West Memphis Three - Geraldo Special Report 1994

New Posts

Mrs G Norris

Mrs G Norris

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
14,077
Reaction score
6,172
Two separate shows, first show between the two trials and once after all were convicted.

1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PskDNX9qRr4
2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qU6oApKMyrM
3 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A23cGFdftxQ
4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAPUvJmqqTs
5 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTsYjBQIMRQ
6 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlSPT73NSX8

Seeing Jack Levin is a highlight .. it is interesting to see Pam and Terry Hobbs together as well as the media reaction to the crime at the time of the trials.

This program was aired between the two trials, and there is talk of the show about whether or not Jessie will testify against Jason and Damien, and what kind of discount in years Jessie could expect if he made a deal with the prosecutors in return for that testimony. The reduction was described as Jessie Snr as ‘substantial’, but more than 20 years.

‘They were discussing about telling the truth’. Jessie Snr. However he maintains he was not there.

In part two you can see Terry Hobbs directly confront Jessie Misskelley Snr. ‘He came out of your home.’ Interesting to see a show produced before the PL movies. Even though sensationalist Geraldo goes right into the satanist theories, the experts on the show point to disturbed teenagers, with ’satanism’ being the ‘excuse’ or ‘justification’ of the crime.

Marginal kids, dropouts, not doing well at home, who felt powerless.

The final comments is that Satanism is used by sadists to glamourise and justify their actions, so the person attributing their behaviour to a ritual cult may or may not believe in so called 'satanism' but uses that to avoid responsibility in a way for their actions, it's not them, it's their 'religion'. Interesting.
 
The 'tabloid' of TV shows! How to whip up a storm of hatred and reduce the chances of a fair trial!

Trial by media whilst events in the court room seem to all be directed towards increasing the number of votes for the next time around.

The mass hysteria back then, which also reached its tentacles across to Europe, was based on ignorance and fear. A potent brew!
 
Imagine they allowed that programme to be aired before two of the defendants had even been tried! Un-frickin-believable.
 
TV ratings and 'entertainment' both trump justice!
 
The first show was obviously recorded between the two trials, but at least according to the transcript on Callahan it wasn't aired until 3/16/1994, which is a couple of days after both sides rested in the Baldwin/Echols trial, the day before the jury rendered their verdict. Anyway, Susie Brewer apparently didn't have much confidence in the claims of Misskelley's having an alibi when she was interviewed there, as she argued "I don't think he did it" rather than insisting he was off wrestling at the time like his shifty-eyed father did. That said, Pam's father was the highlight of the show for me with lines like this one:

Yes, Mr. Misskelley, I didn't get a chance to say anything to you after the trial. But what I say--and I'm talking personally to you. I see a re--repeat--a repeat of a beer-drinking--all I see is--it--what I'm trying to say is it's his raising. I feel sorrier for him than I do for you. You've never done nothing for him. And that's all he ever knew is what he was done. And brother, that's your fault as much as it's his.
Click to expand...

And this response to claims that Misskelley is retarded:

Well, he can think fast enough to do and get out and do what he was doing down there at Mem--West Memphis; drinking his beer and carrying on with the other people. So, you know, it's just like Paul said, in the state of Arkansas, mental retardation starts at an IQ of 65. Seventy-two? We've all got some mental ability, you know? If you want to holler that, then I'm a little bit nuts, too.
Click to expand...

Also, Misskelley Sr. reference to the prosecution's attempt to get his son to testify as "they was talking about telling the truth" mirrors Misskelley Jr.'s comments to his lawyer around the same time:

MISSKELLEY: They told me yesterday, the prosecutors told me, they said if it ain't true, Jessie, don't say it. You know, that's what he told me. He said if it ain't true about you, Damien, or Jason, don't say it.

CROW: Okay.

MISSKELLEY: He said we need to know the truth. That's all we're asking, just to know the truth.
Click to expand...
 
Mrs G Norris said:
Even though sensationalist Geraldo goes right into the satanist theories, the experts on the show point to disturbed teenagers, with ’satanism’ being the ‘excuse’ or ‘justification’ of the crime.

Marginal kids, dropouts, not doing well at home, who felt powerless.

The final comments is that Satanism is used by sadists to glamourise and justify their actions, so the person attributing their behaviour to a ritual cult may or may not believe in so called 'satanism' but uses that to avoid responsibility in a way for their actions, it's not them, it's their 'religion'. Interesting.
Click to expand...

rsbm

^ This actually is quite a sensible observation. I am suitably stunned that it derives from a show hosted by Geraldo.

If there was a potential 'occult motive' for Echols, this would be it.

And it's one of the reasons I do not wholly subscribe to innocence, in his case. (I say Echols alone, as it's him who was all about the 'occult', not that he'd have known occultism if it up and slapped him 'round the earhole, back in '93).

I do see Echols as precisely the sort of kid described. I also see him using other means than his interest in the occult to make himself seem intimidating, all of them rather misguided self-protection mechanisms.

Which is probably why Jerry Driver threw his name out in ten seconds flat as a possible suspect.

The issue of his guilt or innocence is, of course, incredibly more complex than this single issue, but it IS a good point to consider.
 
Ausgirl said:
If there was a potential 'occult motive' for Echols, this would be it.
Click to expand...
That's exactly it. Echols feelings of being powerless motivates him to imagine he empowered himself by through nonsense like drinking blood, being possessed, and communicating with demons as documented in his mental heath records less than five months before he committed the murders. Echols had a rough life and it lead him down a very dark path, and that is how murderers are made regardless of if they take any interest in the occult or otherwise.

My own father wound up killing many children himself in his quest to overcome his feelings of powerlessness from a similarly rough life in a small town. His chosen path was through the establishment though, participating in the slaughter of villages full of people in Vietnam as he eventually confessed to me just around five years ago, though I'd figured as much long before that. Granted, people like to imagine that doing such things in war is completely different, but the underlying motive of empowering oneself is the same, both for the solders who do the murdering and the war profiteers who instigate such conflicts.
 
In my very humble opinion, more cogent arguments as to what would have impelled Echols to commit these crimes in this thread than in the other threads combined. Though I can see how and why "Satanism" or "Occult" motives get thrown into the mix, I think it hurts more than helps the arguments against Echols. It would be much more complex than saying the good book of Satanism says to do it. For me, Echols would be no different than Hobbs or Martin or most others...it is a desire to exert complete control and power over someone and that exists regardless of whether they believe Jesus is our savior or if they believe drinking blood gives power.
 
I avoided the so called 'satanism' aspect of this case for a long time because I thought the argument was inflammatory and off base, but to put it in the context of an image or a cloak a disempowered individual would wear to give themselves cache makes a lot of sense for me, I thought Jack Levin made a lot of sense, he is still alive and commenting on the case it seems, so I'll see what I can dig up: http://www.northeastern.edu/news/2011/08/memphisthree/
 
Other than Jesse's "confession" there is not one shred of evidence to link these 3 to this crime. There was an 'occult' factor here. It was a witch hunt IMO. I'm sure it's clear I have and still am a huge supporter of WM3. I have also indicated in earlier posts I am huge supporter of Damien. I certainly know back then. In the day. In the South. Poor. He did nothing at that time to help his case.
 
I can't see any good in ignoring the more obvious facts of the case and the accused themselves, no matter which side you are on.

To elaborate on that.. I think it odd that people can't see or admit why Echols was a very good suspect. Whether guilty or innocent, he really was up there as a suspect. I am not sure he was the -best- suspect, but he was a good one. Enough so that, if it finally comes out in the wash that he IS guilty, I wouldn't swoon with shock about it.

But Echols made himself a good suspect, so he - quite rightly - was one. If not the best one. ;)
 
Ausgirl said:
I can't see any good in ignoring the more obvious facts of the case and the accused themselves, no matter which side you are on.

To elaborate on that.. I think it odd that people can't see or admit why Echols was a very good suspect. Whether guilty or innocent, he really was up there as a suspect. I am not sure he was the -best- suspect, but he was a good one. Enough so that, if it finally comes out in the wash that he IS guilty, I wouldn't swoon with shock about it.

