892 users online (166 members and 726 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 46
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    177

    How did the 3 teens know/meet the 3 little boys?

    Yeah the title is not too great but that's the best I could come up with to sum up this discussion lol.

    How did it come about that the WM3 could possibly even know the little boys?

    *I know they weren't related.

    *I know none of the older boys lived close by--in fact if memory serves correctly-wasn't Damien's house like 10 miles away?

    *I know Damien didn't own a car or have a driver's license for that matter. Jason did not own a car. I need to look up whether or not Jessie did--and right this second I'm thinking he did.

    *It's been stated Damien/Jason didn't hang out with Jessie.

    So to go to the absolute very beginning-how is it that these three teenage boys-2 don't have a car and the 3rd doesn't hang out with them-come upon 3 little boys in a wooded area miles from home?
    Then let's stop there for the time being............

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Avalon
    Posts
    13,613
    According to Jessie's statement made after the trial they came across them by chance in the woods....the older boys were already there drinking, and the younger group of boys came in, the older boys hid except for Damien who lured them to him by making 'sounds' and then he hid too and when they approached he jumped one of them, when the other two little boys came to the aid of their friend the other two older boys emerged and they each grabbed one each.

    All in Jessie's statement here http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/jmfeb.html

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    middle tennessee
    Posts
    1,092
    Quote Originally Posted by laurensmom View Post
    Yeah the title is not too great but that's the best I could come up with to sum up this discussion lol.

    How did it come about that the WM3 could possibly even know the little boys?

    *I know they weren't related.

    *I know none of the older boys lived close by--in fact if memory serves correctly-wasn't Damien's house like 10 miles away?

    *I know Damien didn't own a car or have a driver's license for that matter. Jason did not own a car. I need to look up whether or not Jessie did--and right this second I'm thinking he did.

    *It's been stated Damien/Jason didn't hang out with Jessie.

    So to go to the absolute very beginning-how is it that these three teenage boys-2 don't have a car and the 3rd doesn't hang out with them-come upon 3 little boys in a wooded area miles from home?
    Then let's stop there for the time being............
    to answer your question, the 3 older boys did not know and had never met the 3 younger boys.
    Hinky Dinky Parlez Vous!-Sleuthy Gal

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    11,218
    Sorry if this is somewhere else or this is off topic for this particular thread. I am totally ignorant to this case and just watched LKL tonight and am interested.

    Was there any history for any of the convicted for any kind of predatory behavior? Was only one boy sexually assualted? Did any of the convicted have a juvenile record and if so for what?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    239
    Quote Originally Posted by Brwnigirl View Post
    Sorry if this is somewhere else or this is off topic for this particular thread. I am totally ignorant to this case and just watched LKL tonight and am interested.

    Was there any history for any of the convicted for any kind of predatory behavior? Was only one boy sexually assualted? Did any of the convicted have a juvenile record and if so for what?
    IIRC Baldwin and Misskelley had minor juvy records, shoplifting and vandalism. Echols broke into a trailer with his girlfriend. New opinions by experts suggest that none of the boys were sexually assaulted.

    I am sure more knowledgable posters will respond. I am just rereading all of the transcripts as I haven't followed along too closely in the last while. Recent media attention has made me interested again. I have a lot of catching up to do.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Avalon
    Posts
    13,613
    Here is Damien's history from George W Woods who was hired by the defense to look into Damien's past which may have effected his competency to stand trial.

    AFFIDAVIT OF GEORGE W. WOODS, M.D. http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/gwoods.html

    ....and here are some highlights from http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/img/exh500.html which is his history from before the crime took place (but impossible to read, so here's a synopsis from another poster) Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - 48 Hours and Paradise Lost; West Memphis Three

    It's actually worth reading the 500 if you can though because the docs are in original form and puts his history into perspective I thought, its stunning really.
    Last edited by OkieGranny; 02-24-2016 at 03:09 PM. Reason: broken link

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    11,218
    Quote Originally Posted by Mrs G Norris View Post
    Here is Damien's history from George W Woods who was hired by the defense to look into Damien's past which may have effected his competency to stand trial.

    AFFIDAVIT OF GEORGE W. WOODS, M.D. http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/gwoods.html

    ....and here are some highlights from http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/img/exh500.html which is his history from before the crime took place (but impossible to read, so here's a synopsis from another poster) Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - 48 Hours and Paradise Lost; West Memphis Three

    It's actually worth reading the 500 if you can though because the docs are in original form and puts his history into perspective I thought, its stunning really.
    Hmmn interesting..just skimming that affidavit. The psychosis actually makes some sense if you read the blogs on the West Memphis 3 website. I just looked at his recollections of his childhood home in his own words, I think it was a 2004 entry and it did sound a bit like he was having some very strange thoughts about the house.. idk..

    Having said that he sounds quite articulate. But if he was psychotic I guess it would interfere with his ability to stand trial.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Avalon
    Posts
    13,613
    This issue has gone before the courts http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/competency.html

    THE COURT: Mr. Davidson and Mr. Price, the Court wants to know -- and in your course of involvement with Mr. Echols which has been rather extensive over the period of the last eighteen months to two years -- is that correct --

    MR. PRICE: Yes, sir.

    THE COURT: -- About that long? Has anything developed in that association with him that would suggest or in any way open an avenue for a diminished capacity or insanity defense in his behalf? Anything at all?

    MR. PRICE: No, your Honor.

    MR. DAVIDSON: No, your Honor.

    THE COURT. Are you both absolutely certain and convinced in that long association with him that he’s as competent as any client you have represented?

    MR. PRICE: Yes, your Honor. Specifically, that’s based on my fourteen years of law practice and over sixty criminal jury trials and including -- I’ve had several of those trials in which I argued either diminished capacity or the insanity defense or argued that my client was not competent.

    THE COURT: All right. This Court makes the following finding: that Damien Echols is competent and was competent during the course of his trial and that he’s voluntarily and knowingly and intelligently withdrawn his request to waive the punishment aspect of the previous trial -- which I might add was mandatory anyway. I’m not sure what the effect of a waiver of that would have been anyway. But the rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court are that all matters are to be pursued on a capital case. So I’m not even sure it could have been waived if he chose to do so.

    MR. PRICE: That was our problem with it.

    THE COURT. That finding is the only thing I can make at this point. I don’t see any reason why the appeal shouldn’t proceed immediately.
    Anything else?

    MR. DAVIS: Nothing further.

    MR. PRICE: Nothing further.

    THE COURT: The Court has made a determination that Mr. Echols is competent to make any rational decisions about the conduct of his appeal and is capable of rationally and intelligently discussing the facts and circumstances with his attorneys and to aid and assist them in the completion of the appeal of his case.
    And you’ll need to fix an order that reflects that.

    MR. PRICE: All right.

    THE COURT: He’ll be remanded to the custody of the sheriff for transportation.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    11,218
    Obviously I need to review all the court documents to form any real opinion one way or another..I am interested but just not sure I have time.

    I'm not on either side yet, however Mr. Price was counsel for the client, not a psychiatrist, is that right?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Avalon
    Posts
    13,613
    Yes, that's right.......George W Woods was the psychiatrist. I'm still reviewing too, it's v interesting, there are def parts of the trial that I am not happy about, specifically mention of the 'black t-shirts' and 'distinctive dress'. I mean honestly, that just makes my blood boil, and I believe it's prejudicial, but I think if they had left all of the inflammatory evidence right out of this, that there would have been a conviction based on real evidence, and we wouldn't be debating the validity of the verdict now.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    45
    They never knew the victims. Not one of the accused ever had any known contact with any of the boys.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Decatur, IL
    Posts
    209

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by Brwnigirl View Post
    Sorry if this is somewhere else or this is off topic for this particular thread. I am totally ignorant to this case and just watched LKL tonight and am interested.

    Was there any history for any of the convicted for any kind of predatory behavior? Was only one boy sexually assualted? Did any of the convicted have a juvenile record and if so for what?
    Christopher Byers was not sexually assaulted (or was Stevie or Michael), it was later determined that Christopher was bitten by animal matter/bites (turtles) to the genital area.... JMO of course and court records!... Ann
    "To thine own self be true"

    "When I refrain from thoughts of harm directed toward others, I accumulate all the benefits of life"

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Decatur, IL
    Posts
    209

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by Mrs G Norris View Post
    Yes, that's right.......George W Woods was the psychiatrist. I'm still reviewing too, it's v interesting, there are def parts of the trial that I am not happy about, specifically mention of the 'black t-shirts' and 'distinctive dress'. I mean honestly, that just makes my blood boil, and I believe it's prejudicial, but I think if they had left all of the inflammatory evidence right out of this, that there would have been a conviction based on real evidence, and we wouldn't be debating the validity of the verdict now.
    GO!!! Mrs G Norris, there are soooooo many parts of this trial that we need to take apart and analyze, because it was the true southern justice of a witch hunt!! There is no proof whatsoever (DNA, Blood, footprints, to name only a few, etc.) linking any of the WM3 to this case other than speculation, fear and innuendo to lead a jury to fear for their lives!!! This to me is a crime that speaks for real justice and truth no matter what the outcome may be !! I would prefer the real justice to be for 3 little babies that never got a chance to speak, Christopher, Stevie & Michael!! God Bless their Souls!!! They finally deserves some justice...... Take Care, Ann!!! JMOO....
    "To thine own self be true"

    "When I refrain from thoughts of harm directed toward others, I accumulate all the benefits of life"

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by annkitty0630 View Post
    Christopher Byers was not sexually assaulted (or was Stevie or Michael), it was later determined that Christopher was bitten by animal matter/bites (turtles) to the genital area.... JMO of course and court records!... Ann


    I'm not trying to be argumentative but there are no court records that states it was determined that it was animal predation. That is the defense's theory which has yet to be challenged by the state. It will only be challenged if the evidentiary hearing is held, and that is what the ASSC is deliberating on at this time. There is also no evidence that Christopher was not sexually assaulted.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    19,111
    Quote Originally Posted by Mrs G Norris View Post
    Yes, that's right.......George W Woods was the psychiatrist. I'm still reviewing too, it's v interesting, there are def parts of the trial that I am not happy about, specifically mention of the 'black t-shirts' and 'distinctive dress'. I mean honestly, that just makes my blood boil, and I believe it's prejudicial, but I think if they had left all of the inflammatory evidence right out of this, that there would have been a conviction based on real evidence, and we wouldn't be debating the validity of the verdict now.
    What is the "real evidence," in your opinion? I'm seriously asking because I can't find any, other than Misskelly's confession which I believe was coerced and I know wasn't admissible in Baldwin and Echol's trials.

    (BTW, I intend no sarcasm by putting "real evidence" in quotes. I was just acknowledging the terminology you used.)

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast