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
Hi Blink,
Thank you for the great information. I tried reading everything all at once, so I am sure that I am missing an answer to my own question, but here goes anyway. . .
Jessie mentioned in his confessions that the young boys were sexually molested by Echols and Baldwin at the site – if non WM3 supporters believe Jessie’s confession than it is likely that the evidence should point to some type of sexual abuse of the young boys. I have read TONS of conflicting evidence about the possible sexual nature of the crimes – the biting, sexual penetration, castration, etc. . .
What evidence – if any – did you find that supported Jessie’s confession that the crimes were sexual in nature?
Sorry for asking the question – I can’t tell your analysis from Truvey’s. . .
I dont think Jessie ever said that the crimes were sexually motivated, but given his statements, it would seem logical for one to reach that conclusion. You have one boy emasculated, and the other with damage to his penis seemingly from trauma, and Michael Moore, the only one who’s pants were not found turned inside out and closed. It is my belief that although I could never prove it, that whatever molestations if any were purpotrated on these boys, it was an act of extreme humiliation and violence, not for sexual gratification per se. Again, I have to point out, in my mind, there was not sufficient evidence to conclude there was any actual penetrations, etc.
I really believe that Jessie saw some things, and ran after Moore, was a decent distance away with Baldwin and Echols backs to him.
B
A lot of references to mosquito bites on the victims. Any reports of mosquito bites on the wm3 that you know of?
Not that I know of, but I am making the assumption that at least Echols was wearing his trench if not he and Baldwin, they are both missing. There is an image of Echols without a shirt on or about May 10 but it is very poor resolution. In fact, I am having trouble converting case images to my system because of that.
Dr. Haskell pretty much hit the nail on the head, this had to have happened between 6:30 and 8 PM.
B
Blink do you know if there was any alcohol evident in the urine?
There was etoh in the blood of Michael Moore that Peretti attributed to decomp.
I am not aware at that time if they could get an alcohol (BAL) tox screen from gastric contents, I know we can now.
B
Blink, give me a moment to compose myself, here. Emotions run deep and seep. I’m still stuck on the images in 3D that you certainly must have suffered your way through. I am familiar with the technology, however more rudimentary – Solid Works – than whatever program you are running that would allow for greater depth and dimension, set into motion and zoomed in on. UGH.
I was tempted; but not possessing the capability myself, I wasn’t about to subject someone else with the daunting task of lifting the children out of the ditch, hands bound to ankles and all ashen gray and so terribly wounded, distorted, and laid bare. I would protect those I love from the sight of such things, so used what resources were at hand and bit down hard – real hard – and focused in on every cut and scratch, paying particular attention to the ligatures and what signs there were that would indicate they’d struggled hard against their bindings, that would have added to the sheer horror!
Having gone over every cut, gouge and scratch, to include the dismemberment of Chris, I’ve come to conclude that though the boys may not have been dead during the bulk, they were certainly unconscious. The rage alone, that is evident here, would have knocked the boys out cold, in very short order, if for no other reason than to silence their pleadings and screams, though I admit that this might be something I merely choose to believe, as desperate as I am to also believe that they were unaware of all that was being done to them.
Still, if it’s any comfort to you, keep your emotions in check and your mind focused upon those things that are certain, such as the fact that the head injuries suffered by all three suggest that the boys were rendered unconscious early on. The assault upon them, and particularly Chris, was so intense that they wouldn’t have regained consciousness prior to drawing their last breaths, but you know that.
I commend you for not posting the photographs of the boys, and I pray that they don’t haunt you forever. You’re doing them a good service, for which they would thank you, were they here to do so. Consider yourself smiled down upon and so warmly embraced by three little boys who continue to be blessed by your grace.
As for the “bigger picture”, well, what can I say to that, so hoping and praying that indeed there will be a new trial and that all of the evidences that have come to light will be presented but I seriously doubt that will happen. With such deep pockets supporting the WM3 and the economy being what it is – and the State of Arkansas at the mercy of a budget, along with such a star studded cast speaking so loudly, I tend to think that the powers that be will content themselves with the admission of guilt as it stands, and move on.
I commend you for not posting the photographs.
Thank you for the kind words. It is a very kind physiological response that extreme pain and sometimes just extreme fear in some can render the body unconscious.
B
@Blink, 50.
We already see the outline of that bigger picture. It is quite disturbing.
Popular entertainment exploited this horrible crime, and took a “innocent Goth teens convicted” angle to maximize profit. There’s nothing new there, actually. Celebrities were drawn to this contrived cause and the money flowed, the multitudes were fooled, and objective reality and facts fell by the wayside. Even that isn’t to be totally unexpected.
Where this becomes unique is with what happened August 19th.
This is the first time I recall that entertainment, money, celebrity and a gullible public united to wear down a prosecutor and a State allowed three bloodthirsty killers to walk. Mob rule replaced the rule of law. Given how cash-strapped most local and state police departments, district attorneys offices, and state attorney general offices are these days and likely will be for some time, it very well may be the start of an ominous trend. All a convict has to do to walk is be relatively telegenic and able to spin a yarn well enough. If a prisoner meets both criteria, he may be able to gain enough leverage to walk out of prison.
There is a book here and I would write it but/for the fact there is no market. Guilty people behind bars are the “dog bites man” story. The railroaded teen yarn is “man bites dog” and sells.
Just ask Mara Leveritt, ad nauseum.
Eventually one or all of these three will re-offend and land back in prison. My actual concern is another innocent will be harmed. Approximately none of the ringleaders who engineered the release will be held accountable, and few even will be questioned about what they did. The irony is that Ellington and McDaniel likely will be ruined while those who browbeat them into a bad decision will prosper.
There’s the bigger picture.
Well- I truly could not have written a better summation.
I agree with you that this decision will ultimately be political suicide for Ellington- I have offers, lol.
I mean that respectfully, but I was one of the first to call out Nifong.
I really want to understand the dynamics that went into this decision, the ones that are not public.
I also have to say, what is the deal with the apparent death of investigative journalists/reporters?
Lots of spoons on lots of tables, I have never seen anything quite like it.
B
Blink, I agree with what everyone said – your role is uncovering the truth, and that is huge. It matters. It matters a lot.
And, yes, supporters, are working on exoneration. Peter Jackson has been especially loud about it. I see absolutely no way it could ever happen, but then I also didn’t believe they could ever be released. It’s important that exoneration (or a pardon) doesn’t happen, becasue that would truly be the ultimate injustice in this case. The way it has turned out so far, with the Alford pleas, has been unjust enough.
A few more thoughts…
I read this installment as soon as it was posted, but wanted to collect my thoughts before commenting with anything. As some others who have already commented, despite being very familiar with the case, I was never aware of the circumstances of Echols’s comment about the urine. I can’t believe this has been so little known, even among non-supporters.
I have no trouble believing Ellington was not aware of it, and not aware of any number of relevant facts of the case. Every time he has spoken out about the case, he has discredited himself further. Jack Dobson, I had also suspected him of having had more sinister motivations in all of this, but in the end decided a simple (and tragic) lack of familiarity with the case on his part is the most likely explanation.
Although, Ellington has shown himself not to be averse to tweaking facts – the way he misrepresented the role of the SAG in all this, and the way he misrepresented his “talking it over” with Sherrif Mike Allen, were both most definitely on purpose. In any case, whether it was ignorance of the case or something more sinister, what Ellington did is seriously wrong. A prosecutor who is both honest and informed would never have done it.
Let me say this emphatically- Sheriff Allen was NEVER consulted about this decision. N E V E R.
He learned about it as a done deal, like the families of the victims, and say what you want about Fogleman and Davis- but we ALL saw them consult the families when Miskelley’s confession was inadmissible.
B
I thought of this when I read the first installment & continue to feel this way;
The infectiousness of crime is like that of the plague.
-Napolean Bonaparte
A perfect storm of dysfunction, abuse and biology stole the lives of three young men, it spread through the offenders making the sum of their actions greater than the parts. There is no doubt in my mind freedom is not commensurate with their crimes. The years spent in prison is not commensurate with their crimes either.
Eloquently stated.
B
Sorry for the consequtive posts, but a few final thoughts on the substance of your impressive work.
There is little doubt the Byers child was abused at home. That doesn’t make the father a killer but it goes a long way toward explaining why Mark Byers was and continues to be the prime red herring “suspect.”
This was a sexual assault although there may not have been any penetration. The term “sexual assault” is used widely here because it wasn’t for gratification but for humiliation. The genital mutilation, bindings, and possible suction marks make that obvious. Criminologists tell us that among the more insane characteristics of serial rapists is a very frequent demented belief the victim has enjoyed the crime just as they would have conventional love making. In many cases, though, the goal simply is to humiliate, control, and inflict pain. This happened here.
One of the more troubling aspects of the so-called “Bible confession” was Misskelley’s claim that the three killers were under the influence of an older man who resembled Echols. Misskelley pointedly testified that this man was not present at the scene nor has any evidence pointed to a fourth individual. Nonetheless, if it ever is proved there was a bite mark from an unknown assailant, and while the Turvey report is geared to implicate Byers it does seem convinced there was, I hope this individual gets a quick visit from the West Memphis Police Department and the Craighead County Sheriff’s Department.
Conversely, the forensics strongly bolster Misskelley’s confession. The wounds are where they should be if Misskelley told the truth. The bodies were where they would be expected to be and in the correct order if Misskelley told the truth.
Finally, it is easy to dump on the WMPD and state investigators for what they did wrong. The luminol tests are something they did right. While they may not have been admissible in 1993, these tests now are recognized as scientifically valid and could have been produced at a new trial to bolster the state’s case. Your analysis of the luminol testing is astonishing, Blink.
Thank you once again for this analysis and I look forward to the third installment.
The older dude, is supposedly Farris, who passed a polly, but he was connected to Littrell and Divilbliss.
I think Lucy has really articulated it best- Ellington, for whatever reason, did not know this case, certainly a prequisite for making a deal of this magnitude.
I really want to be careful in my comments because I do not wish to offend those that “are not convinced” of guilt. For the most part, I feel that barometer for them, means that based on the evidence presented, they could not, in good faith, reach a verdict of guilty to the extend they understand the law. I encourage those that are interested in this case to read the documents, my work, alternative opinions, but by all means, read the transcripts et al . I cannot underscore enough the importance of evaluating reports and witnesses, and what happens under oath, when deciding for one’s self.
B
Blink
I have to agree with some of the others. You have said yourself that this is a teaching blog about crime.
It is obvious to me that many others in the field of crime writing and journalism read this site. This may be the prime benifit to society of your work. Quality journalism with good research and enough understanding of science to find the often overlooked truth for those that are victims.
The very essence of the site name “Blink” taken from a person who desired for people to become instantly cognizant of what is happening around them and why.
It is also an opportunity for our criminal justice systems in the United States to understand that many citizens are desirious of improvements in the system for the benefit of victims and accused.
And, as you discussed in your radio broadcast with Dana, the public needs to become aware of “checkbook journalism” regarding crime reporting in the media. To put a stop to big money and celebrety twisting our justice systems to prevent actual justice from being served.
All of these things are in the process of becoming a reality because of your work and those that read and post comments on this site.
All of this, plus the development of a real community of dedicated readers and posters that have respect for each other and the work that you do.
Oye.
All I got today, and thank you. I wish one could bottle your wisdom.
B
If I were a judge on the Arkansas Supreme Court reading your work, I would be thinking very seriously about holding a hearing regarding the actions of a certain prosecutor with the last name of Ellington.
sigh.
Thanks again, there is percolation.
B
Your response to my post is certainly uncalled for. All I stated was that I was not convinced so far due to a lack of evidentiary support for your statement the no one knew of the urine prior to May 10th. Your links do not provide such “facts”. That a letter referencing the urine is dated May 26th does not support your statement unless we know the contents of that letter state that no one was aware of this prior to May 10th & you have not provided the contents of that letter or any other proof that this information was not known to anyone prior to May 10th. You accuse me of “not reviewing the facts” when all I asked for was the evidentiary support (i.e. facts)you used to support your statement. It is now obvious that you don’t have any, as if you had support of it, it would be relatively easy to provide the source–as any investigator would have done.
socalgal- I am not picking on you- I say upfront. If you disagree with an opinion or reference a source, you must do exactly that, “source it”. As it were, I have done so for you, so posts can be seen in context, in their entirety. (anyone not practicing this on BOC I pray you practice this from now on, updates are coming
Your previous post and my response, which you are referring to:
This was posted in response to the instant piece, on it’s own and un-edited.
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.
My response to you, which was not directly underneath it in bold, as I responded from the HTC:
@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.
I was not being offensive, and if you felt that way, I apologize. The fact is, Echols met with Steve Jones only once following the murders, and that was on May 7th. I agree that Ridge’s notes referencing same and that particular meeting was May 10, but he is referencing a conversation Echols and Jones ONLY could have occurred on May 7th. That meeting is confirmed by both Echols parents.
When I said I felt you were not reviewing the facts in the case, that is what I meant.
I provided a handwritten “note” letter, of a meeting both sides concur was held on May 10th.
I provided a link and reference to a meeting that was held with Jones and Sudbury with Echols parents permission on May 7th.
There is just no getting around whether or not that info is true, that it circulated PRIOR to autopsy, and PRIOR to disclosure of said autopsy to LE.
I am absolutely open to conflicting or dissenting facts in support of any erroneous postings or opinions I have at any time, provided they have a counter point or reference.
” I am not convinced” is a fair statement of course, but without the contrarian fact-based argument,
I just think… is a popular opinion and the equivalent of the hanging of one’s hat, imo.
as opposed to-
Here is how your information conflicts with my opinion, and the basis for that is …
I do not care which side, if there is such a thing, one is on- there is no doubt I have developed leads in an 18 year old case, that “lead” to further implication of recently released guilty murderers.
One has only to ask the principals in this case if that is a true statement on my behalf and I welcome anyone that doubts that, to make some calls to confirm, if one is so inclined.
While it does not mean that it would convict them in a new trial, let’s agree that this info, or anything developed in 18 years would never set them free outside of the set of circumstances already discussed.
I would be very interested, in one single lead, one single factoid, one single forensic result that would potentially seen as exculpatory as to these crimes.
That said, the juror misconduct issue, is not without merit.
Let me tell you how this would have “rolled” provided Ellington was correct, and a new trial was provided or all three.
Miskelley would have been offered a deal to get out, if he agreed to testify against Baldwin and Echols.
He would have taken it, and new testing, and new forensic applications to existing evidence would have secured a plea from either Echols or Baldwin or both.
The entire point of my assay in the folds of my essay, is that there is no legal basis for this plea.
There is absolutely a legal basis for an evidentiary hearing and a potential new hearing as a result.
It is the equivalent of being in the middle of the 400M hurdles relay, and removing the hurdles of the team of your choice.
B
Blink,
Thank you for the links. I have read and re-read, and then researched some of the information.
I think it is very possible that Steve Jones gave Damien this information. Where Steve got the information, I don’t know. Maybe it was just an assumption on his part. He was at the crime scene when the children were discovered. What went on there, and what was discussed, I don’t know.
It does appear that he and Jerry Driver were already out to get Damien Echols. Steve Jones did go and talk to Damien a day or two before, as Damien stated. I have also found nowhere (at this time) where Steve Jones ever denies telling Damien this. (Not that this would make much difference, because he could have said it and still deny it. But, it seems that if he did not say it, he would definitely deny it.)
I don’t think Damien would mention something such as this if he did it. He would be incriminating himself, and he would know it. I don’t see him as being that stupid.
At the time of Damien’s questioning by Ridge on 5/10/93, Damien willingly gave hair and blood samples and agreed to take a polygraph.
In the notes written by Sudbury on 5/10/93, in response to #32, question: Why would your prints be in the area of or at the crime scene?, Damien’s answer is: They won’t be.
To me, this is very strong. He doesn’t try to give some reason or excuse why his prints might be there. He is sure they won’t be.
I find the information from the Defense Motion For Forensic DNA Testing in the link you gave to be very important.
In this motion, the defense, on behalf of Damien Echols, is requesting that DNA testing be done on the urine found in the victims’ stomachs, among many other items, to establish Echols’ innocence. Why would they do this if there was a chance that it was Damien’s? :
“The requested forensic DNA testing was unavailable at the time of Mr. Echols’ trial. It is capable of providing powerful exculpatory evidence. It will establish Mr. Echols’ innocence of the crimes for which he was convicted. The grounds for this motion are fully set forth below.”
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/motions/de_dna_testing.html
Now…..
I must admit, during my research I did come across some things that I have to question.
Jessie Misskelley said that Damien and Jason put their penis’ in the boys’ mouths. Dr. Peretti said he found bruising on the outside of the mouths and on the ears, which would be consistent with injuries usually seen in children who are forced to perform oral sex. Although, he also indicates that you can get this type of injury from a punch or a slap, or from a hand over the mouth, pressing tightly against the mouth:
Excerpts from his testimony:
“In my experience as a medical examiner, those types of injuries to the ears and mount we generally see in children who are forced to perform oral sex. The punctate scratches to the nose and to the upper ribs, you can get the lip injuries by putting an object inside the mouth. You can get those type of injuries also from a punch or a slap, or you can get those type of injuries from the hand over the mouth and pressing the hands very tightly up against the mouth. (TR 1826)”
“If the oral sex was forceful enough to cause those bruises on the outside of the mouth, I would think you would expect them to also cause them on the inside of the mouth. The only damage I found inside their mouths was some superficial bite marks on one of the boys inside the cheeks.”
What I am getting from this is that the bruising to the mouth area was possibly due to holding the boys’ mouths, or putting shirts on their mouths, as Jessie said.
The reason there is no injury to the inside of the mouths is that the penises were put there, not for the purpose of a sexual nature, but for the purpose of urinating.
However, I still feel that Jessie was given certain information prior to his confessions. He also said “they were screwing them and stuff” and mentioned that Damien was “screwing one” from behind (or, in the butt), of which there seems to be no supporting evidence.
Dr. Peretti also states that he also found these types of injuries on Michael Moore:
“On the bruising to the ears and the mouth injuries that you described in Michael Moore’s case. They are similar.”
From Jessie’s confession (IIRC), he said this was not done to Michael Moore. I am also assuming that only Byers and Branch had urine in their stomach. I’m wondering why Michael Moore has these same injuries if this was not done to him. Although, I’m sure if Jessie really was there, he would try to make less of his role than the others.
I also still have questions regarding the fly larvae. If attacked and killed quickly/submerged under the water, how did flies have access to the bodies?
mjh- you DO know when Steve Jones met with Damien. He met with Sudbury and Echols on May 7th, this is supported by more than 4 witnesses.
The subsequent Ridge notes ad interview were from May 10th. Either way, real or perceived, NOBODY knew that. Impossible in advance of all autopsy findings. Warrants were secured and subsequent interviews scheduled as a result-
Regarding the larvae, or possible larvae, as opposed to eggs, which is much more likely, they were laying on the bank for several hours following their recovery.
B
Hi again Blink,
First thank you for answering my earlier question. Second, (and in hindsight perhaps this should have been my earlier question), to what extent does your analysis of the evidence support Jessie’s confessions?
Supporters of the WM3 (from the websites I have visited) say a lot of the damage to the bodies was the cause of post mortem animal predation – including the emasculation. Does the evidence support that this was more likely at the hands of the murderer? Also did any of the fiber analysis support Jessie’s statements about putting shirts inside of the boys’ mouths to muffle their screams? Any evidence of semen from one of the murderer’s masturbation at the scene? And finally, Jessie mentioned that Jason flung either the knife or part of a boy’s body onto the bank – was there anything found that supports this statement?
Thanks in advance for your help.
anya- with much respect, I am not going to be able to readers digest this case for anyone.
I can tell from your post, you have done little research, and I am NOT condemning you for that, I am simply answering your query honestly.
Chris, Stevie and Michael require that if we form an opinion, it is based on our best efforts to review the crimes that befell them.
B
@Blink “Why in the world would the defense through their motion concede their was urine found if there never was?”
Since the state/LE implied there was urine found in the boys stomachs the defense wanted the sample so they could do their own testing but since Burnett denied the testing we will never know! IMO there is no proof so I will chalk it up to rumor/lie. You are right-Steve Jones did not know on May 7th or May 10th because it is a lie he told Damien in the early days of the investigation that Damien repeated to Ridge a few days later. IMO, that is how Damien knew, repeating erroneous information LE told him…just like Jessie did in his “confession”. I swear those involved in the investigation of the case in 1993 were all made from the same mold. Do some investigating on the “investigators” of this crime, past and present, some who were also involved in the Crittenden Co. drug task force that was under investigation by the state when the murders occured, Jones, Sudbury, Bryn “I lost the evidence” Ridge and my favorite Jerry “Damien worships Satan” Driver.
1forall, with respect, the defense would never ever concede that fact, and they clearly did, if it were not so. A fact like that, missed by a defense attorney, is flat out malpractice . I am not saying I can produce gastric reports, I am simply saying there has to be a good faith reason to include the items as a request for testing, period.
B
@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.
This is why i don’t take articles of this nature and use them as gospel. It sure appears that you have most certainly hung your hat. How bout examining ALL the evidence, past, present, and future? An open mind and full digesting of all the evidence for and against would create a balanced picture correct? I mean if your goal is to inform one would think you would also address the evidence that does NOT point to their guilt of which there are tons. Nothing presented here points directly to the guilt of the three definitively. You also have not addressed the lack of dna and the dna that was found at the scene which is not attributable to the three, but others. Now how is it that three long haired teenagers left no dna but someone else did? If you are going to cherry pick facts to paint them guilty, at least don’t turn around and tell someone who doesn’t agree with your opinion as uninformed. There is a mega crap ton of evidence that does not support this theory of the crime.