But Echols made himself a good suspect, so he - quite rightly - was one. If not the best one. ;)
Click to expand...

Likewise, JMB made himself suspect with his behavior, especially as recorded in the second movie. And, as has been stated before, both men now readily admit that their actions made them seem suspicious. Again, however, I am at a loss as to why people can't see that TH should have been considered as a suspect as well.

How many famous murderers have remained free men for extended periods of time simply because they don't look like murderers? So, just because someone's behavior is bizarre doesn't make them a murderer any more than should someone who has exemplary behavior on the surface be dismissed as a suspect based solely on behavior. Crimes require evidence, and so should convictions, especially for murder!
 
JMB would not have become a suspect AFTER being cleared by LE if the directors of PL hadn't made him one.
 
Compassionate Reader said:
So, just because someone's behavior is bizarre doesn't make them a murderer any more than should someone who has exemplary behavior on the surface be dismissed as a suspect based solely on behavior. Crimes require evidence, and so should convictions, especially for murder!
Click to expand...

rsbm

While I agree with you here, mostly, I think there's a difference between 'bizarre' and 'violent' - previous acts of violence are to me an entirely relevant thing to consider.

Mind you, I do think Echols' attacks are a tad girly, aren't they. Fingernails? If he'd done that in MY high school, he'd never have lived down the scorn from the other lads.

My question at this point, I suppose, is not -whether- Echols was prone to violence, but whether the acts he was prone to are on par with the injuries the victims received.

Can Damien be seen, when we look at his previous violent acts, to be capable of inflicting those brutal head injuries?

They are horrific, and it took some force to create them (I am presently looking at those ghastly X and Y scalp lacerations, no mere slap upside the head caused those, that's brute, blunt force - bam! Repeated, hard blows, on more than one victim). And that's just one set of injuries..

It's a bit beyond fingernails.. but on par with the dead dog story (though I am not sure this isn't just a legend, probably started by Echols himself :rolleyes: ) so I am not sure, at this point.
 
Mrs G Norris said:
JMB would not have become a suspect AFTER being cleared by LE if the directors of PL hadn't made him one.
Click to expand...

And they wouldn't have been able to, if he wasn't such a hair trigger tempered, violent *advertiser censored*. :D
 
Mrs G Norris said:
JMB would not have become a suspect AFTER being cleared by LE if the directors of PL hadn't made him one.
Click to expand...

JMB was investigated during the trial because of the Kershaw knife. He was interrogated (not questioned as TH was) during the trial, which was before the movie was released. How did the directors of Paradise Lost make him a suspect? Because they turned over the Kershaw knife? If they hadn't turned over the knife, I think they could have been prosecuted for withholding potential evidence!

If the reference is to the second documentary, yes, the directors did try to make him appear guilty. They did so, IMO, in an attempt to offer up an alternate suspect to Damien, Jason and Jessie. That was part of the purpose of the second documentary. If it led to a further investigation (and ultimate clearing) of JMB, that means that he is cleared, and that is a good thing.

The same cannot be said of Terry Hobbs, however. He has yet to be truly interrogated. However, I am patient. His day will come.
 
I think the exact same strategy is at play with TH as it was with JMB, the idea is as you said to throw up an alternative suspect.
 
It's called scapegoating, and it's deplorable regardless of if it's done to "a hair trigger tempered, violent *advertiser censored*" or otherwise.
 
Mrs G Norris said:
I think the exact same strategy is at play with TH as it was with JMB, the idea is as you said to throw up an alternative suspect.
Click to expand...

However, this "alternative suspect" left biological evidence at the discovery site. IMO, that's a big difference - and justification for investigation, at least! As to "scapegoating," that's what happened to Damien, Jason and Jessie!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 234 more.
Total: 3,765 (members: 235, guests: 3,530)

Online statistics

Members online
235
Guests online
3,530
Total visitors
3,765
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,257
Messages
17,966,366
Members
228,734
Latest member
TexasCuriousMynd
Back
Top