966 users online (141 members and 825 guests)  


The Killing Season - Websleuths

Websleuths News


Page 1 of 9 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 133
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    110

    Dog gone.

    One of Echol's "gal-pals", Heather Cliett:

    one time at the skating rink, Damien told her he stuck a stick in a dogs eye, then jumped on it and burned it.

    http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/img/heatherc2.html

    I wonder if there was any such dog ever found around Lakeshore?

    Blaine Hodge:

    there was a big black Great Dane Dog at lakeshore that I saw on the trail over the Bridge to the right as you go over the bridge it was Dead It's intestines was strung out of his butt A boy named Adam told me he heard Damien did it.

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

    Black great dane at lakeshore with it's guts hanging out?

    Well, that doesn't mean Echol's did it,... is there a witness?

    Baldwin's cousin, Joe Bartoush:

    On 10-27-92 I was at Lakeshore Trailer Park with Damien Echols when he killed a Black Great Dane. The dog was already sick and he hit the dog in the back of the head. He pulled the intestines out of the dog and started stomping the dog until blood came out of his mouth. He was going to come back later with battery acid so that he could burn the hair and skin off of the dog's head. He had two cat skulls, a dog skull and a rat skull that I already knew about. He kept these skulls in his bedroom at Jack Echols house in Lakeshore. He was trying to make the eyeballs of the dog he killed pop out when he was stomping.

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

    Well, If he supposedly took this skull home, then what happened to it?

    Damien's mother:

    FOGLEMAN- ALRIGHT. DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT DAMION HAVING CAT SKULLS AND CARRYING THEM AROUND?

    PAM- IT WASN'T A CAT SKULL. IT WAS A DOG SKULL.

    FOGLEMAN- ALRIGHT. WHERE WAS THAT?

    PAM- IT WAS HANGING ON MY CLOTHES LINE IN THE BACK YARD WHERE I MADE HIM LEAVE IT OUT THERE TO DRY BEFORE HE CARRIED IT TO SCHOOL.


    http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/pamh2.html

    Well, that could have been any dog's skull he found - there's nothing to indicate it was this great dane everyone was talking about!

    In the courtroom:

    FOGLEMAN: Now, that’s a copy, that’s a picture of a book that was taken in execution of a search warrant, so that really doesn’t apply to this particular…

    THE COURT: I know what that is, that came out of the—

    FOGLEMAN: Other trial.

    THE COURT: What is this, a cow’s head or a goat’s head?

    FOGLEMAN: It’s a dog’s…

    THE COURT: A dog’s head. Okay.


    Must have been a pretty huge dog, huh?

    Yes.... Echol's was just a peace loving Wiccan with teen angst.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Avalon
    Posts
    13,568
    The Link Between Animal Cruelty and Violence Towards People
    Cynthia Hodges1

    Acts of animal cruelty are not merely signs of a minor personality flaw, but are rather symptomatic of a deep mental disturbance. 27 Cruelty to animals has been recognized as an indicator of a dangerous psychopathy that claims animal victims,28 as well as human victims.29 A survey of psychiatric patients who had repeatedly tortured animals found that all of them were also highly aggressive towards people.30
    Acts of violence beget acts of increased violence.31 It is a matter of escalation: people who want to victimize start with something they can easily control, then they work their way up.32 A person who only feels powerful and in control while inflicting pain or death must continually sustain that “high” by committing acts that are more heinous or morbid.33 The violent act itself must be viewed as dangerous, without regard as to whether the victim is a person or an animal.3

    The link between animal abuse and violence towards people is supported by studies, which have shown that:
    36 37
    38 39 40 41 42 43
    • 100% of sexual homicide offenders examined had a history of cruelty towards animals.37
    • 70% of all animal abusers have committed at least one other criminal offense and almost 40% have committed violent crimes against people.38
    • 63.3% of men who had committed crimes of aggression admitted to cruelty to animals.39
    • 48% of rapists and 30% of child molesters reported committing animal abuse during childhood or adolescence.40
    • 36% of assaultive women reported cruelty to animals while 0% of non-assaultive women did.41
    • 25% of violent, incarcerated men reported higher rates of “substantial cruelty to animals” in childhood than a comparison group of non-incarcerated men (0%).42
    • Men who abused animals were five times more likely to have been arrested for violence towards humans, four times more likely to have committed property crimes, and three times more likely to have records for drug and disorderly conduct offenses.43

    More here:
    http://www.cynthiahodges.com/animals...n_violence.pdf

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    177
    Well either he burned the dog or stomped it until it's intestines came out.....I'm all for getting answers here, but really, it can't be both ways.

