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
@Ash, great writeup although I have to disagree with your conclusion of regret on the part of Echols and maybe Baldwin. I suspect Echols is a sociopath. Baldwin may very well have willingly fell in with his buddy and now feels some remorse but I believe that is questionable. This would account for his not testifying. A sociopath is often able to testify quite convincingly because they often have limited emotional response which gives them the ability to be cool and calm under pressure. Prosecutors usually trip them up by playing to their narcissism.
I tend to agree on showing some compassion for Misskelley because I believe he was drunk out of his mind and was duped into this past the point of no return. If I were filing a wrongful death suit, I would appeal to Jesse’s guilt in order to make my case. The question is, who would I sue? I can easily say who I would like to sue for enough money to upgrade the whole community of West Memphis but I suspect that would be a long shot indeed.
For me, I have never been able to exclude this crime was a planned and pre-meditated act.
I don’t think they meant to brutally murder them, but it is possible the intention was to scare them and it all went wrong from there.
B
@juls, 50:
It’s not impossible. Then again, I may go buy a lottery ticket since the odds are about the same to win as of approval and receipt of SSI benefits within four months. What Blink wrote in bold absolutely is right. Those checks, which I don’t think ever existed, would have been suspended upon incarceration and wouldn’t have continued “to this day.”
@Blink, bold, 49:
I’v got to go reheat the ribs I grilled yesterday evening between posts and get the sides together, but that is an excellent point regarding the hospital records reflecting the employer. It is incredible how even a finite body of evidence can yield new angles all these years later as you have demonstrated over the last few weeks. I may look into some more docs this evening that relate to this point and comment then.
Incidentally, you need to bill Arkansas. You have turned up a thousand times more information in your last two blog posts than the defense team did when it spent $10 million. There’s a story there but it is unlikely to be pursued.
Unfortunately, this is going to get worse before it gets better. Right now, the PR folks are cleaning house, grooming communication skills, getting ready to launch the interview circuit for November sweeps. At least Echols and likely Baldwin, although I would not be surprised if he just gets a royalty check and lays low, will be hitting the press junkett shortly. This period in the media is similar to work I have done in the IPO field years ago, bringing companies into the public sector. Your IPO position share price counted on the “quiet period”.
B
@ Blink
-snipped-
For me, I have never been able to exclude this crime was a planned and pre-meditated act.
I don’t see how it can’t be pre meditated. Who carries around an ice pick just for the heck of it? If I’m looking at the pic B provided above, the murders were concealed by dense, tall trees. Perhaps the ‘damage’ they did was more than they intended, but they were hunting. I’m also leaning towards the thought they knew the cubs would venture in that direction. Not a murder by chance, no way. The freaks had to be confident their victims would show up, with some degree of certainty. JMHO
Dear Blink, The West Memphis Series Part II is the most difficult thing I have ever read. You have accomplished a most difficult task of becoming the voice of three little boys silenced too early in this life. You have allowed us as your readers to experience a gut-wrenching, stomach-churning horror story of what happened to Stevie Branch, Michael Moore and Chris Byers (Murray). Yes, Chris’ step-father is one creepy, bizarre character and certainly cruel to inflict such abuse upon his young stepson, but I do not believe he murdered these three little boys. I no longer believe the WM3 were railroaded and that there was no evidence AT ALL as the defense would have me believe. I believe they are guilty without a doubt. In retrospect, I find myself wondering if the WM3 could be freed, could also Charles Manson? I mean, he didn’t actually kill any of those people now did he? Could it be that he was railroaded because he was also “different”? He was just a long-haired hippie, free-thinking-type now wasn’t he? No, I do not believe this, I am only making a comparison. It is frightening to me that men of the same caliber could be set free on what seems to be just a whim of many Hollywood/rock star type groupies. Thank you Blink for telling us Michael’s, Stevie’s and Chris’s story. Your love for these children and the others is simply astounding for I believe it truly comes from your gigantic heart and is dictated by no agenda or monetary gain. I look forward to the third installment and the truth. ♥ Stevie ♥ Michael ♥ Chris – Remembering your cherubs
Your exactly right, make no mistake about it.
B
@Ragdoll,
Well, during the investigation, someobody mentioned Damien and Jason had talked about torture, and wanted to torture a bum. Here’s the link:
http://callahan.8k.com/images2/gitchell_notes/gitchell_notes_jason_c_03.jpg
This could explain why they were hanging around the soon-to-be crime scene with an ice axe – that spot was a good place if someone wanted to “catch” a transient.
Blink you said,
I am not sure if everyone knows this, but Echols also lived in the Mayfair apartments which borders the woods when he was younger.
But in Damien’s testimony in the Echols/Baldwin trial he was asked this question,
Q. Have you ever been to the Robin Hood Woods area?
A. No I have not.
This followed a line of questioning when he was asked did he kill the boys or does he know who killed the boys.
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/damien1.html
yup.
B
And here’s the report, in case people find the handwriting hard to read: http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/img/jasonc.html
@ Lucy says:
September 5, 2011 at 11:16 am
Thank you for the link!
For anyone doubting that the defense counsel in this case approached the state for THIS plea deal, this is an excerpt from State AG Dustin McDaniel:
“My staff had been preparing to assist the elected prosecuting attorney, Scott Ellington, in the next hearing ordered by the Supreme Court, which was scheduled for December. I was informed earlier this week that the prosecutor had accepted the plea agreement proposed by the defense.
yes, the intent of bringing an ice ax to the woods points to planned and per-meditated…brings us back to Jessie babysitting and Aaron Hutcheson’s chilling account ?! Thank YOU Blink!
Lucy says:
September 5, 2011 at 11:16 am
Lucy, this is interesting, as it actually makes me wonder if it is possible that the “Bojangles” guy stumbled upon the attack as it was happening, and was also attacked himself.
I suppose it’s also possible that his hair(s) could have been left at the crime scene, if this were the case.
It’s too bad they lost so much potential evidence in this case.
mjh I agree with that, but I have to give the WMPD a break in that this is like a “cword” investigation 18 years too early, if you know what I mean. For the level of training they had, they preformed at about a “C”, with an A for intent. I will share the biggest problem in LE to date: The rank and file is drive a beat, go to school, earn detective, get promoted.
A DA friend of mine, special prosecutor in fact, told me the number one problem is that good cops make shitty investigators and good investigators make shitty cops, he has never seen a hybrid.
That is not in any way an insult, both of these jobs are commisurately low paying for the risk/reward and we all know the toll on the family life. I commend them. What I have always said will be a platform for me is a taskforce based scenario, or major crimes unit, in areas with little PD’s or experience. Monday morning quarterbacking here, but don’t we agree that we are all scratching our heads as to the moral of this story?
B
If y’all have not read this, posting in advance of my discussion of it:
It is the Arkansas Supreme Court reversing and remanding order.
Ellington needs to read his own courts orders, this says the misconduct issue is not up for consideration as it was decided in lower courts already.
I read Ellington said there would likely be a new trial because of the juror tampering issue, which I thought had yet to be ruled on, and that the trace evidence witness Lisa Sakevicius was deceased.
She passed away in 2000, after a battle with cancer, and did he ever think to count how many proceedings were docketed and held since then?
I am beginning to think he cut a deal so he would not have to learn this case. I take no pride in making that statement.
http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/de_assc_order.pdf
-snipped from article-
Echols told Ridge that Jones told HIM that whoever did this “urinated” in the mouths of the boys.
Wow, eh? They couldn’t be linked to the scene of the crime? This comes right out of the horse’s mouth. Stating the obvious…the only way he could know that detail was if he was there.
I see how BOC’s investigation would have influenced the verdict in a new trial. Guilty as charged. Rightfully so. I understand why the defense would panic, but for Ellington to hand it over so readily? If Aasistance was offered by McD’s office…it’s not like he’s walking into the case blind folded.
I remember when this plea was first made, my fear was who’d be next to walk away from a cell they should be in for the rest of their lives.
@ Ragdoll, I don’t think we really want to know just how many death row and life inmates have a team of advocates working on their behalf.
There is no real closure for the families of murdered victims. They are either distraught because a culprit was never convicted or because they’re gearing up for the next appeal. It’s a horrible road to travel and takes a strong family to survive.
@Lucy, 5:
Brilliant! I have never thought this was premeditated in who the victims would be, yet that is a very plausible hypothesis. Indeed, 40/55 are adjacent to this area and it is rich with drifters and the homeless so they very well could have been the intended victims if the opportunity arose. It always struck me as beyond mere fantasy the statement Baldwin made. As it were, these beautiful children happened upon the paths of these three killers instead. This doesn’t seem organized beyond the ligatures and drownings, and unfortunately some poor police work and a nearby stream, in particular, gave the murderers a lucky bounce.
Agreed this is disorganized, but I cannot exclude an ambush possibility, that clearly was not supposed to end like this. There are many ancillary statements leading to this, but none I could say- I think this was the motive.
@Blink, 2, bold:
I would bet money I do not have you never dealt with initial incorporators who would have represented the problems posed by Echols, lol. Eventually he will explode. The venues during sweeps week will be carefully chosen, but eventually someone will ask a tough question or punch the right button. I agree there will be a tremendous effort to polish Echols and/or Baldwin between now and November. There are far too many variables to have an assuredly clean roll out, though. The first is Echols himself. I maintain his performance on the witness stand was what put the noose around his and Baldwin’s necks. Also, Misskelley is roaming loose and unemployed in West Memphis. He very easily could re-offend between now and November.
Miskelley is openly blackballed. Baldwin and Echols attended a release party with Vedder as a host following their release and he was not invited. In case anyone is unsure as to Miskelley’s potential for admissions, that should set one straight. Moreover, for those WM3 supporters feeling he was challenged, how do you feel about him being left out in the dark, $300 worth, at least. IMO: They PRAY Miskelley re-offends.
Are you kidding? They can claim stocked up on crazy, and blame him at the same time. What better way to do that than to give him enough rope to do so? Infuriating. I do not give him any pass, but I do believe under the law at that time, he is THE ONLY person that should be free, if any of them should.
Granted, with northwards of $10 million invested in this project, the PR efforts will be extensive and professional. But some things, especially here, cannot be controlled.
Now for something not speculative but substantive.
I reviewed the disability determination documents on Exhibit 500 for the first time in years. Two things caught my eye.
First, on subpart 130, a disability examiner intake form, I found the following.
“21. Is capability development by DDS necessary?”
“Yes.”
That isn’t especially surprising in and of itself and would be expected. It merely means there would have to be further inquiry into Echols’ functional residual capacity, which in plain English simply means to determine what can he do if the disabilities claimed are proven.
To be blunt, that made this a conventional case and one not put on a fast track that could have led to a determination letter and payments prior to incarceration. I am not 100 percent certain but will state emphatically that those two things likely had not happed at the time of Dr. Woods’ affidavit. So did Woods assume or make up this stuff? Did the defense present this to him as fact? And if the latter, shouldn’t he have inquired into what specific mental disabilities disabled Echols to evaluate compentency?
This stinks to high hell. (bolded by Blink)
There is something else interesting on subpart 130, at question 22.
“22. Is development of work history necessary?
“No.”
So Echols’ self-reporting, which omitted the job at Alsford ( Alderson corrected by B) Roofing, never was verified. I don’t for a nanosecond think Echols knew he would murder three children and a bag from a business that adjoined his worksite would be found. But I need to mull this some more as it may indicate why the bag wasn’t linked if the investigators relied upon the work history from the DDS rather than medical records. ( bag ws also from Dad’s employer, Joe Hutchison)
@Blink, 12:
You have started to close in on the key problems with what Ellington did. The defense had filed a motion to bifurcate the jury misconduct issue from the evidentiary hearing. A ruling had not been made. While I think there was jury misconduct, in the past the ASSC had ruled against a new trial on this issue standing alone. This is why I submit that without new DNA evidence that was exculpatory, the jury misconduct issue was not about to result in a new trial. It is speculative but likely the defense initiated this deal after it new there would be no smoking gun from the DNA evidence. Two questions have been asked but not answered. First, why cut a deal prior to the evidentiary hearing? Second, how did the parties get around a specific remand that ordered an evidentiary hearing? I realize the law encourages settlement, but this was ordered. I don’t seek how it is legal even now.
Ellington was profoundly ignorant about this case. He didn’t know, I imagine, the ASSC had dealt with juror misconduct, by way of example.
I alluded to this yesterday, and this is post so long on a holidy lunch stomach I only will mention it in passing.
The ASSC ordered the evidentiary hearing after Dennis Riordan, a great attorney, represented that the DNA results were not cumulative. Although it in all likelihood was an accident, that wasn’t correct. The jury had been told at the first Baldwin/Echols trial that the DNA didn’t implicate the defendants.
I’ll follow up with links at a later time, but to me this is a smoking gun. Why McDaniel didn’t petition for rehearing after this was brought to his attention, and I have it from a very good source that he was told, is beyond me.
Me in bold. I cannot tell you how miffed I am that our appointed folks made mud pies outside while the defense went to school. I hate that is my opinion, but it is a burgeoning issue, or it precedes me, I don’t know.
B
Blink, I wasn’t sure whether I should ask you this, because I don’t want to give you the impression that I’m pestering you to hurry or anything like that, but I keep checking so I’ve figured I better ask, lol… When do you think the 3rd installment will be up?
I am not ignoring your question Lucy, in a loose reply to you, a few of my files have been requested, officially.
I am not sure how that relates my next post until tomorrow, given the Holiday.
I anticipate tomorrow late afternoon or Wed morning right now.
B
I left out this nugget, which isn’t relative to the disability determination or the state’s legal screw-ups but goes into the delusions of grandeur and marked psychosis of Echols. From Exhibit 500, subpart 163, a questionnaire provided to Echols:
“5. What would you change about yourself?”
“nothing”
This is from a boy locked in a mental facility at the time, a boy who had tried to take his life, a boy who had a history of juvenile offenses, a boy who had severe family problems, a boy who dropped out of school in ninth grade, fill in the blank.
It isn’t big but I find it freaking amazing. If I were to write a book about this tragedy turned farce, that excerpt would be the first chapter in toto.
@Blink, bold, 15:
You have convinced me, and I thought Misskelley had been ostracized because he was not as attractive and–being the criminals they are–Baldwin and Echols are still pissed at him for ratting them out. Both of those things are true, of course, but you are more than likely right his re-offense would be celebrated for the reasons you set forth.
Damn. How many levels of corruption are possible? I’m not superstitious, but there simply is no way this cannot reach critical mass and NOT blow back on the key exploiters. I don’t know whether there is such a thing as karma, but cliches about playing in shit or with fire spring to mind.
So you are right. This will get worse before it gets better. I look forward to learning about the $300k denied Jessie if you are ever at liberty to explain it.
As for the little brothers playing in the mud, when I get the chance to give this the attention it richly deserves, you will realize the age you attached to them is far too great. These were infants breastfeeding while their betters were in law school. It’s a short work week and my office is piled up, but I will try to take time to demonstrate was a disaster the State and county handling of this case has been ever since neutral DNA results were presented as exculpatory without a challenge.