The most telling aspect is the state of Arkansas deciding to let three men who they think really did murder these boys walk out when they were under absolutely no obligation to do so. All the “Hollywood” supporters were doing was providing a thorough investigation of all aspects of this case. The state was under no obligation (with the guilty verdicts recieved almost two decades ago) to listen to them or even attempt to cut a deal. One must wonder what new revelations will be coming down the pipe to see how this “eleven” case was dropped to a zero.
You know, there is nothing like a dissenter that appears from nowhere, first post, crying fowl, without a link, or a counter position to tell me that I know exactly what I am talking about.
You seriously took your time to come on here and tell me how wrong I am, without so much as an example?
I will tell you what- you want them to be innocent, poof, they are innocent- ( wand waved).
After all, that is all you really need- correct? To think that you could not be dumb enough to invest your energy to have it all be for not? Maybe donations involved?
I completely respect anyone who does not see this case in the same light, I stand behind my support of those posters 100%. That said, they make you look like your first time at amateur night- they come with files, quotes, links and case law-
Three long haired teens did not leave DNA? A better question would be appropos- why didn’t I?
I mean, I had long hair in 1993, and nobody has checked my alibis?
You see how ridiculous that sounds?
I agree no article should be gospel to anyone, we should all draw on our best efforts to analyze our position, with all available sources.
B
B
Oh and if Misskelly had already sat in jail for 18 years i highly doubt he would sell out Echols and Baldwin now when he already had a chance to do that and very well could have been free or on his way to free already. His rotating accounts of the crime would also have been called into question and I do not think that would have helped the prosecution at all.
@1forall:
So the defense entered into a conspiracy with law enforcement and the prosecution to stipulate to non-existent evidence that could have led to their clients’ executions because it went to how heinous the crime was? This is what you just claimed, and frankly, is par for the course with far too many supporters. Think for yourself and think critically. I can’t believe you did either with that ridiculous comment.
I’m pretty sure you are aware that your interpretation of facts is not with out some holes. And is mostly supported by statements or interpretation of statements given to other people and borders on heresay. This is by no means a linear accounting of all evidence. The problems here are using fake facts. The urine in the stomach can not be taken as fact, if it had been tested it would be a fact. No test. No fact. This is the same with many of the other “facts”. As has been demonstrated by others above me.
I don’t want them to be innocent, I have a very strong feeling they are innocent. What I really want is for ALL of the information to be examined. I think hanging your hat on circumstantial evidence is pretty prejudicial when there is an equal amount against others that makes a mega ton more sense. In this case especially depending on what lense of guilty or not guilty you look through is how you will see things. I don’t see a linear straight line of guilt here. What i see is evidence that can not be trusted. I see evidence that was not allowed to be tested. I see a rush to judgement whilst refusing to maintain an open mind and fully look into this case with no prejudice.
And honestly if you were in WM in 1993 you very well could have been a suspect if you listened to heavy metal and were a bit different. This is what scares people about this case. The rush to judgement. The continued rush to hold them guilty. I would gladly eat my hat if it comes out with REAL evidence that they are guilty and issue apologies to the families but as it stands right now that is not happening. Many of the things you write off as untruths… like the bite marks and animal predation have been verified by highly qualified individuals. And not just one mind you. I prefer a team of experts to a one off any day. Due to the fact that this case was never fully vetted, the sad truth is that those little boys families can NEVER know beyond a shadow of a doubt who did this. That fault is with the shoddy investigation and the continued refusal of “experts” to admit to that simple fact. The sad truth is that without the satanism reasoning having any traction in 2011, they prosecution actually did not have hard proof. Same with the fiber evidence. If these things had been allowed to be examined with modern technology then maybe your arguments would hold traction. Unfortunately this is basically creative writing. By not examining the massive amounts of circumstantial evidence against others this is only telling one side of the story and that is a fact.
You do realize, you are pontificating without a single link, a single contradictory citation, and your post is entirely your own opinion. That said, some of it is true.
I said the same in my first piece. I WELCOMED a new trial, if the ASCT ruled that way after the evidentiary hearing- but what I absolutely would have rallied behind, is developing new techniques applied to old evidence for presentation at the hearings scheduled for Dec 5th- 21st. However, no new trial was on the horizon, not 18 years later.
Is it me? Did everyone miss the link to the article where the defense spent millions on digging up backyards, testing, and buying old vehicles in attempts to find an alternative suspect.
All that cash. Got them Out, never ever developed another suspect, in fact, in my eyes, cleared the only lingerers.
What other possible scenario and suspects fit this crime with any level of reason? I am all ears.
B
hello blink,
I wanted to apologize but also let you know that I take umbrage at the tone and assumption underlying your reply to my questions.
I apologize because you correctly pointed out that I was asking you for what you refer to as a reader’s digest of the case as it pertains to the MIsskelley confessions – specifically of the Callahan documents. I did this because I found you to be informed and unbiased – as a layperson I did not want to incorrectly analyze the evidnce but you are correct that I should not ask you to provide a review for me of the crimes that befell the young boys.
However, I can assure you that I have done a great deal of research and that I was doing exactly as you suggest – to review the crime before forming an opinion – by asking you for your interpretation of the evidence as it dealt with the Misskelley confessions.
I don’t think that you should assume what the knowledge is of your readers – a simple suggestion to more closely examine the callahan documents would have sufficed.
I am certain that some individuals who have viewed your cite are probably only aware of this case through Paradise Lost or other propaganda, while others – like myself – have used other sites as well as your wealth of information to construct our own opinions of the case.
Unlike many others out there, who I am certain have only relied upon Paradise Lost or Devils Knot to guide their research, I have spent hours sifting through the evidence presented at the original trial. I looked for unbiased interpretations especially when the evidence required analysis that I knew I could not perform. Unbiased information about this case is very rare. I found your site especially helpful; I can cut through legalese quite easily, but it is much different to read an autopsy report without a medical background or to know what evidence can now be examined in light of the advancements in forensic technology. Moreover, you appeared to have access to evidence (re: road runner petro bag) or knowledge (the DNA testability of urine) that other sites do not have or post.
Your reply to my post suggests that I have made minimal effort to research this case and the tone implies that my ignorance in some way dishonors Chris, Stevie or Michael. On the contrary, I have researched a great deal about this case. Like many others who visit your site, I was looking to you for an analysis of a particular part of the case that I had felt was lacking in the overall record that is available on the web for the common person to read and readily understand.
I won’t bother you with any future questions but please know that my research and interest in the case – though seemingly inconsequential – was a way to honor the three young boys who often are forgotten because of the celebrity of the WM3
I re-read your post. I owe you an apology. You asked me about something I have yet to cover, you did nothing wrong and I should have considered your query appropriately.
My sincere apologies- I have no problem being “wrong” and admitting my shortcomings and I certainly respect anyone that can do the same.
We will get there. I commend you on seeking sources to form your opinions.
B
@Blink19bold:
It is truly astonishing the amounts of money and time expended to produce nothing. Houses and trucks and land purchased. Nada. Experts poring over all these things. Nada.
Now the fact they didn’t come up with anything exculpatory in and of itself isn’t evidence. But it tells me they couldn’t produce anything even to create reasonable doubt, and I suspect the same happened with the DNA testing. They couldn’t even get enough to make Mark Byers or Terry Hobbs a better red herring suspect.
