1065 users online (211 members and 854 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 24
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    middle tennessee
    Posts
    1,092

    The Victims: Michael Moore, 8; Christopher Byers 8; Steven Branch, 8

    on may 5, 1993 three 8 year old boys, michael moore, steven branch and christopher byers went missing in west memphis, arkansas. their bodies were found naked and bound, (left foot to left hand, right foot to right hand). tied with shoelaces believed to be from their own shoes. the date of their discovery was the following morning, may 6, 1993 in the 10 mile bayou drainage ditch in the robin hood hills woods area of west memphis.

    the robin hood hills murders.

    Steven "Stevie" Branch lived with his mother and step-father, Pamela Hobbs and Terry Hobbs, and younger sister, Amanda Hobbs age 4.
    Steven Branch's biological father is Steven Branch, Sr.

    Christopher "Chris" Byers lived with his mother and step-father, Sharon Melissa Byers and John Mark Byers and half-brother Shawn Ryan Clark age 13.
    Christopher Byers' biological father is Ricky Lee Murray.

    Michael Moore lived with his mother and father, Diane "Dana" and Roy Todd Moore and sister, Dawn age 10.
    Hinky Dinky Parlez Vous!-Sleuthy Gal

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by EntreNous View Post
    on may 5, 1993 three 8 year old boys, michael moore, steven branch and christopher byers went missing in west memphis, arkansas. their bodies were found naked and bound, (left foot to left hand, right foot to right hand). tied with shoelaces believed to be from their own shoes. the date of their discovery was the following morning, may 6, 1993 in the 10 mile bayou drainage ditch in the robin hood hills woods area of west memphis.

    the robin hood hills murders.

    Steven "Stevie" Branch lived with his mother and step-father, Pamela Hobbs and Terry Hobbs, and younger sister, Amanda Hobbs age 4.
    Steven Branch's biological father is Steven Branch, Sr.

    Christopher "Chris" Byers lived with his mother and step-father, Sharon Melissa Byers and John Mark Byers and half-brother Shawn Ryan Clark age 13.
    Christopher Byers' biological father is Ricky Lee Murray.

    Michael Moore lived with his mother and father, Diane "Dana" and Roy Todd Moore and sister, Dawn age 10.
    EntreNous

    do you believe the WM3 did this? Forgive me if you have already answered this. I happened upon this thread and posted after the one comment. I will leave my question, and go back to the other threads.
    I'm just sayin.....

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    L.I., NY
    Posts
    6,510
    The 3 subjects are appealing their case. Alot of people truly believe they are innocent.

    Larry King just had this case on....
    The World Has Gone Mad.

  4. #4
    kileyizzle's Avatar
    kileyizzle is offline ♥ we have but two lives. The life we learn with, & the life after that ♥
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    201
    where else can i find more information on this?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    110
    Larry King just had this case on...
    And where did his guests say they learned about the case?

    Paradise lost.

    Nuff said.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    538
    I think most of us first learned about this case bcuz we watched Paradise lost.
    I did. Then I looked into it further.

    jmo


    Statement from musician Eddie Vedder, in response to Diana Moore:

    I humbly ask that those personally connected to the case understand that there is no way I would ever speak out publicly without having read and studied every document and detail made available in the last twelve years. The murder of the three young boys is without question the saddest and most horrifying element of this brutal case.

    As the father of two I cannot comprehend the overwhelming sense of grief and heartbreak the parents have suffered over the last seventeen years.

    It hurts to think that while trying to correct the further injustice of three men wrongfully convicted, their pain is further compounded.

    This case is so sadly one of tragedy upon tragedy. I send Ms. Moore my respect and understanding, and am so sorry for her unfathomable loss.

    Ed Vedder
    http://larrykinglive.blogs.cnn.com/

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    110
    Statement from musician Eddie Vedder, in response to Diana Moore:

    I humbly ask that those personally connected to the case understand that there is no way I would ever speak out publicly without having read and studied every document and detail made available in the last twelve years. The murder of the three young boys is without question the saddest and most horrifying element of this brutal case.
    Here's another statement from musician Eddie Vedder last night, in response to "Mr. Bojangles":

    He was in a restaurant called Bojangles and he went into a bathroom and left blood all over it and he was never found or investigated, or the people that worked at the restaurant weren't even interrogated, I believe.
    You see, had Vedder ever bothered to even simply gloss over the actual trial transcripts during his "extensive research", he would have known that Bojangles manager Marty King TOOK THE STAND at Echol's trial, and testified that they had cleaned up the bathroom and disposed of the bulk of the evidence before the police came to collect it.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    middle tennessee
    Posts
    1,092
    Quote Originally Posted by Bennettras View Post
    EntreNous

    do you believe the WM3 did this? Forgive me if you have already answered this. I happened upon this thread and posted after the one comment. I will leave my question, and go back to the other threads.
    so sorry, bennettras. i thought i'd answered this question but i must have missed it. it's been a while since i posted here and just happened to see this today.
    to answer you honestly, what i believe is that there is enough evidence to merit a new trial. from jury misconduct in the first trial, a questionable confession, new dna findings and motive on the parts of others, i believe it would be a travesty of justice to execute anyone without the utmost in careful jurisprudence.
    Hinky Dinky Parlez Vous!-Sleuthy Gal

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    middle tennessee
    Posts
    1,092
    Quote Originally Posted by Dirty larry View Post
    Here's another statement from musician Eddie Vedder last night, in response to "Mr. Bojangles":



    You see, had Vedder ever bothered to even simply gloss over the actual trial transcripts during his "extensive research", he would have known that Bojangles manager Marty King TOOK THE STAND at Echol's trial, and testified that they had cleaned up the bathroom and disposed of the bulk of the evidence before the police came to collect it.
    this is why i and several others quit posting here. so much of the same, inaccurate misinformation. having to go round and round and re-explain every little piece of evidence, non-evidence and getting on with actual facts. i can't tell you how many times we've been over this and it was ALL erased.

    mr. vedder was absolutely correct in his statement.
    Hinky Dinky Parlez Vous!-Sleuthy Gal

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by EntreNous View Post
    this is why i and several others quit posting here. so much of the same, inaccurate misinformation. having to go round and round and re-explain every little piece of evidence, non-evidence and getting on with actual facts. i can't tell you how many times we've been over this and it was ALL erased.

    mr. vedder was absolutely correct in his statement.

    Marty King's testimony:

    http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/martyking.html

    Q: What did you do with the mess?

    A: Well, we couldn't leave it so we had to clean it up. We drug a water hose around, that's as big of a mess as it was in the floor and proceeded to wash and clean up the restroom.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    110
    Thank you Sunny.

    You see, that's another reason this controversy exists.

    Very few of the supporters who claim to have read the testimony actually have.

    One thing is for certain - Eddie Vedder or Natalie Maines never have.

    Yet these are the same people who insist the trials were unfair.

    How does that work exactly?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    538
    Just putting this here for those who might be interested...


    Normally we would have swept and mopped, but you know, there was a large amount of mud on his feet, and that was on the floor so we just washed it down the drain. There was some blood above the commode and on the wall. Maybe it looked like where he had leaned up against the wall cause it looked to be the impression of a forearm. There was some blood on the floor, commode, doorknob and in the hallway where he had left also. An off duty officer by the name of Billy Covington came in the next morning, a friend of mine, and I was telling him of the event that happened the night before and it kind of struck him in a strange way. He said, “Don’t clean that blood off the door handles or the wall or anything, and I will get back with you in a little while. Later that afternoon DETECTIVES BRYN RIDGE AND MIKE ALLEN CAME OUT AND TOOK A REPORT... and then THEY TOOK BLOOD SCRAPINGS OFF THE WALL IN THE WOMEN’S RESTROOM, OFF THE MEN’S DOOR IN THE HALLWAY AND OFF THE WALL IN THE HALLWAY. I told them about the sunglasses and we fished them out and they took ‘em with them. I told them about the roll of toilet paper and they said ‘we don’t need that, JUST DISCARD IT.’



    FACT: During the Echols trial, Detective Bryn Ridge is asked the following question by Val Price, “Detective Ridge, what is the date that you sent the blood scrapings off to the crime lab to be analyzed?” Ridge answers, “They were never sent.” Price asks “They were never sent?” Ridge responds, “That’s correct.” Price asks, “Where are the blood samples at this time?” Ridge answers, “I don’t know sir, they’re lost.” Price asks, “They’re lost?” Ridge answers, “Yes sir, that’s my mistake. I lost a piece of evidence.” Detectives Bryn Ridge LOST THE BLOOD SCRAPINGS AND SUNGLASSES HE COLLECTED WITH DETECTIVE MIKE ALLEN AT THE BOJANGLES RESTAURANT.

    FACT: John Mark Byers claims to have seen ‘a little skinny black guy’ on the night of the murders coming out of the Robin Hood Woods. These are the people that JMB claims to have said ‘if they come up here, we’ll hold on to ‘em for you.’ These statements come from John Mark Byers’ interview with the police on May 19th, 1993.

    (Link to the actual police transcript)

    FACT: Detectives James Sudbury and Bryn Ridge NEVER press John Mark Byers regarding the ‘little skinny black guy’ he mentions being in the area where the bodies were found even though BRYN RIDGE HIMSELF PERSONALLY KNEW ABOUT THE BOJANGLES MAN. This ‘little skinny black guy’ matches the description of the Bojangles man. Detective Bryn Ridge himself took the blood scrapings from the Bojangles restaurant and subsequently “lost” the evidence.



    FACTS: Detective Bryn Ridge “lost” the blood scrapings and the sunglasses he took from the Bojangles Restaurant. Christopher Murray (also known as Christopher Byers) had the community looking in their direction. Neighbors were wondering why the police were friends with an unemployed jeweler whose son was out of control. Detective James Sudbury, who questioned Byers during his first interview was also in the “drug task force.” Neighbors also wondered why certain members from the “drug task force” and the West Memphis Police Department would visit Byers at his home for barbecues during the weekends. Detective James Sudbury, along with two other officers, would later be fired in 2001 for falsifying evidence and missing drugs from evidence lockers. (More on this in the WMPD page)


    http://www.midsouthjustice.com/Chronology7.htm


    JMO

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    538
    Juror Misconduct

    Do you think it's fair that they knew about JM's confession?


    To protect their privacy, the jurors are identified only by their assigned numbers, not by name, in the petitions. Their names are being filed under seal.

    The foreman, Juror Four, had been contacted many times by reporters and lawyers following the trial but never granted an interview until Oct. 8, when he was interviewed by two attorneys representing Echols. He refused, however, to sign a declaration.

    "In Juror Four's opinion, it was unreasonable to expect the jury to ignore the Misskelley confession despite the court's instructions to do so," Riordan wrote, summarizing the interview. "The Misskelley confession was published in the newspapers. It was a primary and deciding factor in the case. It was a known event."


    Jurors Six and Seven also revealed in recent defense interviews that they had more knowledge about the details of the Misskelley prosecution going into the Echols/Baldwin trial than they admitted during voir dire, according to the petition. Several other jurors indicated that they, too, had been exposed to extensive pretrial publicity.

    http://www.wm3.org/News/view/DEFENSE...OR-MISCONDUCT-

    JMO

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    110
    Do you think it's fair that they knew about JM's confession?
    The Defense did.

    If you read the transcripts of the jury selection, you will see that they were well aware of the fact that the jury knew Misskelley had given a confession.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by ~Lisa~ View Post
    Juror Misconduct

    Do you think it's fair that they knew about JM's confession?


    To protect their privacy, the jurors are identified only by their assigned numbers, not by name, in the petitions. Their names are being filed under seal.

    The foreman, Juror Four, had been contacted many times by reporters and lawyers following the trial but never granted an interview until Oct. 8, when he was interviewed by two attorneys representing Echols. He refused, however, to sign a declaration.

    "In Juror Four's opinion, it was unreasonable to expect the jury to ignore the Misskelley confession despite the court's instructions to do so," Riordan wrote, summarizing the interview. "The Misskelley confession was published in the newspapers. It was a primary and deciding factor in the case. It was a known event."


    Jurors Six and Seven also revealed in recent defense interviews that they had more knowledge about the details of the Misskelley prosecution going into the Echols/Baldwin trial than they admitted during voir dire, according to the petition. Several other jurors indicated that they, too, had been exposed to extensive pretrial publicity.

    http://www.wm3.org/News/view/DEFENSE...OR-MISCONDUCT-

    JMO

    The ASSC has already ruled on this:

    http://courts.state.ar.us/opinions/2.../cr94-928.html
    At the outset, it should be noted that the basis for Echols's claim - i.e., that the jury considered improper and extraneous information in its consideration of his guilt - does not fall within any of the four categories of errors for which error coram nobis constitutesappropriate relief. Although Echols maintains that his claims regarding jury-deliberation irregularities and impermissible jury bias should fall within the ambit of error coram nobis, this court has specifically declined to extend the writ to remedy a case involving allegedly misleading responses by a juror during voir dire. See Davis v. State, 325 Ark. 96, 925 S.W.2d 768 (1996).
    It has been more than ten years since Echols's conviction. This fact clearly demonstrates that Echols did not exercise due diligence in bringing his claims to light - especially in view of the fact that the point on which he relies (the jury's alleged consideration of Misskelley's confession) was known to the court, the prosecutor, and to Echols's defense team at the time of trial. In his memorandum brief, he points out that, during trial, the trial court denied his motion for mistrial when one of the police witnesses inadvertently mentioned Misskelley's statement. At that time, the court stated, "I suggest . . . that there isn't a soul up on that jury or in this courtroom that doesn't know Mr. Misskelley gave a statement." Thus, Echols should have been aware from the time of his trial and conviction of the possibility that the jury might have been aware of and considered this extraneous information.3
    For these two reasons - coram nobis is not applicable to address and correct the errors that allegedly occurred here, and Echols failed to exercise due diligence in raisingthese claims - we decline to reinvest the trial court with jurisdiction to consider Echols's petition for writ of error coram nobis.4

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast