The West Memphis Three HBO Paradise Lost Purgatory: Victims Parents Plea For No Oscar, Call Film Cruel Hoax
Beverly Hills, CA- Following an announcement that The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences is considering the HBO documentary Paradise Lost III : Purgatory, as one of 15 submissions being considered for an Oscar in the documentary category branch of AMPAS, chaired by Rob Epstein- Todd and Diana Moore took action.
The Moores are the parents of James Michael Moore, one of three eight your old victims murdered on May 3, 1993 along with Chris Byers and Stevie Branch. Within days of an exclusive series on the murders appearing on www.blinkoncrime.com which included the discovery of potential new evidence; the nearly 18 year old case that resulted in 9 previous convictions of three suspects took a radical turn.
On August 19th Jessie Misskelley, Damien Echols and Charles Jason Baldwin pled guilty to the murders of all 3 children via an Alford plea and were immediately released from jail as convicted murders on parole.
Paradise Lost III produced by Joe Berlinger and Bruce Sinofsky follows it’s predecessors I and II, released in 1996 after the initial convictions of the West Memphis 3.
Berlinger is a member of AMPAS, and has produced several unreleased documentaries of Hollywood A- listers including Charlize Theron, Hugh Jackman, Oprah Winfrey and Cameron Diaz.
Click below to read impassioned and unedited letter sent to Chairman Epstein.
The following is the unedited letter sent to Chairman Epstein by Todd and Diana Moore:
TODD MOORE
DIANA MOORE
PO Box 721
2004 Main St.
Hughes, AR 72348
November 22, 2011
Chairman Robert P. Epstein
AMPAS
Awards Office
8949 Wilshire Blvd
Beverly Hills CA 90211
Re: Paradise Lost III: Purgatory
Dear Chairman Epstein and members of the Documentary Branch of the Academy:
We are Todd Moore and Dana Moore.
Our cherished eight-year-old son, Michael, was brutally murdered on May 5, 1993 by Jessie Misskelley, Damien Echols, and Jason Baldwin. Misskelley was tried and convicted in 1994. Baldwin and Echols were convicted by a separate jury later that year. All three entered Alford pleas to our son’s murder August 19, 2011. They are now, as they have been for the past 17 years, guilty as a matter of law. They have been guilty as a matter of fact since the moment water flooded Michael’s lungs after he was beaten, stripped, hogtied, and then discarded into a stream to drown.
Michael was the joy of our lives. In addition to our son, his murderers also tortured and slaughtered two other children, Christopher Byers and Stevie Branch. These three precious victims were classmates and friends, and their loss was a tragedy felt throughout the entire community.
We are horrified to learn that a documentary that glorifies Michael’s killers, Paradise Lost III: Purgatory, is among 15 documentaries being considered for an Academy Award. Because of public pressure that exploded due to gross misrepresentations of fact in two previous documentaries, Michael’s killers were unjustly able to enter into a plea agreement, were released from prison, and now pose additional threats to society. This third documentary further insulted the families of these three boys and may lead to further injustice. We implore the Academy not to reward our child’s killers and the directors who have profited from one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated under the guise of a “documentary film.”
We realize that documentaries have a point of view and advocate a position to some degree or another. As with the two before it, this film crossed the line into a cruel hoax that had real-life consequences larger than even those of us who still mourn our horrific losses. It is not art. This film is cynical and exploitative deception that compounds our pain needlessly and rewards those who inflicted it. It and the two films that preceded it are simply tasteless tabloid entertainment presented as social commentary.
We are private individuals. The directors, Bruce Sinofsky and Joe Berlinger, are aware of this because we refused to participate in their last two films. We appeared solely in the first film because the directors lied and told us their purpose would be to “protect children.” You can imagine our shock and disgust when the first film opened with gruesome and gratuitous images of the crime scene and remained exploitative and salacious until the credits rolled. It did nothing to promote child welfare. It did everything to support child killers and to benefit monetarily from a ghastly crime.
We were hardly the only people Sinofsky and Berlinger misled or manipulated.
Consider what happened to John Mark Byers. He was Christopher Byers’ adoptive father. Confrontations between Mr. Byers and Echols’ supporters at hearings were staged. Of course, Berlinger and Sinofsky were there to film these episodes. Berlinger and Sinofsky would transport Mr. Byers to the hearings and wire him for sound beforehand. Furthermore, Berlinger and Sinofsky maneuvered Mr. Byers and Echols’ supporters in order to film the anticipated confrontations. Later, after the cameras were packed away, Mr. Byers acted like a different person. Instead of being belligerent, he was affable. When asked about his change in demeanor, Mr. Byers stated that he was supposed to act that way when the cameras were present. Mr. Byers was quoted as saying he received $500 per hour for “exclusive interviews.”
These contrived “confrontations” and other distortions caused many viewers to believe Mark was the “real killer.” It had a terrible impact on his life. We brought this to the attention of HBO. Our complaint was ignored because these falsehoods proved lucrative.
The complete list of distortions would be a long one. The above example is illustrative of the manipulation and distortions that are prevalent throughout the entire Paradise Lost franchise. The films are bereft of ethics, principles, or factual accuracy and basis.
Publicity from the first two films did generate millions of dollars in donations. Much of that money went toward the defense’s investigation of the case. Not a single piece of exculpatory evidence was produced. In other words, between $10,000,000 and $20,000,000 has been collected, although no one knows the exact amount collected or how it was spent. In eighteen years, nothing was found to clear the names of the actual killers. Late last year, the windfall that went toward the legal defense resulted in the granting of an evidentiary hearing which was set to be held a few weeks from now. Instead, the murderers opted to initiate a plea negotiation with the State. As a result, they remain convicted of the deaths of three children.
We have to note that this situation is similar to the one that confronted the Academy when Capturing the Friedmans was nominated for Best Documentary Film of 2003. Two of the Friedmans’ sexual abuse victims presented another Open Letter to the Academy. Capturing the Friedmans had much more artistic merit and integrity than Paradise Lost III: Purgatory, yet it did not receive the award. The Academy made the right decision then, and we pray it does so this time as well.
Sincerely,
Todd Moore Diana Moore
cc: (via eMail)
Commercial Appeal
Jonesboro Sun
LA Times
Variety
Hollywood Reporter
People Magazine
Associated Press
United Press International
Reuters
Related Posts
Related Posts:
557 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
GraceintheHills says:
I can understand your sentiments, Dysthymia (and what an interesting hat you have). I keep reading in some of the posts that these men “admitted” they committed this crime. Many Blinksters have pointed out that this is a teaching blog as well, so I’ll just remind everyone that the Alford plea is NOT an admission of guilt–that is what sets it apart from other guilty pleas (i.e. nolo contendre or no contest). It is a guilty plea in which the defendant does NOT ADMIT committing the crime and is able to proclaim his/her innocence, and acknowledges that the state has enough evidence that *could* lead a jury or judge to find him/her guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
You are correct, GraceintheHills, about the Alford Plea. But by signing their names under guilty of each charge of murder, I take it that they were admitting the real truth of what happened all those years ago.
Your name here is lovely…GraceintheHills makes me think of those old songs I used to sing in Sunday school. They were so lovely. Great name. You commented on mine: Dysthymia. That is simple, I have the medical condition, dysthymia. It is a bummer
Peace.
Howdy Ragdoll…I just wanted to let you know that the documentaries didn’t make me think the WM3 were innocent…as a matter of fact I’m not sure they are. What I do know is there’s an awful lot of “wiggle room” for the WM3, and by that I mean alot of unanswered questions and quite frankly alot of room for doubt. IMHO
I suggested that Mom watch the documentaries as another tool for her to use to come to her own conclusion as to the circumstance surrounding the WM3. I do not have to vouch for these films, we are all grown and will take from them what we will.
Mom…I always look forward to your posts and between you and me I’m not sure what you could say to make your opinion any more clear. You show nothing but respect to everyone and for the life of me I will never be able to understand why some people feel the need to be rude when they disagree with what you have to say.
Grace…so nice to see you again! I look forward to more posts from you on this subject as well!!
To all….I hope you have a safe and happy Holiday Season!
About all I will say at this point is that I feel absolutely horrible for the Moores. They have to feel completely helpless while they watch the media fawn over 2 out of the 3 people who they blame directly for the horrific murder of their child. Millions of dollars have been raised and spent in order to tell a one sided story promoting the defense without finding anything definitively pointing to another guilty party.
Just as in the Caylee Anthony case, I do not believe there was enough evidence to justify the death penalty. A DP case should be determined on the amount and strength of the evidence ALONG with the nature of crime. One without the other will give defendant advocates material and avenues to create a retrial or merely muddy the water and get public opinion on their side.
Maybe 18 years was all the evidence justified. However the way it happened and is being played out is a stab to the heart of Mr and Mrs Moore IMO and my prayers go out to them.
This is not over. Peter Jackson will be back looking for a pardon once he helps put a new governor in office. I would say the cards are being stacked in his favor.
That will never happen. There will be no pardon, and if Mr. Jackson would like to impact United States politics, I suggest he applies for a US citizenship. Otherwise, nobody will be able to accept his money for campaign use.
B
Dear GraceInTheHills,
You wrote:
Rose, I am one of those who lost loved ones in the Holocaust, and I did not find Mom3.0′s remarks offensive in the least. And, I’m not just being polite. As I read her words, I felt she was explaining that when one visualizes the horror, it makes it all the more real in one’s mind. Imo, she was spot on in her analysis.
__
Thank you very, very much Grace, thanks for sharing your personal grief with us and for letting me know that you did not take offense to my comments, and also for explaining that you get what it was I was trying to say.
I am so sorry for your loss Grace, words will never be able to convey my condolences ever-
Thank you for speaking up Grace.
Thank you.
Mom3.0
I should have done the same, but sometimes I feel it important for those in the conversation ( Mom 3.0 has kindly told me to but out before, lol, and deservedly so) but I just wanted to acknowledge that I am the great granddaughter of a czech jew who fled Europe, leaving everything behind, and the granddaughter of a decorated WWII veteran ( her future son in law)- you can imagine those dinners I was too young to remember lol.
I did not lose anyone in the holocaust, and I am so very sorry and touched by that horror that has caused loss for millions.
If you have never been, I was fortunate enough to be invited to the museum in DC a few years ago for the grand opening, and it has changed me in the same way that I force myself to watch Schindlers list every few years.
B
I totally agree that this case seems to divide so many. I hope we can bridge the divide here on BOC
I am very disheartened over what I too feel is subtle and overt hostility here, – I have never felt like I needed to defend myself here on BOC, but with this case, I have felt like it- maybe I am being overly sensitive- perhaps it is because this is the first time I have ever not been able to get to Blinks way of thinking.
Everyone on BOC are like part of a family, one that is open to everyone, equally — a family with the motto of advocacy -respect- kindness, truth and justice- AND one that reads -be sure to check your ego at the door-
This case does provoke strong feelings, and no matter what a persons decision is on quilt or innocence – everyone seems certain they are right
I am not certain- I have not decided.
I can not get off the fence-
I have reasonable doubt – I have researched and continue to do so, yet, I still have reasonable doubt-
Blink says she feels that with all of her research ect that there is no doubt these three are guilty- that is a very strong statement, one I dont think she just willy nilly decided upon-
Therefore I must be missing something- so I continue to research- and I continue to post- some seem angered by this- by my questions, by my persistence- by my inability to pick a side…. well I cant help it- I have reasonable doubt
I too want to know that these little boys killers were found and accused and prosecuted. I do not want to think LEO may have got it wrong and possible 3 young men were innocently imprisoned while the real killers walked free.
So I continue to research, I continued to post
I hope in the end … truth and justice will prevail- and nomatter what, I hope that BOC will remain a family- open to all…. Just Be sure to check your ego at the door
Peace AJMO
I think by admitting one cannot form a solid opinion either way is the definition of one being devoid of ego- I teach that to BOC editors constantly.
I am the first to say that I do not believe based on the case presented in 1994 that I could convict these three without some reasonable doubt. I think I have done a fair job to date representing the herculean task the prosecution had before them, and without today’s technology.
That said, the bulk of the media and “starpower” support this case received, is based on the superficial analysis of folks with their own non-objective biases of “injustice” based on 3 guys that were made to look like monsters because they were different, and that resulted in their conviction.
I can honestly say, if I felt that in general, outside of BOC ( cause we all know the work we bring forward here is uber-researched and thought through) that the general public with opinions on this case HAD reviewed all of the evidence and case files, and it was not just a case of “identifying” with stars, HBO, or the general concept of “not fitting in”, I could feel that the greater powers that be have this case resulting this way for some as yet unforeseen moral or lesson to society.
The stage was set for this case to be won or lost on the totality of evidence based on current testing environments, based on the available “grades” of existing evidence, and that opportunity was lost and I blame one person’s utter lack of commitment to the very job he took an oath to serve- Scott Ellington. As he pointed out, it was his decision alone to make, which btw, I do not agree with as it relates to the last order in the case, but as it were, it seems nobody in the Supreme Court of Arkansas gives a rats ass that this man usurped their jobs in his first 18 months as a prosecutor so who the hell am I?
I am an advocate for Chris, Stevie, and Michael, and those that continue to be victimized by their murders.
The reality is, he was out-lawyered, derelict in his duty, and other than the handful of folks saying so or showing up at the hearing that day in August, most seem fine with that result lining the pockets of 3 men that pled guilty ( ok, that agreed that their is a propondorence of evidence that would likely result in their guilt, which by the way is an important point considering they WERE ALREADY CONVICTED and the appeal they won was regarding the testing of evidence, the weight of which was never quantified in the first place as at NO TIME did ANY testing EXONERATE or EXCLUDE any of them, in fact, circumstantially, and potentially, physically- it pointed to them.)
I have yet to see one researched question about this case asked of him, the defense lawyers or convicted, the stars raising cash to fund this effort, to date. Not one. That in itself is criminal and dishonors these boys who died a gruesome, painful, and torturous death. I have heard the party line.. no physical evidence.. every time I do, I want to whip out my pocket Arkansas supreme court rules of criminal procedure cliff notes and recite the ole, weight of circumstantial evidence in a collective consideration to be given the same weight as physical evidence most especially in the event no other conclusion can be reached for it’s existence.
The reality for me is this, there are so many that could convict Casey Anthony without one shred of physical evidence tying her to the murder of her child, and there is no DOUBT there is more evidence in this case.
Love to you, and to slowroller, and to anyone advocating a researched position in this case, whatever it is, let us please not make it personal at the risk of what I consider extremely important conversation in honor of these children.
One last thing, how pissed am I that Todd and Diana Moore had to write such a letter- that is shameful, regardless of what side of the fence one is one, profit at someone’s murder is flat out just that.
B
Slowroller,
Im sorry, but You were the one that threw up my “place” here on BOC- not me, and you did it in a way that I can only think was meant to create a divide or to seemingly paint our discussion as- poor little me against Mom3.0-
Well Slowroller I am not against you – I am with you. I want the killers of little Mike and Chris and Steve to be punished. I support The Moores and the other families- I support LEO I support Blink
I want justice for all the victims and their families – For Ron and Nicole and their families- for each and every victim and their family.
I just need to be sure beyond any reasonable doubt that these 3 are the killers of these little boys.
Why is that wrong?
I just need to be sure for Chris and Mike and Steve. I need to be sure for The Moores and for the other family members. I need to be sure that any mistake that was made by these well- meaning/hard working LEO is not the reason why you and others see guilt, while I see reasonable doubt-
I want to make sure that any mistake that was made is never repeated thereby securing justice for everyone in the future.
Slowroller,
Please do not claim to know what I feel in regards to any other case or any other victim or any other verdict.
You have no idea what I feel about Ron Goldman or Nicole Brown Simpson-or the OJ case. No idea- although there were mistakes made in that case- it all comes down to REASONABLE doubt- was I able too follow the investigation and the evidence to conclude guilt beyond a reasonable doubt- YES I was-
You do not know ANYTHING about how I feel about little Caylee or the verdict- but rest assured my thoughts ARE just, and they are backed up with facts- and sadly they are bolstered by my own painful research- research that will haunt me forever-
and I must point out here slowroller that both of those cases were tried before a jury- and the jury handed down a verdict of NOT guilty-
Does that make me believe that OJ Simpson was innocent or that Casey Anthony was innocent?
H@ll no-
and it seems you and I are not against one another on those points either…you see, we agree more than we disagree- and it seems we both agree that sometimes juries do in fact, get it wrong-
Where you are certain that this isnt the case IRT the jury in the WM3 case, I am not so certain- that is the only difference SR
Peace
AJMO
No problem, but in an effort to move past the debate, I am not posting that comment- with much respect, I do feel that you are both taking some things personally, and reacting in the same vein.
I am just going to ask that we agree to disagree, and that we ALL support each other as advocates, without needing our particular positions on the matter to be validated if that seems out of reach, please.
B
Dysthymia,
Hello, I just wanted to let you know that I read your response to Grace and I can understand why you feel the way you do about the Alford plea. I think you underscored others thoughts as well-
Why on Earth would 3 innocent people give up on the truth and sign their names?
I also understand Graces explanation of the plea- stating that they did not admit guilt, and they maintained their innocence while acknowledging that there was evidence that could support another conviction.
Ps- Thank you for explaining your name, Dysthymia- I am sorry that you suffer from that condition- but I am glad that you are handling it well and for doing it with a sense of humor – which IMO is very apparent with your comment of:
” That is simple, I have the medical condition, dysthymia. It is a bummer”
CB- Hi, thank you for your kind words-
Ragdoll, thank you for sharing yours too- No worries guys I will not let these films cloud the issues for me-
Al- I happen to agree with you I dont think there was enough evidence to ask for the death penalty in either of these cases- but I understand why the prosecution in both cases asked for the death penalty – as I am sure like in Florida, they have a set of criteria that fit- such as a death of a child under the age of twelve- the heinous nature of the murders ect. perhaps you are right that a death penalty should be asked for based upon the strength of the case- circumstantial vs physical ect ALONG with the criteria-
I am not so sure that Perter Jackson will be looking for a pardon- It seems that he will at least be pacified to have his new documentary on the screen- perhaps by that time his advocacy will be spent in more ways then one- no one can keep yp the fight forever we all give into outside influences over time- regardless of our hopes and dreams….
Sad but true.
I wanted to share a bit of news it seems that Peter Jackson is not only helping Damien but he is also willing to help the others as well- He recently helped Jesse get a new rental home and he paid his rent in full for a year. Which I find very good, as I do not want any of these 3 to fail in their successful integration into society- I want them to lead productive lives I dont want them to reoffend (or offend depending on your stance)
What I would like to see is all three working to help others- perhaps they could volunteer for the innocence project or something like that….it seems a waste to do nothing for the good of others when they have been given a second chance.
Blink thank you for sharing your history with me/us I appreciate it alot- I bet those were lively conversations. If I ever get the chance to travel there, I will be sure to visit the museum.
I need to reread your next long and very thoughtful response again-before I respond- thank you for taking the time to lay it all out and share your thoughts-what I am able to say now, without careful deliberation is -
yes Blink you have done an excellent job to date representing the herculean task the prosecution had before them, and without today’s technology.
I want to say to Slowroller that I am sorry if my responses only fueled the debate and did not help to bridge the divide- that was not my intention. I do agree to disagree and I do agree to support one another as advocates.
I would also like to apologize to Blink and to the readers and most assuredly to The Moores- for taking any amount of time away from the reason we are here- discussion on how to further our advocacy for Steve and Chris and Mike and their families-as well as for all the victims and their families-
AJMO
Peace and Happiness to All during this Holiday season and to all a very Happy and Healthy New Year.
At no time, have you not been an advocate in any case you have contributed to.
My own team rarely agrees across the board, and it is the genesis of creative thinking- I am so very a student of that and always will be.
Not to you personally Mom 3.0, but to anyone that this may resonate to:
1. There is no requirement to agree with any opinions I have, or that of the readers and contributors here.
2. Respect and Advocacy are the foundations for debate, period. With that said, all opinions are welcome.
3. I learn from every one of you, and if you can, please do the same- I am so priviliged to read the posts of y’all, and that you let me hang out. I know that is received in jest, but I do mean it sincerely.
Some days I so wish I could repeat some of the most humbling and ernest of conversations I have, I am sorry that I cannot always do that because of source and privacy issues, but I do my best to work it in when I can, in an anonymous setting.
The point is, it matters so immeasurably.
B
I have been out of touch for a while dealing with medical issues (had a hysterectomy Monday). I have been still reading here. I am so glad that Blink made a statement that I have felt for a long time. There is way more evidence in the WM3 case than in the Casey Anthony case. Every time the fibers that matched clothing of the defendants or clothing at their homes are mentioned, people want to point out, anyone could have owned a similar shirt, house coat, ect. What are the odds that the clothing fibers, blue candle wax, ect., all matched stuff at the defendants homes? This is the kind of evidence that made me fall off the fence onto the guilty side. JMO too!(:
Not that kind of site, seriously.
B
The evolution and advancement of science do not translate into an automatic right to re-litigate every aspect of a case.
I absolutely agree with that. However, the statute was mis-applied according to the Ark supreme court, and therefore they essentially got a shot at a new evidentiary hearing, period. The new trial was Denied IN the courts previous motion to the plea. It is my opinion Judge Laser and Scott Ellington had no standing at the circuit level to “grant a new trial” in order to accept the pleas. We have been over this at length in the beginning and although I will never reveal posters identities, I am sure it is clear to most who the attorneys are.
B
I don’t believe we’ll ever know the truth. After all this time, there isn’t any evidence left to test(IMO) and people can be influenced to change testimony for either side. Then “Hollywood” or “New Zealand” comes in to muddy up everything, too.
I wish that Peter Jackson would stand back–way back–and consider what he is doing and saying in interviews. He was a respected director and it is disturbing to read about him getting “matching tattoos with Damien Echols. He circumvented his country’s immigration policy to get Echols (a man he really only barely knows) into New Zealand. He hired him as a producer for a film (with no film experience! He vows to get Echols a pardon for the triple murder charges he pled guilty to (in The Alford Plea.) Mr. Jackson also obtained a rent-free house (all utilites turned on) for Jessie Misskelley, another person he barely knows.
Mr. Jackson’s interviews always sound like he’s lecturing everyone in the US about our horrible legal system and how he is going to set everything right by obtaining a pardon for Echols (and the other two.) He has no more proof of the WM3′s innocence than any of us do. All we have, along with him, is our opinion. Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley are the only ones who know the absolute truth about their guilt or innocence.
I wish Mr. Jackson would go back to New Zealand and make more movies. He was good at that.
For those who question Peter Jackson’s intentions, this link will make it quite clear and was dated 12/16.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/28/peter-jackson-to-exonerate-damien-echols_n_1063647.html
@ cbickel says:
December 13, 2011 at 10:35 am
Got it friendy! Thank you for clearing up the misunderstanding which is mine. I’m grateful for the deep level of respect BOC’ers have for each other. It just rocks. Getting it done <3
Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to all!
Dysthymia says:
December 12, 2011 at 12:58 am
Your name here is lovely…GraceintheHills makes me think of those old songs I used to sing in Sunday school. They were so lovely. Great name. You commented on mine: Dysthymia. That is simple, I have the medical condition, dysthymia. It is a bummer
Peace.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
@Dysthymia, thank you so much for your gracious post! It sets such a lovely tone of how we Blinksters can and should politely ‘agree to disagree’ and still remain friends who respect each other’s views, AND are staunch advocates for Mike, Chris and Stevie…and all the other victims we come to know through Blink’s amazing blog.
I know Dysthymia is a difficult illness; my two cousins suffer from it, also. My friend, I will keep you –as I keep them– in my nightly prayers. Wishing you peace and happiness during the Holidays…and throughout the New Year.
*****************
Dysthymia, I will share the story of my “hat” since Chanukah and Christmas are upon us soon, and it seems to fit the Season. Some of you already know that ‘GraceintheHills’ is our beautiful Black Labrador, Gracie, who loves running the hills around our home. Someone callously dumped her in our driveway on a cold night in late 2005, during a horrible hailstorm just 8 months after our beloved German Shorthaired Pointer, Easy, passed away. She had the most luxurious, shiny black coat we have ever seen on a Lab, so I wanted to name her Beauty (as in “Black Beauty”). My husband took one look at that shivering, flea and tic-covered little girl, and said, “Let’s name her Grace — for the Grace of God brought her to us.”
We put posters up and an ad in the local newspaper, but no one claimed her. She became ours.
My husband had told me he could never open his heart to another dog after Easy died. He was inconsolable. He couldn’t bear to hear me utter Easy’s name in those first painful months. But, when I yelled for him to come quick — that we had a seemingly lost, little Labrador pup in our driveway — he came bounding up the basement stairs, grabbing towels, a flashlight, and grooming tools along the way. Seeing his eyes light up as he stroked Gracie’s fur and gently removed the tics and fleas, I knew a miracle was occurring: Another ‘room’ had opened in his heart — and Grace walked right in.
I wanted to share this story of joy with all you Blinksters because sometimes–in the midst of so much sorrow–I think we need a simple story with a happy ending to lift our spirits a bit, if only for a moment.
Peace and love to all of you during the Holidays and always.
***************
For the families of Stevie, Chris and Michael, you are in my thoughts and prayers. I can only imagine how difficult the holidays (every day, undoubtedly) are without your son beside you at your table. Please know that you have legions of supporters who honor the lives of your beautiful boys. They will never be forgotten.
@Grace~ Thank you for sharing your story.It was both heartbreaking
and heartwarming all at the same time.
Happy Christmas to all!
GraceintheHills,
What a perfect, lovely story for the holiday season. Grace had a miracle and the two of you did, too. Bless you and your husband. I have a soft spot for dogs, too. Mine is a “rescue” peke.
Have a wonderful and blessed holiday season.
Peace and Love to all the Blink(s) here.
Hello Blink and everyone.
I am sorry it has taken me so long to respond to your thoughts Blink- My children are on Holiday and so we have been busy.
First, Id like to say thank you, again, for taking the time to share your thoughts Blink- And the Biggest thanks for welcoming all opinions, whether they are in agreement or not-
I agree that without differing opinions, we would never be able to learn and grow- nor would we be able to evaluate our own thoughts and beliefs thereby possibly seeing that we could be wrong or that others may be right….or better yet that we all have common ground in which to foster advocacy for truth and justice and we all can further our advocacy for the victims and their families by working together and hearing one anothers “side”.
I am gonna break it up into more than one post- otherwise it might as well be a novel… sorry for the length, but I wanted to make sure that I didnt brush over any of your points Blink, as each one of them is valuable and deserves thought and attention.
AJMO
Mom 3.0-
Can I ask your preference as I will not have the ability to efficiently read, absorb and respond to your post trio, lol, I say affectionately of course until tomorrow, if you would like me to post them and go back to them by tomorrow afternoon so they are not hanging and others have a chance to review/weigh in- or would you prefer I hold them and respond at the same time. You spent a great deal of your time in the busiest of weeks to address my words, and I want to show you that same respect of course.
B
Part One
Hi Blink-
Blink You wrote:
I think by admitting one cannot form a solid opinion either way is the definition of one being devoid of ego- I teach that to BOC editors constantly.
__
Thanks Blink, I am aware, and I know how serious you are about separating ego from action- that is one of the reasons I choose to hang out here- I strive to be more like you and your team-
You wrote:
I am the first to say that I do not believe based on the case presented in 1994 that I could convict these three without some reasonable doubt. I think I have done a fair job to date representing the herculean task the prosecution had before them, and without today’s technology. That said, the bulk of the media and “starpower” support this case received, is based on the superficial analysis of folks with their own non-objective biases of “injustice” based on 3 guys that were made to look like monsters because they were different, and that resulted in their conviction.
__
While I agree that most persons, even those with star power, first relate to this case-through their own “shared” experiences with DE or JB or JM as teens… I do not know this to be the defining factor of their beliefs or advocacy for the 3…. they may base their first feelings of possible railroading, on their own personal thoughts on whether or not these young men were different, which led to their “pickup” and conviction– but I do not think it can be said that everyone that feels this way initially- does not then later, take the time to delve deeper into the case and the files and learns more….
Thereby forming their stance on guilt or innocence on much more than feelings and starpower or shared experiences…
However, I do agree that there are some that base their opinions on nothing more than a brief snippet of information ect and I do believe that many refuse to delve deeper and choose to hold onto their initial thoughts- because it is easier than reading and forming a well thought out opinion – perhaps some are afraid they may change their stance upon careful deliberation?
This goes for both sides of the fence- and for regulars vs those with starpower also.
You wrote:
I can honestly say, if I felt that in general, outside of BOC ( cause we all know the work we bring forward here is uber-researched and thought through) that the general public with opinions on this case HAD reviewed all of the evidence and case files, and it was not just a case of “identifying” with stars, HBO, or the general concept of “not fitting in”, I could feel that the greater powers that be have this case resulting this way for some as yet unforeseen moral or lesson to society.
__
Blink- I hear you loud and clear – see I am out here researching and reading ect- and I am sure there are others like me, that are researching ect-
Some must be willing to review everything just as you have, just as I and others here are willing to do…
None of us can know what another feels or why- and if we can accept this fact- that we can not know why others are motivated to seek the truth and why some see guilt…. while others see innocence…. or why still others can not choose… then I think it becomes easier to acknowledge that everyone has dedicated themselves to finding the truth… but we all interpret that truth differently…perhaps that is the lesson?
IMO there is no other way to look at it or no other way to feel then to accept that the greater powers that be have this case resulting this way for some as yet unforeseen moral or lesson to society- one which we may never fully understand.
Why do we need to separate ourselves into sides- stars vs regulars- nons vs supporters-perhaps they like us, HAVE reviewed all the evidence – even though they identify with the stars- and/or the 3 due to shared experiences- or to LE or a specific witness ect- IF we and they researched and reviewed the evidence whether or not they can relate to the 3 or to others should not interfere with our final analysis of the case.
We are all human and bring our own experiences into any analysis- why should this case be different or so polarizing? WE should be able to incorporate each persons thoughts and experiences into the final analysis otherwise we could be missing an important point of view that may be pertinent to getting to the truth…
You wrote:
The stage was set for this case to be won or lost on the totality of evidence based on current testing environments, based on the available “grades” of existing evidence, and that opportunity was lost and I blame one person’s utter lack of commitment to the very
job he took an oath to serve- Scott Ellington. As he pointed out, it was his decision alone to make, which btw, I do not agree with as it relates to the last order in the case, but as it were, it seems nobody in the Supreme Court of Arkansas gives a rats ass that this man usurped their jobs in his first 18 months as a prosecutor so who the hell am I?
___
I understand that this is a circumstantial case- I really believe that a circumstantial case is more than sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt- Having said that, I also know that a circumstantial case is only as strong as the foundation it is built upon-
I agree that the police in this case were working with less then optimal science at the time-
Had they had the DNA testing we have now- who knows what may have been uncovered
The luminol- had this testing not been novel at the time who knows what could have been uncovered- if they had bluestar who knows what could have been known?
BUT- truthfully Blink- they did test the evidence using the newest sciences and what evidence was left, and able to test- and not too degraded -they did test- and it did not point toward these convicted 3 having done it- ( You are Right- This Does not mean that lack of evidence after 18 years excludes them either)
I hear your utter disbelief and disgust for what has happened Blink- I understand why you feel the way you do about Ellington–
He agreed to NOT go to trial-
We will never know through presentation in court whether or not the prosecution and the evidence could have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that these 3 were the killers
YET- we both agree that the first trials did not prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt-
At the very least we have Jury misconduct- and we can see that the juries based their decisions on anything but the evidence- it was basically a trial of hearsay- and who seemed most truthful-
They saw Hollingsworth as truthful- and we both know she wasnt-
They did not cross examine any of the witnesses with facts and other witnesses-
Jason Baldwins lawyer was so hell bent on Damiens case-He did not even put up a defense for Jason- and He was right DE and JB should never have been tried together- which I know you agree with this thought.
He never obtained the records of the detention center to show that MC could have been lying- He never called any of the other inmates or workers-ect
We have trial testimony that LE brought in JB because he was friends with DE and JB, and the confession that he gave that implicated them and himself is FULL of BS and wrong details and facts-
and JB was with the police for hours before that confession was given and none of it was taped and we both know that the judge first denied a warrant for the homes because this confession was so faulty-
- yet it was enough to take JB to trial and enough to implicate the other two- on the faulty words of a lying teen who could have just as easily implicated any other person in the killings …but he was brought in because of knowing DE and JB… and he was led Blink- inadvertently or not -the questions were leading…. who knows if he was led to make incriminating statements on DE or JB?…heck he may be developmentally delayed, but he knew which names to bring up to be seen as “truthful” afterall, DE and JB were the people he was brought in to discuss….
I understand why you feel the way you do about Ellington Blink- I wish there had been a re-trail too- but saying that he usurped the prosecution after being on the job for a mere 18 months…
IDK- The prosecution was in that meeting in court, they could have declined- despite Ellington- despite the tentative agreement…they didnt—
It might be that sometimes it takes a fresh set of eyes to see the reality for what it is … to be able to set aside ego and emotions…
perhaps he took a step back and realized that after 18 years, and allegations of jury misconduct ect- that there could never be another trial- not a fair one- as witnesses are dead- like LG and Mrs Byers ect- and others were proven to be useless- like the occult guy- and other LEO over the years, had run into their own legal problems like Jones and others…. and given the fact that some of the families now questioned the case and LE’s handling ect – perhaps he rightfully thought it would be best to opt out- and get an Alford plea- perhaps in the end the prosecution undestood much the same…
So they opted for the Alford plea which states:
that all 3 could be proven guilty and they were sentenced to 18 years served- AND although the 3 could claim innocence – which they can claim until the cows come home- but we all know that means next to nothing in the eyes of the law and to those that believe they are guilty despite any plea- those like The Moores
You wrote:
I am an advocate for Chris, Stevie, and Michael, and those that continue to be victimized by their murders.
I know you are Blink- and I would expect nothing less than your hardwork and devotion to them and to their families as well as to justice.
AJMO
cont Part 2
Part 2
Me again Blink-
Blink you wrote:
The reality is, he was out-lawyered, derelict in his duty, and other than the handful of folks saying so or showing up at the hearing that day in August, most seem fine with that result lining the pockets of 3 men that pled guilty ( ok, that agreed that their is a propondorence of evidence that would likely result in their guilt, which by the way is an important point considering they WERE ALREADY CONVICTED and the appeal they won was regarding the testing of evidence, the weight of which was never quantified in the first place as at NO TIME did ANY testing EXONERATE or EXCLUDE any of them, in fact, circumstantially, and potentially, physically- it pointed to them.)
—
The reality is, he was out-lawyered…Blink- I understand this, I do money buys a better defense always has- BUT my agreement to his being outlawyered is a double-edged sword Blink- see the exact same thing can be said and is true- IRT the first trials- these kids were beyond poor- they were given court appointed attorneys who had next to no money or time ect inorder to test evidence ect ect nor to
go out and investigate thoroughly ect- and even though Stidman seemed to be devoted to his job/advocacy- his hands and pockets were still tied- even when lucky enough to stumble upon some witness the judge often chose to deny the testimony such as with the “false”
confessions and with the MC counselor ect-
And although they tried, The other lawyers were sorely lacking-
DE’s lawyer thought it was a good idea to put DE on the stand to be his own expert on the occult and his beliefs and interests-
DE was essentially put in the place of hisown defense own experts and own character witnesses- What the heck? They did next to nothing Blink-
JB’s lawyer was basing JBs case on the strength of DEs case- and he bet JBs case association- heck he even said it in his closing arguments- insinuating- hey I think DE is guilty too- gee the prosecution proved that case…. BUT, but should JB be condemned or be found guilty by mere association to the perp “guilt by association is a terrible thing”
__
You say that Ellington was “derelict in his duty”, —- may be so BUT the same can be said for The Judge who allowed some of these things in court- like Perriti being declared a turtle expert or the lake knife demonstration…or the albums or the wax coming in without
definite testing that proved it was candle wax ect ect….and the same can be said for many of the LEO that lost evidence or never collected it, or never followed up on evidence- or that did not take notes ect ect
You went on to write:
other than the handful of folks saying so or showing up at the hearing that day in August, most seem fine with that result lining the pockets of 3 men that pled guilty
__
Blink, *IF* they are the killers of these three boys, I agree that it is a travesty that they seem to be profiting off the crimes- BUT you, yourself said that based upon the court cases- you could hold some reasonable doubt- so why be mad at others that DO see reasonable doubt and think they are innocent- why should they not advocate for these 3 “wrongfully” accused and convicted 3?