I imagine your question will just linger there, unanswered.
As you stated earlier to another poster… its not my job to readers digest the evidence pro innocence for you.
And i’m not saying that to be a smart alec, I have a strong suspicion you are quite aware of the discrepancies AND the dirge of evidence that doesn’t point to your conclusions. You still haven’t addressed the DNA. THAT was my point about the long haired teens. Say what you want but i have a really hard time setting aside the DNA, or believing that 3 teens pulled off this crime leaving no physical evidence pointing to them and yet OTHER supposedly transfer dna was found???? I mean the evidence was good enough to warrant a new trial. http://www.arktimes.com/images/blogimages/2011/07/18/1311026332-wm3.pdf
And at least warrants a read if for no other reason than illuminating how much reasonable doubt there is in this case.
I keep a semi open mind, I have my suspicions of course as many do, But i leave it to folks to examine the case docs of which there are thousands of pieces of evidence to create a better picture. One can not overlook recantations of statements, and encouragements to, submit faulty statements and so on and so forth. Hobbs vs. Pasdar is a great read. If you want to hear from someone who was not only completely overlooked in this case until 2007 but also has never given an accurate accounting of his wear abouts or timeline of events and what a coincidence! His DNA was found at the scene, along with some other bizarre happenings. Granted it could be a strange set of coincidences, but thats some crazy coincidences. I’m sure you’ve read them… its on Callahans site as well.
No ONE but the Defense team knows what they have now. I have a suspicion those things will be coming to light shortly. I do believe that the defense was preparing one heck of a refutation of all that was considered fact in this case. I do believe this is far from over and i am glad for it. I also wanted a trial, But i do not believe that a guilty verdict would have been found. This case is far far from over. I’d be interested in reading your follow up if this case drastically changes and one would hope you as well would be willing to offer up an apology to the three if this interpretation is proven false.
If a knife was indeed used to damage the lower abdomen area and scrotum of Chris Byers, then the weapon was never identified. The survival knife found by the diver in the pond was eliminated as the weapon used.
The bruising found to be the possiblity of matching the hilt or handle of a knife is never explored. This bruse may not be from a knife at all. It could very well be from the handle of the ice axe.
Thus far, I think that the boys had been in these woods many times and perhaps interacted with their killers. We don’t have a real motive for the attacks on the boys.
If the above is true, then the first attacks would not have been expected. What we do have is rage that is taken out on three eight year old boys to the point of death for some unknown reason.
If a penis was inserted in the mouth there should have been some DNA
transferred. The autopsy report indicated that mouth swabs were taken. Was the material on the swab so contaminated that it was never a real source for comparison? Or were they like some of the other samples never tested?
These perps are now released into society. The likelyhood of a future crime by anyone of them is about eighty per cent. I would be watching them very closly.
IMO the most damning thing against the WM3 innocence is the fact that after spending $10M with even more available their defense team elected to have them plead guilty. If their confidence in innocence was soo strong they should have absolutely insisted their clients have a chance to prove their innocence and accept nothing short of a retrial or reversal to not guilty.
Blink… Awesome job getting the truth out. Im am really enjoying your work and learning some new things. Please keep up the great work!
I do have a question. How or where is it reported that urine was found in the stomachs of 2 of the boys? Is it reported somewhere? I think the fact that Damien mentions it without anyone even knowing anything about it is very telling!
Anyways. Thanks Again!!
Well never mind my question, the answer was found. LOL
http://callahan.8k.com/images/motion/dnamotion06.jpg
Thank you so much for all your work!
@whatevs
What exactly is your point regarding DNA?
I would be glad to address it should you be prepared to ask a specific question, otherwise did you want to to research how many homicide cases that do not have a FULL PROFILE of DNA linking a suspect result in convictions?
I am apparantly not being clear. If you want to discuss what you feel would not.hold up in court, I am cool with that, but you need to.bring it.
@whatevs
So do. I understand you correctly?
You get to poke holes with paper airplanes and the rest is my job to convince others?
BYOF
BRING YOUR OWN FACTS
@ATG
Your such a smartie.
I did not even go.there on the handle and you got it.
Kudos
B
“there has to be a good faith reason to include the items as a request for testing”
Yes, the good faith reason the defense requested the items for testing is to exclude their client’s involvement in the crime. No where does the defense concede there was urine found in the victims stomach contents. Respectfully, some here clearly do not understand the meaning of testing items to exclude the convicted aka exculpatory evidence.
Also, Michael Moore’s pants were not found right side out and zipped/buttoned, those belonged to Stevie.
ok on the pants, then I stand corrected. You should know that theory to request to test items not in evidence yet not refuting it’s very existance is ridiculous. Please don’t be insulting to me or other posters when someone does not agree with your view.
B
“What other possible scenario and suspects fit this crime with any level of reason? I am all ears.”
2 words, Terry Hobbs. This is not over. There is much the defense team has found that is not yet public information.
Really? Since I am assuming you will not be backing that statement up with any facts, I obviously cannot take it seriously, and if it were true, wth would all three admit guilt instead of presenting this “evidence of Hobbs guilt” which would likely have resulted in a new trial, and the ability to exonerate themselves?
Are you suggesting that Ellington and the SGA are in receipt of this information, implicating Hobbs and they cut a deal for these three to plead guilty? I think you know the implications of such a statement, respectfully, whether one believes in their guilt or innocence, that is beyond outrageous.
For the record, John Douglas is a strong mentor of mine, disagreeing with his findings had me pouring back over thousands of documents as a result. I stand by my opinions in this case, and I will also mention there are a few experts who will not go on record, because as you also know, they are not permitted to given their contracts with the defense so you can feel free to discount this statement-
“I have never seen that ice axe, let alone did I know it was in the possession of one of the accused . I have reviewed your report, and if the measurements and weight of the specimen you provided are an exact match to the implement in evidence, than no, I could not exclude it as a weapon used in these crimes.”
..” specifically, the scalp wounds to James Moore appear to be consist with the measurement of the rear blade, but one would need macros of sufficient quality to be sure and I do not believe I have ever seen any macros of approximations as well- are they available?”
B
Mom3.0
In your post you spent some time learning about luminol and what it can do to blood evidence.
To use luminol or not to use luminol is a typical delima for all technical work. One of the things all good technical people consider is, if I do a particular proceedure or process and it does not produce results, am I painting myself into a corner with no way back?
How do I leave myself a way to recover? Inexperienced people lack this critical thinking and often find out the hard way that they made a poor choice.
I have read through this piece three times and each time I find something else to consider. I am upping my estimate of the number of times it will take to get it clarified in my mind.
Hi – I guess the only thing that really bothers me in my mind is – what was the motive?
I will be the first to say I have no earthly idea.
B
Correction, Michael Moore’s pants were not found right side out and not zipped/buttoned, those belonged to Stevie. (left out the word not)
I will provide testimony if needed.
I have always thought The wm3 were/IS guilty.
So, looks like you overlooked the facts I stated about how they were tied, the rigor and the fact it was a dump site from part 1…I’m going to call you out on this now…you DON’T have access to the crime scene and ME photo’s do you? If you did and you had the resources you say you have it would have hit you in the face like a golf club!
Just because I disagree with your assessment, does not grant you the right to question my integrity or be rude. I would never have agreed to review this case without access- who could or would?
Just in case you don’t know..luminol also reacts to urine…animal urine..guess there wouldn’t be deposits of that out in the woods now would there?
Here’s another fact…no fecal matter was found at the scene from the 3 children…it would have expelled after death.
I specifically stated there was evidence that Byers had evacuated his bowels, if you reviewed his autopsy files and images, you would know that there was “an abundant amount of feces about the anus”.
So you are incorrect, that finding is clear- feces on the victim=feces at the crime scene, so you are again incorrect.
DUMP SITE!
There has been other donors of DNA found and none was from the WM3, FBI will be comparing it in CODIS so it’s a wait and see process now.
Are you suggesting their are complete profiles of foreign DNA that is not matched to any of the known controls or samples in this case? Because to my knowledge, the only 2 new “profiles” which are male, have NEVER been tested against anyone but the defendants, and as you know, they could belong to any male processing the crime scene or the evidence- why has that not been done? Are you further suggesting that the FBI is actively investigating a case where three defendants just pled guilty? Or are you referring to the NDIS arm of CODIS?
Bill- you were right to remind me to bring your previous post over, as I said I would discuss it when we got there. Your post:
good enough for me, so you saw the bodies as removed, 3 very similar positions (almost a seated type position) in full rigor with ligatures same length, arms outstretched almost all equally duplicated.
That is incorrect. Branch and and Byers were tied right wrist to right ankle, one shoelace from each respective shoe, one of the others, so that accounts for the exact lengths. Byers hands were BEHIND his back, Stevie’s in front. Byers was tied much tighter than Branch, as his legs were in a fixed position or “V”, both were face down, I agree that there was not appreciable mud plugs in the nasal cavaties, but there was an appreciable amount of mud and debris on their knees, which clearly extended beyond where their heads would, so I think it likely the knees were what “anchored” them, which had evidence of abrasions to them.
Michael Moore was tied differently, and his left arm was along his left hip, and his right was basically sitting atop his right knee. Moore was found on his right side, his left side surfaced, and he was in full rigor as his left knee was rigidly affixed to his right.
3 instances of same body position in full rigor, 6 same length ligatures (wrist to ankle) bodies were “pushed face down in the mud…but yet there was an absence of mud “plugs” in the nasal cavities from the soft mud.
Also think about that body position, if they were unconcious and placed in the ditch face down the torso would have flattened down and the legs and arms would be behind thier backs. For the position they were in they would have to have been in rigor already.
Lividity also wasn’t fixed and it wasn’t pronounced either.
they were basically suspended in water with little exception, that lividity was not fixed is consistent with that.
Water in the lungs was not tested for similarities to ditch water so one doesn’t even know if it’s from the same place.
The water in the lungs, which was dirty, and included terminal aspiration, caused their drowning, so how are you getting around the fact that Moore and Branch both had extensive perimortem fractures and wounding that were fatal in themselves? We are talking minutes, how could it have occurred elsewhere?
There is not a shred of evidence to conclude that they were murdered anywhere other than on the banks, period. If YOU had access to the macros, then you would know that the injuries sustained by all three, had they occurred somewhere other than this location, would have been very bloody, and let’s not forget it was not on any of their clothes.
I think we can both agree it was poor crime scene management, police emotions got the best of them as I know first hand how that can happen since we are all human.
The skills of the local coroner and pathologist have a lot to be desired as well.
It is stuff like that that loses cases!
Poured over a lot of other files, and there are a lot of other problems but it would take a book to write, the above is just a very good point of showing it was a dump site not an actual scene.
Cheers
Bill, I am going to bring your post over to the new second installment due to post tonight or tomorrow as I address these issues at length. They are good questions.
B
I am going to respond directly in your posts, I am in bold. Does anyone else notice that if we line up all the expert theories, together, they do not even agree with each other in the totality of the case file.
ie: Dr. Spitz= carniverous predation
Dr. Haskell= possible aquatic animal predation
B
Uh last time i checked Dna was a pretty good fact… But ok lets start with the Urine…
So the urine was the smoking gun?
Was it listed on the autopsies? If so where?
Damien clearly states that Steve Jones told him about the Urine in his statement on the 10th… The prior meeting happening on the 7th… How in the world did they know there was urine in the stomach at that point? And said statement was given in the presence of Sudbury who did not refute this claim since he was also present on the 7th when Jones allegedly told Damien about the Urine.
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/dwe.html
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/desud.html
I also don’t know why my comment about Jessie not flipping on Damien or Jason at a future trial. Considering he had AMPLE opportunity over the last 18 years to flip on the record officially. AND that due to Jessie’s conflicting statements they would be torn apart by the defense. WHICH is the reason the prosecution had to seperate the trials because they could NOT get Jessie to testify, EVEN though the prosecutors violated Jessie’s 5th and 6th ammendment rights on multiple occasions by contacting him without notifying his attorney as stated by Stidham here: http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/motions/de_jb_motion_to_dismiss.html
Does that sound like proper conduct for a prosecutor to try to
take advantage of someone in that manner? I do believe that many of Jessie’s later statements thru feb 1994 were given to attempt to try to make a deal. BUT the point is he could neither keep his story straight NOR did he actually go thru with it. Now explain to me how you feel confident that a prosecution team would be able to in good faith bring his statements to bear in a trial knowing full well that the majority of the above listed info including the improper contact would most definitely be brought up in a trial by the defense?
Do you realize Sudbury’s notes, written and transcribed make no reference to the “urine” comment from Damien? There is no reference to it in his interview with Griffin on May 9. There is no reference to it in any transcribed report from Ridge. Not that I agree with it, but it was a common practice for detectives to keep case sensitive information out of transcriptions and keep the handwritten notes private on occasion.
B
Oh and i forgot DNA is faulty science. ONLY WHEN IT DOESN’T SUPPORT YOUR VERSION.
I tend to believe in science and that 95% of the time its right. Which is far better than humans by far. I’ll take the DNA over an opinion any day. Trials without DNA or direct physical evidence are basically decided by opinions. I do not trust opinions. I trust facts. And not old regurgitated facts, repackaged as new, that the prosecution already had an has had since 1993 and yet decided not to use because it bears no correlation to the three convicted men. I’m ANXIOUSLY awaiting what NEW tidbits you have for part three!
I invite you to review “dogisyourname” post. He included the links to review, and as I have been saying, there is nothing exculpatory to the WM3.
B
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pT4KJxr_2J0 You should watch these… all these guys would HIGHLY refute your opinion on animal predation. There were 6 experts who would refute your opinion. The whole series is worth the watch especially since they had DIRECT ACCESS to ME PHOTOS and information not readily available on the internet.
I certainly watched every second of that presentation, and I will be the first to say Riordan is a masterful attorney. The victory of a new evidentiary hearing, and the wording of that order were well deserved by the defense team and I have never stated otherwise. Moreover, I believe I have classified the direction of the defense as utilizing the “CSI Effect” as a strategy – was brilliant and necessary.
For a price, one can find experts that produce findings for the state, or findings for the defense, that is not new or novel.
B
Hi Blink,
I don’t believe that you have addressed the fact that not all of the victims parents still believe that the West Memphis Three are “the real Killers”. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPkivEqmAXc&feature=player_embedded#!