    Damien's testimony-he found the skull while walking with his dad.

    Now, is it at all possible that some of these kids blamed every single gross/weird/scary thing on Damien?

    And FWIW I for one would not want to come across Damien on a dark alley.....no way.....out of his own mouth he's spooky as hell....

    For my own reasons, I'm trying to figure out if his beliefs/interests/etc. led him to murder three little boys......

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    110
    Well either he burned the dog or stomped it until it's intestines came out.....I'm all for getting answers here, but really, it can't be both ways.
    Yes actually, it can.

    As Bartoush said, Echols stomped the dog, and stated that he would come back later to burn off the flesh and retrieve the skull.

    Damien's testimony-he found the skull while walking with his dad.
    Yet Jack Echols never mentioned this in either of his statements, and Damien's testimony conflicts with his mothers account as well.
    Now, is it at all possible that some of these kids blamed every single gross/weird/scary thing on Damien?
    Sure, it's possible - but it's certainly not reasonable to believe by any stretch of the imagination.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    19,098
    Quote Originally Posted by laurensmom View Post
    Well either he burned the dog or stomped it until it's intestines came out.....I'm all for getting answers here, but really, it can't be both ways.

    Damien's testimony-he found the skull while walking with his dad.

    Now, is it at all possible that some of these kids blamed every single gross/weird/scary thing on Damien?

    And FWIW I for one would not want to come across Damien on a dark alley.....no way.....out of his own mouth he's spooky as hell....

    For my own reasons, I'm trying to figure out if his beliefs/interests/etc. led him to murder three little boys......
    Personally, I think it's quite reasonable to believe that it became customary in West Memphis to blame every weird thing on Damien Echols.

    And there's no question that Damien did his best to cultivate his reputation as the boogeyman.

    So whether he actually mutilated animals is hard to say.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    110
    Personally, I think it's quite reasonable to believe that it became customary in West Memphis to blame every weird thing on Damien Echols.
    Your need to believe that doesn't make it reasonable in any way.

    whether he actually mutilated animals is hard to say.
    No, it's really not.

    It's just hard to accept for his appologists.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Queensland Australia
    Posts
    2
    Did investigators check police/newspaper records/reports of missing pets prior to the murders and following them?

    [URL=http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/ably.html"]
    Q: Was there anything, at any of those, did you ever see any what you would call illegal activities going on at these um?
    A: Killing the dogs was illegal to start with because we would steal the dogs from people and um, that rape where they rape that girl out there I know that was illegal.
    And this:
    http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/jmpc.html
    When talking about the "meetings" they had, Jessie could remember about nine people showing up and at one particular meeting "Kent" was to bring a dog "as his treat," the dog was taken away in the woods where it was killed and skinned. The dog was brought back and cooked in something that looked like Crisco in a "washing machine type bucket." Jessie said he eat a little one time and got sick. "Kent" was to catch the dog at the trailer park and Jessie believed they had killed about four dogs altogether. Jessie said Jason and Damion would both have sex with Dominique at these meetings.
    And this:
    http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/jerry_driver_statement.html
    Driver: He never admitted those guys but always that there was more than 3 people involved, I got those name from a, from a kid, in school at Marion, this is who you know is involved with Damien. Um, I suspect there's some people at Lakeshore that were involved with him that we don't even know and there's probably some still out there that. . ., that were involved at the time, because we've still founding dogs and things you know that they cut up and due that kind of mess.
    Q: When now?
    Driver: Uh-huh

    There are more, if you look.
    I would think that there must have been quite a lot of lost/missing dogs/cats reports I can't find any references in the documents to verify missing pets though which is not to say they aren't there.
    We could take the view that all these people making these statements are lying, (as many are stating) so some actual evidence backing them up would be handy to have.
    I now understand why they say "Chain of evidence", because each piece is a part of the whole, and it all links back to Echols and his followers, below is the physical evidence.
    http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/jdreport.html
    On June 8, 1993, at approximately 10:00 A.M., I received a call from Steve Jones at my office. Mr. Jones requested that I meet him at a location near Lakeshore Trailer Park. The location was under the I-55 overpass that crosses the railroad tracks. Mr. Jones advised me that he had an informant involved with certain individuals in the area who were participating in ritualistic animal sacrifices. He took me to an area at the north end of the I-55 overpass where we discovered the carcass of a cat and the bones of another animal as well as the carcasses of 10-15 pigeons in a pile. We also found evidence of small bonfires at the same location. We then moved to a location along the railroad tracks where we observed a lot of grafitti (sic). At this time, Mr. Jones observed a knife in the dirt on the south side of the tracks south of the retaining wall. I noticed that it had a blade with a serrated edge and called for CID from the CCSO. Investigator Bobby Stabbs from the ASP, Asst. Chief Don Bray and Lt. Gary Kelly of the Marion Police Dept. also responded. Both still photos and video tape records were made of the scenes. The knife was bagged and removed by Lt. Kelly.
    Now the supporters will have you believe that these witnesses reports and
    animal remains evidence is not connected in any way with the three convicted.
    However it is more reasonable to believe that it is all part of Echols Balwin and Misskellys (among others) reign of madness which concluded in the brutal murder of three innocent children !
    Last edited by chicoliving; 12-11-2010 at 02:43 AM.

  8. #8
    I don't follow this case as closely as many here, but I'm not impressed by this thread in either direction.

    This is more of the "is Damien the type of person who might have done this" nonsense - it's no substitute for actual evidence. Damien insists that he didn't do this - that it was part of the hysteria following his arrest when the police were searching for any and all "dirt" they could get on Damien. There were also, I believe, many others with scarier pasts who were suspects at one time, including a sex offender (Martin Something) who lived in the area and "guessed" that the murder victims were tied with their own shoelaces (etc).

    I think the guy who did this (it was in a prior post from a couple of months ago when I spent several hours reading on this case) is a step-father. Mark Hobbs; a hair that's a 90%+ match to him was found at the scene after he said he was nowhere near it, a hair from a friend of Hobbs (again, a 90%+ match) who Hobbs hadn't been with until the boys were killed was found, he was trying to set up an alibi saying he was with family members of the victims searching when he wasn't, he said he was "in and out of the woods all night" even though the woods were a very small area, he told someone he found the bodies during the night, he had a pocketknife owned by one of the victims, etc.

    That's evidence. Some argument over the impossible to prove issue of whether Damien killed a dog isn't. It might put him on the suspect list, and Damien's persona made him a more attractive suspect than a step-parent, but it shouldn't persuade anyone.

    And if we're trying to build a case around "is this the type of person" nonsense, then Jason Baldwin's LACK of any kind of similar past - his shy, peaceful, non-violent demeanor balances the scales in the other direction, and Jessie Miskelly's similar lack of serious pathology is another stone on the other side of the scale. I'm not impressed by the "Damien was creepy" arguments.

    In any case, the court just ordered a retrial, so we'll get to see everything that's come up over the last 20 years and maybe the truth will finally come out there.

    Anyone know when and where they're scheduled for?

  9. #9
    If animal abuse alone were proof of murder, then maybe the WMPD should arrest Michael Vick. It may be true that all murderers start as animal abusers, but not all animal abusers end up as murderers. Damien was very prone to making sensational statements regarding what he was "going" to do. As to the statement by Jason's cousin, anatomically what he describes is really not possible. I believe a little exaggeration is in evidence here. Remember, to be a murderer, you need opportunity, motive and evidence that the suspect intended to cause the death of the deceased. The WM3 had no motive for these murders. The Satanic cult motive has been refuted by real (as opposed to diploma-mill) experts. The WM3 had alibis for the supposed TOD. Some people don't want to accept that they were with family, but, if they were, then they were. As to evidence, the only real physical evidence links two people to the discovery site and excludes all three of the WM3. So, your animal abuse stories, although interesting, prove nothing. On the other hand, as I feel that the new evidence to be presented at the hearing will show, someone that had a motive, an opportunity and left physical evidence is guilty.

  10. #10
    Peanut Monkey,

    The hearing or hearings (we still don't know which) are still unscheduled. I've heard that the lawyers are busy until March, but that's just rumor.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    DFW
    Posts
    6,538
    Quote Originally Posted by Peanut Monkey View Post
    I don't follow this case as closely as many here, but I'm not impressed by this thread in either direction.

    This is more of the "is Damien the type of person who might have done this" nonsense - it's no substitute for actual evidence. Damien insists that he didn't do this - that it was part of the hysteria following his arrest when the police were searching for any and all "dirt" they could get on Damien. There were also, I believe, many others with scarier pasts who were suspects at one time, including a sex offender (Martin Something) who lived in the area and "guessed" that the murder victims were tied with their own shoelaces (etc).

    I think the guy who did this (it was in a prior post from a couple of months ago when I spent several hours reading on this case) is a step-father. Mark Hobbs; a hair that's a 90%+ match to him was found at the scene after he said he was nowhere near it, a hair from a friend of Hobbs (again, a 90%+ match) who Hobbs hadn't been with until the boys were killed was found, he was trying to set up an alibi saying he was with family members of the victims searching when he wasn't, he said he was "in and out of the woods all night" even though the woods were a very small area, he told someone he found the bodies during the night, he had a pocketknife owned by one of the victims, etc.

    That's evidence. Some argument over the impossible to prove issue of whether Damien killed a dog isn't. It might put him on the suspect list, and Damien's persona made him a more attractive suspect than a step-parent, but it shouldn't persuade anyone.

    And if we're trying to build a case around "is this the type of person" nonsense, then Jason Baldwin's LACK of any kind of similar past - his shy, peaceful, non-violent demeanor balances the scales in the other direction, and Jessie Miskelly's similar lack of serious pathology is another stone on the other side of the scale. I'm not impressed by the "Damien was creepy" arguments.

    In any case, the court just ordered a retrial, so we'll get to see everything that's come up over the last 20 years and maybe the truth will finally come out there.

    Anyone know when and where they're scheduled for?
    They have to have more evidence than just two hairs from Terry Hobbs & David Jacoby. That itself does not mean that TH and his friend DJ killed those boys.

    I hope eventually the WM3 do get new trials that proves once and for all they either did kill Stevie, Michael & Chris or they did not.

  12. #12
    In his latest interviews, Damien has stated that there is more evidence which will be presented at the evidentiary hearing. If a new trial is granted, I have every confidence that the verdicts will be not guilty for all three defendants.

  13. #13
    Peanut - it's TERRY Hobbs, not MARK Hobbs. Mark is Chris' father - and a vocal supporter both of the innocence of the WM3 and the guilt of TERRY Hobbs.

    I otherwise agree with your post; the few remaining "non-supporters" out there are clinging to the "hoodoo voodoo Damien was craazzzyyy" nonsense as all the proofs have come back supporting the WM3. Especially considering that Damien had shoulder-length black hair and wore Army boots - how would there be NO forensics linking him?? Not a fingerprint, bootprint, strand of DNA or a hair? I don't see it. He was a misfit, wise-ass kid who didn't seriously consider that people are wrongfully convicted in this country. Jessie was never able to give a single statement to anyone that aligns with the known crime scene and physical evidence.

    There is no evidentiary basis to believe they're guilty, so nons go to "look how crazy and creepy Damien was" -- it's pathetic. And then DNA comes back to Hobbs, Hobbs' friend that he was with the day the boys were killed, and his alibi falls apart (including attempts to lie about when he was with other family members, his statements to his girlfriend about finding the boys "buried underwater" -- and his use of that weird phrase in a WMPD interview gives some credence that he actually said it, his massive inconsistencies between the Dimension Films interview, his WMPD interview, and his depositions) .... I truly don't understand how anyone can ignore this mountain of both physical evidence and circumstantial evidence and continue to honestly believe the WM3 are guilty. .... But then I'm not impressed by disputed stories of a dog killing; if I were, maybe I could say they're guilty.

    You want to go after someone with a supporter network who is actually guilty as all hell? Go look at Mumia Abu Jamal's case - 4 eyewitnesses, powder residue on his jacket, confession at the hospital, a radical hate-filled personal agenda...

    Let's punish the guilty, protect the innocent, and man up and admit it when a mistake was made.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Avalon
    Posts
    13,568
    ^ Few remaining non-supporters? Clinging to voodoo? Jessie never able to make a single statement which didn't correspond to the crime scene? And I do not recall thinking 'Look how crazy and creepy Damien was'.

    Well it's OK think what you like about us 'non-supporters' or as I prefer 'realists' who are pretty satisfied that the right people are in prison, that they will remain there and are unlikely ever to get out. Good luck with the hearings, but I don't expect it to go very far. They got 'em Perhaps you think there aren't many of us because we don't have a great need to discuss an already solved case, and are not afraid of an overturning of justice here any time soon.
    Neither the state nor the defense team are saints, and there is usually plenty of incompetence to go around on both sides of the courtroom.

  15. #15
    According to Webster, a "realist" is "a person concerned with real things and practical matters." To me, DNA is a real thing. People who deny the implications of the DNA evidence IMO can hardly be called "realists." I'm anxiously awaiting the hearing when more evidence (real things) will be revealed.

Page 1 of 9 1 2 3 ... LastLast