reveals the act itself; biting. The shoelace ligatures used to restrain this victim did leave deep furrows, and also did leave patterned abrasions on both the wrists and ankles. This indicates that the victim was struggling while the ligatures were in place. This indicates further that the victim was very much conscious before or after the ligatures were affixed to his wrists and ankles.
We know that this victim did not drown, that is to say that no hemorrhagic edema fluid was present in the victim’s lungs, or well in the victim’s mouth. This indicates that the victim was already dead when he was placed into the 2? ft of water in the drainage ditch at Robin Hood Hills. This is, again, very different from the other two victims in this case.
Dr. Richard Souviron forensic odontologist: all mutilation is peri and post mortem, no knife was used.
On a final note, Mr. Hale states in his supplemental report on Chris Byers that there is a stab wound on his head. This is actually incorrect, and rectified by Dr. Peretti who states in his autopsy report of Chris Byers that the same injury is a 1¼-inch laceration to the left parietal scalp.
There is also, again, a lack of mosquito bites to this victim, which, as mentioned earlier, suggests that he received his injuries elsewhere first. This because the injuries took time to inflict, time during which many mosquito bites would have been received, even after death.
Additionally, unlike Steve Branch, there is no overkill present in this victim’s face. That is to say that this is another of the marked differences between the killings of Steve Branch and Chris Byers which is very important to note, and which will be explored more thoroughly in this report.
Recommendations
It is apparent from the physical evidence in this case that Chris M. Byers was attacked with sudden, violent force from which he defended himself in only a limited fashion. It appears as though this attack took place, at least in part, while his cloths were off and while the shoelace ligatures restrained him. He was sexually assaulted (an assault of a sexual nature, to areas of the body considered to be sexual, that does not include sexual penetration), and associated stab wounds indicate that he may have been conscious during several phases of the attack.
Analysis: How does he miss that the dosage of (car) was sub therapeutic, meaning below the level at which he was described and confuse it as non-therapeutic, in his estimation, as a possible means to subdue him. He completely missed the fact that it is likely that the level, found in his blood, was greatly reduced because there was very little blood volume left in his body. AND, it was a prescribed medication. Turvey does not mention the other factors that support Byers died first, and he died quickly and violently. While he did have stomach contents, he did not have any urine in his blatter and there was substantative evidence his bowels had evacuated at the scene, commonly a result of an immediate violent death.
Consensus or Conundrum- Depends Who You Ask
Regardless of which expert one believes, within the confines of each report, is the absence of the belief with any certainty that the “Baldwin” serrated knife was used. What they all agree on, is that the gouging injuries to Branch and Byers were very similar. They all agree that there was evidence of blunt force trauma, significant curvilinear fractures, what is commonly referred to in Forensic Pathology today as “chop wounds”, other sharp force trauma.
Thoughts onPost Mortem Animal Predation
I agree it is possible that snapping turtles could have caused what looks to be possible claw marks and at least one possible bite mark. I am emphasizing possible because I don’t think one can rule out animal predation 100%
Bryn Ridge himself testified he has seen snapping turtles in that area, some time ago. That said, there was not so much as a crawfish found in that creek as it was being pumped out, and that included a screen.
Dr. Spitz went as far as to suggest that somehow a carnivore of some kind was the cause of the animal predation although all oter evidence suggests that the boys were completely submerged, as well as their clothing, and there was obviously no animal tracks or other artifacts at the scene that would make that theory sound anything remotely believable. Thankfully, he stopped short of suggesting that a new breed of homicidal carnivores with a cleaner crew who could walk upright was responsible.
