08-19-2010, 04:20 PM #1Registered User
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
- Tupelo, MS
Let me throw out a theory here, please. You all seem to be nice folks that can discuss rationally, so tell me if I'm crazy or not.
Due to the post-conviction confession, I have no choice but to believe that Jessie was there at the crime. HOWEVER, I see nothing at all (except Damien shooting off his mouth which could or could not be the truth) that points to Jason and Damien being there. No forensics, no evidence, no nothing. AND I can't really find anyone that says the 3 ran around together. They knew each other, I know. But as far as D and J hanging out and being friends with Jessie, I'm not finding much. It seems that he traveled in different circles from D and Jason.
What if - Jessie was there, he did it, he helped, just like his confession states, but it was with 1 or 2 other guys and not D and Jason? Maybe someone like LD Hollingsworth? Maybe Jessie was scared of his accomplices so he didn't want to pin it on them. He then picked out 2 loser type kids that he thought he could beat up if it came down to it to blame it on. I'm just not convinced Jessie understood that he wasn't going to tell truth and then go home.
So - am I crazy?
08-19-2010, 04:56 PM #2
LD Hollingsworth, I could believe that in a New York second.
Nice work on the timeline, BTW!!!"If at first you don't succeed, skydiving isn't for you!"
The above post is my opinion and my opinion only. Please do not copy and past to other forums. If I wanted to posted on other forums, I would do it myself. Your cooperation is greatly appreciated in this matter.
09-01-2010, 02:35 PM #3Former Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
09-01-2010, 04:52 PM #4
But in Sheridan, Ark., south of Little Rock, Baldwin's grandmother wasn't so sure of Jason Baldwin's innocence.
"I thought in my own mind when those boys were killed that my grandson is sorta superstitious about that devil stuff," said Jessie Mae Baldwin. "He was always catching lizards and snakes, I thought something was going on in that child's mind."
What? Why? Bcuz he liked catching lizards and snakes?
Alot of kids do imo I used to catch frogs and salamanders
Idk I'm still on the fence someone pleaseeeee push me off one way or another!!
This case drives me nuts!
Last edited by ~Lisa~; 09-01-2010 at 04:59 PM. Reason: link
09-01-2010, 05:01 PM #5Former Member
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
I think it was more this statement:
Baldwin, 76, said she and her husband, Purd Baldwin, 82, learned of their grandson's arrest from a television report Friday morning.
"We just looked at each other and I said, 'I don't know what that boy has on his mind, killing people like that,' " Mrs. Baldwin said. Jason Baldwin's father, Larry Baldwin, lives with his parents but was unavailable Friday.
"He's just heartbroke," said Mrs. Baldwin. "He's a mess."
Mrs. Baldwin said that, when she learned of the boys' deaths, she told people that whoever killed the children should be executed. Now that she knows her grandson could be convicted, she said her feelings haven't changed.
09-01-2010, 05:04 PM #6
Btw...they will be talking about the case on LKL tonight. 9/1/10
TONIGHT: CASE OF THE "WEST MEMPHIS THREE"
Three young men accused and convicted of murdering three little boys in 1993. Find out why Pearl Jam’s Eddie Vedder and The Dixie Chicks’ Natalie Maines think they deserve a new trial.
09-01-2010, 05:15 PM #7
09-01-2010, 06:12 PM #8Former Member
Ok so, just bcuz they arrested him he's guilty??
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
But the fact that his own grandparents believed he was capable of this crime tends to outweigh any opinions to the contrary from those who have never even met him.
09-01-2010, 07:24 PM #9Former Member
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
Now my opinion is that he is guilty, that he was capable of this crime,(based on the research I've done over the years) and since it was the jury's opinion as well, I would say I'm in good company. Then the added bonus of the ASSC upholding the convictions, and not a single appeal in 17 years has found merit in the courts, I would say I'm in excellent company. But that's my opinion.
09-02-2010, 03:51 AM #10
It is hard to make judgments on young teen boys, because their personalities are not completely formed. We do, however, have extensive information on Damien's mental state around the time of the killings. Combined with Jesse's low iq, and a few troubling incidents in Jason's background (IIRC vandalism?), could make a recipe for trouble for three younger kids easy to attack.
But then again...
We have testimony that Christopher Byers step-father JB was abusive, and iirc he has been convicted of violent crimes. Likewise little Stevie Branch's step-father TH had a violent past before the crimes, including sexual assualt.
And even more...
The area where the children were found was easily accessible from a major interstate and there were verified reports of a bloody stranger and gun shots that evening.
So who can really say what happened to these poor little fellows? I hope they are having a blast in the Boy Scouts of Heaven.
09-02-2010, 07:13 AM #11Former Member
So who can really say what happened to these poor little fellows?
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
And he has.
On tape - three times.
To the police.
To the Prosecution.
And to his own attorneys in private.
If you still don't believe him - then it's only because you don't want to.
09-02-2010, 11:00 PM #12
09-02-2010, 11:34 PM #13Former Member
I never said I didn't believe him. I do have serious issues with his iq and the circumstances surrounding his confessions.
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
In fact, Let's look at the testimony of his own witness, Dr. William Wilkins:
DAVIS: Ok. And the WAIS-R is the test that you use to determine the defendant’s IQ?
DAVIS: And in that particular test, what was the performance IQ?
WILKINS: 75? Let me—yes.
His Performance IQ was 75 in the test he took for the trial.
DAVIS: Ok, and in 1992 there was also—prior to the time you did your examination there was another IQ test, correct?
DAVIS: What was his performance IQ at that time?
So his performance IQ plunged 13 points from the previous year.
In fact, prior to the test given to him for his trial it was consistently average...
DAVIS: Ok, so the two past IQ examinations that had been performed on him immediately prior to the one that you did indicated that his performance level was in the average range, is that correct?
WILKINS: Uh, low average, yes. The first placed low average, the second one average, yes.
DAVIS: Ok, well am I correct in understanding that anything above 80 is in the average?
WILKINS: That depends on the criteria you want to go by. Typically it’s—Social Security uses 80 above, other places use 84, so yea.
DAVIS: So, by most criteria 84 and 88 would be in the average range?
DAVIS: Ok. And when we talk about performance IQ, describe what that is, what that involves.
WILKINS: Those entail, problem solving, conceptualization tasks, thinking tasks, they’re non-verbal. Example is putting together puzzles. Being able to—I show you a pattern of blocks and you have to build designs that match the pattern of blocks. It’s conceptualization in a non-verbal form, problem solving in a non-verbal form.
DAVIS: And in regard to that he rates about average, right?
WILKINS: On those two testings, yes.
So his previous performance scores were average - he's charged with murder, and in a test given by his witness, his score suddenly drops 13 points.
You suppose maybe he was faking?
Let's see what his witness had to say about that...
DAVIS: Now the MMPI-2, that was another test that you conducted on him, is that correct?
DAVIS: Now I don’t want to get too complicated ‘cause I don’t understand all this stuff, but I notice down here you said, let’s see, you said he had a high—or you said a mild elevation in the F scale.
DAVIS: Ok. Now Doctor it’s true that what you actually found was a T value in that F scale of 83.
DAVIS: Now are you telling me that that’s a mild elevation?
WILKINS: It’s an elevation above normal levels.
DAVIS: Well don’t they rank the elevations—as far as the T scale is concerned isn’t that something that’s actually ranked in terms of low range, middle range, moderately high range and very high range?
WILKINS: Yes. That may have been a mistake then. I may well have mispronounced what it was supposed to be.
DAVIS: This is a text regarding—MMPI Handbook. Show me here what an 82 to 88 T score on the F scale indicates to you in that book.
WILKINS: Uh, very high.
DAVIS: Very high?
WILKINS: Yes. This would not be quite the same because this is for the MMPI rather than the MMPI-2, which changed critera, but it would still be in the high range.
DAVIS: So when you put in here that that was a mild elevation, that would not be accurate would it?
WILKINS: No. It would not be. No.
DAVIS: And then from that statement that it was a mild elevation you interpreted that that could show malingering, right?
DAVIS: And malingering means what, Doctor?
WILKINS: It means, uh, making up stuff. Trying to present yourself as being ill when you’re not for some particular gain.
DAVIS: Did you explain to Jessie what these tests were being performed for?
WILKINS: We talked some about them in general, yes.
DAVIS: Ok. And he knew that you were coming to court to testify about the results of these tests?
DAVIS: And you talked with his lawyers before you took the test or gave him the test?
So his own witness got caught on the stand "mispronouncing" Misskelley's malingering index - when the actual score strongly indicated he was faking to aid in his defense.
These aren't opinions, they are the documented results of his testing.
Of course this wasn't the first time Wilkins got caught "mispronouncing" MMPI results...
A psychologist who evaluated Jessie Misskelley Jr. as borderline mentally retarded and very suggestible went before the state Board of Psychological Examiners last month and had his practice limited.
Dr. William Wilkins of Jonesboro must practice under the direction of a supervisor and cannot handle sexual abuse or neuro-psychology cases, he said under rigorous questioning from prosecutors this morning in the capital murder trial of Jessie Lloyd Misskelley Jr.
Why was his licenses restricted?
An evaluation of Wilkins done by another psychologist reported concerns about Wilkins' lack of knowledge of fundamental psychological defects and the scales used in scoring the Minnesota Multi-Phasic Personality test (MMPI) and Wexler tests, common psychological and intelligence evaluation tools. Wilkins used both those tests, along with the Rorshchach test, in evaluating Misskelley.
Now, you say you also have issues with the circumstances surrounding his confessions.
Tell me, what issues do you have with the private taped confession he gave his own attorneys on 2/8/94
JONESBORO — In a private audiotaped conversation with his attorney on Feb. 8, 1994, Jessie Lloyd Misskelley described in graphic detail how he and two cohorts tortured and killed three 8-year-old boys — one of whom may have still been alive when they were dumped into a West Memphis ditch.
The tape was played Thursday during a Rule 37 hearing in Jonesboro. Misskelley, Damien Echols and Charles Jason Baldwin, commonly referred to as the West Memphis Three, were convicted in the May 5, 1993, slayings of Michael Moore, Steven Branch and Christopher Byers.
The conversation on the tape took place four days after Baldwin and Echols’ trial began.
On the tape, Misskelley said he, Echols and Baldwin were drinking alcohol next to a ditch when the boys approached.
“Damien grabbed one of them and started hitting him,” Misskelley told Stidham.
Within moments Miss-kelley and Baldwin attacked the other boys, he said. Misskelley said he let his boy go, and then Damien yelled “get him.”
At one point Baldwin pulled out a knife and started cutting one of the victims, and Misskelley told his attorney, “That’s when I realized they’re going to kill these boys.”
What possible reason would an innocent Misskelley have for confessing in private to his own attorneys?
I do not know what happened to those boys
but I will say that the WM3 did not get a fair trial.
09-04-2010, 12:07 AM #14
This is what happens when you forget to put IMHO on your posts. My apologies. I know about as much as any average citizen I guess. I followed the media during the trial, saw the documentary (only the first), read transcripts and forums, stuff like that. It is all my own opinion. Even if Jessie did it, he (and the victims) deserve a fair trial so the truth can come out. In my opinion only.
09-04-2010, 12:25 AM #15
Going back to the beginning...
Have 3 teens kill 3 boys in a relatively small area, at dusk or close to it, in a heavily wooded area, in a ravine with water at least 4-5 ft deep, and in there frenzied state be able to completely wash the area down before leaving. But many, many small critters, attracted to the scent, sliding down the muddy banks...yep, that would do it.
Again, all my own opinion. And again, I am not saying they didn't do it. I think it makes more sense than one crazed lone killer type (like Tommy Sells) did it. Why hide the bodies? And these bodies were well hid. Someone wanted them to stay hid, at least for a while. If you were planning to hop back onto the highway and you knew you had left little forensic evidence, you wouldn't go to the trouble. Like I said, jmho.
By Motherof5 in forum Sheila and Katherine LyonReplies: 51Last Post: 08-04-2015, 03:12 PM
By SeriouslySearching in forum Skyla Whitaker and Taylor PlackerReplies: 521Last Post: 12-09-2011, 07:50 PM
By cecybeans in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years oldReplies: 445Last Post: 12-19-2009, 03:00 PM
By colomom in forum Madeleine McCannReplies: 163Last Post: 04-04-2009, 05:27 AM
By SeriouslySearching in forum Nancy CooperReplies: 423Last Post: 10-25-2008, 11:21 PM