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
@ A Texas Grandfather says:
September 5, 2011 at 8:59 pm
I’ve never heard of this project. Talk about pros and cons. Thank you for bringing it up and explaining the cause of the IP. Unfortunately, it appears ill prepared law students are asked to review cases far beyond the magnitude of their experience.
There seems to be a few cases out there that involve IP. It seems there are various of this project. The link I have involved HIV related crimes (not an in depth piece):
http://hivinnocenceprojecttruth.com/2011/09/03/clark-baker-emphatic-regarding-cases/
Various states may have their own version of an IP:
http://www.innocenceproject.org/about/Other-Projects.php
B, a link I thought you might be interested in. I hope this helps…I’m more than happy to a more in depth search if needed
:
http://www.innocenceproject.org/about/Other-Projects.php
It would seem I like to use the phrase ‘it seems’ in my previous post just a tad.
Anyhoo….another link with 1 reference to Medill Innoncence Project (this one involving journalism students):
http://www.medillinnocenceproject.org/michael_lane
One more thing I failed to mention. Damien Echols supposed sexual misconduct, involved a consensual relationship with his then, girlfriend. How many teens are guilty of the same “misconduct”?
Who was underage, what is your point? I don’t know, how many teens break into trailers, have sex in them, and when the cops show up steal the gun out of the holster and then tell your docs and the police you were going to shoot the girls father. You did read her testimony, right?
B
Blink
I really stirred the pot. New things to think about.
The easy one first.
The one case I can think of at the moment regarding the Innocent Project is the case where the car photographer for a Used Car Magazine was sent to a junk yard in or around Milwaulke. She had been there before and had no problems. She was a brunette and about twenty-five years of age. I cannot at the moment think of her name.
This time was different. The Innocent Project had managed to free a guy that was the member of the family that owned the large junk yard. When she arrived to photograph the car they wanted to sell, he beat her and kept her prisoner for four days in a house on the junk yard property. He along with his mentally slow cousin, finally stabbed her to death in a garage and burned her body in a 55 gal drum.
I don’t blame you in the least for refusing to help this project if they break the data into compartments so that you cannot evaluate the whole. This is something new to me. I had no idea that was their proceedure. No real professional IMO should ever work in that manner.
One of the “Innocence” project’s reoffenders is Steven Avery, Wisconsin. This case is so rotten, it has a wiki page!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Avery
@Blink, 35.
There is the only way I see juror misconduct could have been considered on behalf of either Baldwin or Echols. It is spelled out expressly in the Baldwin opinion, http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/jb_assc_order.pdf, and in Footnote 4 to the Echols opinion, http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/de_assc_order.pdf. I have discussed this with several people I respect. The consensus is that if the prior guilty verdicts were introduced by the State as “evidence,” the defense then could attack the verdicts on the juror misconduct claim. Given the low probative weight of the previous verdicts, given the posture of the case at such a hearing, all the State had to do was not introduce them. The defense hinted that it felt it necessary to challenge the verdicts one way or another, which was valiant but fairly lame. This was a collateral attack by another name. You are right the State was brilliant in that it knocked in the head a backdoor attempt at a collateral attack via juror misconduct on the previous verdicts. The key State argument, dressed as a concession, happened to be spot on:
“The State does not resist admission of the juror misconduct evidence, although the State does not believe it will aid the Court’ resolution of the question on remand – whether a new trial would result in acquittal.”
Indeed, it wasn’t “evidence” relevant to a future trial unless past convictions made it so.
Yes, Judge Laser instructed the parties to submit their positions on juror misconduct via briefs. I have no link for it, but there was a defense motion that asked Judge Laser to allow oral arguments at a proceeding prior to the evidentiary hearing. The reason, of course, was so they would know whether to deal if the DNA evidence did not pan out. This is speculative, but the defense approached the State after it learned the DNA test results would not be helpful at the evidentiary hearing, and was fully aware the juror misconduct could be kept off the table. Is there any other reason anyone can suggest?
There was no way the juror misconduct claim was going to be made at the evidentiary hearing unless the State opened the door.
You have raised some questions no one has answered. Let me break them down.
1. How did the parties avoid the express language of the remand, which was to hold an evidentiary hearing?
2. Did the parties go beyond the scope of the remand when JURY verdicts were vacated and a “new trial” ordered?
3. How did Craighead County regain jurisdiction over Jessie Misskelley?
The answer to 1 is “as a matter of law they likely could not”, to 2 “yes,” and to 3 “I don’t have a clue.”
You are right about use immunity of one confession against Misskelley. It would have been available to the State at the Baldwin/Echols evidentiary hearing and not at another Misskelley trial. But I think you are wrong in this regard: the other confessions Misskelley made were going to deny him a new trial he would have lost.
So here is the question you didn’t directly ask, and I have, and there is no explanation at all offered. Let us hypothetically assume the parties could bypass the evidentiary hearing, stipulate to have jury verdicts vacated and a “new trial” ordered, and drag Misskelley into the mix.
WHY DID THE STATE AGREE?
The State had a much better hand than most legal commenters either realize or have acknowledged. I cannot for the life of me come up with any reason to deal before a ruling were made on juror misconduct–most likely favorable to the State–and prior to the evidentiary hearing. It boggles the mind.
This was slapped together at lunch. If I get time this week, I’ll start with the comedy of errors that led to this fiasco. It begins with a misrepresentation, likely erroneous, about the DNA statute that led to an erroneous decision and this fiasco. It will take time and links to put together.
Ok, so good news, the three hours of reading and sourcing in Lexis and WestLaw this morning was not a fat waste of time, lol.
You may be right on Miskelley, but I have to believe that because the 3rd confession whereby he goes full monty was protected by immunity, it would negate the use of the priors because the argument would be that they are/were substantially similar to those used to convict him on the same charges. Fruit of the poisonous tree, no, but let’s say a close branch.
I have discussed with a few colleagues as well, and the consensus is that even if the “reconsideration” of the motion is applied, as you know, that still only applies to the parts of the motion not decided by the Supreme Court.
Did I miss the ex parte filing on the docket?
B
Added: I’ll see what was docketed September 1 for Misskelley if I can find it.
@Blink, yep, whoever takes it on has to be prepared for the backlash. However, I really could care less about these celebs and their money.
It would take someone who feels like the same as I, has the money, and isn’t vulnerable to a media PR smear. In addition, anyone who feels like 15 or 20 years in prison is a fair sentence for an animal who murders children is off their rocker IMHO.
I read the testimony of the mentally ill girl Damien was involved with, yes. Do you have access to her mental health reports or diagnosis?
She is not a convicted felon that I know of or accused in this case, why would I?
The reason that a trailer was broken into was because the young couple was forbidden to see one another, and they ran away from home.
I actually do know teens who were involved in delinquent behavior. NOT ONE is a murderer.
I am sure you do, no doubt in my mind and I am sure that can be true most of the time, but it is not in this case.
If you think it is ok for kids to break the law at will for teenage romantic angst, let me know where you live if I can find some I will send them to your neighborhood. Seriously.
Echols, Baldwin and Miskelley are all convicted murderers, so again, I am missing your point.
B
Now in regards to Ellington. There are many ways to conceal payment. The only way find out is to try and follow the money disbursed by the new defense team.
To apply all of the findings in the Arkansas Supreme Court ruling would not have resulted in anything like was what was done.
This behavior cannot be allowed to stand. Not only does it make a mockery of the law, it will give every criminal in a prison an opportunity to try a similar tactic.
Not as Crazy as Nifong in North Carolina in some respects, but certainly thumbing your nose at the courts.
liam ,your question as to alibi, was one of my first questions too,sorry i cant link right now but,i found a police statement that jason & damien are picked up from laundry mat at 630pm may 5 and dropped off seperately ,sis’s trial statement*michelle echols testimony at callahan* changes the time of pickup to 400pm and no jason. the alibi fell apart , imo
Ragdoll that is hilarious and I am dying, I am going to try my best not to post it so as not to FLAME the situation.
ROTFL
Understandable
I noticed that you’re selective in the commentary you approve. I can’t say that I blame you.
Being “convicted” of a crime, does not always = committing the crime in question.
Also, I don’t think it’s ok for kids to break the law. And, it’s also not ok to make the leap from breaking into vacant trailers, with murder.
If you think it’s ok to accuse kid who break the law of murder, please tell me what the names of your relatives are. Seriously. I’d like to know how many potential murderers you’re related to.
O, you bet I am selective in commentary. I won’t tolerate rude and disrespectful from anyone, on any case.
B
Rats. I screwed up my links, B. My apollies.
I’ve found these links. I’m not sure if this is what you’re looking for. Hope they help some:
http://www.medillinnocenceproject.org/
http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=5142
I love reading “healthy” debate.
-snipped-
Protess and his students said Anthony McKinney had been wrongly convicted of the 1978 murder of a security guard in Harvey.
Two years ago, Cook County prosecutors subpoenaed notes and recordings from the Innocence Project. Among the information subpoenaed was students’ grades, private e-mails and Protess’ syllabus.
Prosecutors said they wanted to investigate whether the students may have skewed their findings to get a good grade, a claim Protess and his students denied from the beginning.
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2011/03/18/report-nu-cancels-wrongful-convictions-professors-class/
Forgive me for not going back over all the comments (and I have just begun to read Part 2). Wasn’t the luminol testing on the creek bank disallowed because the boys’ bodies had been put there after removal from the water. Blood from a ‘crime scene’ cannot be distinguished from blood and fluids that ended up there later through (mea culpa) ‘leakage’.
Or can it?
I think no..
No, as I published, it was disallowed because the “scientific community” considered it new and novel and therefore not scientific evidence. The areas where the boys were placed are clearly deliniated and while I agree it is “possible” to cross contaminate overall, the pattern of disbursement of any luminol images is still likely to show the difference between a contamination and an actual spatter.
B
It would seem there is controversy regarding Medill Innocence Project, and it’s founder, David Protess.
He has retired, but leaves behind skeptics who believe his students were graded upon the evidence they could uncover. Can the evidence these students found, be trusted, as a result?
-snipped-
But in 2009, the methods of Protess’ students were first questioned as Cook County prosecutors alleged that students paid off a witness an effort to prove a man was wrongly convicted.
Prosecutors, who also alleged students misrepresented themselves, later subpoenaed documents including Protess’ records, student memos and grades, suggesting that students may have received better grades from Protess for uncovering evidence.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/13/david-protess-northwester_0_n_876285.html
I can’t find the specific cases but perhaps the exoneration of 11 death row imates (Illinois) are being investigated? The details of Protess’s retirement have not been released.
Well, that is Ms. Lyon’s stomping grounds
B
Blink -
Looks like your analysis has touched a nerve with Baglady, another poster that has “already hung their hat.” One thing this case has taught me is the last thing anyone wants to question is their own premises. So many people become convinced the WM3 are innocent before they even know the facts. When confronted with the facts, they often jump straight to advocating instead of investigating – to keep their original belief in tact.
@susanm – even Damien’s “final” alibi falls apart. The Saunders were supposedly at Splash Casino with the DeWitts that night, but Splash records show that Don DeWitt had only 1 guest on May 5 – presumably his wife. http://callahan.8k.com/images2/splash_casino/sc_registration_may5.JPG
Then, on the stand, Damien admitted to the following:
Q. So the story kind of changes to fit the facts we need to cover, right?
A. Yes, sir.
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/damien1.html
I find it very interesting that supporters will not go near the validity of the “finding” of the ice axe and the analysis of it’s use as a probable weapon in this crime. No adverse facts or evidence to a syllable of our findings. Not even to say, told you, cops boned the case and did not present the axe, instead they hung their hat on the knife even though their own experts would not say for sure it was used.
Nobody is touching it.
B
The only thing that ever really made me doubt these crimes were committed by the WM3 was the severity of the attack on Christopher Byers. His injuries screamed personal rage on the part of someone close to him. I started to think that perhaps the other boys unwittingly stumbled upon an attack on their friend and became victims themselves. However, I decided put everything else out of my mind and look at what Blink presented to us.