Fortunately I Dressed For Bushwhacking
Starting with one of the most important parts of the autopsy evidence, is the very fact that detectives knew VERY LITTLE about it outside of the cause of death, until late May at the earliest. So little in fact, that Gary Gitchell, Lead Investigator, wrote a list of follow up questions to the crime lab on May 26. (need link here)
Frank J. Peretti, MD preformed all three autopsies on May 7, 1993, and filed reports on May 10th for cause of death only. Those causes of death btw, were all listed as homicide by multiple injuries, period. Nobody knew that two boys died from drowning, and not all three. This is particularly concerning because the first conversation that Steve Jones and Det Sudbury had with Damien Echols was on May 7th prior to autopsy and in his subsequent interview with Det Bryn Ridge on May 10, when asked by Ridge how he knew about that, Echols told Ridge that Jones told HIM that whoever did this “urinated” in the mouths of the boys.
Urine was found in the stomachs of 2 of the victims, but that information was given by phone only to Gitchell, and not before May 16th, 1993. There is no possible way Damien Echols could have had case- specific information unless he was there or knew someone that was that told him what occurred, as the detective interviewing him at the time was clueless to that fact during the interview.
There are certainly many statements by both Echols and Miskelley prior to arrest that indicate they had prior knowledge of the murders, but I have been able to ride the see saw on those for the most part, like many.
The fact that Echols knew that there was urine in the stomachs of two victims, when it was intentionally ommitted from the report can only mean he was there, or knew someone who was, and in my opinion, both.
To be continued, West Memphis Three Part III
Sources:
Crime lab Index: http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/img/crimelab.html
Chris Byers autopsy:
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/autcb.html
Michael Moore:
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/autmm.html
Stevie Branch:
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/autsb.html
Turvey Report: http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/b_turvey_profile.html
Related Posts
Related Posts:
1,388 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
K- y’all, I never do this, but I committed this today, and I was not going to miss your deadline, but I am still tweaking and adding imagery.
Should have all the embeds and hypers, images up in a bit.
Lame. Utterly unconvincing.
http://www.wtol.com/Global/story.asp?S=6483245
Sorry to have disappointed you of course, what specifically do you find objectionable or erroneous?
B
Thank you, Blink.
It will take us a very long time to digest this information.
I so wish we had it before that stupid Alford plea…
They did, and I believe that is why Baldwin changed his mind. I realize that may appear controversial, and I am open to criticism, but I can’t slice this pie any other way.
B
WOW! I don’t know what else to say just yet. I had always just assumed that the WM3 were innocent. You know what they say happens when you ASS-U-ME anything. Ihad never read anything more than the slanted websites and I saw some of PL1. Good job once again Blink. I have to tell you, I wish you could have seen my eyes bug outta my head when I clicked and saw the new headline. Now, I will go back and re-read a little slower.
Lol, I would have as well Angellica. I know it is daunting. This is not my fave piece to write, I openly admit there is no way ( at least for me) to present this data with my analysis, in a readily digestible format.
But I did not feel I could present my sole opinion as an editorial without the experts and imagery.
The age of this case makes it really difficult to present on a blog, lol.
B
Thank you Blink. I admit, I haven’t read the whole piece yet, but already questions…and ANGER about the surpressed luminol tests by defense. What else was surpressed? 8 locations of positive reactions?
Back to reading. You are pulling this investigation together like a puzzle. Bottom line…you have good EXTRADORINDARY by our wee cubs. God bless your tenacity, sister friend!!!! <3
you have good = you have done. I need an MRI on the brain.
I guess we have Brent Turvey to thank for engineering the innocent movement. I am praying that many will read this and at least take a REAL look at the evidence once and for all.
This is a big report. A lot of details to digest. I may have to read this three or four times to get it all sequenced. I understand now why this took so long to research and produce. Especially during the effects of the storm, power loss etc..
An early observation is the possiblity that Chris Byers may have arrived by himself ahead of the other two and was attacked first.
Michael Moore may have been the one that MissKelly had to chase.
This area is actually a type of limited swamp. A carefull examination of the area with regard to footprints, broken folage and ground disturbance should have been made immediatly on hands and knees if necessary. Of course, searchers tromping around the area leaving tracks and disturbed vegetation may have made that difficult.
There is no doubt that you have taken this whole case apart, found some real strange things and put it back together in a meaningful way.
I will wait for the links to work. Is the blue flashing area in the photo intended to show the path of the luminol search?
I am still hyperlinking, upgraded a few things so when it hypers a PDF it has it’s own rules, lol.
That blue blink is an overlay of the sketch of the detective’s luminol sketch, and the exact coordinates, because the area has been cleared.
B
Blink – thanks for getting this posted. I would like to know when the boy’s bicycles were found and where.
Thanks
The boys bikes were found in the 10 mile bayou, underneath the pipe bridge, one on each side, after being drug, the same day they were found.
B
“Utterly unconvincing” = Brilliant argument there Sherlock
Blink, Do you have a link to transcripts regarding the May 7th conversation that Echols had with Steve Jones and Detective Sudbury where he makes the statement about the urine? I cant seem to find it in your article, perhaps I missed it or you haven’t had a chance to include it yet.
Thank you!
http://callahan.8k.com/images2/d_echols/de_notes_01.jpg
Thanks for keeping on this case since your first article Ive been reading a lot of different sites an info on thease tragic murders.
More great work by the Blinkmeister.
I get that this was at a time that is very different than where we are now with scientific evidence, BUT why didn’t this get brought back around to trial? It seemed quite the rush to let these boys (now men) go with the plea instead of having retrials.
The prosecutor wants to make it appear that the state of Arkansas most likely would not win at trial so in order to save the state from the cost of retrial, and what would surely be lawsuits by all three men if they were found innocent at trial, there was this huge rush. Almost 18 years after the convictions and then a few days before they were released word broke, which also was just a few months before it would be decided if they could get new trials.
Why doesn’t Mara Leveritt have this information? She’s the one who wrote the book about the case which is now being made into a low budget movie to be released only long enough in theaters to make it eligible for the Academy Awards. I mean, Blink, you have this information which I’m assuming you got legally and from the correct sources. I’m just shocked that so many people who should know the facts (as in Ms. Leveritt) are coming away from this release with celebrations and accusations. Odd thing is I hear very little about this case and I’m in Arkansas. Other than an FB post here or there, I have not heard folks discussing this case. And the only remarks I’ve heard back the WM3 and celebrate their freedom.
I’m afraid of a couple of those who were released. Age simply ages you, it doesn’t mature a person unless they do things that cause maturity. Do murderers like this recommit? What I mean is, what happened while they were in jail is that they became heroes instead of convicted murderers with high profile attorneys and Hollywood stars on board for their freedom. I’m certain that they read a lot of books and became educated from that. But behavior, emotional, and psychological issues (maybe not they, but Echols has a long list of problems)were not addressed, or maybe they were.
I’m dumbfounded to have the information that you have provided when I just assumed they were innocent and the cops needed to get someone put away fast. I pray this would not happen in these days of CSI. While the TV show isn’t real life stuff, there are real life CSI folks as we all know and forensics, if only we had that 17 years ago.
If Ms. Leveritt does not have this information, it is because she chooses not to. I read her work, and it was wrought with factual errors and ommitted others. I SOO see the value in a journalist on the ground covering and writing on case as an investigative journalist and not a reporter- don’t we really understand that in a large way? Hasn’t social media has brought that possibly in a jetpack?
I have found her to be intelligent and eloquent, but by her own admission, she is absolutely biased in this case to be on the board of fundraising efforts, selling books at press conferences and a principal and editor in a publication covering the case. I will let the masses make that judgement call, I have no dog in that particular fight.
I will say, that she had not updated her pay per membership site until the announcement on mine I would be featuring the case, on August 14. Her last update was July 22. The magic of Rss?
B
@ CarneVoodoo says:
September 2, 2011 at 4:38 pm
What does the link have to do with this piece?
Why wasn’t the urine tested for dna?
There is no DNA in pure urine, and it was in the stomach contents so the best that one could hope for would be foreign epithelial cells, which at the time, I do not believe they had the technology to extract.
B
The “indicative of familiarity” is in Part 3?
You have a level of knowledge based on submersion in reports few will get to, including me.
May I suggest a “cheat sheet” – a few bullitted points to take away?
I think in the article you convey: 1) detailed descriptions of the homicides from physical evidence, 2) evidence the homicides were committed at the site (luminol), 3) evidemnce Echols knew an inside fact (urine in mouths). What other takeaways?
I thought this was an educational piece rather than a prosecutorial piece.
Agreed, no way around that and maintain the integrity as I saw it. I do not feel that I can cliff note this case as badly as I would love to. What difference would it make given the outcome? I feel pretty strongly that the cliff note version freed people that are guilty of this crime, essentially.
B
“on May 10, when asked by Ridge how he knew about that, Echols told Ridge that Jones told HIM that whoever did this “urinated” in the mouths of the boys.
Urine was found in the stomachs of 2 of the victims, but that information was given by phone only to Gitchell, and not before May 16th, 1993.”
Blink,
Obviously, this would be pretty damning evidence. But, how do you know this? Is it documented somewhere? You said this information was only given to Gitchell by phone, and not before May 16th. Do you know what specific date it was given to Gitchell? Did he write it down? Why is it not in the reports, and how do we know for sure that Damien even said it? If it wasn’t documented, or better yet, tape recorded, then, I don’t know if we can be sure he did.
Defense’ own motion indicating urine was found:
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/motions/de_dna_testing.html
Ridge notes transcribed:
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/dwe.html
B
I was going to ask the same question as NanaStacy. Why wasn’t the urine tested for DNA? Blink answered that there is no DNA in urine. I was curious about that so I did some research. DNA can be extracted from urine, the success rate for doing so is about 80%. Over time the sample will degrade depending on age and how well it is stored. Here is my source for that information. http://www.orchidcellmark.com/forensicdna/forensicfaq.html
I would be interested to know if they still have the urine sample and if it has ever been or will be DNA tested.
Maggie M- that extraction has to do with urine contained from the direct donor, my assumption is from the bladder directly or from a control sample. The urine was found in the stomachs of 2 victims, meaning it was subject to stomach acid, and the GI process as a contaminate, and of course, would need extraction from the known sample (victim).
B
These poor boys-what a horrible, horrible way to be treated. As always, this case leaves me in tears and makes me question what kind of humans walk this earth.
Thanks Blink, that makes sense.
Wow, B! One can only imagine the time you put into this. You’re absolutely awesome in your service to those without the ability to speak for themselves, you do know that don’t you? You told their story. You enabled their voices to be heard above all of the fanfare, as only you can, and for which we are eternally grateful.
In my work, I was so “affected” by forensic and autopsy evidence in this case, while the team was working it, I made them assign numbers to each child. That lasted 2 days really. The burden on knowing such macabre details about a child as a Mother- I learned I will never be a clinician, on a case I am personally working on.
I can tell you every measurement and every classification and pattern of every wound on Mike, Stevie and Chris, from memory. We have the technology to build animations of this crime that in my mind, would make it inconceivable it happened any other way.
That said, it is all over. Trying to figure out exactly what my role is here.
B
Here is the question that keeps going through my mind. If there is evidence that Damien knew about the urine before that info was released, which is really damming and points to guilt in my opinion, why would the state of Arkansas agree to this plea deal and release the 3? Surely this would come up in a new trial and be just as damming now as it would have been 18 years ago. Why wouldn’t the state take it’s chances on a new trial rather then releasing the men who were convicted of these crimes? It makes no sense to me.
Well I think you have hit upon the multi-million dollar question nobody is asking.
B
Thank you so much for delivering part II as you said you would. When do you think you will have part III? Can’t wait to read it. I have this question for you: since you have pretty much confirmed what I already believed, that they are guilty, what do you think the supporters will do now? Echols has duped them all! Millions have been donated to this cause. What do you think is going to happen?
Blink,
Thank you for speaking for these little angels! I admire your integrity and your never-ending search for the truth!
Thanks about the luminol path. You have overlaid this information on an older photo.
This still shows the Arkansas-Louisiana Gas Co. (ARK-LA) right-of-way to be uncleared and in bad shape. The pipeline is a 10″ line put together with screwed pipe in about 1930. Welding techniques for pipe did not develope until a few years later.
The little hill marked turtle hill is probably named from its shape rather than the fact that turtles were in the area. I think it is a streatch to blame some of the wounds on turtles. They normally eat what they kill and not carrion.
The fact that the court allowed a motion from the defense to withhold evidence regarding the work with the luminol is IMO an admission that the judge did not understand science and was not about to allow anything in court that he or she didn’t understand. This is one of the reasons I believe we should always have video in criminal trials.
The bite marks on James Moore, missed by the ME? but confirmed by Dr. Davis (odontologist) as human bite marks, through autopsy photos, and has excluded the defendants (3).
So where do we go from here? Dental records (including xrays) of any other suspects? Was anyone else considered? What do you make of Byer’s teeth removal?
Thank you for bringing this to light and for the info that the autopsy photos aren’t very clear in this area.
Blink wrote: “Bite mark evidence is very important in any criminal case because it demonstrates behavior and lends itself to individuation. It can reveal to an examiner who committed the act, because bite marks can be as unique as fingerprints. And, once established, it also reveals the act itself; biting.”
Well said.
Word Girl: That is an excerpt from Turvey, and is my fault I did not do a better outline as to what was mine and his..
Not one child had human bitemarks.
B
All these years and I never realized the horrible,torturous, deaths these children suffered. I’m very hormonal right now and I could just cry. I hate that there was jury misconduct and the investigation botched. The killers need to be in jail.
Good maps and photos here.
http://www.jivepuppi.com/jivepuppi_paths_to_the_crime_scene.html
Don’t know if this has been posted before but it helped me see the area better.
Blink -
VERY compelling analysis of Damien’s urine statement vs. when it was first discovered by ANYONE else.
Did Ellington know of this evidence? If so, I do not understand how he could let these guys walk. I knew from the start something was not right, but if he knew of this evidence then something is VERY wrong here.
I have extensive case knowledge and this is the first time I’ve come across the urine angle. It is incredibly damning, and thanks for this info. Is it possible that Ellington himself didn’t know about it? I know, for example, that he inaccurately claimed the Medfords had “recanted” when they clearly did not and would have continued to testify as they previously did.
Blink,
I appreciate all the hard work that went into this piece. Like ATG and others, I am going to have to read and reread this to get all the points. You definitely have got me thinking.
The blood evidence- I do not know if the information I am going to share will have any use in this case- or if you have already considered these facts and eliminated any or all of these potential concerns/points.
But here goes-
When I was trying to understand the whys and hows in the Casey Anthony case- one of the areas that I most researched was the Stain in the trunk. How did it get there? Was it blood? Did luminol react with bleach /urine or fecal matter ect?
Heres what I learned about luminol-
Once luminol is used- the sample is no longer viable for other testing. The area can no longer be tested for DNA- Luminol destroys DNA, although in some cases a reagent can be used to try and regain some.
This was all very interesting to me during the Anthony case- because it made me wonder if the stain on the carpet, was composed of a “bloody” outline but no DNA was found because of the luminol testing. Yes, I know the prosecution argued that it was a stain of decompositional fluids- therefore it would not contain DNA- probably so. I do not know if the sections of carpet cover was tested with DNA- prior to luminol or after. I also wondered if the stain was directly related to bleach being used to clean up the stain- Were the pictures we discussed previously, taken before or after the luminol had been used? That would have direct bearing on the hows and the whys of the stain.
In trying to figure this out- I read up on everything I could concerning luminol. Luminol reacts with blood, urine and fecal matter- from My understanding, not just human, but animal also. In fact In lab tests/science projects they often substitute cows blood ect- Luminol gives a number of “false positives”. This can happen, when bleach or other such cleaning products are used- sometimes ofcourse when trying to get rid of evidence- Luminol also reacts positively to some plants materials, some compost materials, some paints/dyes- iron, copper, rust.
Another interesting thing I learned, which you also pointed out- is that if the testing is not done properly, or by properly trained CSI techs- mistakes can occur-
A repeated spraying can create streaking on vertical surfaces and pooling on horizontal surfaces. Luminol needs to be mixed close to the time of the spraying. If sprayed more than once or often? unclear?, It can actually cause the reaction spot to fade-
So heres some of my concerns- Did inexperienced people actually cause pooling streaking ect? Considering this testing was new, did they have standards and follow protocols- besides the areas (which you touched on) in which we know they did not best utilize luminol… Did the ditch water and animals ect effect the testing?- Ditch water, I imagine would contain fecal matter, cleaning products, dyes, iron, copper, rust ect ect- it was runoff and was obviously filthy. Were the tests reacting to urine, Such as on the trees, in the water itself- on the bank? Was it reacting to plant materials?- Was it reacting to the childrens body placement?…. the bringing the bodies into the area to dump? (I can see why you think it wasnt a dump site…but I am still not sure) Was it reacting towater/blood/other bodily fluids dripping from bodies- Allens wet clothes other officers shoes the killers ect ect? Was it bad testing proceduresor other?
Blink- I wrote when you posted your second part- Id be wearing my thinking cap…I am very interested in your thoughts- as always. You probably have already thought all this through and can give some much needed info explaining the whys and why nots… I look forward to it.
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Luminol
and
http://www.scribd.com/doc/55693845/Use-of-Bluestar-Forensic-in-Lieu-of-Luminol-at-Crime-Scenes
and
http://www.bookrags.com/research/luminol-chmc/
and
http://shs.westport.k12.ct.us/forensics/08-blood/luminol.htm
and
http://www.crime-scene-investigator.net/blood.html
Here are some of the links – I was able to find discussing luminol- they arent my original links( for the Anthony case)- but contain the same info.
Thanks
AJMO
@jack dobson
I cannot fathom Ellington was not aware of any of the case relevant details. That said, I used to believe in Santa.
“Trying to figure out exactly what my role is here.
B”
Blink, justice is often not so much in the punishment, as it is in the reveal of truth.
Plus, on a more practical level, you can help to ensure that some governor down the line doesn’t get talked into pardons. These are still young men.
I swear you are the practical me, among other attributes, great point as always.
B
Well, Jack Dobson and Blink, an Alford plea being a huge deal as attornies were asking each other what it was, how could Ellington let these guys go and in such quick fashion if he knew what Blink had/has discovered? It seemed so rushed to me and I would have expected new trials, but never what happened.
I wonder how many people would cross to the other side of the street if they were about to pass Echols? Just by chance he did it; I’d be afraid. I never knew the brutality until you wrote about it Blink. I guess you don’t hide the down and dirty and maybe others have.
Sadly, if the down and dirty is meant to be laundered, it has a way of doing so, regardless of the laundromat.
(say it backwards like Yoda, lol)
B
Ellington certainly was wrong about the Medford affidavit’s contents, so I have started to think him rather clueless. I had begun to ascribe much more sinister motivations to him, but ignorance is the likely one and I should have applied the razor earlier.
Thanks for all your hard work. I am going back through the autopsy information for a second time. It is painful to do so but important. The urine, incidentally, indicates a very real desire to degrade these beautiful children in the most base ways possible…but you know that.
I do, and I know that the act is one of juvenile intention, and possibly an act that had befallen one of the accused, previously.
B
I am not convinced by the urine statement so far. The links only show that urine was found in the stomach of two boys, on May 10th Damien stated a juvie officer told him someone had urinated in the boys’ mouths, and that Gitchell referenced the urine in a letter dated May 26th. I don’t see anything which shows when Gitchell or anyone for that matter learned of the urine. I also don’t recall the prosecutor asking Damien about this knowledge of urine at the trial, although he was asked at trial about how he knew one boy was cut up more than the others.
@beaglebrd
I’ll give you my quick take on Ellington.
He is relatively new to his job. He has been bombarded with supporter B.S. for so long he actually has bought into some of it, as he did with the Medfords. He doesn’t know the case all that well, as the previous indicates. He wants rid of this thing.
Now what follows is speculative, but I imagine not far off the mark.
The State was likely to win the evidentiary hearing. I won’t wade into the weeds but the burden was on the defense at that juncture and incredibly high. If a new trial had been granted, though, an acquittal was possible for Echols and Baldwin. This raises the question about why a deal was cut for Misskelley given he definitely would have been convicted again, but that is an aside.
The defense knew the only way to get a new trial was to prevail either on the jury misconduct claim or because DNA testing would have raised reasonable doubt. That doubt certainly would have been raised if DNA matched a red herring suspect such as Terry Hobbs. My guess is the defense knew, at the time it approached the State Attorney General, the DNA test would be a nothing burger and everything would ride at the evidentiary hearing on jury misconduct.
Enter Scott Ellington. He’s knew and uninformed or misinformed. He believes the jury misconduct claim to be valid and that he will not prevail at a new trial. I can tell you, in my personal estimation, the jury misconduct claim would not have allowed the defense to prevail at the evidentiary hearing but that is irrelevant now.
So in a sense, both the defense and the State at least felt they had to deal. Thus, the Alford plea.
It shocked me, to be frank, but then again the more I analyze the more it becomes obvious the weak link here was Ellington. This should be a sound warning to all voters that those down ticket offices such as district attorney are those that most affect their lives.
I’m off my soapbox now.
@socalgal
Respectfully, you are not reviewing facts in this case, and I learned long ago it is a waste of time to try convert an opinion of someone who has Hung their hat, so to speak.
@jack
Agreed with the exception that there is an entire lunchtable
discussion that is not happening
If that happened as described, Blink, it would seem the SAG also wanted rid of the case. I find this odd given how hard he fought to uphold the convictions, but he, too, may have been worn down.
I think a defense attorney knew the SAG, approached him, and asked that a meeting be arranged with the local prosecutor and it was. Whether the SAG knew it would lead to these results–remember, Echols is on a suspended sentence and unlike probation mental health treatment cannot be forced, by way of example–is an open question. To be quite honest, I don’t know whether or not the SAG agreed with the results or was appalled by them.
He certainly did not ask for a rehearing on what seemed to be an erroneous ruling by the Arkansas State Supreme Court that led to an evidentiary hearing. That is possibly telling.
“That said, it is all over. Trying to figure out exactly what my role is here.
B”
FWIW, I think you have a gift. You see things that others miss.
I believe your role here is to expose TRUTH…and that you’re fulfilling that role brilliantly.
You are not responsible for what others do with TRUTH.
Continue to shine that light!
Thank you for all you do.
@socalgal – I’m with you at this point – and Blink respectfully I am reviewing facts in this case – yes it sounds damning but come on Glitchell would say anything, after all the case was an “11″ wasn’t it??? Why not bring in such ‘damning’ evidence – not at all convincing at this point to me
Do you have a link to the state’s lab report from the analyzation of the boys’ stomach contents stating there was urine found? I could not find one, maybe I overlooked it.
The link you gave for the defense’s request to do testing on the items listed is not proof the state’s lab found urine in the stomach contents, neither are hand written notes from a WMPD detective. If you could show solid proof it would be appreciated.
Below is a link to a report Gitchell submitted to the lab inquiring about the urine in two of the boys’ stomachs stating Peretti told him about it but at a Rule 37 hearing held October 2009 Peretti testifed that he never told anyone urine was found in any of the boys’ stomachs who is telling the truth?
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/img/kermitc2.html
The causes of death were all listed as homicide by multiple injuries.
If any of the victims drowned I don’t believe it was from the water in the ditch and I don’t think Peretti knew either, thus the multiple injuries COD. There was very little liquid/fluid found in the stomach and lungs, so little it is possible the drowning may have been caused by the basal skull fractures. Terminal aspiration is described by Peretti, because he saw some fluid in the sphenoind sinus. In basal skull fractures this is common and does not mean the victim inhaled water or breathed in water. Considering the head injuries consistant with those basal skull fractures, he ought to have known of this fluid in the sphenoind sinus, was consistant with basal skull injuries.
If Michael and Stevie drowned, it may have been from their own fluid. The head injuries I believe, are the direct cause to all froth and fluids noted, especially taken into consideration where the fluid and froth was situated.
There is an evidence submission report (linked below) where a Mason jar of water where the victims were found was submitted to the lab by the WMPD but there is a note where it states it was not received by the lab so it was never analyzed. That is unfortunate because if the fluid taken from the victims at autopsy would have been compared to the water sample the actual cause of the drowning, could have been pinpointed.
http://callahan.8k.com/images2/ascl/ascl_evidence_submission_5_17_93.jpg
Something occurred to me as I continue to digest this info. Misskelley might want to be very careful and check who is around him at all times. Even tho this case is over a lot of personal ‘face’ and ego is invested in the innocence of the WM3. I would not be surprised at all if Misskelley blows that innocence out the window. They can question his intelligence all they want but if he ever elects to go public, it’s all over and the supporters will be barbecued in the court of public opinion. That includes Ellington. I’m not sure that Misskelley hasn’t become sort of a victim here also. He appears to have a conscience and the least blood on his hands.
I was finding it hard to get through the Luminol testing and especially the injuries to the boys and then POW Blink comes up with the urine confession and even outdoes herself after the Icepick revelation in part 1. It only dawned on me a while later that these sick monsters beat up the boys and then urinated on them, that is beyond degrading and to think these scumbags have thousands of supporters who will just ignore this info makes me so angry.
@jack dobson
There is no doubt the SAG wanted no part , he let an elected prosecutor who had an 18 year old case for a year usurp the supreme court.
lizzy says:
September 2, 2011 at 10:48 pm
“Trying to figure out exactly what my role is here.
B”
Blink, justice is often not so much in the punishment, as it is in the reveal of truth.
Plus, on a more practical level, you can help to ensure that some governor down the line doesn’t get talked into pardons. These are still young men.
______________________
Absolutely, Lizzy!
Blink, your role is what it has always been – truth.
But for you, and those few like you who care enough to stand in the face of such adversity in order to proclaim, uphold and maintain “truth”, far greater would the majority be that bought into the lies, and the lives of three innocent little boys, who suffered so greatly, would further cease to matter.
Standing back and looking at all of this from a safe distance – (I can well imagine and even understand that when you can do such things as bring these children back to life, along with all of their wounds and sufferings, in 3D format, you need to guard your heart, and maintain a safe distance, such as in assigning them numbers rather than names in a futile attempt to depersonalize them somehow) – one of the most devastating of all things for me is the realization that to so many Chris, Stevie and Michael have ceased to matter. You enable them to matter, still, as well as to ensure that they always will.
The written word is forever, you know, and for as long as there is a Blink on Crime for the curious as well as the concerned to refer back to, Chris, Michael and Stevie, to name but a few of the many, will be able to tell their side of the story, and in so doing there will always be those who rise up in defense of them so that truth will never become so completely obscured.
Big, warm, heartfelt hugs to you, Blink as you press on.
@julio
Thanks for the kind words.
B
@ 1 for all
Why in the world would the defense through their motion concede their was urine found if there never was?
I admit I could not find anything more than I linked to, but as I said, I still say Gitchell had to be under that impression or why put it in the memo. Jones still would not have known that on May 7. He would not have known it on the 10th either.
Not seeing how that info true or not is not something Damien clearly knew.
@Morgan
Thanks for the kind words. Not trying to make this about me or us of course, but it has occurred to me given the outcome here there is a bigger picture situation that is not yet known.
I really pray for that. I also pray that this happened the way I theorized with the bulk of the brutality perimortem.