What I really don't get is...

New Posts

A

Ausgirl

...
Joined
Sep 16, 2010
Messages
6,487
Reaction score
349
... how there are still people who cannot see that the original investigation and trials were incredibly flawed, therefore the WM3 did not get a fair trial and, really, had no hope of one.

The question of guilt is another thing -- they very well may be guilty, so I get why there's room for argument there. I really do. No worries there.

But... the corruption, the obvious railroading, the tainted jury...

Injustice happened. Arkansas took a sleazy way out of admitting it, via Alford. Now the WM3 are free. The end. What is the --point-- of abject denial of this, when it actually has little to do with the matter of guilt or innocence?
 
:uthere:

Let's stop with the personal and snarky comments.

You know who you are.

tia
fran
 
Ausgirl said:
... how there are still people who cannot see that the original investigation and trials were incredibly flawed, therefore the WM3 did not get a fair trial and, really, had no hope of one.

The question of guilt is another thing -- they very well may be guilty, so I get why there's room for argument there. I really do. No worries there.

But... the corruption, the obvious railroading, the tainted jury...

Injustice happened. Arkansas took a sleazy way out of admitting it, via Alford. Now the WM3 are free. The end. What is the --point-- of abject denial of this, when it actually has little to do with the matter of guilt or innocence?
Click to expand...

I completely agree. The trial was horrible, the evidence was just ludicrous and yet they convicted 3 young men without any real evidence.
I find it scary. I do not know how this prosecution sleeps at night.
 
Well. To be fair, there was a square ton of pressure on the heads of every person connected to this case. I can understand desperate measures, you know?

eta: And Echols and Misskelley -made themselves- really good suspects, thanks to their own cruddy behaviour. Let's not forget that fact (Baldwin was guilty, as the lawyer said, by association, and that's my general opinion there).

But there's a line where it all becomes corrupt.. and I think WMPD had already well and truly crossed that line long before these murders. Never mind the expected sort of behaviour under pressure, and honest-but-slipshod mistakes made. They had some serious rackets going on there, and every reason to want the case tied up fast and the spotlight off them, and some positive press.

There's a quite scary page on jivepuppi's site, with a list of officers involved with the search and the various charges brought against them in months and years to come. Dodgy drug stuff, stolen weapons, a crapton of money... Many lost thier jobs for outright theft, and one was fired (but, mind you, NOT convicted) for demanding sex from a 14 yo girl and making 'terroristic' threats to her, when she didn't want his fat manatee carcass all over hers. Gross. Yeah, that's the guy you want on board your child's murder case.

Just reprehensible, the lot of it. And interesting how many surnames in that article are shared by other POI's in the case. :\

So I'm no longer surprised at some of the underhanded interview tactics, you know? What's that, compared to the rest of what was going on, and all the blind eyes turned for however long they were turned..

The bigger picture may explain a LOT, you know?

Still has nothing to do with actual guilt or innocence, but it is relevant to the reasons the WM3 are currently free, however anyone feels about that.
 
Ausgirl said:
Well. To be fair, there was a square ton of pressure on the heads of every person connected to this case. I can understand desperate measures, you know?

But there's a line where it all becomes corrupt.. and I think WMPD had already well and truly crossed that line long before these murders. Never mind the expected sort of pressure, and honest-but-slipshod mistakes made. They had some serious rackets going on, and every reason to want the case tied up fast and the spotlight off them, and some positive press.

There's a quite scary page on jivepuppi's site, with a list of officers involved with the search and the various charges brought against them in months and years to come. Dodgy drug stuff, stolen weapons, a crapton of money... Many lost thier jobs for outright theft, and one was convicted for demanding sex from a 14 yo girl and making 'terroristic' threats to her, when she didn't want his fat manatee carcass all over hers. Gross. Yeah, that's the guy you want on board your child's murder case.

Just reprehensible, the lot of it.

So I'm no longer surprised at some of the underhanded interview tactics, you know? What's that, compared to the rest of what was going on, and all the blind eyes turned for however long they were turned..

The bigger picture may explain a LOT, you know?

Still has nothing to do with actual guilt or innocence, but it is relevant to the reasons the WM3 are currently free, however anyone feels about that.
Click to expand...

Yes. I remember the case. I remember the need to get it solved but if you don't solve it correctly, and KNOW THAT, How could you not do something to make it right.
 
Ausgirl said:
... how there are still people who cannot see that the original investigation and trials were incredibly flawed, therefore the WM3 did not get a fair trial and, really, had no hope of one.
Click to expand...
While I've seen flaws in the original investigation and trials evidenced beyond any reasonable doubt, I've not seen them evidenced to the extent that they support the conclusion that the three didn't get fair trials. However, I don't know how to address such snide attacks on those of us who do believe the three were rightly convicted as being in "abject denial" without my response being taken personally.
 
They did not get fair trials. The fact that they were all convicted with not one direct piece of evidence shows the railroad effect.. They wanted someone in jail quick and they got it.
 
Echols was a POI for some really good reasons, too. Jessie also, if not so obvious, he liked to pick on smaller kids and had a temper plus some quick fists..

There's for sure two sides, but there's a lot that wasn't right about the process that put them in jail, and ended up in an Alford plea. Even guilty men deserve a clean investigation and a fair trial.
 
ScarlettScarpetta said:
The fact that they were all convicted with not one direct piece of evidence shows the railroad effect..
Click to expand...
They were in fact each convinced using both direct and circumstantial evidence, as deputy prosecutor Melanie Alsworth explained at the Alford plea hearing:

MS. ALSWORTH: -- the Court can make
13 findings.
14 Your Honor, as far as the circumstantial
15 evidence is concerned, the autopsy reports on
16 the victims showed that there were many injuries
17 that were consistent with multiple weapons being
18 used. One was a sharp object, such as a knife.
19 One weapon was consistent with the size of a
20 broom handle. One weapon was large and blunt.
21 Additional observations were the knots that
22 were used to bind the victims. The knots were
23 of three different types, indicating that more
24 than one person was involved.
25 Your Honor, I believe that there was

26
1 evidence collected in the form of fibers from
2 some of the victims' clothing at the scene that
3 was subsequently compared to fibers taken from
4 two of the defendants' homes that were
5 microscopically similar to the fibers collected
6 from the victims' clothing.
7 Also, Your Honor, there was a knife that
8 was found in the lake behind Mr. Baldwin's
9 residence. This knife was a survival-type
10 knife. Believe that the testimony could
11 possibly establish that the pattern of the knife
12 was consistent with some of the injuries on the
13 victims. Testimony from the State would
14 establish that Mr. Echols was known to carry a
15 knife very similar to this, with the only
16 exception on the end of his knife was a compass
17 that was not present on the knife that was
18 recovered from the lake.
19 Your Honor, as far as the direct evidence
20 is concerned, would point the Court to the
21 statements that the State would introduce that
22 were allegedly made by Mr. Echols, admitting his
23 involvement in this case, which was overheard by
24 girls at a softball game.
25 Regarding Mr. Baldwin, he allegedly made a

27
1 statement while he was in juvenile detention to
2 another detainee in Craighead County.
3 And with Mr. Misskelley, he made statements
4 to law enforcement officers after he was
5 Mirandized, implicating himself in these crimes.
6 The facts from Mr. Misskelley's statement and
7 what we allege Mr. Baldwin's statement to be are
8 consistent with the actual evidence in the case
9 and we'd ask you to consider those as well.
Click to expand...
 
Ausgirl said:
... how there are still people who cannot see that the original investigation and trials were incredibly flawed, therefore the WM3 did not get a fair trial and, really, had no hope of one.

The question of guilt is another thing -- they very well may be guilty, so I get why there's room for argument there. I really do. No worries there.

But... the corruption, the obvious railroading, the tainted jury...

Injustice happened. Arkansas took a sleazy way out of admitting it, via Alford. Now the WM3 are free. The end. What is the --point-- of abject denial of this, when it actually has little to do with the matter of guilt or innocence?
Click to expand...

It's a mindset Aus and no words said here are going to change that. Such persons have to be right in all regards and the other person has to be wrong in all regards, regardless of what the point is or how well established that point is. For that person, it is not about critically analyzing facts but it is more about I'm right, you're wrong. There is no changing it and therefore no sense fighting it. Just my take on it.

BTW - Your ability to look at all sides, accept all possibilities and analyze facts from that basis is a breath of fresh air.
 
Ausgirl said:
Well. To be fair, there was a square ton of pressure on the heads of every person connected to this case. I can understand desperate measures, you know?

eta: And Echols and Misskelley -made themselves- really good suspects, thanks to their own cruddy behaviour. Let's not forget that fact (Baldwin was guilty, as the lawyer said, by association, and that's my general opinion there).

But there's a line where it all becomes corrupt.. and I think WMPD had already well and truly crossed that line long before these murders. Never mind the expected sort of behaviour under pressure, and honest-but-slipshod mistakes made. They had some serious rackets going on there, and every reason to want the case tied up fast and the spotlight off them, and some positive press.

There's a quite scary page on jivepuppi's site, with a list of officers involved with the search and the various charges brought against them in months and years to come. Dodgy drug stuff, stolen weapons, a crapton of money... Many lost thier jobs for outright theft, and one was fired (but, mind you, NOT convicted) for demanding sex from a 14 yo girl and making 'terroristic' threats to her, when she didn't want his fat manatee carcass all over hers. Gross. Yeah, that's the guy you want on board your child's murder case.

Just reprehensible, the lot of it. And interesting how many surnames in that article are shared by other POI's in the case. :\

So I'm no longer surprised at some of the underhanded interview tactics, you know? What's that, compared to the rest of what was going on, and all the blind eyes turned for however long they were turned..

The bigger picture may explain a LOT, you know?

Still has nothing to do with actual guilt or innocence, but it is relevant to the reasons the WM3 are currently free, however anyone feels about that.
Click to expand...

I Agree with everything Ausie you just hit the nail on the head!
 
Ausgirl said:
Echols was a POI for some really good reasons, too. Jessie also, if not so obvious, he liked to pick on smaller kids and had a temper plus some quick fists..

There's for sure two sides, but there's a lot that wasn't right about the process that put them in jail, and ended up in an Alford plea. Even guilty men deserve a clean investigation and a fair trial.
Click to expand...

This is true. I really applaud your efforts in this case.

My problem is that without a fair trial there is no justice. There is not justice in the case nor will there be until there is a real investigation into the evidence in this case.
 
ScarlettScarpetta said:
This is true. I really applaud your efforts in this case.

My problem is that without a fair trial there is no justice. There is not justice in the case nor will there be until there is a real investigation into the evidence in this case.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

We can't have that now because the men responsible have plead guilty and there is no ongoing investigation. The defense/defendants claim they are still investigating, but we haven't seen any evidence other than witnesses recanting for some reason.

I think they like the propaganda and it has been very lucrative for them to continue with this 'who did it' because they are making tons of money.
 
UdbCrzy2 said:
Exactly.

We can't have that now because the men responsible have plead guilty and there is no ongoing investigation. The defense/defendants claim they are still investigating, but we haven't seen any evidence other than witnesses recanting for some reason.

I think they like the propaganda and it has been very lucrative for them to continue with this 'who did it' because they are making tons of money.
Click to expand...

In your opinion. They did plead guilty but they maintained their innocence. And it is now up to the prosecutor to make sure justice is served. Not them. They should be ashamed for that trial and what they used as evidence.
 
ScarlettScarpetta said:
In your opinion. They did plead guilty but they maintained their innocence. And it is now up to the prosecutor to make sure justice is served. Not them. They should be ashamed for that trial and what they used as evidence.
Click to expand...

Why didn't they go to trial instead of pleading guilty since they claim to have evidence to prove them innocent?
 
UdbCrzy2 said:
Why didn't they go to trial instead of pleading guilty since they claim to have evidence to prove them innocent?
Click to expand...

I don't know. But I think that if I had been in prison for 18 years, I think I would just want out at that time. They already know they are up against a corrupt system down there. More interested in saving face than the truth.
 
reedus23 said:
Such persons have to be right in all regards and the other person has to be wrong in all regards, regardless of what the point is or how well established that point is. For that person, it is not about critically analyzing facts but it is more about I'm right, you're wrong.
Click to expand...
The vanity you describe certainly explains the snide attack on those of us who believe the three were rightly convicted which is the basis of this thread, particularly given the utter lack of evidence presented to support the charge which subverts any possibility for critical analysis of argument.

reedus23 said:
There is no changing it and therefore no sense fighting it.
Click to expand...
Such defeatism only allows things to change for the worse, and cheering on those who insist on imagining they are right in aversion to any rational analysis of evidence to the contrary only serves to fuel such change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 91 more.
Total: 3,927 (members: 92, guests: 3,835)

Online statistics

Members online
92
Guests online
3,835
Total visitors
3,927
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,189
Messages
17,964,851
Members
228,714
Latest member
hannahdunnam
Back
Top