There is a great deal of evidence linking the WM3 to the murders in addition to their willingness to accept a plea rather than fight to be exonerated. I now believe there are other scenarios that can account for the immense brutality of the attack on Christopher. For the WM3 to violently attack all three boys simultaneously they most likely attacked them one on one. Young Christopher’s attacker could have been the sickest, most depraved of the three. Or the savagery intensified as the attacks continued. There are a number of reasons that could account for the different wounds inflicted on each child.
When the WM3 accepted the pleas I knew I would have to search for something to make me believe they were wrongly convicted. In the end, it simply isn’t there. I believe Baldwin, Echols, and Misskelley are the worst kind of monster.
wow. I just have to say that I admire you for sharing that. I think there are so many with similar outlooks.
I also think in general it is difficult for people to think they have invested their integrity in something that turned out to be wrong, and blame themselves, so they stay fixed in the position for lack of desire to face it.
I have done that.
B
@Blink, 6:
Davis was quite plain about the limit of the immunity to this statement, I think (first page): http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/jm_feb17.html
Note the term “this statement.”
You make a sharp argument against other statements, of course, but immunity agreements tend to spell out what isn’t covered in cash someone crawfishes, as happened here.
If I were an ASSC justice, I would make a rare sua sponte motion to have the State and defense come before me and explain how they got around my order. Then again, there is some reason I’m not God.
Your research was excellent and not wasted at all.
I am awaiting confirmation of this, but I have been drafting something today, I think in this case, it either has to be to the justice who penned the order, or Nostra sponte as the circuit court did have at least a partial remand on the hearing issue for Dec 5th.
Thanks for the kind words and I realize it is difficult for anyone out there reading that this decision will impact future cases across the country like wildfire, but it has the potential for that.
It is not just the fact that in my view the circuit court had no jurisdiction to override convictions and appeals in a capital case, it is also the fact that it flies in the face of the constitution in that it unilaterally “expunged” the role of the jury prior to the convictions, and the future ability of THESE defendants, to be judged by a jury of their peers.
Yes, in the end, although I think I am clear as to what I think the outcome would have been, one has to consider the violation of the defendants rights.
B
To all WM3 supporters, consider this as a friendly little “FYI”…..
As hard as you all are working to spread misinformation and in some cases outright lies, there are those of us working even harder to educate everyone we can on the TRUE facts of this case. I can say that I was extremely saddened to see the post release comments from people that believed these guys were railroaded. It was astonishing how many of them knew only what they had seen from that HBO “crockumentary” or worse, knew NOTHING of the facts.
What has made me feel better though is that for every “supporter” ignorant of the facts there were 10 people who had never even heard of this case. Those are the people that I’ve been working to get all the real information to and you know what…..IT’S WORKING! As new people are hearing about what really happened here they will know that there are now 3 convicted murderers walking free.
And to Blink, I can’t tell you how much YOU have inspired me to continue to relay this information to anyone who will listen. Thank you so much!!!!
Just now getting to read part II!! Weather hasnt been so friendly here in Mississippi! =)
Love to all my fellow blinkers….. i support the truth no matter which way it goes… I say that as a “once known to support the wm3″.
Love!
Bam!
Blink, I say this again after Part II: This is an excellent and well reasoned expose’ on this case. I am from Northeast Arkansas and followed this case from day one. I learn something new everytime you post. I have a friend who was convinced of the defendant’s innocence. She would get mad anytime a different view was given. I told her a week or so ago to read your articles about the case. I told her they were presented in a factual atmosphere and that every comment was backed by evidence. After she read Part I, she simply said “Wow” when she called me. Today, she calls and is swinging toward guilt after reading the part about Echols’ urine comments. I wish they had tested the stomach contents, but realistically, once the urine was mixed with other liquids, identifying it specifically as urine may have been very difficult if not impossible. Echols confirmed that it was urine by his comments. Looking forward to the next part.
I’m very interested in this case and believe they are guilty. The majority of the websites I pull up are “pro” sites – which makes it hard to find out the truth.
