Page 6 of 16 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415 ... LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 378

Thread: My Theory

  1. #126
    The pants! I finally found a discussion about the pants:

    http://www.wm3blackboard.com/forum/i...p?topic=3228.0

    Basically, Michael's blue scout pants were found inside out, zippered and buttoned. Chris' blue jeans were found inside out, zippered and buttoned. Both pair of pants were dirty. Stevie's blue jeans were found right side out, unzipped and unbuttoned. They were relatively clean.

    Sorry it took so long, but the boards have been so active since the release that it's been hard to keep up!

  2. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Compassionate Reader For This Useful Post:


  3. #127
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tupelo, MS
    Posts
    153
    Thank you so much, CR! This makes sense with your theory. Clean pants unzippered and unbuttoned would corroborate TH trying to pull the pants on a dead or dying child, then giving up and dragging the pants off the other 2. Thank you again.

    May I ask another question? I was reading the luminol tests last night and the experts who applied and "read" the luminol said that spot #5 was probably where the crime was committed. Judging by the pictures, that could be possible. That leads me to believe that the crime was committed there instead of a manhole or somewhere else. Where does that fit into your theory?

    Ok - 2 more questions : What you and the supporters are calling "road rash", is that what Peretti is calling possible scratches or wounds from a limb or stick? Or is there other wounds "road rash" that was just glossed over in the trial and never spoken about?

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to SheBoss For This Useful Post:


  5. #128
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Rochester, New York
    Posts
    27,390
    Quote Originally Posted by SheBoss View Post
    Thank you so much, CR! This makes sense with your theory. Clean pants unzippered and unbuttoned would corroborate TH trying to pull the pants on a dead or dying child, then giving up and dragging the pants off the other 2. Thank you again.

    May I ask another question? I was reading the luminol tests last night and the experts who applied and "read" the luminol said that spot #5 was probably where the crime was committed. Judging by the pictures, that could be possible. That leads me to believe that the crime was committed there instead of a manhole or somewhere else. Where does that fit into your theory?

    Ok - 2 more questions : What you and the supporters are calling "road rash", is that what Peretti is calling possible scratches or wounds from a limb or stick? Or is there other wounds "road rash" that was just glossed over in the trial and never spoken about?
    Any "evidence" found by the cops is very suspect to me. I think some of it was "created" to make them look guilty. JMO
    Buttons updated 07/22/2014-2014



    Thinking of Sue

    Thanks Steadfast for the spinning Buffalo Bills Emu

    Made by HD ----->

    Warning: Some buttons may be offensive!
    BAD WORDS AND OFFENSIVE MATERIAL
    AND STUFF LIKE THAT THERE!!




  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Steely Dan For This Useful Post:


  7. #129
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tupelo, MS
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
    Any "evidence" found by the cops is very suspect to me. I think some of it was "created" to make them look guilty. JMO
    Considering the autopsy report stated (I think) that Byers died by bleeding out and not drowning, I would think the luminol would show a HUGE patch of blood. We carry a lot of blood in our bodies.

    That's still my lynch pin for their innocence and why I'm still on the fence. I'm still trying to figure out how 3 drunk teenagers can beat, slice, carve, and kill 3 little boys (ok, they carved 1 boy, the others were just beat and drowned, I get that) and there be NO blood at the scene. 3 drunk teens can clean up the crime scene that well and in fading light? It makes no sense to me.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to SheBoss For This Useful Post:


  9. #130
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    4,199
    Steely - you are too funny!

    I am glad that these men are out of prison. No true evidence they committed this crime & I believe time is coming for those/he who did! Hooray for DNA
    ~ krimekat ~
    Live in Peace & Peace will live in you

    ++++++++++++
    Forum Information & Esoterica

  10. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to krimekat For This Useful Post:


  11. #131
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by SheBoss View Post
    Thank you so much, CR! This makes sense with your theory. Clean pants unzippered and unbuttoned would corroborate TH trying to pull the pants on a dead or dying child, then giving up and dragging the pants off the other 2. Thank you again.

    May I ask another question? I was reading the luminol tests last night and the experts who applied and "read" the luminol said that spot #5 was probably where the crime was committed. Judging by the pictures, that could be possible. That leads me to believe that the crime was committed there instead of a manhole or somewhere else. Where does that fit into your theory?

    Ok - 2 more questions : What you and the supporters are calling "road rash", is that what Peretti is calling possible scratches or wounds from a limb or stick? Or is there other wounds "road rash" that was just glossed over in the trial and never spoken about?
    I think Stevie was probably made to take off his own pants. I agree the crime was done nearby where the bodies were found because I just can't see someone risking going into those woods with bodies knowing people were around looking for the boys. Way to risky. The luminol patterns are also pretty convincing.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Livvy For This Useful Post:


  13. #132
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Decatur, IL
    Posts
    207

    Red face

    Quote Originally Posted by Livvy View Post
    I think Stevie was probably made to take off his own pants. I agree the crime was done nearby where the bodies were found because I just can't see someone risking going into those woods with bodies knowing people were around looking for the boys. Way to risky. The luminol patterns are also pretty convincing.

    I can only say one thing "HALLELUJUA" to the WM3 getting out and now we have to have to hold accountable the true killer of these horrifying crimes committed against Christopher, Michael & Stevie......... JH, you should be on the watch list of the WMPD, however, we all know you are not.... That should be scary enough (like any horror movie all kids watch) to make your skin crawn that a murderer lurks free in your community....... Anyhow, enough of my rambling, glad to see everyone is onboard with Damien, Jessie & Jason are completely innocent of these crimes and please sign the petition to EXONERATE them all at the BB site...... Take Care All & Keep Your Babies SAFE!! Ann
    "To thine own self be true"

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

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to annkitty0630 For This Useful Post:


  15. #133
    The problem with the Luminol testing is that, to be certain that the Luminol was reacting to blood, an additional test should have been done. It wasn't. Luminol will react to other agents beside blood. I don't remember off the top of my head what, but there are other things that react positively with Luminol. It's just another example of the horrible investigative job the WMPD did in this case. However, if the spots are blood, it could have been from when the bodies were carried from the manhole to the ditch.

    Yes, the scrapes and scratches could have been caused when the bodies were removed from the manhole.

    A word about the post-conviction statements: they were made right after Jessie's trial. Any accurate statements in them could have easily been garnered from the trial, or have been fed to Jessie by LE. The statements were made because LE wanted Jessie to testify against Damien and Jason. They interrogated him frequently (although they denied it, he told Stidham that they did) and IMO fed him information or rather rehearsed the story with him repeatedly so he could get it straight. However, it must be noted that even these post-conviction statements fail to stand up to the evidence of today, and even to some extent to the evidence in 1993.

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Compassionate Reader For This Useful Post:


  17. #134
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Forest Dweller.
    Posts
    8,188
    Quote Originally Posted by Compassionate Reader View Post
    The problem with the Luminol testing is that, to be certain that the Luminol was reacting to blood, an additional test should have been done. It wasn't.
    (Bolded and respectfully snipped by me)

    This highlights one of the many reasons I don't share theories here. We are all trying to bring logic and critical thinking to a problem in which many of the components are (now) unknowable. It's interesting to read other people's theories on what might have happened, but unless we can find a way to hop in a time machine and go back and investigate the evidence as it existed in 1993, a theory will simply be that...a theory.

    People can try to build a case against Terry Hobbs or Mark Byers or Bojangles (etc. etc.) until the cows come home, but in the end, it really means nothing because the evidence simply is not there. A hair consistent with Hobbs in a shoelace knot? Okay. Does that prove Hobbs killed these boys? No, it doesn't. Bojangles wanders into a fast food joint covered in blood and mud. Okay. Does that prove he murdered these boys? No, it doesn't. Had any of these incidents been investigated properly 18 years ago, we'd be standing in a very different place right now. But we aren't, so all these theories, imo, are like bodily orifices...everyone has at least one. And usually more than one.
    People seldom do what they believe in. They do what is convenient, then repent. ~Bob Dylan

  18. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Mountain_Kat For This Useful Post:


  19. #135
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tupelo, MS
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Compassionate Reader View Post
    The problem with the Luminol testing is that, to be certain that the Luminol was reacting to blood, an additional test should have been done. It wasn't. Luminol will react to other agents beside blood. I don't remember off the top of my head what, but there are other things that react positively with Luminol. It's just another example of the horrible investigative job the WMPD did in this case. However, if the spots are blood, it could have been from when the bodies were carried from the manhole to the ditch.

    Yes, the scrapes and scratches could have been caused when the bodies were removed from the manhole.