If I hadn’t applied the razor and attributed this to stupidity, particularly in the case of Ellington, I would go into Black Helicopter territory and submit $10 million can buy more than old pick-up trucks, abandoned property, and shady investigators.
Jack- the reference was $300 being requested on a FB a post for electric bill needs by his fiance, to turn their lights on.
The fact that Mr. Miskelley is so ill advised, given his limitations and all, have me seriously considering his competency to plea? Anyone? Would that endeavor not require independent counsel or a GAL?
I have serious concerns about his ability to accept such a plea on his own, given the content of the legal pleadings over the last 18 years without so much as a notation of therapeutic efforts while incarcerated.
Ya feeling me?
B
Misskelly has been cast aside and IMO will become bitter over a period of time. He is unemployable and living below the poverty line. There is a good chance he will reoffend and have to complete the rest of his sentence. He will resent the fact that all the attention is on Damien, and Lori controls the donations to the WM3 which Jessie hasn’t seen any of. He will confess again. I have heard that it is well known in the Arkansas penal system that Jessie could never shut up about what happened on that horrible day. How he confesses is the question. A tabloid interview for big bucks or a behind bars interview that shows what Damien & Jason are really like.
@ Lucy
“during the investigation, someobody mentioned Damien and Jason had talked about torture, and wanted to torture a bum..”
They MIGHT have. Bojangles might have very well been a victim too afraid to come forward.
I see you are afraid to give your readers a balanced opinion. SHOCKING.
There is nothing balanced about your posts in fact, I would say they are completely off-balance.
I am sorry for you that your not remotely embarrassed by the all caps posts that went on all night, and clearly for you this has nothing to do with this case. I will not subject myself or readers to your issues.
I wish you well, sincerely.
B
addendum: Misread the “$500.” Between that and all the nearsighted misspellings, it is time to change my optometrist from someone other than Dollar Tree.
@Blink. 9/5 1221 pm from
http://blinkoncrime.com/2011/09/02/the-west-memphis-series-part-ii-guilty-by-plea-and-have-been-set-free/#comments
Imo that’s good ‘ol boy syndrome. Besides being a way of life,
I smell future electionitis
@ Al says:
September 5, 2011 at 1:45 pm
Part of me says it’s our right to know and yet, I’m with you….ignorance can be bliss. The only analogy I can offer is liking it to having my innocence stolen (oh shuddy to the hecklers
). This plea makes me feel violated, and I’m not in Arkansas.
Mr. Browne’s long piece tells us how far and wide this case has been presented to the public. His conclusion that he believes all three are guilty, but believes they should have been released for time served is strange.
Of course he is English or British. Unfortunately, statistics show that people who do these types of crimes are likley to commit similar offenses when released into the public. About 80 per cent is the rate.
Why should the public be burdened with this possibility? We are not able to give the three victims new life, so why give their killers such an opportunity?
I believe that any person over the age of twelve has the ability to know right from wrong. Society needs to get over the idea that those who commit crimes against persons should only be partially punished because of their age or percieved mental ability.
Jack has raised some very valid questions regarding possible legal misconduct in regards to those supporting evidence against Echols.
In regards to Blinks question about Echols being able to go to the pharmacy and pick up a medication that was likley a controlled drug. While it may not have been legal, if it was paid for and the small town pharmacist new the family, it is possible that he did. In small towns, everyone is known. If Echols did pick up the prescription, I just think that he was told, “Ok, I’m going to let you have it, but tell your mama to come by and sign for it”.
Echols need for medication would not in my opinion prevent him from doing work for the roofing company. There is plenty of support work on the ground for those that actually do the roofing. These are very low skill level jobs. Mostly requiring a strong back.
While Blink’s analogy about the mud pies is funny, IMO it is a sad commentary on the willingness of a fellow by the name of Ellington to be too lazy to do his job.
ATG-
It kills me to say it- Ellington is either an intentional fraud, or an unwilling patsy.
I do not know which yet, But I know he is one or the other.
B
@ Jack Dobson
lol…you rock man…even with the stinkin ‘ole Dollar Tree specs. No worries.
@Blink, 17, bold:
It would be difficult to say who would most strongly resist the withdrawal of the Misskelley plea: the defense attorney, the State, or the circuit judge. I suppose another option is all three.
Laughing at the mere suggestion and the predictable reaction(s).
It is quite a contrast. Echols and likely Baldwin are holed up in Beverly Hills while Jessie and partner rattle the cup for three hundred bucks to get the electricity to her trailer restored. Yes, he has been badly advised but it is sooooo hard to withdraw a plea, as I’m sure he would be advised both in and out of court.
@MP77:
Agreed. He should sell that story right now so he doesn’t have to resort to crime to steal money or whatever and risk a return to prison. I would hope the tell-all would air on a major tabloid show the last week of October before the Echols and Baldwin roll-outs in November.
@MP77
I also have heard from a central player in this case that Misskelley continued to confess in prison to various counselors.
-dog
Thanks for replying, Blink! Looking forward to it!
On another note, I see CBS is going to re-air their terrible 48 Hours WM3 episode(A Cry for Innocence). I’ll send them an e-mail correcting some of the inaccuracies and pointing out some glaring omissions, but I doubt it’ll do any good. I should be used to all this by now, but all the biased media coverage this case gets really gets to me.
Is what it is.
Thanks for your efforts Lucy.
B
@whatevs
You completely glossed over the DNA analysis I posted, calling it “old.” Well, I have news for you. Those results were part of the same DNA testing that revealed the Hobbs hair – the holy grail of all red herrings – the same testing that allegedly “excluded” the WM3. Nothing in the latest round of DNA testing changes the fact that none of the WM3 were excluded from contributing to the mixture from the penile swab of Michael Moore.
@BLINK says:
September 5, 2011 at 9:46 am
… shades of ‘the c-word’ & company ….
Ragdoll
Are you aware of the “Innocence Project” operated by a professor of law and his students at Northwestern University at Evanston, Illinois?
This project is aimed at cases where someone is believed to have been convicted of a crime on poor proceedures and evidence. These are young law students who are taught to do a lot of research into case records to find if there is some possibility that the person is innocent or guilty of a lessor crime for which they were convicted.
While I think there is merit to their work, they have made some big mistakes in several cases. This resulted in people being freed from prison only to have them murder someone after release.
There are two types of criminals. The petty thief who steals without directly threatening anyone. The progressive criminal who starts out with petty theft and then esculates to armed robbery and if not put away from society, will commit murder in order to not be caught.
It is sad that there are people in society that are so politically correct that they cannot concieve of a person in society being punished for bad acts.
I believe we have such a person associated with this case. A woman that married one of the perps while he was in jail. I think she is an educated woman who made a living doing landscape archectiture. Why these people do these things is beyond my ability to comprehend.
Can anyone reference the actual cases ATG is referring to if possible?
In the interest of disclosure I have been requested to work on behalf of one of the innocence projects teams on a few cases, but declined because the scope of the work would only allow me access to the confines of whatever I was tasked with and not the full case file. No way would I ever work that way and put my name on something.
B
If Damien Echols participated in these crimes as LE stated and a jury ruled, here are the similarities Damien Echols has with Jeffrey Dahmer:
Bullied as a child for being different
Tortured animals
Fascination with dead animals and morbid topics
Substance abuser
Loner
Drank blood-took job at blood bank
Overkill
Sliced skin from corpses
Necrophilic
Collected skulls in his room
Mutilated victims’ bodies
Kept body parts as trophies
Sexual interest in children and males
Children were victims
Used his own weapons at crime site
Stalked victims
Diagnosed as schizophrenic
http://maamodt.asp.radford.edu/Psyc%20405/serial%20killers/Dahmer,%20Jeff.htm
If Damien Echols participated in these crimes as LE stated and a jury ruled, here are the similarities Damien Echols has with Ed Gein:
Mom had a mental disorder
extreme poverty at times
Father was abusive
Loner
Bullied as a child
Set fire
Dropped out of school, but was an avid reader.
Early fascination with death and “dark” topics
Mother worried about his hobbies which included morbid/dark topics
Diagnosed as schizophrenic
Was a substance abuser
A child was one of his victims
Stalked victims
Necrophilic
Consumed blood/body parts
Mutilated bodies
Overkill
Used his own weapons at crime site
Kept body parts as trophies
Kept underwear as trophies
Sliced skin from corpses
Collected skulls in his home
He was considered by some to be mild mannered while hospitalized
http://maamodt.asp.radford.edu/Psyc%20405/serial%20killers/Gein,%20Ed.pdf
@ K says:
September 5, 2011 at 3:57 pm
Your comment about Mr. Bojangles possibly being a victim…I had that very thought. It’s a strange coincidence, if the man does exist.
@A Texas Grandfather, 24.
Thanks.
The potentially false affidavit pales in comparison to what Ellington did.
Click on the following link and read Footnote 4:
http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/de_assc_order.pdf
I don’t care if you are a layperson or an attorney. Does that read like a definite “you must consider evidence of juror misconduct?” It obviously does not and specifically does not; the discretion was left to the trial judge.
Ellington has dissembled so much I don’t know where to start. There were going to be several hurdles for the defense to get a new trial. The first would have been Judge Laser’s decision on whether and how juror misconduct could be considered. The defense had filed a motion for the judge to make that determination, and asked that it be done at a proceeding prior to the evidentiary hearing. So why deal prior to that ruling whether it were at an earlier hearing or in the form of a pre-trial motion? I hope this makes sense, but as soon as this deal was announced and Ellington went running about claiming fear of juror misconduct, I knew something was terribly wrong.
My gut is the defense would have jumped at this same offer even if it had prevailed at the evidentiary hearing and was granted a new trial, something unlikely at best but let us assume it to have been in the cards. I would not have concern if that had happened.
Finally, the great unspoken. Why was a deal cut with Misskelley if Elllington’s big concern was jury misconduct? It wasn’t an issue at his trial and applied only to Echols/Baldwin.