I am just curious to hear if you have any thoughts on this…
I have addressed it, and my thoughts are that Melissa Byers is deceased, but she was certainly very outspoken as to their guilt. Steve Branch, Stevie’s bio-dad was escorted from the court last month because he begged the judge not to let them out and he was making a mistake.
Mark Byers changed his tune because outside of this paycheck, he lives on disability, and the Moore family has publicly accused him of taking blood money in their opinion. Pam Hobbs has never said she believes they were innocent, she said she had concerns her ex might have been involved based on a bitter divorce and finding Stevie’s pocket knife Terri took from him. ( as an aside, Blink Jr was in my sisters wedding in June and they bought him a stainless steel engraved leatherman thingie and he opened it that evening and promptly sliced his finger in the hotel, so I keep that for him now.) Terri Hobbs believes they are guilty. I have no info on the current opinion of Ricky Murray, but he believed in their guilt previously.
B
Well I said this once before and I’ll say it again. DO OVER!!! I know that’s not scientific and I also know there are no links. I can wish this crime had never taken place but that won’t change things, the best I can wish for is that if a crime like this ever happenes again that other LE have learned of the mistakes made by everyone involved in this horrific crime and do better than what was done for Chris Beyers, Steve Branch and Michael Moore.
Speaking of Michael Moore…what do his parents think of the release of the WM3?
I will tell you what they think- they are heartbroken. They absolutely believe in their guilt, and they have not told me this directly, but through a mutual contact it is my understanding they are now considering a wrongful death suit.
B
I hope the Moore family files a wrongful death suit. Since the WM3 are hanging out with Hollywood perhaps the state of Arkansas can recoup some much needed monies.
So the Moore’s are considering a wrongful death suit. Blink, could they include the outside interests who have funded the defense in their suit?
If so, that would make for one heckuva interesting case and would for sure draw huge attention. Something I haven’t mentioned is, it’s heartbreaking to even look at the photos of these 3 little guys and think about what happened to them. This was a crime motivated by hatred and that motivation needs to be considered when evaluating other suspects. Seems like if either Hobbs are Byers fostered this level of hatred for those children, it would have been displayed earlier in various ways.
Speaking of hatred/anger, I can guarantee that I would be experiencing an extreme level now were one of those boys my son and I was sure of the WM3′s guilt.
@1forall and whatevs
The DNA evidence does not exclude the WM3 as possible donors. First, they did not test everything — including Damien’s pendant that had blood of the same type as Steve Branch on it (also same type as Jason). Second, of the evidence they did test, not all of THAT excludes the WM3 either. The defense was untruthful in saying it did.
You can see the victims and convicted’s DNA profile on one page here:
http://callahan.8k.com/images2/writ_exhibits/Exhibit_V_12.jpg
Here is the document from Bode that outlines what items had mixtures. It is the combined Ligatures from Steve (34AB) and Michael’s penile swab (5D):
It tells exactly where on the charts to look for the mixtures… the locus D5S818.
http://callahan.8k.com/images2/writ_exhibits/Exhibit_V-1_02.jpg
On the ligature the results on that locus are 10,11,12 —Results are in the fifth column (there should only be two numbers)
http://callahan.8k.com/images2/writ_exhibits/Exhibit_V_11.jpg
On the swab the numbers are 9,12,13 —Results are the second column (there should only be two numbers)
http://callahan.8k.com/images2/writ_exhibits/Exhibit_V_07.jpg
Now going back to the chart that lists the DNA profiles of all victims and perps…
on the D5S818 locus
Echols is 11,12
Miskelley is 11,12
Baldwin is 9,9
Moore is 9,13
Branch is 10,12
Byers is 11,12
The ligatures’ results for that locus read 10,11,12….
Therefore, for that locus, alleles could be present from Echols, Branch, Misskelley and/or Byers
From the same ligature, the results for D3S1358 match only Steve …out of the six people.
From the same ligature on the locus D13S317, the results read 8,11
Both Branch and Echols have the same results on their known samples for that locus.
As far as Micheal’s penile swab, the results from the D5S818 locus are 9,12,13 .
Again, going back to the chart that lists the DNA profiles of all victims and perps…
on the D5S818 locus
Echols is 11,12
Misekelley is 11,12
Baldwin is 9,9
Moore is 9,13
Branch is 10,12
Byers is 11,12
All parties have either a 9, 12, or 13 at this locus, so no one can be excluded. Unfortunately for this swab, no other loci were reportable.
Dog- I appreciate you breaking this out, and I hope those on the “exculpatory DNA” kick will take the time to review. In my final piece on this case, I intend to include the totality of the evidence I have not covered specifically, because the hair and fiber evidence, and some of the clothing of the defendants have compelling results as well.
B
It appears that the defense had not given up even on Mark David Byers as a “Real Killer”:
From the Memphis Commercial Appeal article that amazingly revealed the defense spent $10 million and produced basically nothing to implicate anyone else:
“Six years ago, the West Memphis Three defense team quietly took possession of the house, renting it for three months from its current out-of-state owner in a bid to resolve old suspicions about Byers and to test a recent tip about a small pool house in the back yard.
“There was some indication the boys might have been killed in there,” said Ron Lax, a Memphis private investigator hired by the defense team.”
The article goes on to report this bundle of cash also tried to implicate Terry Hobbs via DNA, and implies there were others that were focus of the cash infusion. Most of the money was used to investigate Hobbs and Byers.
I must assume, since there is no indication to the contrary, this huge amount was spent legitimately. How on Earth can those who support the convicted and blame one of these alternative suspects explain the failure to produce anything substantive with $10 million dollars? Seriously?
That aspect of this story has all but been ignored. It is the duty of the defense to raise all reasonable doubt possible. Most defense attorneys only can dream of having this much money to do so. Alternative suspects are a very legitimate way to raise reasonable doubt. But to spend this much money and not produce anything more than we know? It tells me there was nothing to find. Others can interpret it otherwise, but it is beyond charitable to do so.
This is how I feel about this case – I think one of the children was abused at home, but that has nothing to do with his death or murder – its just a tragic coincidence.
I also think this was a drug fueled event – with only partial recollection by the three members, if they are indeed guilty.
Something similar happened in NY a few months ago – someone took acid and meth, flew in to a rage and very violently killed his friend who he was with, and also decapitated him. In the morning, he had very little recollection, but enough fear to flee, and was eventually found and charged with murder.
If you have demons inside you that you havent dealt with, taking drugs is going to bring them up.
It’s pretty much the only motive I can think of – a very bad case of six human beings crossing paths in the woods at the same time – which was the wrong time.
“Do you realize Sudbury’s notes, written and transcribed make no reference to the “urine” comment from Damien? There is no reference to it in his interview with Griffin on May 9. There is no reference to it in any transcribed report from Ridge. Not that I agree with it, but it was a common practice for detectives to keep case sensitive information out of transcriptions and keep the handwritten notes private on occasion.”
B
You missed the point. The point is if Damien is saying in front of a person who was there on the seventh, as Sudbury was and was also in attendance on the 10th… WHY would he not dispute the statement Steve Jones told me from Damien. ALSO the autopsies of the boys were being carried out on the 7th. So how it it possible that this Urine was known to everyone but yet was not proven. And as far as keeping it a secret it was so secret it wasn’t even included in the autopsies.