    A word about the post-conviction statements: they were made right after Jessie's trial. Any accurate statements in them could have easily been garnered from the trial, or have been fed to Jessie by LE. The statements were made because LE wanted Jessie to testify against Damien and Jason. They interrogated him frequently (although they denied it, he told Stidham that they did) and IMO fed him information or rather rehearsed the story with him repeatedly so he could get it straight. However, it must be noted that even these post-conviction statements fail to stand up to the evidence of today, and even to some extent to the evidence in 1993.
    I looked this up just so we'd know:

    "Although Luminol is advantageous, it also has several disadvantages. Blood is not the only substance that triggers Luminol. Copper, bleach, horseradish, urine, fecal matter, and animal blood can all distort investigations that involve Luminol because they cause the Luminol to glow everywhere that these substances are located. Also, luminol prevents other tests from being performed on the substance that has been sprayed with it, although DNA can still be safely extracted for further tests."

    This comes from here:
    http://www.tech-faq.com/luminol.html

  20. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to SheBoss For This Useful Post:


  21. #136
    Urine would be very possible in an area where transients were found on occasion. I thought I had read about another test they should have performed on the areas where blood was suspected, but what you've posted seems to indicate that other testing would have been impossible. Makes one wonder why use Luminol at all.

  22. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Compassionate Reader For This Useful Post:


  23. #137
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Mass
    Posts
    1,081
    The fibers from the boys clothes will be tested better at some point I hope
    "Don't pee on my head and tell me it's raining" ~Judge Judy

    Revenge is beneath me , but accidents DO happen .

  24. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Silkprint For This Useful Post:


  25. #138
    Quote Originally Posted by Silkprint View Post
    The fibers from the boys clothes will be tested better at some point I hope
    It is my understanding that the additional testing of the fibers is part of the still-uncompleted (or at least unreported) testing being conducted by the defense at the present time. I simply don't know when the results will be made public, but I believe that they will be made public, probably when the defense presents their total package of additional evidence/information to Scott Ellington. Then, if he is a man of his word, he will reopen the investigation and finally true justice will be served. At least that's my hope and prayer for this case.

  26. The Following User Says Thank You to Compassionate Reader For This Useful Post:


  27. #139
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    7,459
    Quote Originally Posted by SheBoss View Post
    Considering the autopsy report stated (I think) that Byers died by bleeding out and not drowning, I would think the luminol would show a HUGE patch of blood. We carry a lot of blood in our bodies.

    That's still my lynch pin for their innocence and why I'm still on the fence. I'm still trying to figure out how 3 drunk teenagers can beat, slice, carve, and kill 3 little boys (ok, they carved 1 boy, the others were just beat and drowned, I get that) and there be NO blood at the scene. 3 drunk teens can clean up the crime scene that well and in fading light? It makes no sense to me.
    Read Blink on Crime's discussion West Memphis Part II Guilty-by-Plea:

    In 1993 under Arkansas law, Luminol testing was considered new, novel, and not accepted as scientific evidence. There was actually a huge amount of blood found at the murder site.

  28. #140
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,844
    Quote Originally Posted by Pensfan View Post
    Read Blink on Crime's discussion West Memphis Part II Guilty-by-Plea:

    In 1993 under Arkansas law, Luminol testing was considered new, novel, and not accepted as scientific evidence. There was actually a huge amount of blood found at the murder site.
    No, that's a very misleading statement. According to Kermit Channell...

    There were no visible signs or
    indication of blood at any of the locations that we investigated.
    http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/luminol_dsmith.html

    There were many different sites which tested positive with luminol, but luminol tests positive for other things than blood. More sophisticated tests are needed to distinguish between blood and all the other things which show up with luminol, but those tests were never carried out. In short, the luminol tests were inconclusive.

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

    When a luminol solution is sprayed on surfaces, it reacts with metal ions, such as iron, which are stored and transported by hemoglobin cells (red blood cells). Very discrete iron concentrations on a surface, such as 1 part per million, are enough to catalyze luminol's chemi-luminescence (react and cause a glow). However, luminol sensitivity is not blood-specific, and the compound also reacts with other substances, such as saliva, rust, potassium permanganate, animal proteins, vegetable enzymes, and other organic fluids and tissues. Therefore, luminol tests are not conclusive for blood and cannot be admitted for evidence in court.
    http://www.enotes.com/forensic-science/luminol

  29. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Cappuccino For This Useful Post:


  30. #141
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    7,459
    Quote Originally Posted by Silkprint View Post
    The fibers from the boys clothes will be tested better at some point I hope
    Sadly, since only the defense is testing these items (receiving the results) and paying for the testing, anything that points towards guilty of the WM3 is never going to be revealed.

  31. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Pensfan For This Useful Post:


  32. #142
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,291
    Quote Originally Posted by Pensfan View Post
    Sadly, since only the defense is testing these items (receiving the results) and paying for the testing, anything that points towards guilty of the WM3 is never going to be revealed.
    That's why I think this will never be revealed and I wouldn't doubt that it already has been tested. Maybe that is why Lorri has such a funny look on her face.

    A closed case is all the Prosecutor wanted and they got 3-guilty pleas, plus 2 jury convictions of murder. Most cases are settled by a plea of guilt, most do not go to trial.
    “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.”

    ― George Carlin

  33. The Following User Says Thank You to UdbCrzy2 For This Useful Post:


  34. #143
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,752
    Quote Originally Posted by UdbCrzy2 View Post
    A closed case is all the Prosecutor wanted and they got 3-guilty pleas, plus 2 jury convictions of murder. Most cases are settled by a plea of guilt, most do not go to trial.
    Not murder cases.

  35. The Following User Says Thank You to Smelly Squirrel For This Useful Post:


  36. #144
    Just curious, but for those who believe the WMFree are guilty because two juries said so, do you believe that juries always get it right? If that is true, why do we need an appeals process in this country? And, if that is true, then I guess both OJ and Casey Anthony are innocent, right?

  37. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Compassionate Reader For This Useful Post:


  38. #145
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,291
    Quote Originally Posted by Smelly Squirrel View Post
    Not murder cases.
    Yes Smelly, it's true. If you google 'guilty plea' and look under 'news' you will see many murder cases that resulted in a guilty plea. Below I have a link to some stats from US Department of Justice.

    Bureau of Justice Statistics
    http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/dccc.pdf


    Here is another one for you

    About 60% of defendants were convicted of a felony
    Sixty-eight percent of cases adjudicated within one year
    resulted in a conviction. Fifty-nine percent of defendants
    were convicted of a felony, and 9% of a misdemeanor.
    The felony conviction rate was highest for those originally
    charged with motor vehicle theft (74%), followed by drivingrelated offenses (73%), murder (70%), burglary (69%), and
    drug trafficking (67%). Defendants charged with assault
    (45%) had the lowest felony conviction rate.

    Nearly all (97%) convictions obtained during the 1-year
    study period were the result of a guilty plea. Eighty-seven
    percent of guilty pleas were to a felony.


    Seventy-nine percent of trials resulted in a guilty verdict or
    judgment, including 82% of bench trials and 76% of jury
    trials.
    http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fdluc04.pdf
    Last edited by UdbCrzy2; 09-24-2011 at 06:09 AM.
    “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.”

    ― George Carlin

  39. The Following User Says Thank You to UdbCrzy2 For This Useful Post:


  40. #146
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,752
    That report doesn't separate out murder.

  41. The Following User Says Thank You to Smelly Squirrel For This Useful Post:


  42. #147
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    84
    So back to the manhole story, have I missed any statements about TH actually hanging out in manholes? As I said in another post, Deanna mentioned manholes when asked if Damien had any special hiding places.
    http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/holcomb.html

  43. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to h818 For This Useful Post:


  44. #148
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Mass
    Posts
    1,081
    I never knew this either .
    There is always something new. That's why I don't think I will ever feel I am 'well informed' about this case .

    I really don't care about the satanic stuff .
    There are so many religions out there that people could find scary . Alot of teens experiment with that stuff to feel important and they are curious .
    I brought home books on witchcraft from the library as an almost teen and my parents FREAKED out . I only looked at them because I heard someone else talking and wanted to see what it was . No biggie to me but I saw then how people react and it was silly .
    "Don't pee on my head and tell me it's raining" ~Judge Judy

    Revenge is beneath me , but accidents DO happen .

  45. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Silkprint For This Useful Post:


  46. #149
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,291
    Quote Originally Posted by Smelly Squirrel View Post
    That report doesn't separate out murder.
    If you are doing this for a class, shouldn't you be the one doing the research?

    If you look at the rest of the board you will find that some of the murder cases have resulted in a plea of guilt instead of a jury trial. Please take a look around the rest of the board here.

    You can also use Google to search this. Here is a link for you.
    [ame="http://www.google.com/search?aq=f&hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&btnmeta_news_searc h=1&q=murder+and+guilty+plea"]murder and guilty plea - Google Search[/ame]
    “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.”

    ― George Carlin

  47. #150
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    563
    If they were killed in the manhole, wouldnt it have been easier and more convenient to just leave them there. Why tie them up and bring them to the woods.
    All comments are my opinion or observations only.

  48. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Peepers For This Useful Post:


Page 6 of 16 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. What Is Your Theory?
    By SeriouslySearching in forum Deaths of Male College Students/The River Killers
    Replies: 141
    Last Post: 04-08-2014, 08:31 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •