FACT - THE WM3 WERE NOT "FORCED" TO ACCEPT THE ALFORD PLEA:
After years of steadfastly upholding the verdicts of two Arkansas juries, The Arkansas Supreme Court finally relented to pressure from WM3 celebrity supporters and the WM3's all-star defense team. In December 2010 the Arkansas Supreme Court granted an evidentiary hearing scheduled for December 2011. The purpose of the hearing was to allow Judge David Laser to hear any "new evidence" the defense had gathered over the years that might justify a new trial. Judge Laser was a new judge who replaced the original trial judge - Judge David Burnett.
But instead of presenting that evidence to Judge Laser at the December hearing, the defense went to a new prosecutor (Scott Ellington) in the summer of 2011 and suggested a deal. Their clients would plead guilty using a legal maneuver called an "Alford Plea" in exchange for time served. The new prosecutor inexplicably accepted the deal. No one "forced" the WM3 to plead guilty. It was their own idea.
Instead of presenting their "new evidence" and gaining complete exoneration, the slick WM3 defense team convinced a newbie prosecutor he could get rid of a difficult case if the WM3 could plead guilty and be released from prison. Now, that same defense team and a slew of celebrity WM3 supporters are hounding Arkansas officials for full exoneration. Without full exoneration, the WM3 will forever remain convicted child killers and convicted felons.
Innocent people with solid evidence of innocence do not plead guilty. Period.
Misskelley Alford Plea:
http://wm3org.typepad.com/files/misskelley-alford.pdf
Echols/Baldwin Alford Plea:
www.wm3org.typepad.com/files/alford-plea-dj.pdf
FACT - EVEN IF "THE HAIR" DOES MATCH TERRY HOBBS, THAT DOESN'T MAKE HIM GUILTY OR THE WM3 INNOCENT:
After years of efforts to frame step-father Mark Byers with the murders failed, the WM3 defense team and makers of the documentaries Paradise Lost 3 and West of Memphis have turned to a new red herring suspect... step-father Terry Hobbs. Many recent media reports claim that "Hobbs' DNA was found on a victim." That sounds pretty compelling, but it's not exactly true.
When most people hear the word "DNA" they assume that means something like blood or semen. This "DNA" is actually a hair fragment found on a shoestring used to hog tie Michael Moore. The defense often says the hair was "tied into" the shoestring. But there are currently no publicly available photographs or documents to prove that claim.
Experts paid by the WM3 defense team claim that they determined through lab tests that Terry Hobbs is a "possible source" of that hair. Problem is, 1.5% of the rest of the population is also a "possible source" of that hair. That means that more than 4.5 MILLION Americans are also "possible sources" of that hair. In addition, Michael Moore frequently visited the Hobbs home. The hair could have easily landed on Moore's shoestring through secondary transfer as he played there. The hair is meaningless and will never lead to the conviction of Terry Hobbs.
Paid defense experts also report that a second hair found on a tree stump near the crime scene weeks after the murders could have come from Hobbs' friend, David Jacoby. But it also could have come from 7% of the rest of the population. A whopping 21 MILLION Americans are also possible owners of the hair found on the tree stump. The “Jacoby hair” is completely meaningless as evidence in court.
The WM3's own hired expert called the hairs "weak evidence" during a 2007 press conference. How the hairs have suddenly become "strong evidence" in West of Memphis is beyond explanation:
"The two hairs that I know about – the one that could have in fact come from Mr. Hobbs and the one that could have in fact come from David Jacoby – constitute what I call weak evidence. Because there are other people it could have come from and there isn’t any way to really prove our selection of possible sources for that hair. I don’t think – my personal opinion – I don’t think that that hair evidence would be enough to convict Mr. Hobbs or Mr. Jacoby or anyone that would be in a similar situation because it’s simply not strong enough. The percentages I gave of people who could be the source of those hairs are 1.5% of the population in the respect to one hair and 7% in respect to the other hair. That’s not particularly strong evidence and especially in the context of what most people are accustomed to with DNA testing." - Thomas Fedor, Forensic Serologist
http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/press_conference.html
http://wm3truth.com/new-alternative-suspect-terry-hobbs/
http://www.westmemphisthreefacts.com/