Life for the West Memphis Three - Free After the Alford Plea

[claudicici]

The GQ article was long, true.

I liked the description "sizable minority" to put down the rest of us.

how is that a put down?



...as for Jessie and whether or not the "fat cats" are not equally supporting all three,I think Jackson & the other celebrities were supporting the CAUSE in the beginning.I don't think much personal support was given to any one of them when they got out.Damien & Lorri were staying with friends,Jackson flew them out to New Zealand because Damien became a Friend that he cares about.This was not about the CAUSE.None of the celebrities owe any of the three.Of course you will support a friend more than an acquaintance,so paying jessie's rent is really going above and beyond IMO.Are you guys sure Jason's trip was financed? It's really not that expensive to fly to Amsterdam off season and he was working.

 

[AngelontheRiver]

I thought the fund was setup only for Echols via his wife Lorri Davis...

I guess they have nothing better to spend their money on. Too bad they could not have done something more compassionate like donate to charity to help children instead of to a convict who murders children.

I wonder why the Moores don't bring a civil suit?

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I wonder why the Moores don't bring a civil suit?

I don't believe that they have grounds for a civil suit. Movies have been made about true crime for years. If there was anything illegal about it, it would have been brought up long before now. As TH discovered, a civil suit also needs substantiation. Since the defense informed the Moores before the DNA evidence was released, and it is my understanding that all of the families (both victims and defendants) were offered monies (or some sort of compensation) for their participation in the documentaries, I don't see that they have grounds for a civil suit. They can't claim defamation of character as they didn't appear in the latest documentary, except maybe in clips from the first. I don't think that they'd be successful in a suit for pain and suffering as the filmmakers are not causing the pain and suffering. The pain and suffering was caused by the loss of their child, and the filmmakers are only acting as news reporters. I don't think a civil suit would fly.

 

[AngelontheRiver]

I don't believe that they have grounds for a civil suit... I don't think a civil suit would fly.

I don't mean the producers. I mean sue the three for wrongful death like OJ was sued.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I don't mean the producers. I mean sue the three for wrongful death like OJ was sued.

OJ was found not guilty. Right now, the three are convicted. I don't think that a civil suit could be brought against them. When they are exonerated, I believe that the real killer will be tried and convicted shortly thereafter, and there will be no need for a civil suit.

 

[AngelontheRiver]

Why couldn't they be sued? OJ lost his civil suit. The burden of proof is less.

 

[Dysthymia]

I don't think that they'd be successful in a suit for pain and suffering as the filmmakers are not causing the pain and suffering.

The Moore family demonstrated a great deal of suffering when they wrote to inform the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences why they didn't believe Paradise Lost 3 should be included in the documentary division of nominees. I believe that the families of those dead little boys have a huge amount of new pain and suffering and grief when those movies go on their publicity rounds. It is inevitable that they'll have to see the film footage or hear or read about the latest film no matter how they might try to avoid it.

Originally Posted by AngelontheRiver
I don't mean the producers. I mean sue the three for wrongful death like OJ was sued.

Hey, AngelontheRiver. (I'm from the tri-state area, too)
I read somewhere online (some debate about this very topic but where I do NOT remember) that the reason there could be no civil suit against Mr.(s) Echols, Baldwin, and Misskelley is because the Arkansas statute of limitations ran out for civil suits on this case many years ago. That must be true or else I would think that those families would have done so. IMO


Originally Posted by Dysthymia I liked the description "sizable minority to put down the rest of us.

claudicici Quote: how is that a put down?

Would the supporters like to be tagged as a "sizable minority?"

 

[Dysthymia]

...as for Jessie and whether or not the "fat cats" are not equally supporting all three,I think Jackson & the other celebrities were supporting the CAUSE in the beginning.I don't think much personal support was given to any one of them when they got out.Damien & Lorri were staying with friends,Jackson flew them out to New Zealand because Damien became a Friend that he cares about.This was not about the CAUSE.None of the celebrities owe any of the three.Of course you will support a friend more than an acquaintance,so paying jessie's rent is really going above and beyond IMO.Are you guys sure Jason's trip was financed? It's really not that expensive to fly to Amsterdam off season and he was working.

Peter Jackson stated that he privately donated millions (10) for DNA tests and other evidence investigations. So it seemed that there should have been funds collected over the years and safely set aside for each man should he ever be released from prison.

I think people were just shocked that Jessie Misskelley seemed to be homeless and desperately poor when the other two were flying around the world, going to Disney World, and getting tattoos. The contrast was huge until Peter Jackson stepped in and gave him a home. I agree with you that PJ doing that was going above and beyond. To be honest, if I had money (which I don't) and did the same thing he did, I'd be hospitalized until my insurance ran out. But things are different for the rich.

 

[claudicici]

The Moore family demonstrated a great deal of suffering when they wrote to inform the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences why they didn't believe Paradise Lost 3 should be included in the documentary division of nominees. I believe that the families of those dead little boys have a huge amount of new pain and suffering and grief when those movies go on their publicity rounds. It is inevitable that they'll have to see the film footage or hear or read about the latest film no matter how they might try to avoid it.

Originally Posted by AngelontheRiver
I don't mean the producers. I mean sue the three for wrongful death like OJ was sued.

Hey, AngelontheRiver. (I'm from the tri-state area, too)
I read somewhere online (some debate about this very topic but where I do NOT remember) that the reason there could be no civil suit against Mr.(s) Echols, Baldwin, and Misskelley is because the Arkansas statute of limitations ran out for civil suits on this case many years ago. That must be true or else I would think that those families would have done so. IMO


Originally Posted by Dysthymia I liked the description "sizable minority to put down the rest of us.

claudicici Quote: how is that a put down?

Would the supporters like to be tagged as a "sizable minority?"

Why not? I don't understand.I thought a sizable minority means not as many yet a substantial amount of people?

 

[claudicici]

Peter Jackson stated that he privately donated millions (10) for DNA tests and other evidence investigations. So it seemed that there should have been funds collected over the years and safely set aside for each man should he ever be released from prison.

I think people were just shocked that Jessie Misskelley seemed to be homeless and desperately poor when the other two were flying around the world, going to Disney World, and getting tattoos. The contrast was huge until Peter Jackson stepped in and gave him a home. I agree with you that PJ doing that was going above and beyond. To be honest, if I had money (which I don't) and did the same thing he did, I'd be hospitalized until my insurance ran out. But things are different for the rich.

....but Jessie chose that contrast.I think people forget that Jessie was never close to Damien and Jason to begin with.Jason and Damien on the other hand were best friends.Even though they forgave Jessie and understood he's still the reason they ended up in the predicament in the first place.I'm not saying he shouldn't get as much support as the others,I just think it's up to each supporter.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Bottom line, I think that they will all three be taken care of as long as is needed. Right now, with unjust murder convictions on their records, they will continue to need help. Why should the "fat cats" be the only ones to contribute to that help? I think supporters will continue to give because it's one way we can feel that we are helping. As to the expense of the testing, I posted this in another thread, but check these costs out. Remember that each item had to be tested against at least six samples - the three victims and the three defendants. If the item were tested against the TH or DJ samples, then that's two more tests.

http://www.bodetech.com/wp-content/u...icing-2011.pdf

Just sayin'.

Let me try the link again. I'm trying to link directly to the pricing list, but it keeps going to the home page. You can get there from the home page, but it's convoluted:

http://www.bodetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/DNA-Services-Pricing-2011.pdf

If this doesn't work, the ellipsis (three dots) should be replaced with "ploads/2011/12/DNA-Services-Pr" which completes the link.

 

[Cazzie]

Who has custody of the evidence? Who ensures that the recent and future testing of the evidence is accurate? How is it that the defense team and supporters can shell out millions of dollars for testing...did that huge amount of money go to private labs or to the state of AR (who allowed these 3 false convictions)....and are the test results going to hold up in court (someday)?

This has been bothering me greatly for a while...

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Who has custody of the evidence? Who ensures that the recent and future testing of the evidence is accurate? How is it that the defense team and supporters can shell out millions of dollars for testing...did that huge amount of money go to private labs or to the state of AR (who allowed these 3 false convictions)....and are the test results going to hold up in court (someday)?

This has been bothering me greatly for a while...

AFAIK, the State of Arkansas has custody of the evidence.

The accuracy of the testing is only as good as the lab which does it. Bode (who has done the defense testing in the past, with a few exceptions) has an excellent reputation, as evidenced by their outrageous pricing.

Bode is a private lab. I seriously doubt that the defense team would entrust any testing the the State of Arkansas and its Crime Lab!

IMO, since the chain of evidence has been maintained (the defense obtaining the material from the State each time and sending it to Bode [or wherever] through proper channels), I don't see any problem with the results being accepted in court.

Remember that Ellington himself volunteered to have the State Crime Lab run all DNA through CODIS after the testing was done. I don't know if that has occurred, but he made that statement in the Q & A after the release.

 

[Dysthymia]

Remember that Ellington himself volunteered to have the State Crime Lab run all DNA through CODIS after the testing was done. I don't know if that has occurred, but he made that statement in the Q & A after the release.

I had forgotten about that. I wonder how long something like that takes?

Compassionate Reader:

Although we disagree on the guilt/innocence of Echols, Baldwin and Misskelley; I think that you are one of the best advocates for the WM3 that I have ever seen. They are fortunate to have you on their side.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

Remember that Ellington himself volunteered to have the State Crime Lab run all DNA through CODIS after the testing was done. I don't know if that has occurred, but he made that statement in the Q & A after the release.

Ah, but also remember that Echols attorney has filed a motion to dismiss the testing he originally requested.

So, don't hold your breath waiting for any testing. Besides that I thought they ALREADY had such evidence to prove they are innocent. NOT

Here is the document in which he asks for the testing dated Oct 29, 2007
http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/2nd_Amended_Habeas_Petition_10-29-2007.pdf

Then after the guilty pleas, here he is quietly dismissing the request on September 8, 2011 with a motion to dismiss that requst
http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/de_motion_dismiss_habeas.pdf

So, here you can see there is no evidence that will be tested. As far as Ellington goes, the case is closed and Echols attorneys also consider it that way. Read the above documents, don't take my word for it.

When you hear the defense attorneys or ANYONE from the defense team talking about having evidence tested, believe me that is just smoke and mirrors because the above documents tell me the facts. But, they continue to ask for money/donations.

I have to wonder if they really believe that ALL their supporters cannot see through that. I guess MOST of their supporters really don't look at the evidence and ONLY watch the mockumentaries.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

I had forgotten about that. I wonder how long something like that takes?

Compassionate Reader:

Although we disagree on the guilt/innocence of Echols, Baldwin and Misskelley; I think that you are one of the best advocates for the WM3 that I have ever seen. They are fortunate to have you on their side.

A month after the guilty plea and after the release Echols attorney quietly filed a motion to dismiss any testing. The links are in my post above.

This should set off an alarm to the supporters because the 3-guilty keep asking for funding and donations claiming it's for DNA testing, but now we know that is never going to happen.

 

[Cappuccino]

Echols has merely filed a motion to dismiss the Habeus Corpus writ, neither he nor his lawyers have the power to dismiss any motion for the tests which were still underway because they were the business of Miskelley and Baldwin's lawyers and have nothing to do with DNA, (they are mostly fibre and animal hair tests). The DNA tests were completed before August 19th and there was nothing left on Echols wish list to be tested anyway.

This is just more of the same though - look back through old postings and you'll find that those on the pro-prosecution side have been claiming that the DNA tests weren't really happening since 2005.

 

[Cappuccino]

Why couldn't they be sued? OJ lost his civil suit. The burden of proof is less.

They can't be sued because there is a statute of limitations on wrongful death suits, in Arkansas it is 3 years IIRC.

ETA: Just checked, its 5 years.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Simply put, since Damien has been released, the Federal appeal is moot. The body has been produced! (Remember, habaes corpus means "produce the body.") That's why the attorney filed a motion to dismiss the Federal appeal. As Cappuccino said, it had nothing to do with testing unless testing was ordered as part of the Federal appeal. All necessary testing was requested, and ordered by Judge Laser, as a result of the preparations for the evidentiary hearing.

 

[AngelontheRiver]

Simply put, since Damien has been released, the Federal appeal is moot. The body has been produced! (Remember, habaes corpus means "produce the body.") That's why the attorney filed a motion to dismiss the Federal appeal. As Cappuccino said, it had nothing to do with testing unless testing was ordered as part of the Federal appeal. All necessary testing was requested, and ordered by Judge Laser, as a result of the preparations for the evidentiary hearing.

Will there be testing or not? If not, how will they be exonerated?