I lived in Memphis when this happened in ’93 and it was all over the news here. My friend’s husband at the time (in ’93) said he knew Baldwin from school (when he lived in Memphis) and he was into satanic things (hearsay – I know – but still compelling)
I am so glad you investigated this. Is there ANYTHING we can do to get this plea deal overturned? Is there any hope at all that something can be done??? Is anything in the works that you can divulge?
Thanks again – and let’s get the word out – DON’T BELIEVE THE LIES!
Well let me say this, yes, there are some things in the works, I do not know that it would change or rescind the pleas, but there are definitely violations of rights here, and by rights I mean Stevie, Chris and Michael, and their representatives by proxy.
B
Also, I have just skimmed some of the comments but will read in more detail later. On the issue of Prosecuting Attorney Scott Ellington, he appeared at a forum in Little Rock sponsored by the WM3 organization a few days after the three were released. In an continuing effort to smash his political career, he admitted that he had never seen the need to read the entire case file! So, a prosecutor doesnt’ even read the case file and examine the evidence before deciding to release three admitted child killers back into society?
Well that certainly would explain a lot, and make him incompetent.
Does everyone whose job it is to protect the rights of the victims in this case?
B
Mike
Thanks for your post. Basically your friend did not have good information, but once she was pointed in the right direction her truth meter kicked in. Everyone has a way they recognize truth. Some are just a bit faster than others.
Those with a monetary or polictically correct agenda are the ones who refuse to accept truth because it interfers with what they are trying to accomplish.
If Scott Ellington admitted his not reading the case file in its entirety, then he should IMO be brought up on charges and disbarred. Along with the disbarment,the court should take steps to overturn everything he has done regardig this case.
For the most part, this is his only cowboy contribution. Greg Itzen will end up playing him, mark my words.
B
What makes sense is that Scott Ellington is a Supporter.
Has anyone seen The Conspirator? Two totally different cases, Mary E. Surratt and WM3. One judged by a military tribunal (at the insistence of the Secretary of State), the other judged by their peers. There was, in both cases, a rush for justice. Mrs. Surratt’s trial eventually ensured all civilians would be tried in a civilian court.
I sincerely hope BOC’s extensive and tireless work on this case leads to a new trend, especially where it reduces the resurrection of future Alford pleas. If due process was followed, the justice system will be proven to work, without tampering, corruption, check book journalism, etc etc.
This is where I tip my hat to CJBP Jr. We all know c word removed Caylee from this earth. Had he not continuously insured the rights of the ex con (her own defense seemed inept to do same), c word would have gotten off altogether (no probation….no guilty to lying to LE…nothing).
-snipped-
Well, that is Ms. Lyon’s stomping grounds
B
Aaaaahhhhh. I see where you were going with your ‘inquistion’. You already knew
Off topic, but . . .
lol, I see all these little quilty-kaleidoscopy things by our names, EXCEPT MaggieM has a photo of my cat, and dadgum has . . . what is that thing . . . a wad of chewed gum, lol. Dunno if these are quite right for your site, Blink, but at least my quilt is lizard green.
I have a G rating assigned, let me know if anyone’s what what ends up showing.
lol
B
Ragdoll
Thanks for the links regarding the Innocence Project. I think the project at one time was conceived with a good motive. Your comments about other groups trying to help supposed convicted criminals achieve freedom is what made me think of the project.
I was suprised to see Blinks reply regarding her refusal to get involved based on the methods used and I completly agree with her decision. I did not have any details except for remembering the Wisconsin case that resulted in freeing a killer to kill again.
Now we see that the criminal justice system in both Cook County and the State of Illinois are doing an investigation regarding this body of work and its true motivation of securing a good grade. The University IMO has done the right thing and closed the activities to any association with the school.
Sometimes an idea concieved originally as a teaching method gets out of hand because of publicity. To think that inexperienced law students could do a thorough balaced analysis of a crime by breaking it into managable chunks without spending the time to look at the whole and the professor using this method, tells me that he had little to no experience in the real world.
Over and over again we find that students are given an unbalanced view of the world while studying a subject. That is why there are professional organizations to certify ones ability and competence in a particular field.
I see that Blink has given all of us a unique “coat of arms” associated with our posts. I don’t know the reason, but I am certain she has a good one.
lol, no, it is randomly selected as I feel the need to point out. Real men were pink, btw, lol.