No, your missing the point- and to be honest, I am a little weary of you spouting your opinion about considering facts when you don’t have yours straight. If you disagree with something, back it up. For example, I do not even know what your next sentence even means. Give me an example with a source for such an accusation please.
Timeline of Interviews:
1. Steve Jones/James Sudbury May 7, 1993 at Echols trailer. According to Pam Hutchison testimony, Steve Jones arrives before Sudbury, makes a call and then an additional detective shows up, what is bizarre is that Sudbury interviewed Pam and she never said, “You were at my house with him”- so it is unclear if she did not recognize him or if she was present the entire time. Steve Jones was never called to testify.
2. Bill Durham/Shane Griffin May 9, front yard of Baldwin’s house 5PM, both questionaires completed.
3. Ridge interviews Echols with Sudbury on May 10 at 11:54AM http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/img/d_echols_may10_ridge_report.html. There is no way Sudbury was present initially when Jones was present with Echols and that statement was made, this has to be the first he hears it.
The cause of death ONLY on all 3 were filed on May 10, simply stating death by multiple injuries, that is it.
The physical autopsies were preformed May 7th, but the report was not signed off on and filed until May 28, 1993 which is why Gitchell got the phone call as to what it would say, in advance, and generated the May 26th letter before the autopsy and tox came back. There is simply no other explanation as to how Echols would have known about the urine- whether it was or was not. Lost samples or “other” you can’t explain it any other way.
Again, Gitchell was told there was urine and as a result, was requested to retrieve a water sample, that is without question, I have previously posted his letter to the Ark crime lab dated May 26, 1993.
Ridge’s notes say it all. 16 days before anyone could have known about the urine issue.
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/img/kermitc2.html
As far as the DNA goes it is very very irresponsible to approach a case or any set of data and say that just because it was found and leads somewhere else, therefore it is irrelevant. The person who perpetrated this crime spent a lot of time to remove all physical evidence. THERE IS NO PHYSICAL EVIDENCE leading to the WMFREE. There is evidence pointing TO other people. Statistically thats a one and a million coincidence. But it seems to me that you prefer coincidence over examining true oddities. Plus your interpretation of the DNA is pattently wrong.
Dogisyourname and BLINK… THATS old info. NEW TESTING With full profiles was done a few months ago… THAT was the what got them out. Those results have NOT been released. The info listed above is incomplete. But it most certainly does not mean that the WM3 are guilty. It also doesn’t exclude a large portion of the human population. Some of the items like the necklace were unable to be retested since the losoriginal testing was destructive. SOME of the things the defense wanted to test were in fact lost like the papers used to dry the boys clothes. So no you can’t exactly say that the defense cherry picked information. Once again remember that many of these items could have been tested and should have been tested the first time around regardless of cost and we wouldn’t be where we are now.
You still cant explain away this…
http://callahan.8k.com/images2/writ_exhibits/Exhibit_AA_02.jpg
http://callahan.8k.com/images2/writ_exhibits/Exhibit_AA_03.jpg
http://callahan.8k.com/images2/writ_exhibits/Exhibit_AA_04.jpg
ALSO Dog your didn’t include how many people contain those same strands in differing combinations. Talk about casting a wide net.
Now I understand that some people recieve money for contributing to a case. I would say while there are a few bad apples who will say anything for some cash or who will inflate there credentials to make themselves more important, to garner fame and noteriety. I do not believe this panel of experts needed or felt compelled to lie. I mean this is a distinguished profession forensics. That is seriously calling into question 6 distinguished members of your profession. I would much rather trust a panel of experts than person with an agenda. Simple fact is the state really can’t find an expert to say with authority it isn’t animal predation. Maybe you could volunteer?
1. That is false, by court order, the testing had to be completed within 90 days, as of 7/25/11, it was-status on the testing , was filed:
http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/de_dna_statusreport_7_25_11.pdf
http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/de_statusreport_7_18_11.pdf
This testing and $10million later, the defense approached the State with a plea deal- we have NO idea outside of that evidence to date, what the defense may have found on their OWN to potentially implicate their own clients, if it was exculpatory, they already had the venue to have it heard- and the state already agreed NOT to stand in the way of a new trial.
Why do I feel like if I pulled a video of this crime out of a vault somewhere it would not matter to anyone that is not even considering the possibility that the three folks who just pled guilty to these murders actually committed them?
B
@Lovely, 45:
I agree. While I respect the conclusions of some profilers and others that this was an organized murder due to the relative paucity of physical evidence, I disagree to a large extent. There was an element of luck, which was the nearby stream, that helped take care of much of the DNA evidence. It did require organization to tie up the children but that was after the fact, and to hide weapons afterwards, but that is about it.
This was a thrill kill. It was a spontaneous act that escalated from humiliation to sexual abuse and murder. It was coincidental the three killers came across the three children. All the killers were substance abusers and that played a role. Further, the very morning of the murders, Damien Echols’ psychological progress report was composed by his shrink and indicated he was prone to do “strange and harmful things” http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/img/exh500.html.
The jury never heard this horrific psychlogical history as direct evidence. It was suppressed. There have been efforts by supporters of the three to keep it hidden or minimize it. But think about this: that very morning the person who treated Echols for his severe mental illness, in the muted way of a medical provider, warned his patient was a ticking timebomb. That is explosive, pardon the pun, and doesn’t get enough attention.
Given all of the above, I have no doubt two of these killers would urinate into the mouths of the children. Beyond stipulations and motions, I have not found an autopsy report yet to confirm urine was in the stomach. Nonetheless, such a degredation would be in character with the nature of this crime.
This was a senseless act of violence with no rhyme or reason. While all three murderers had criminal histories and at least two had inflicted violence on others in the year prior to the killings, May 5, 1993, was a great tragedy in that three innocents crossed paths with those who would kill them. If that had not happened, the odds were fairly good Echols would have committed suicide and the two others would have gone to prison for property offenses.
These three were not rehabilitated in prison. It would have been ridiculous to try to do so to someone on death row and two others locked up for life. They now roam the streets. They will re-offend again, as eighty percent of the prison population does. The odds are higher given the State assumed they would be behind bars forever and there was no need even to try to address their anger, substance abuse, and mental health issues.
So your analogy to the New York case is dead on.
jack- something I have been hesitant to publish because as you can see this is a very passionate subject to a great many followers of this case-
I CANNOT verify that Damien saw that Dr. on that day. I cannot. Did you happen to notice the date is cut off and it is the only “askew” page of that entire file? A script was written that day, that is verified, but even in the defense index, it is not characterized as a “session”, as were the previous visits where he would also meet with the caseworker. Damien did not mention it in his interview, although he admitted being under care and stated he was receiving a disability check.
I cannot verify that either. I have only been able to verify that his application for SSDB was in process, there is no determination letter in any of the “500″ outside of requests for more information from him in March of 1993. I am sure you understand the implications of this, as the entire Rule 37 issue contains sworn affidavits that his attorneys and experts did NOT know that he was considered disabled .
Dr. Wood used that “determination” strongly in his report, and went so far as to say that Echols had received payments and continued to, which frankly, is impossible. His conviction would have permanently suspended that, and payments if he was eligible, would have been suspended through his initial arrest once it superceded 30 or 90 days.
B
Oh nope wait i found it. This is dated July 17th 2011 and is infact new sources of DNA including stomach contents. http://www.arktimes.com/images/blogimages/2011/07/18/1311026332-wm3.pdf