This doesn’t withstand much scrutiny rather quickly.
@k, 25.
Thanks so much. I washed the Dollar Tree specs and it helped! They got smoked up over the grill last night.
What appeal is Misskelley moving to dismiss 9/1/11, btw, I cant tell from the docket.
Yes, this is what I am saying. It allows for remand/reconsideration for an evidentiary which was granted,
Furthermore, Baldwin is barred from attacking the juror misconduct angle as it relates to a new trial on that basis, in other words, this only becomes a matter of consideration following the outcome of the evidentiary hearing finding a new trial is warranted as it reads:
http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/jb_assc_order.pdf
Miskelley had no standing on the jury misconduct issue, and it should be noted he was granted a change in venue to be tried in Clay county. Something else- really important.
By virtue of Miskelley statement to prosecutors on February 17, 1994 post-conviction, that statement gave Miskelley grant immunity. That means, that whether or not he received a new trial, those statements could never be used against him for any of the admissions therein (with few exceptions, one would be if he took the stand and changed his tune subjecting him to perjury).
HOWEVER- as it relates to consideration as “evidence” at the evidentiary hearing as to the likelihood of a new trial ending in an acquittal for Baldwin and Echols, it is absolutely admissible. His statement from Feb 17, 1994 would never require him to testify at the evidentiary hearing, the confession stands alone.
If their is one person that more than likely would have won a new trial once that confession comes off the table, it is Miskelley.
http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/jm_assc_order.pdf
Judge Laser non-specific ruling on the subject of jury misconduct, it is clear-
http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/order_3_15_11.pdf
And Miskelley could have had his own shindig:
http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/order_3_17_11.pdf
Prosecution does not fight testing, but believes it will not warrant a new trial, and plan to use Miskelley statement at the evidentiary hearing:
http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/de_dna_state_4_8_11.pdf
State does not fight misconduct evidence, and quite brilliantly reminds the court, that if introduced, it comes in at the evidentiary hearing, not on it’s own:
http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/ag_juror_reply.pdf
Defense trying to get out of the presentation of Miskelley statement and presentation of juror number 4 at the evidentiary hearing itself, slick:
http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/de_5_25_11_reply_juror_misconduct.pdf
Have I lost it? In review of Laser’s Order, I do not believe that excerpt from the Arkansas Nov 2010 order is correct as he cites:
http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/de_jb_alford_plea.pdf
The order was for reconsideration and remand for evidentiary hearing which was scheduled, it had no codocil to grant a new trial without it, and superceded it’s authority outside of it.
Reversed and Remanded for evidentiary hearing, reconsideration for motion overall.
That means that the reverse and remands are already spelled out as to what the jurisdiction of the circuit court are.
At no time, and in no place, is the court granted leave to vacate the convictions and is in violation of it’s own order following the Supreme Court Opinion.
The order and Pleas dated August 19:
http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/de_jb_alford_plea.pdf
What am I missing? Not seeing this loophole everyone jumped through and my biggest concern is going to be the use of these cases as get out of jail free cards not just in AR.
B
Is it possible Misskelley was threatened to take the plea? Otherwise, if he didn’t understand what the plea meant, it wasn’t explained in way for him to understand.
I dont think so, I think he wanted to get out of prison.
B
Blink
Of the two choices in your reply to my post, I’ll go with the first.
At this point, until proven differently, I think he was bought and paid for by a portion of the 10 million spent by the new defense team. He was even willing to take steps to usurp the legal process that was already setup.
I have not decided yet if he is the lamb or the lion. It do know his campaign donations on the record were fairly straightforward. I find it very odd that Peter Jackson calls for him to be fired, and praises MCdaniel, and encourages him to run for Gov when McDaniel says it was Ellington’s call.
I think someone earlier on here posted Jackson got the names mixed up, I don’t think so.
http://www.facebook.com/notes/peter-jackson/so-the-west-memphis-three-are-finally-released/10150348803586558
Is it Roirdon and McDaniel that have a prior relationship? I know if this happened in my state, I would be requesting meetings at Drumthwacket.
B
I ran across some pre-election posts about the primary between scott ellington an his opponent from last May. From what was discussed, scott ellington was the asst. deputy prosecutor for 2 1/2 years prior to running for the prosecutors spot. It seems there was some cocerns about how “tough” a prosecutor he would be, since he was a public defender for many years prior. I’ve reread his press release on the day of the wm3′s release. I dont think he was ill prepared or unfamiliar with the facts, I think he just checked off the box on a campaign promise.
Blink,
I cannot wait to read your latest installment on this case and all of the fellow Blinksters input. But on a dire other note…
Just got back this afternoon from a much needed but short vacay to the coast. Found out on the way that the wildfires are burning all around us. Texas is on fire. We need all the prayers and hope we can get for our neighbors and four-legged friends of all species. It is intense to sit here and watch all of the smoke around us. I hope my fellow Blinky Texans are safe. There is a great FB page (TxStormChasers) that has been keeping up with all of the crazy fires that seem to be starting out of nothing. Stay safe out there and please help take care of our first responders – they are quickly becoming short on resources.
I have an editor going through this, you have my prayers and a rain dance.
B
I’m getting a bit of a bead (is that the word?) on motive–or, at least, the perfect storm…it has to do with “children who are left alone to wander in the woods where danger lies.”
I’ll work on this but if anyone else wants to riff on it, please do.
Mom Three? You’re great at analyzing family dynamic…
See y’all later=I’m not ever leaving my little troop of cubs.
You really need to reference your claims, in order to prove that you’re not interested in spin, but in providing information.
Also, the bag theory you posit, has been debunked.
http://www.wm3blackboard.com/forum/index.php?topic=5499.msg87302#msg87302
I’m still waiting for your new evidence. ZZZZZZZZZZ so far, no luck.
What are you talking about? Everything in this work is sourced, and that link is to a members only support site so nobody can read it. Debunked? Enlighten us.
B
PS – I have an idea. When you post something that is actually new vs. regurgitate the state of AR’s so called case, perhaps you can use an asterisk or some other indication? This way readers will know that you have a thought that is independent of convicted felon, Jerry Driver.
http://westmemphisthreediscussion.yuku.com/topic/6429
I like the new schtick regarding the mountain climbing pick. That’s very creative. Though, I’m interested in learning who the “three” intended to shave with the razor you left out of the proverbial bag. Any ideas?
schtick? It’s in the evidence, nothing creative about it.
I did not leave anything out of the bag, all hyperlinks are in the piece you have not read but now feel qualified to critique. Including the fibers that matched 2 others on the victims traced to Echols.
It should be noted that one of the razors was broken at the top of the neck handle, which was exactly how Echols used them not to shave, but to tattoo. Mark Byers found a brown jacket with 2 razors in the pockets, same brand, iirc.
B
I have a 27 year old son who had never heard of this case. I told him about it yesterday, the horrible things done to those innocent little fellows and how those accused had been released. I told him about Jesse confessing and implicating the other two and that there was
some other evidence against them depending on who you asked. That many people now think they were innocent and wrongly convicted. Then I showed him the press-conference where Echols and Misskelly hugged and he looked at me and said….”they’re guilty”. I ask why he thought that and he said…”the hug, I may can forgive someone who helped send me to prison for 18 years for something you did NOT do but I would have ripped his throat out with my teeth for accusing me of doing those things to 3 little boys…where is his anger? Not for going to prison but for being accused of killing 3 little boy in such a horrific way?”
I said….yep.
Lisa- interesting reaction indeed. However, it was Baldwin and Echols that hugged, and the reaction from Miskelley is worth noting as well.
B
A question I have is, just how in the hell are they going to find the real killers while hanging out in Beverly Hills preparing for the talk show circuit? The more I read, the more that I think Misskelley was manipulated by Baldwin and Echols into going along with this crime and now they are ostracizing him. IF I had the deep pockets of the advocates, I’d look into providing support for Misskelley while providing an opportunity for him to have his say on stage also.
Absolutely, I mentioned this yesterday, some sharp PR wiz is missing their moment. Except, I am hearing that the word is whoever reps Miskelley is going to get the backlash of the rest, and who is going to want the big boys mad at them?
I guess in fairness I am discussing sort of thinking a long the lines of the “starting cross fires” strategy to eventually stop the inferno. In case it is not clear, this checkbook journalism crap is on my last nerve.
B
Hello Blink & Blinkers! I overflew this case and the first question that came into my mind was: if those were not the guys who did this( for wich i have no idea) why haven’t there been other similar cases connected to this case in the 18 years that passed since 1993? This is a crime that wears serial caracteritics for its brutallity and sadistical side. Or have you ever seen someone doing such things when not being caught stopping with that?
So how exactly are Damien & Lori earning a living?
Neither of them work.
Blink…my apologies. I had my murderers mixed up!! Thanks.
Thanks for your considered response to my last post. For those just tuning in, let’s recap: You claimed that Echols knew there was urine found in the stomach of two boys before anyone else knew of that fact. In support of this you cited the Defense Request for Forensic Testing and Gitchell’s letter stating Dr. Peretti told him this.
You missed one, I supplied the handwritten notations from Bryan Ridge from 5/10/93 indicating ECHOLS told him that he was told by Steve Jones (which we know is false). I also documented in detail in subsequent posts, that contrary to misinformation, the autopsy findings were not completed or filed until May 28, 1993. However, it is clear since the ME requested a water sample and was given one on May 12, it supports Gitchell’s comments that he was requested to get one based on the concern for the lumen contents.
I replied that your links did not support that urine was found.
( I do not disagree there is no documented evidence or testing that the liquid found in the stomachs definitely was urine, we all agree if the stomach contents were sent out at all, they were not tested and we know they were discarded at a minimum
1. Echols statement that he was told urine was found only has import if, urine was, in fact, found in the stomach of two boys. However, no urine was ever found in the stomachs of any of the boys.
( I disagree, and if the contents were never tested, you can’t have it both ways, you cannot say what the liquids found were either, or what they were not- what we can say, is this:
According to Gitchell, he was told it was suspected urine in their stomachs, he acted on the ME request on May 12 based on it. At the time of Echols interview, that would be most of them, prior to his arrest, nobody knew about the suspected urinating in the mouths, Echols out of his own mouth states this to Ridge on May 10, and there is no dispute about the Jones Meeting May 7, prior to the completion of the autopsies.
Investigatively, I do not know how that made it back to Gitchell if at all, but to suggest that information, which ends up being a possibility at autopsy is huge. Just because it was not tested, the observation it may be, the statements by Gitchell, the collection of urine samples from suspects and Echols clear prior knowledge that Ridge and Jones DID NOT HAVE cannot be disputed.
2. Dr. Peretti’s autoposies were conducted on May 7,1993. Dr. Peretti clearly states that he examined the abdominal cavity and no unusual fluids were found.
THAT IS NOT WHAT THE REPORT SAYS. Respectfully, this is what is driving me batty, you cannot interpret Peretti’s findings and say “what he says” without a direct quote. The words “abdominal cavity” do not appear in his report because the abdominal cavity is not a medical term as it relates to an autopsy. Not trying to be a hardass but I keep hearing the facts police not referencing the facts but their version. Not only that, he describes the fluids. He would have no determination as to whether that fluid was unusual without testing it outside of “markers” which are not noted specifically for that reason.
Dr. Peretti does not send urine samples to toxicology (because none was found).
Think about what you just wrote, lol, you cannot know what a tox report will find unless you send them, there is no presumptive lab tests for stomach contents with a minor exception again to observations, which we know that no slides or collections were made during it.It is entirely possible based on observation, or certainly smell, meaning the contents were suspicious to be urine, prompted his concern that it was, it is indisputable a water sample was collected with the intent to test against the lumen contents, as included in Gitchell’s letter.)
Autopsy links below.
3. Dr. Peretti testifies due to the publicity surrounding the case hee did not immediately share his autopsy findings with LE. This is also borne out by Gitchell’s 5/26/93 letter to the crime lab. Testimony & letter link below.
4. 5/24/93: West Memphis Police purportedly send water sample to crime lab–for sole purpose of comparing mud-lab claims never received. Link below. Your correct it was never received, but again, your misquoting the test request, that is not what it says. Two different waters.
Nope, the bottle of water was sent to the Medical Examiner on 5/12/93, as you can see, at the request of the ME, and received:
http://callahan.8k.com/images/ascl/ascl_may12_release.jpg
5. No “urine” sent to crime lab for analysis. Link below.
Sure there was- did you happen to notice that WMPD secured urine samples from suspects at the time?
http://callahan.8k.com/images2/ascl/ascl_evidence_submission_5_24_93.jpg
6. 5/26/1993: Prior to receiving autopsy report or autopsy form, Gitchell sends letter containing hearsay statement that Dr. Peretti told him urine was found in stomach of 2 boys and requested water sample but equivocates and says “can the urine OR WHATEVER IT IS..tell us anything about suspects”. Note above that water sample allegedly sent on the 24th was sent for mud comparison.
It is not hearsay when the person it was told to is reconveying it, btw.
7. Dr. Peretti does not testify at trial that urine was found in stomachs. Link below.
How could he?
The contents were not preserved, or thrown out prior to testing, there is no way that information gets into a criminal trial by either side- there is no good faith basis of confirmation and highly prejudicial.
8. In 2004 Defense requests forensic testing of certain evidence samples referenced by their evidence number, except for the “urine” -that request is not based upon a belief that urine was found, but rather, they requested it based upon Gilchell’s mention of it in his 5/26/93 letter.
Again, your interpretation, that MAY have been what the defense should have stated, but the quote is URINE WAS FOUND IN THE STOMACHS OF TWO OF THE BOYS, the ref the exhibit, agreed.
Link below.
Autopsy links: http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/autcb.html
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/autmm.html
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/autsb.html
Crime lab documents: submissions and reports: http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/img/crimelab.html
Gitchell letter to crime lab: http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/img/kermitc1.html/page 2 number 9
E42-mason jar with water sample sent for testing on 5/24: http://callahan.8k.com/images2/ascl/ascl_evidence_submission_5_27_93_2.jpg
Peretti testimony: http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/ebtrial/fperetti.html
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/ebtrial/frankp.html
Defense request for forensic testing: http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/motions/de_dna_testing.html
My response in bold. Going Forward, to all, our links have to match “what we say they say,” I say..
You did a good job including links, but in some cases, they do not match up, and honestly, I cannot devote the time to go back through it and correct, and I can’t have interpretations submitted as quotes- you can certainly say the way something is interpreted by you…
Lastly, I think we have now covered the urine debate adnauseum, unless anyone comes up with any new observations or anything not repeating what I have painfully disected, let’s move on.
LE lost stuff, it cost them big time, we know.
B
Blink,
‘Tried to track ATG’s IP reoffenders; IP’s p.r. group is a force to reckon with. And I’m not too shabby at research.
ATG…do you recall which crimes you referenced? tia
WG
Eddie Vedder and Echol’s wife better be careful-they may get more than they wished for.