Nomatter anyones thoughts on guilt or innocence- isnt it better that these 3 are being helped and not ostracized and left to their own devices? Isnt it a good thing that many eyes are upon them- and all supporters are trying to help them to become productive members of society?
For those that feel that they ARE Guilty – based upon the mistakes that were made in this case, based upon the evidence being gone- based upon witnesses dying or changing their thoughts ect- based upon the funding of a new defense- can you not take some solace in the fact that these 3 did serve 18 years for these murders- they were punished- although the sentences were reduced- they were incarceratecd and kept away from their families and society- they were prisoners for 18 years and they were subjected to everything that any prisoner would be subjected to— so if you believe they are the killers, at least they were apprehended- and convicted and incarcerated- try to take solace in the fact that everyone knows them- and encourage those that want to see them succeed- do not vilify them-
Everyone should be praying that they are self-sufficient and productive members of society- everyone should be hoping that they remain in the limelight under watchful eyes… as the alternative could lead to so much more lost as we all know from our observations on released convicts and the success rates…regardless of guilt or innocence when they were sentenced…..
You wrote:
( ok, that agreed that their is a propondorence of evidence that would likely result in their guilt, which by the way is an important point considering they WERE ALREADY CONVICTED and the appeal they won was regarding the testing of evidence, the weight of which was never quantified in the first place as at NO TIME did ANY testing EXONERATE
or EXCLUDE any of them, in fact, circumstantially, and potentially, physically- it pointed to them.)
__
Without knowing everything you know Blink, all I can say after careful research is that I am not so sure that a preponderance of evidence would result in guilt AGAIN- for all the aforementioned reasons-
Yes they were already convicted- but as you so rightfully pointed out a # of times there were mistakes that likely would have guaranteed them new trials- or should have-
I agree that the evidence can circumstantially point to them- but this same evidence can point to 100′s of others as well
I agree that the testing was afforded to them, which DE and all stated TEST IT ALL- they did not want to cherry pick any for testing- and I agree that none of the testing exonerated them nor did it exclude them as the perps- BUT- how does any innocent person exonerate themselves from false accusations/convictions? how, without finding the actual perpetrators?
If they werent there and they didnt do it, how can they prove it? especially DE and JB who were implicated by a person who says HE was there and saw?
IDK
all respectfully submitted- and aJMO
CONTinued Part 3
Part 3
How does an innocent person prove innocence?
They try to prove they werent there- they have an alibi-
well these 3 gave they gave an alibi- several alibis- all of which are not undeniable or provable- other than through phone records which could not be recovered at the time… see that another double edged sword Blink- although it is true that LE did not Have the benefit of our science at the time in 1993- which could have helped to prove guilt- BUT the 3 did not have the benefit of our teens in this day and age the technology that could have helped to prove their innocence- cell records or any phone records FTM- cell phone pings- computers- and FB or Myspace which could have proved they werent there….
Many innocent people can not account for their whereabouts and most do not have anyone to collaborate their alibis- as they were alone at home at the time… or a family member would offer up an alibi-perhaps despite guilt…. so these alibis they gave- are not proof that they werent there…
How does an innocent person prove innocence?
They offer up themselves to answer all questions by LEO
All three talked at length to LE- all three talked and answered questions without their parents- alone- helping to fill out the questionnaires (in the front yard of JB’s)
All were forthcoming about their beliefs and who they may have thought committed the crimes- all 3 denied involvement- even Jesse initially-
All three didnt run- Jason was in school the next day JM went wrestling- DE went to the skating rink in the trench coat and to the BB games ect…
How does an innocent person prove innocence?
They take polygraphs-
They did and were told they “failed” and this testing was not video taped ect ect
How does an innocent person prove innocence?
They offer up hair ect for testing- they did this then and they continued to do this…-
I do not know what more an innocent person can do to prove their innocence- other than LE finding the actual perps- or the accused finding them themselves….
Blink you wrote:
I have yet to see one researched question about this case asked of him, the defense lawyers or convicted, the stars raising cash to fund this effort, to date. Not one. That in itself is criminal and dishonors these boys who died a gruesome, painful, and torturous
death.
Blink- I understand really I do- I do think some hard questions need to be asked and answered- but no matter what question was asked the answer will always fall short in honoring the little boys lives, or in illustrating the horrors they had to endure, and no matter what the answers – they will always fall short in explaining – as so much of it is based upon evidence that many of us are not privy to… and
so much more is based upon interpretations.
For example-
Blink- you and your team have reviewed every bit of evidence you have seen the autopsy photos, you have compared and measured wounds and built demonstrative aids models ect- you have talked to confidential sources…
I can ask you a million questions about this research and about the models and about the measurements ect but any answer you give me will fall short becuase I am not privy to this research motr can I hear from the sources ect… all I can base my thoughts on are your interpretations and their interpretations…
The ice ax-
based upon careful research and measurement comparisons of wounds along with witness accounts and photos ect you have reviewed the evidence and upon careful deliberation you have interpreted the evidence to conclude that JB used the iceax to attack one or more
of these children…
Again, I can ask you a million questions and you can answer as many as possible but your answers will fall short in their “truth” becuas I can never be privy to this info, nor can I weigh your thoughts myself…
You may be right but I and you will never be able to prove it….
The manhole theory-
The person/S who believes this is a viable explanation bases his thoughts on the evidence but it is skewed through his interpretations of the evidence- I can ask him a million questions on the thigh pattern and about the skull fractures ect but what I am left with is my thoughts on his interpretations…
Yours mine and others interpretations of this pattern evidence does not go to prove this theory true or false we interpret the physical and circumstantial evidence differently-
He may be right but he and we will never be able to prove it one way or another….
The ritualistic satanic/occult theory
The expert/ people that believe this is a viable explanation are basing there thoughts on the evidence on their interpretation of the evidence-
The expert and Jones & driver ect, the prosecution-(closing arguments) were viewing the evidence through their own skewed lens- the evidence supported their view the facts. It supported their view because their own research and experiences bolstered it
You and I and others review this same supposed ritualistic occult evidence and we do not interpret it as anything that would support this notion… bu it was the truth for them at the time, and is still the truth for some….
The lake knife or a serrated knife=
Those that believe this is a viable theory believe so because they have viewed the evidence and interpreted it and the facts-
Animal predation /necrophasia-
Those that believe this to be a viable conclusion do so because they have viewed the evidence and researched and concluded that it is likely based upon their interpretation of the evidence both physical and circumstantial-
Others view this same research this same evidence and interpret it to be nothing more than poppycock…
Evidence all evidence is open to interpretation whether it be circumstantial or physical…
Although I think it can be said that Circumstantial evidence by its very nature is an interpretation of evidence….
all evidence is supported by witnesses and experts and research and
facts…
those hearing/seeing reviewing these facts are able to review this evidence and interpret it for themselves-
The strength and weakness of any evidence whether it is circumstantial or physical- must be weighed against or upon the investigation, and the collection of evidence and the questioning of
witnesses and the follow up of every viable lead ect- Is it solid?
If LE failed in any of these endeavors if they fell short in obtaining evidence, in securing evidence, in follow up and questioning of witnesses and POI ect, then all evidence is
compromised.
Most assuredly in a case that is based upon the totality of evidence which is at best circumstantial or at worst only conjecture.
You wrote:
I have heard the party line.. no physical evidence.. every time I do, I want to whip out my pocket Arkansas supreme court rules of criminal procedure cliff notes and recite the ole, weight of circumstantial evidence in a collective consideration to be given the same weight as physical evidence most especially in the event no other conclusion can be reached for it’s existence.
Blink, you know that I know that circumstantial evidence can be just as good as physical evidence-especially when taken in its totality. (although I can not go as far as to say in this case that all the circumstantial evidence points only to these 3 to the exclusion of all others)
I really believe that a circumstantial case is more than sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt-
however – a circumstantial case is only as strong as the foundation it is built upon-
Was the investigation and the gathering of evidence and securing of evidence handled properly- was the crime scene secured- was the information coming out secured- was all documented and ample notes and photos ect taken… were witnesses questioned properly were appropriate follow ups done- were all statements verified were all claims looked into and bolstered by other witnesses/other info- were all family members interviewed were all poi interviewed? and found were all other avenues exhausted??
We have luminol testing compromised-
We have bodies compromised
We have the ditch compromised
We have witnesses compromised
We have confessions compromised
Were the autopsies performed by competent experts was all evidence tested and secured and documented was it verified and backed up by others? ECT ECT
No Blink- sadly, in this case, the foundation was not solid- and a mountain of circumstantial evidence amounts to “Jenga” blocks when one pulls out a piece of evidence for further scrutiny it becomes apparent that the evidence is wobbily….LE set up this case on a faulty foundation.
The foundation of this case is not solid, it is sorely lacking in a stable cohesive foundation- this circumstantial evidence becomes only conjecture when one takes a hard look…
The candle wax- where is the testing where is the comparisons?
The clothing- why is it clean? why was it not photographed and tested while inside out?
why wasnt the bodies photographed while in the ditch? why werent copious photos taken why wasnt protective gear worn? why were common grocery bags used to hold evidence that was folded neatly on the bank and dried on sticks why did ridge lie on the stand about this collection of evidence? why were photos taken of the clothes and the shoes strewn out on the floor of the office? On and on….
You wrote:
The reality for me is this, there are so many that could convict Casey Anthony without one shred of physical evidence tying her to the murder of her child, and there is no DOUBT there is more evidence in this case.
__
Blink, there was physical evidence-
Caylee was found in the laundry bag from the home she was found with her beloved blanket- in a pullup from the home
She was found in a shirt that only casey knew of
There was a hair found in the trunk that showed death banding which could only belong to Caylee or a maternal relative.
There was AMPLE evidence of decompositional fluid in the trunk of caseys car-
There was bluestar testing- which lit up-
AGAIN-There was Decompositional fluid in the trunk there was an image of a child visable-
Caylee was found wrapped in duct tape which was unique that was proven to be in the Anthony home at one time-
There was significant levels of chloroform in the trunk
There was the smell of death- & Dr Vass showed that there was high levels of decomposition in the trunk-
Her new version 3.0 dos NOT take this evidence into account- as Casey left for her date with Tony and George took little Caylee away from casey …supposedly …
yet Casey was seen backed into the garage- she borrowed a shovel… she lied about Caylees whereabouts and wellbeing
There was physical evidence- Blink and I never thought Id be arguing that fact with you Blinky- although I do understand your reasoning for making the points… and I can agree to a certain degree based upon my understanding of your interpretations of the WM3 case…
Perhaps in time I will come to see things from your point of view entirely… IDK
As for the circumstantial evidence- you know there was a MOUNTAIN RANGE FULL of circumstantial evidence pointing to Casey and to only Casey-….you know that that the lies they supplied in Court in Version 3.0 only came about after her defense threw out the complete BS and decided to paint George as a perverted culprit- thereby providing the jury with doubt- and an alternate badguy-
Although we can agree it wasnt reasonable, based on the totality of the evidence, we know WITHOUT a doubt that LE, in Caylees case, had a solid foundation to build the mountain…they left NO stone unturned- they followed up on every lead- they gathered all evidence and secured the evidence and sought out every witness and theory and what it ALL pointed to was Casey Anthony -
The foundation was solid Blink- their work was solid -and the prosecutions handling was sound- was it perfect- no- did they leave out evidence that I feel could have aided in proving their case- YES- but IMO they proved their case to anyone that took their time to review all the evidence both circumstantial and physical which IMO the jurors did not-
If there is a comparison to this case IMO- it is that the juries were won or lost in opening and closing statements- they went with their feelings– Casey “proved” that she wasnt guilty by offering up a different perp- thereby illustrating the only way someone EVEN an innocent person can prove their innocence is by providing an alternate perp…
-Evidence and the law are what a verdict is supposed to be based upon – Guilt or Innocence beyond a REASONABLE doubt- not a made up oubt- not a forced doubt- not beyond a shadow of a doubt- but whether or not the evidence exceeds the threshold of beyond a reasonable doubt- it shouldnt be a matter of Kronking someone –
You wrote:
One last thing, how pissed am I that Todd and Diana Moore had to write such a letter- that is shameful, regardless of what side of the fence one is one, profit at someone’s murder is flat out just that.
B
Blink you know I love you – and I am honored that you allow me to share my thoughts and opinions
Just for the record I want to be clear- I am not saying these three are innocent- all I am saying is that right now, I have reasonable doubt.
I do understand how mad you are about The Moores feeling their only recourse was to write this letter-
I am glad that you decided to give them a podium here, when you posted this letter-
They deserve to be heard- in all their anger and grief no matter what, they deserve to be heard
They, the other families, and little Mike, Chris and Steve will forever be in my prayers.
Thanks again Blink for hearing me out and for being wonderful beacon for those who seek to be advocates for all victims and their families. I am honored to be here on BOC with you.
With respect
AJMO
Peace
Blink I appreciate your asking for my preference-
I realize that my thoughts are rather lengthy…LOL-
Thanks for letting me know that the posts reached you-
I am comfortable in allowing you to handle them in the way you are most comfortable- whether it be to post them now or to hold and respond all at once-
Which ever is alright with me- I am just glad that we can have this conversation and that we are both open to hearing oneanother regardless of any disagreements…
I look forward to reading your responses Blink and I look forward to incorporating your comments into my own thought processes and I appreciate your willingness to share your thoughts so that I may continue to learn and to grow.
With gratitude-
Mom3.0
I am going to post for now and respond tomorrow, it gave me much to think about and I know it will others following this case as well.
Update 12/23/11 10:40PM Mom3.0, like you, I am time challenged wrt to the impending Holiday commitments, I know you will allow me some room to respond at my earliest. I may take a while, but I come through eventually, lol.
A very Happy Holiday to all, and my best wished for peace, love and light.
Love
Blink
B
Seasons Greetings
Thanks for the heads up Blink- Dont worry, enjoy your time with family and friends- no rush
I do know you always come thru.
My warmest wishes to you and yours- and to all, during this holiday season and throughout the New year.
For me, this came out of the blue. Anyone else?
http://marquee.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/19/reese-witherspoon-lands-west-memphis-three-movie/
sigh.
That should indicate what kind of budget has been allocated, and what Ms. Leveritt et al was and will be paid for the movie rights.
I like Reese, I don’t even know what to say to be perfectly honest.
B
Quick question: Mom 3.0 do you also post as Compassionate Reader on other forums?? You sound so much like her, I had to ask. Thanks.
susan- nope not me- and it kindof worries me that you think that as many on other boards seem to hate her-
I think it is sad- this war that seems to be going on elsewhere-
From what I have read of her postings, she seems to be a staunch supporter of the 3′s innocence.
I am not a “supporter” nor am I a “non”- I can not say the three are innocent
nor will I say that the evidence that convicted them proves to me they are guilty.
I am a BOC reader and poster- who only began reading up on this case after Blink wrote about the victims Mike, Chris, and Steve. It is she, who brought to my attention the accused, and the case against them, which led to their convictions.
Without Blink, and her articles, I would never have delved into my research, and even though Blinks pieces have given me alot to ponder they have not convinced me of these 3′s guilt.
As for “Compassionate Reader” I agree, we do seem to have several things in common- from what I have read- she has worked in the educational field and it is my understanding, that she has worked with kids such as Damien, Jesse and Jason- and she too feels that the 500 and Jesse’s IQ and Jason’s “journal” writings
are blown out of proportion.
It is my belief that most who have worked in a special education setting with kids who are deemed to have emotional or behavioral problems, as well as developmental disabilities would feel much the same.
This diagnosis has little to nothing to do with whether or not these kids are bad kids or whether or not they will grow into the next Ted Bundy- many of these kids just need additional support and guidance along with individualized instructional and behavioral plans.
I realize that most see Damiens and Jesse’s fighting and damiens fires ect as signs of the future of evilness as well as jason and Damiens knife fetish ect as well as seeing all 3′s homelife and histories as precursors to the murders but I do not-
I see each kid as a person who must be dealt with individually both with and separate from their diagnosis and histories.
IF we overgeneralize , then we would end up essentially having to put at least one of the victims in the same category
Starting fires-
behavior issues-
fighting-
and that wouldnt be right. Having a poor family coming from a dysfunctional family, having problems in school, being labeled as having emotional/behavioral problems does not make any child the next Ted Bundy nor does starting fires, vandalizing, fighting, threatening suicide, threatening harm towards others/parents- siblings ect doesnt either.
AJMO
Mom 3.0- as usual I largely agree with you and what I may not entirely, I still support it in a general way because overgeneralizing about anything opens the door for bigotry and prejudgements which is not healthy, imo.
That said, sometimes troubled kids turn into Ted Bundy, or Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris.
It is important that we observe and react to profiles that reflect distress and escalation as all 3 of these young men had. I agree they were all different and at different levels of “at risk”, and perhaps if they had proper “special needs” development therapists or programs this would not have happened, we will never know. Behavior is predictive, no getting around that.
It is my firm belief that Damian was every bit as troubled as the concerned doctors, social workers, teachers, therapists and his parents thought he was. The 500 presents those findings by his own legal team to spare his life. You can’t have it both ways, imo. One can’t say it is blown out of proportion when the goal is to argue innocence, and then interpret it to show grave and depreciating capacity to mitigate punishment for guilt.
Did Damien, Jason and Jesse ever really have a chance to grow up in what one might loosely term a normal childhood? Hell to the No. Their socio-economic status not withstanding- they all came from highly malfunctioning and addictive/abusive situations wrought with long histories of mental and psychological problems. I will be the first person to say that in many ways, the writing was on the wall for each of these young men, and putting them together is tantamount to kindling in many ways, literally and figuratively.
In some ways, with the exception of Michael Moore, the same background issues were present for the tiny victims in this case; that is not lost on me.
I have never felt “remorse” in any case I have investigated to the point I wished I had never covered it.
However, this one is about as close to that feeling as I have had to date.
If I did not believe strongly in the old adages that everything happens for a reason and there are no so things as coincidences; this case would have brought an end to my work with this outcome.
So I again wish to say thank you to you and all readers and contributors who have so thoughtfully and respectively weighed in, regardless of all respective fence positions, lol.
B
IRT my last post & “Compassionate Reader” Perhaps my use of the word hate was too strong- I apologize to any who took offense to it
–
Hi Blink. Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts with us- Like you, I also find myself agreeing, but at the same time, disagreeing
Which is as it should be, as there is no right or wrong, in the sharing of opinions and perspectives.
There is no easy answer to why a child becomes a killer. There is no diagram we can follow that will allow us to figure out which kid will become a fine upstanding citizen and which will become a killer.
You wrote in part :
“sometimes troubled kids turn into Ted Bundy, or Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris, true Blink- and sometimes those who are not troubled in childhood and adolescence become killers too.”
There is no play book. It is easy to say in hindsight these kids emotional/mental issues were clues to what would later transpire but in truth– it all comes down to choices and triggers and mindsets.
However, even with their mental/emotional problems, I do not think they were destined to be “killers” nor were they beyond help.
In the case of Columbine, there were many factors that made it possible. There were many failures on many different levels and at different times. Had any one of these factors changed, it is my belief that Columbine would have never happened.
I agree, it is important to observe and realize and react- to all factors and issues and diagnosis.
Though at the same time, it is also important we do not become a prisoner to these “profiles” as there are many teens that have their own set of “500” or who are self-centered, egotistical, self-loathing heart-sick, downtrodden, narcissistic, manipulative & exhibit violent tendencies and/or fantasize/ write about violent murderous scenarios, who do not later become murderers.
Hindsight is always 20/20 but in some cases it doesnt help
Every kid, heck every person is “at risk” given the wrong set of circumstances, the wrong diagnosis, the wrong treatment – anyone and everyone is capable of wrongdoing- even with the appropriate treatments ETC
Behavior CAN be predictive -for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction… but it isnt always a predictor.
There is no person who will react in the same way or the same exact manner, even with the basic same set of “risks”-
Even siblings growing up in the same household with the same abuse will not react in the same way-nor are they destined to become an abuser-
Some wet the bed, others do not- some are quiet and become “pleasers” others do not, instead acting out, against all authority ETC
Many who are sexually molested to not become molesters.
Some become promiscuous others do not. Some who were physically abused become bullies ETC others do not. Some grow up to be abusers themselves-still more are good parents from the start.
Even those growing up in the best households and who show no indications of problems can grow into a killer, never giving any warning to point toward in explaining why and how.
Blink, I agree Damien was troubled. I agree the concern of his parents and teachers and social workers was warranted.
Having said that -IMO- these pages do not encapsulate DE – they are not evidence of a murderer to be, they are not a blueprint on how to recognize a child-killer.
Blink, I realize that the 500 were presented by his own legal team- but certainly you realize that the 500 were not and could not be presented as evidence in court to show DE‘s guilt or his propensity to commit these murders.
I am not trying to have it both ways, and I am not trying to use these histories to argue innocence. I am simply stating my opinion that none of these factors should be used to argue/ illustrate guilt. It is my understanding that the defense did not bring in the 500 to argue innocence either- they were using it in the penalty phase, Which is standard procedure when someone has been found guilty and is in danger of forfeiting their life as punishment.
The only time I have encountered someone using the 500 or the journals ETC to argue the case, is when someone uses it as proof of guilt or as proof of the propensity to commit the murders, which again I disagree.
The truth is, most of the children and adults living in and around the area would have fit into these categories and may have had their own 500 or SHOULD have, that doesnt mean they are the killers nor does it mean they grew up to be killers-
Yes, it is sad that these boys and so many more like them, then and now, do not have the best of childhoods or the best of care – But Blink that does not mean that they or the 100’s like them will become murderers.
Yes, sometimes alone without a “buddy” people do not act out- take Karla H- most believe she would have never became a rapist or killer if not for her husband Paul- That may be true,or not. It seems to me, she was rather instrumental in every endeavor, even going so far as to cover up her part and play victim afterwards- resulting in his arrest and her lenient sentence.
I understand the thought process, but to say that DE’s friendship with JB and/or JM was kindling for what happened, no I cant agree.
I value any child who would befriend a “problem” child. I commend any child who refuses to go with the crowd and ostracize and taunt another. I think it is a good thing that little Chris had friends like Mike and Stevie. Just as I feel it is a good thing that the 3 accused/convicted had friends.
Friendship is good thing, when wrong choices are made, that is bad.
You wrote:
I have never felt “remorse” in any case I have investigated to the point I wished I had never covered it.
Blink, I know how hard you have been on yourself on this case and how you wonder about the “what might have beens” and “if onlys”-
Dont be.
Youre right, things do happen for a reason – maybe you can only sit back and let others work out what that could mean for themselves- maybe the overall message isnt for you- but for others-
perhaps you were supposed to merely start the discussion and let it echo until the message is heard..
Somewhere within lies the truth -Let be heard in the reverberations
One thing is for certain Blink- I know you shouldnt let anything stop you from doing this work-
Thanks Blink for all you do, and for welcoming and respecting everyones thoughts and opinions-
Peace
AJMO
Correction* Blinks quote should have ended sooner:
“sometimes troubled kids turn into Ted Bundy, or Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris,”
This part was mine:
True Blink- and sometimes those who are not troubled in childhood and adolescence become killers too.
Sorry about that.
Just finished washing a very information program entitled “Origins of Human Aggression”. Let’s just say a gaggle of not so good qualities can evolve if aggressive behaviour is not addressed in a child’s early years (terrible 2′s ring a bell???)
(4 parts)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BelCtlekuik
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0Go3md35nA&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ae3D6kuQGh0&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxOoc7qMZfg&feature=related
Thought some people might be interested in this.
http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7456398/child-murders-robin-hood-hills-directors-joe-berlinger-bruce-sinofsky
Thank’s for the link, redly…..it was a good article.
This is a link to an interview with Damien and Lorri RE: West of Memphis.
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/52653
And this is a link for the West of Memphis official trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFSuAI1ao8A
I just wanted to add that from what is shown in the trailer, it looks as though MC and VH are both recanting their testimony…..and there is what looks to be a “turtle experiment” of some sort…..AND David Jacoby is also featured.
I’d like to edit my last post. Please replace the word “experiment”
with “demonstration”. Thank you.
Per Xara: “it looks as though MC and VH are both recanting their testimony…”
“looks as though” might be the key words here. Amazing what a little film editing can produce. May also be considered amazing how far a “documentary” filmmaker will go to get his point of view across…
ragdoll thanks for the links- interesting.
Redly nice to see you on this thread thanks for bringing that link over.
xara- wow- I really appreciate you bringing that clip over. I hope they did turtles experiments on something other than that one person. And I must say I was very surprised by Carsons snip- I didnt see anything on David Jacoby though.
AJMO
susan
true- but without having even seen the filmone can not say.
Also I agree with you on a documentary filmmaker going to great lengths to get a point of view across- especially since this documentary has the full on support of DE and wife…
Yet, the same thing can be said for LEO officers fixating on a point of view or prosecutors as well as defense attorneys or jury foremen trying hard to get their point across to, could it not?
AJMO
When it was created, the raw footage in PL 1, 2, and then used for 3, the film makers did have the full support of all participants. It was not until it was released in 1996 that everyone saw how skewed it was that the arms were in the air in protest. The producers are on record they believed in the innocense of th wm3, and imo, that is well reflected in the work. I will likely not have the time to get through 3 until the end of the week due to deadlines, but I watched about 30 minutes last night.
Very hard to watch this mess all the way around. I dare someone to say that it is a good idea to film attorneys, defendants and LE during due process in this way again. It absolutely compromises everyone involved and I cannot even believe I am saying that, lol.
B
* point of view across too… arggg
Vicki says:
Deleted scene from pdl This shows the creepy necklace with damiens’ blood type
The video haves to run a few minutes before it gets to the part that show them discussing the case.
Please pos this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKnGYZfuBBQ&feature=related
Vicki says
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOCOcw0vRZg&feature=context&context=C33910f7ADOEgsToPDskKaJBJueVkFM9pYyQHTxEjf
Vicki says:
What do y’all think of that Necklace?
You mean the hatchet thingie?
B
@ Mom3.0~
David Jacoby is the man with the long beard near the end of the trailer.
Yes Blink, he hatchet thing!What u think of it.
I think Damien was wearing it when he killed Stevie Branch.
B
Yes Me too, Blink! I think he was waring it too. It probably pressed up against the poor kid when struggling to get away from that sick Damien
Thank you xara- I went back and watched..
Blink, thanks for sharing your opinions. I have watched all 3 films now.
No, none of them helped me to move off the fence- but what they did help me to do, was to empathize with all participants. Whether it was with the parents/family of Little Mike, Stevie and Chris or the parents/family of the accused.
I realized that these parents, all of them were filmed at their worst in the midst of rage, shock, grief, and all that entails.
I realized how easy it is for some to look at these clips through a skewed perspective and come away thinking- there is something “off” about these parents…or stepparents, and then to make a not so large leap to perhaps they had something to do with what happened…
As for the 3, They came off as not very likable.
And I found myself realizing how easy it is for some to use these clips as fodder to argue guilt- its not so hard to leap and make this assumption either- look how they act-an innocent person wouldnt act like that…
See here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOCOcw0vRZg&feature=context&context=C33910f7ADOEgsToPDskKaJBJueVkFM9pYyQHTxEjf
If one watches through their own skewed lens, then it becomes easier to say the films are biased or the 3 are guilty….or even that they are innocent-depending on the viewers perspectives.
I think it is all in the eyes of the viewer- in their perspectives not in those of the film makers.
In watching, I found myself asking the same questions Ive been asking all along, I found myself bothered by the same concerns IRT the investigation, the gathering, documenting, and securing of evidence/witnesses, POI’s etc.
I found myself wandering about the LACK of a zealous defense and I found myself wondering about the decisions of the Judge and the juries.
I found myself asking exactly what happened? If these murders were committed by these 3, how did they do it, what are the facts, and evidence telling me? What is the truth?
Having said ALL that, What is my perspective? Objectively. The films were made by those who believed the 3 were innocent, so yes, the films are slanted toward the filmmakers beliefs-
The 1st was the most evenly balanced, the 2nd was less so, and the 3rd was basically a retell and a self -pat on the back for a job well done- whether it was by a director, a supporter or a participant- although I think it also held some very compelling information from experts- (animal predation etc)
STILL, each film, I believe is important for the questions and concerns it brought to light. Each is important for the attention it brought to this case and to the investigation.
Each film is important for giving a voice to the families, all the families, and for bringing attention to the victims- Stevie, Mike and Chris and to the murders and the aftermath.
SO STill, the films are important as documentaries for the telling and the “memory” …in other words they document the people, the events, the times, the places, the thoughts etc.
AJMO
RE-
Vicki says:
What do y’all think of that Necklace?
Vicki, I know this isnt the reaction you were looking for, but my thoughts on the “creepy” necklace are-
1- it is typical wear for alot of young men in 1994 who were into the metal scene.
2
The whole point of the necklace is to show its creepy coolness. , the whole point is to make your parents and elders think eeewwww! what is wrong with that kid
3 The whole purpose of the necklace is to “show off” to your metal friends and impress your “metal” girlfriend- and yep, even to share it with your best bud- like a type of BFF gesture.
4 There is nothing feminine about that necklace. A kid, a guy, wears it to say hey-look, even though Im wearing jewelry, Im a manly man hear me roar!
5 The makers of those types of necklaces know all of the above and “bank” on it- even though they, like most adults snicker and think Oh those crazy kids- thinking they are all that- when we all know they will come to feel silly when they grow up and look back at the “fads” that they were led to believe(sold/told) were cool…
AJMO
You can “think” whatever you want. That will never be considered solid evidence, so forget about it. Stick to evidence that could actually be used in an arguement, such as the ice axe. That is honestly the best piece of evidence there is, yet even then, the wounds don’t make sense. Based on the photo posted in an earlier article, the axe would have had to have been held in a really awkward position and then used with a scraping motion. It just doesn’t make sense. The mark in that photo seems more indicative of a bite, with its circular nature. The new doc West of Memphis, has a man actually being bit by a snapping turtle (which were abundant in those woods) and those bite marks are incredibly similar (pretty much identical) to those on Steve Branch.
I agree it will never be considered evidence, it is gone.
The wounds absolutely make sense as they relate to that weapon, I appreciate your acknowledgement of my development as an “amateur”. I do not disagree that a portion of the wounding on the boys is post mortem acquatic life- I do not agree that it caused Chris Byers fatal injury.
One more thing-
This ain’t over. Diguirio v Ragland- jus sayin
The Lost PL1 scene and the blood on the Pendant-
Thank you Vicki for bringing the clip over. It gave me much to think about-
FWIW here is my 2 cents:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKnGYZfuBBQ&feature=related
My concerns-
1st why do these lawyers seem to be meeting without DE defense also present? And why do so many seem to miss the Defense lawyers questioning the chain of evidence -the knife finding, and now the blood? and why does no one seem to take note of these Defense lawyers questioning Gitchells work or the fairness of LEO and of the Judge? IDK
Again. I guess it comes down to the viewers perspective…
Next, LE had this necklace for a year- Did theu not have discovery rules and time limits like in the Caylee case?
This necklace was never introduced as evidence during the trial- both sides had “rested” their case..
.
The necklace had been handled by how many people before “they” decided they better go back and look through the evidence, to see if it was all there, because of “allegations”- that were brought up in court??! ( I guess they never found the blood from bojangles though)
“They” did not find this evidence, but Fogelman did, he found this blood AFTER the trial and simply called the judge and asked for a continuance – which the judge granted- They did not alert either defense team of the finding or of the subsequent rush to test this blood- the defense was for all intents and purposes blindsided…
Then the information was leaked regarding Damiens necklace being found containing blood andplans for testing to see if genetic markers match those of any victim…this info was leaked to the news outlets -which also alerted the masses to the fact that there was a continuance-
Those jury members that showed up for deliberation that day, were told “something” by the judge, but it was unknown to the defense, & seemingly was not on record- and those memebers that did not show up for deliberations, as well as a few that did, heard from the news that morning/there was no need for them to come in that day… (they were not supposed to be watching the news)
Does this info not concern anyoneelse?
The results come back:
Lab results show DNA type ds180 matched DE- their was more of his blood on the pendant…The 2nd typing only was able to pull-up the dq alpha — which was found to match Stevie, Jason and 11% of population. (hmmm kind of like the blood on the kershaw knife IRT little Chris and his Dad)
http://www.jivepuppi.com/jivepuppi_DNA_part_one.html
According to the above site, if I am understanding it correctly,
- DQ Alpha testing is like most lab testing, highly susceptible to contamination- with this test, in particular, the results depend on the blood, if it is a mixture of blood it could give false readings if it is old blood it can also effect the results ETC
My concerns over this evidence?
I happen to agree with the Judges ruling it shouldnt have come in, as the results were inclusive- even if you DO believe that the testing was done correctly, and the sample was not compromised- the blood typing could match 11% of the population- yes including Stevie, BUT it also matched Jason, who had owned/worn the necklace and although it also matched a victim, it is most likely Jasons blood- relying solely upon deductive reasoning.
At the time of the murders DE had no marks- no injuries -no abrasions- So how did his blood end up on the pendent during the murders?
Jason- no injuries were documented on Jason – at the time of arrest- no one reported seeing any injuries at school, the next day may 6, nor did his family or the community (same for DE)
Stevie Branch had extensive injuries if little Stevie IMO he would have bled much more than a speck…
It is said that these murders occurred on the ditch bank- all blood had been splashed away/washed from the banks and the area- little to no evidence remained at the sight-
The killers expertly cleaned the area- leaving no prints no DNA, no cans no trash, but we have to believe that DE wore this necklace during the murders, and left blood on it…
This long necklace, and didnt keep it inside his shirt, and it was not washed meticulously, by DE in the cover-up?
DE was so clever to clean the scene, and get rid of the knife behind JBs in the lake, and all the clothes and cans and bottles and blood & managed not to injure his knuckles etc???
Yet, he was dumb enough not to scour the pendant, the most prominent part of the necklace, he just happened to miss a couple of spots.. still he was stupid enough to wear it to the police station after having been a LEO POI for weeks?
Not likely JMO. The blood could match 11 % of the population. This necklace was worn by more than one person, touched by more than one person – obviously the blood belongs to more than just Echols- but can we really say whether it is JB’s or Stevies… Or just that it belongs to someone other than Damien??
AJMO
Thanks for letting me share more than 2 cents worth—
Blink I looked up the case you referred to in your response to coen-
If I found the right case it deals with taping… and that taping being lawful to and thereby admissible in court..
So heres my questions:
Are you saying that LE at some point taped a conversation between one of the accused and a visitor, and this conversation proves guilt in some way?
Are you saying that you have knowledge that someone on the outside secretly recorded someone (Im assuming one of the convicted) and the tape holds value as evidence in this case- or are you hinting towards a secret taping of the meeting behind closed doors with the prosecution and defense and judges?
Or are you perhaps making another reference to the defenses lawyers reading your iceax piece and capturing their reactions?
Sorry but I dont do well with hints- any help you can give… Am I in the right ball park?
TIA-
AJMO
My bad, no. Sorry Mom 3.0
It deals with wrongful death suits and when they can be filed:
http://abelllaw.typepad.com/files/ragland-v-estate-of-trent-digiuro-no-2009-ca-186-october-22-2010.pdf
B
Mom3.0 –you misunderstood me! I said it could have pressed up against one of the kids and made some kind of mark.
I Was actually asking for Blinks opinion.
There was no mark from the necklace I observed in the case file I observed.
B