1014 users online (185 members and 829 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 23 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 331
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    177

    Random things about this case...

    Every once in a while I'll be reading here or somewhere else and think of something I want to post, but there's really no certain place to post it. I thought this would be a good idea for random thoughts/statements/etc.

    I have a few to start off with-some thoughts-some questions. Please feel free to comment or answer if you can.

    *I had forgotten that Gitchell stated in pl2 that he had visions/dreams of Damien standing in his bedroom door. I believe he honestly thought Damien was pure evil.

    *One question I have (of many lol) is I could've swore I read somewhere a long time ago that Damien's family (mom, dad, sister) doesn't visit anymore. Does anyone know anything about this? Because even a few years after he was sentenced I know his mom still talked to him on the phone and visited in pl2. It just seems like I read it but I can't remember the exact wording or where it was that I saw it. ETA In pl2 his mom certainly didn't seem afraid of him.

    I know I'll have tons more.

  2. #2
    Basically, they visit only rarely now. He wants them to stay "out of the limelight" as much as they can. Here's a link to an article in the Jonesborto Sun where the article appeared. The entire article is interesting.

    http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?f...ogId=536692537

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    177
    thank you so much! so basically he's convinced them to try and live their lives....exactly what I was looking for!!

  4. #4
    I know that he really feels that he let his son, Seth, down. He wanted to be a better father to Seth than his own father was to him. However, he couldn't do that in prison. I don't know what he'll do when he gets out. It's really sad.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    133
    i don't think damien is going to get out. imo

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    DFW
    Posts
    6,915
    Quote Originally Posted by mendz View Post
    i don't think damien is going to get out. imo
    I'd be Shocked if he did.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    177
    Quote Originally Posted by iluvmua View Post
    I'd be Shocked if he did.
    I would be too....maybe we'll hear something tomorrow

  8. #8

    Unhappy

    I have to believe that he will eventually get out. However, if you're talking about bail if an evidentiary hearing is ordered by the ASSC, I don't think so either.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    5,011
    The shoelace that the hair found to be consistent with Hobbs was found in-has it ever been proven which victim the shoelace belonged to or if it didn't belong to them?

    Wasn't it one that was longer than what the other victims were tied with and had been cut into two pieces that was used to tie up Michael?

    If the shoestring could be proven to belong to Hobbs and his hair was found in it I think that would convict him of the crimes!

    One more thing, the state denied the defense testing of the foreign hairs found on the victims in the last round of tests.

    Is there documentation they were ever tested? If they were does it say whether they were found to be human or animal? If found to be animal hairs, was the specific species that the hairs came from identified?
    "IT TAKES A LOT BIGGER MAN TO STAND UP AND ADMIT HIS MISTAKES THAN TO HIDE BEHIND A LIE"
    WHY WON'T ANYONE STAND UP FOR HALEIGH??!! WHY?? TELL THE TRUTH!!
    HALEIGH DESERVES IT!!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    19,111
    It's hard for me to believe that TH or anyone else can be convicted on a single hair. Not when the suspect was known to have some prior contact with the victim on whom the hair was found.

    But if evidentiary rules are as lax now as they were win 1993, who know?


  11. #11
    To me, the damning hair is the other hair, Jacoby's. He stated in his deposition in the Pasdar case that he and Hobbs were playing guitars after Hobbs dropped Pam off at work but right before the boys went missing. How did that hair get to the discovery site? Even if the hair in the ligature is proven to be from a shoelace that was Stevie's (even though it was used to bind Michael), I seriously doubt that a hair attached to the shoelace of an eight year old boy would stay on the lace all day. Remember, Hobbs maintains that he did not see the boys that day (although witnesses say differently). This hair would be like the "magic bullet," doing things that defy physics. Eight year old boys tie and retie their shoes many times during the day. The shoelace simply could not have stayed on through all of these retyings. If the hair on the shoelace was picked up when the boys were with Hobbs around 6:30 pm, as the new witnesses state, how do you explain the Jacoby hair? It cannot be explained, in my opinion, unless it came from Hobbs. He picked it up when he was with Jacoby playing guitars and then it fell off him onto the tree stump at some point when he was at the discovery site. Even though he claimed to search off and on all night, he also claims that he was not actually at the discovery ditch. That's why I believe that, if a hair is important, the Jacoby hair is the most important. Even though I don't see how a hair could get embedded into a ligature by innocent transfer, I really don't see how the hair of someone who was never in contact with the victims could be at the scene unless it was carried there by someone who was in contact with the victims. Just my opinion.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    177
    So I just watched on the Memphis Fox News-they interviewed Donald Horgan-Echols' lead attorney-he said foreign dna was found on the genitals of one of the little boys. He also said it didn't belong to Damien, Jessie, Jason, Hobbs, or Jacoby. This is the first time I had heard of this. Did any of you know about it?

    http://www.myfoxmemphis.com/dpp/news...vidence?ref=nf

  13. #13
    I knew about it. I have no idea whose DNA it could be. Watch the clip where Pam Hobbs is on the phone with one of the reporters and tell me what you think about that.

    http://www.myfoxmemphis.com/dpp/news...e-court-ruling

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    19,111
    Quote Originally Posted by Compassionate Reader View Post
    To me, the damning hair is the other hair, Jacoby's. He stated in his deposition in the Pasdar case that he and Hobbs were playing guitars after Hobbs dropped Pam off at work but right before the boys went missing. How did that hair get to the discovery site? Even if the hair in the ligature is proven to be from a shoelace that was Stevie's (even though it was used to bind Michael), I seriously doubt that a hair attached to the shoelace of an eight year old boy would stay on the lace all day. Remember, Hobbs maintains that he did not see the boys that day (although witnesses say differently). This hair would be like the "magic bullet," doing things that defy physics. Eight year old boys tie and retie their shoes many times during the day. The shoelace simply could not have stayed on through all of these retyings. If the hair on the shoelace was picked up when the boys were with Hobbs around 6:30 pm, as the new witnesses state, how do you explain the Jacoby hair? It cannot be explained, in my opinion, unless it came from Hobbs. He picked it up when he was with Jacoby playing guitars and then it fell off him onto the tree stump at some point when he was at the discovery site. Even though he claimed to search off and on all night, he also claims that he was not actually at the discovery ditch. That's why I believe that, if a hair is important, the Jacoby hair is the most important. Even though I don't see how a hair could get embedded into a ligature by innocent transfer, I really don't see how the hair of someone who was never in contact with the victims could be at the scene unless it was carried there by someone who was in contact with the victims. Just my opinion.
    You may be right and I certainly find the Jacoby hair very suspicious.

    But a defense attorney will argue that since Jacoby was often at the Hobbs house, a single hair of his might well remain lodged somewhere on one of the boys.

    I'd feel better if there were fingerprints or more hairs. Maybe additional testing will turn up some...

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    19,111
    Quote Originally Posted by laurensmom View Post
    So I just watched on the Memphis Fox News-they interviewed Donald Horgan-Echols' lead attorney-he said foreign dna was found on the genitals of one of the little boys. He also said it didn't belong to Damien, Jessie, Jason, Hobbs, or Jacoby. This is the first time I had heard of this. Did any of you know about it?

    http://www.myfoxmemphis.com/dpp/news...vidence?ref=nf
    This is the first I've heard of it and it makes me shudder. Shades of the Ramsey case.

    I won't be a bit surprised if it eventually turns out that DNA transfer is so easy and so common as to be almost meaningless.

    EXCEPT, if the prosecution's theory is correct and we're supposed to believe JM that the children were sexually assaulted, I would expect foreign DNA to be washed away, wouldn't you? At the very least, if I remember JM's confession correctly, we should expect the "foreign DNA" to be mixed with that of the defendants.

    Even if it doesn't lead to an intruder, this foreign DNA may disprove the sexual assault theory.

    (ETA: I wonder if the DNA has been tested against the other victims. I speak from personal experience that boys of that age do a lot of experimenting (which doesn't mean they will grow up to be gay, of course). If a parent or stepparent came upon the boys "experimenting," an overreaction of extreme rage would not be surprising. This is all entirely speculation on my part and in no way, as I see it, reflects badly on the victims.)

    (ETA #2: the discovery of foreign DNA on the genitals of a victim should put to rest the prosecution's claim that all forensic evidence was 'washed away" by submersion in water.)
    Last edited by Nova; 11-06-2010 at 05:58 AM.

Page 1 of 23 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Things to Do in a New Case or When There's No News
    By BeanE in forum Gabriel Johnson
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-26-2010, 02:34 PM
  2. Random Thoughts and Discussion Ideas#6 About the Case
    By cuppy199 in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 544
    Last Post: 07-01-2009, 09:15 AM
  3. Random Thoughts and Discussion Ideas#5 About the Case
    By cuppy199 in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 726
    Last Post: 05-24-2009, 12:50 AM
  4. Rants and Random Ideas ABOUT THE CASE thread #3
    By cuppy199 in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 628
    Last Post: 10-12-2008, 10:30 AM

Tags for this Thread