B
Question regarding the luminol evidence: if it was ruled inadmissible at the time of the original trial (as the result of a Frye challenge, I presume) could such evidence later be deemed admissible at retrial based on the present general scientific acceptance of such evidence? A girl can dream can’t she???
Under the instant order, yes, subject to admissibility based on the merits of the testing under the advesarial conditions, and discovery. Interestingly, I am not seeing discovery filings outside of the status update.
I doubt it would survive a Frye, but honestly, in an evidentiary hearing with this orders wording, I think it is like a giant food processor. The burden was whether or not a new trial would result in an acquittal, and I am NOT seeing that at all.
B
Here is a link to the video where Scott Ellington admitted to not reading the case files.
http://www.viddler.com/explore/clintonschool/videos/473/
Maggie and kitty, thank you for posting-
If anyone is interested in this case and you have not watched this video, you need to.
It is replete with ex parte communication and I am comfortable saying if I were a chief justice, I would lose my lunch in the first 12 minutes.
If Dustin McDaniel is not called to answer his participation in this, which was LARGELY outside of a courtroom then all I can say is that there is no resident of Arkansas that better ever give a rats ass about jurisprudence in their state. Just wow.
Mara Leveritt does not know this case and it is disgusting that at this venue she does not disclose her interests in the Arkansas Times. Are you kidding me? These clients agreed to the HBO filming, and then THEY SUED THEIR ATTORNEYS FOR AGREEING TO IT. Which is it? She thinks it was a good thing, and forgot that it PAID THE DEFENSE and continues to pay the defendants?
OMG, no candlewax found at the scene? It was on one of the boys shirts, as was testified to?
I never attack a professional, but this is unreal. Huge, huge amounts of money were raised for the defense she says. Good News, because under Ar law, soliciting public funds is open to disclosure.
Obscene
B
I re-watched the press conference today of the three convicted child killers before being released. It’s haunting. Watch it again and keep your eyes on Misskelley. It is excruciating to watch. At first, he seems to get the silent treatment from Jason, despite his efforts to communicate. Then the talking heads get going, and Jason loosens up a bit, particularly when his lawyer openly calls him a hero and you can hear the audible sighs from the media. Then Jason starts to pat Jessie affectionately. Afterall, Jason’s been given the “good boy” role to play and after 17 years, he’s learned to bring it.
Damien, who’s been given the “sensitive, misunderstood” role, and who has been caressed and fawned over by bleeding heart celebs, brought it, too. Although, he gets to bring it with a swagger and belligerent tone, because afterall, he’s f*ing misunderstood. And there’s no mistaking his body language with Misskelley. He doesn’t even aknowledge he’s in the room. Miskelley’s got “stupidity and ugliness” — two things Echols has been reported as saying about Misskelley, that he has no tolerance for.
Misskelley’s role as the retard is crystal clear. He was not invited to the fancy party because he has a role to play. While Jason and Damien were knee-deep in theatre and pyschology classes (respectively), Jessie cleaned up barracks and felt he wasn’t “ready” for education classes in prison. (http://thewm3.yuku.com/topic/428/Jessie-Misskelley-Jr-12-2-01)
Self-fulfilling prophecies….all of them.
Did you read this chat? If that is Miskelley as it is professed, whoever still thinks he is challenged and borderline retarded as was reported, you need to read this. No way.
I completely agree they will keep these guys apart-
B
B
Father of victim says he will fight release of West Memphis 3
WEST MEMPHIS, AR -Posted: Sep 06, 2011 8:25 AM CDT
Updated: Sep 06, 2011 8:25 AM CDT
Steve Branch, the father of one of the three 8-year-old boys killed 18 years ago, said he will do everything in his power to overturn the law that allowed the West Memphis Three walk free.
Nearly three weeks ago, Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley, known as the West Memphis Three, were granted freedom with a rare Alford plea.
“I’ve just lost a lot of sleep,” said Branch.
Branch said the release of the West Memphis Three is an abomination of the justice system.
“I couldn’t believe that the justice system, the D.A. and the prosecutor would let this happen,” he said.
http://www.kait8.com/story/15400491/father-of-victim-says-he-will-fight-release-of-west-memphis-3
========================================
God bless him! My heart aches for him. One can only read this and know that our Blink is fighting the good fight with this father.
ATG, you look most handsome in pink and Dadgum’s puppy sure is cute!
Okay, why is my cat (who passed on a year ago) showing up on your site? It has me just a weeee bit freaked out! lol
My sympathies on your cat, and I have no idea, you must use it on something that knows to make it your avi.
B
@Blink, 22, bold:
I do not expect it, but the ASSC should be worried enough about its turf to initiate action. In the real world, it likely won’t and Mr. Branch may not be legally educated but his words are among the truest spoken: this will open a Pandora’s Box. Juries are our buffer against an arbitrary state and they took a big hit August 19th.
I think that also, but I think there are more areas of rules of criminal process and procedure up for review.
For example:
1. pre-sentencing report
2. victim impact statement
While this was a plea deal, it does not entitle it to supercede these parameters, but it did.
B
Blink says:
“Obviously I cannot publish it, but our team built an animation in precise scale to the wound macros in this case including a trajectory fade, and there is, and never will be a doubt in my mind that ice axe was a weapon used in this crime, and was in the custody of Jason Baldwin”
I can understand how this has you convinced. This is where I shut up. I believe that if I actually saw this, I would be convinced too.
I agree that you should not publish it. (I also feel, like Mr. Blink, that the crime scene footage of the boys should never have been displayed in the documentaries or anywhere for public viewing. Never, ever would I want my child shown that way.)
The timing of when Jason got the ice axe and when he sent it back are a little too coincidental, too, I agree.
I just cannot believe that they would not pay more attention to this weapon. Did they only test it for fingerprints? Why would they not test the axe for blood/DNA material? Why would they not test it, as you did, to see if it would have caused these injuries? That’s the first thing I wanted to do when you mentioned it…match it up to the injuries.
I understand it was 18 years ago. I am sure this is not something LE ever expected to find when looking for these children. But, there is so much that they seemed to overlook or disregard. It’s hard to understand why.
@Blink, 40.
Excellent points. This expedited Alford plea deal did undermine quite a bit of ancillary criminal procedure. Yet those with standing to raise these issues all were on board with the agreement.
The suspended sentence is a double-edged sword. Unlike parole or probation, a hearing isn’t required to send these three back behind the walls. On the other hand, how can supervision be justified for thieves and not for murderers who cannot be forced to undergo mental health treatment, by way of example? Didn’t Ellington owe the people, in his capacity, a duty to at least try to protect them via some conditions on release?
Since I think all three very well may re-offend in the next ten years, let us hope it is on a narcotics charge and not remotely similar to what happened in the past. At this juncture, that is the best outcome I see, pathetic as it is.
I would only disagree with your point that all those with standing were on board. In terms of the victims rights statement , which is to be a consideration for a pre-sentence report, were not.
Those would be the next of kin of the victims, who were noticed one day before. Ellington is quite specific, he told them then so that he was clear he was not offering them veto power.
B
oooh! We now have ***astericks***next to our names!
Must mean those are the really good posts to read, right?
Oh, goody, I got purpel, too! Thanks, Blink.
lol, I cant see the asterisks!
B
Maggie M, thanks for the link! I’m no chief justice, but I definitely feel like I’m about to lose my supper. Disgusting.
Also, with all these news of Jessie and his community college ambitions, I want to repeat my question, for any supporters still reading this – what is Susie Brewer’s mental age?
@Maggie M, 36:
This is the first thing I have ever tried to watch and could not finish because it outraged me so much. Thanks for the link and I do hope to get the stomach to view it in full. Ellington was as cringeworthy as Leveritt, from what little I saw. He sat there, mute, while the defense villified his predecessors, who weren’t perfect but who did many, many things right, much more than he.
@Blink, 42, bold.
I agree the next of kin should have standing but since they are represented by the people, or supposedly are, I don’t see how they would. Granted, I haven’t read the Arkansas statutes that pertain to victims’ rights and impact statements so that may be all wet but in most jurisdictions these issues have to be brought to the court’s attention and addressed by prosecutors. From what little I could manage on the clip of the panel session, I’m shocked Ellington felt compelled to give one day’s notice.
Someone needs to provide him with a job description.
There are ways individuals can sue public officials for nonfeasance, though. Just sayin’.
On this one, it is clear:
http://www.acic.org/justice/#Prosecution
You need to watch the whole shabang. For the most part, words fail me, but I will say this-
There is not a ham sandwich in all of Arkansas that fears Scott Ellington.
Let me know when you get to the part where he opines the first 2 witnesses of the defense in a theorhetical new trial. I admit it, I have never in my life heard a prosecutor indicate fear of their case from defense witnesses they have full backgrounds on, and that may never be called as it is not his job to anticipate same.
B
cj and Blink
Well, I suppose it would take a man who understands himself and his place in society to wear pink.
I confess, I did wear pink dress shirts purchased by my oldest daughter about thirty years ago. She wanted to get her dad up-to-date with fashion. Pale blue and white were not, in her opinion, stylish enough. However, I was careful to choose a safe environment for wearing them.
When my Blink Jr was in first grade, I sent him on picture day in a crisp RL pink button down.
When I picked him up he and Blinkette were whispering in the back and pretty quiet- highly unusual.
Once in the door, Blinkette told me she needed to speak to me privately ( the child had a cast on her right leg she broke on a trampoline at a friends .. i know, but..) she could climb the three flights like a spider monkey- adorable.
She told me Blink Jr was teased because he was wearing pink but did not want to tell me, and that she was proud of him because he told them real men wore pink. Broke my heart.
I apologized to him holding back tears and told him I would arrange for re-takes and he could pick whatever he wanted to wear.
2 Months later, my wee man picked the same damn shirt. Hilarious, I did not say a word.
Viva the pink to the real men I say.
(no mom’s of tweens out there, he will not wear pink in this phase)
B
@Blink, bold, 46:
Howling at the ham sandwich line. I will watch in full a little more distant from dinner.
Since these three are on suspended sentences for the next ten years, I fail to see how it was even ethical for Ellington to participate in a panel discussion about a technically ongoing case. Not that legal niceties seem to bother him much, mind you, but if by some unlikely twist of fate this got kicked back into trial court…
The link pretty well is boilerplate in most states. The folks in Craighead County pretty well were screwed when this clown lucked up and got elected because he is their voice or lack thereof.
I recommend you do not fast forward to minute 78 and hear Scott Ellington, prosecutor of the 2nd district, tell the free world he will not accept evidence in this case and that it is to be forwarded to the DEFENSE for processing. If this was not such an egregious tragedy, I would be checking my office for hidden cameras.
As exbiditious as it would be, given the states head in sphincter holding pattern, I am pretty sure that usurping LE and sending “evidence” for processing to defense attorneys of admittedly guilty clients on suspended sentence parole is not a great idea, or , legal. For Real- WHO IS THIS GUY?
Except, I actually did, I said it the other day, If I did not know better, I would swear someone was effing with me for the reaction.
McDaniel orchestrated this. Ex parte, I might add, and Ellington is his Fredo; minus the boat and Lake Tahoe.
They did not need it, they had WM3 cash. They build sets for this now.
Off to force a sun salutation that I do not mean.
B
LOL! Avatars! (I thought I was seeing things for a minute there.) You do think of everything, don’t you Blink?
ATG, if I get a blue one, would you like to trade?
Oh and I think Dadgum’s might be a calf???
Are you telling me that video on viddler is real? Out of context, I would have sworn it was a hoax. And we wonder why our country seems to be in decline. I started to lose it when the lone prosecutor joked around like it was funny for “Max” to leak the deal, but the families of the victims were under a gag order so he waited until Thursday to tell them since he didn’t give them a veto.
As usual, you cut right to the heart of it. He was referring to Mr. Branch who told him he would be going to the press and anyone else who would here him.
You can see my future comments about the piece at your leisure, I am not sure this is a one sitting video for anyone who understands this case well. Are we in a new Twin peaks?
B