I got in contact with the West Memphis P.D.

I just finished reading http://www.amazon.com/Murder-Room-Sherlock-Holmes-Perplexing/dp/1592406351/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1415394236&sr=1-1&keywords=the+murder+room and had an idea, but I made a mistake.

I spoke with a detective about getting this group, The Vidocq Society (TVS), on the case of the Robin Hood Hills Murders. The Vidocq Society works, pro bono, on cold (murder) cases that are at least two years old. They do not seek out cases though, cases need to be presented to them and they then decide if they will take up the case. Have you discovered my error?

The detective informed me the case is no longer cold. Duh, I say to myself, the Alford Plea, of course. So the problem is this. If you believe, as I do, that the West Memphis 3 are innocent, then the WMPD will never take up the case again because it is closed. This is an injustice to the victims and their families :banghead:

I will try to contact TVS and ask them if any of them have gone over the case on their own and would be willing to share any information with me. I read some of John Douglas's opinions, but more information would be better.

The parents of these boys need closure before they pass. From what I have read, they all, or most, feel the WM3 are innocent. At least one of the parents has died and that pains me.

One last thing. The detective did tell me that the case could be re-opened if the prosecutor decided to do so. Certainly, the prosecutor needs compelling evidence to do this. This is where TVS could come in handy, but again, it is not considered a cold case. If anyone has any suggestions on getting the prosecutor to re-open the case, I would be willing to contact him/her if I feel the suggestion is reasonable.

I've said it over and over again. Ellington is the key. When Damien, Jason and Jessie were released, he told everyone that any and all new evidence should be submitted to the defense. Supposedly, what would happen then would be that, once "compelling evidence" came to light, the defense would present it to Ellington. Then, he and he alone would be charged with reopening the case. I don't know about you, but I think that the new bite mark evidence is pretty "compelling" and I know that it has been presented to the defense. However, nothing happened. So, Dr. Cowart went "public" with that evidence. (It is in the "Viable Suspect: Terry Hobbs" thread.) So, I have deduced that either the defense has no desire to continue with this case (highly unlikely) or Ellington is sitting on the bite mark evidence. One other possibility is that Ellington has determined (based on what I know not) that the bite mark evidence is not "compelling" enough to warrant reopening the case.

That leads us to another conundrum in this case. Some time back, PH and JMB, through attorney Ken Swindle, brought an FOIA action against the wmpd demanding that, since the case was closed, the evidence be returned to them. The suit was dismissed. That means, IMO, that either the case is not closed or the State of Arkansas does not want it reopened for some political reason. Given the fact that Arkansas just elected a new governor from a differing party, I believe that there may be some hope. Obviously, we can't petition the Governor for a pardon. That action would have to be instituted by the falsely-convicted men. However, IMO, we don't want a pardon. We want the case reopened if it is closed and TH investigated as a viable suspect, if the case is, in fact open. That's where things stand now. The newly-elected governor takes office in January as does a new Senator (not sure what he can do, though). I'm thinking that the best course of action would be to petition the Governor (in January or February) to reopen the case (if it is, in fact, closed) or to order the investigation of TH through Executive Action.

There are a couple of other facts that need to be brought to light. First, Ellington agreed to run all DNA evidence through CODIS once it was all in. So, if the case is closed, where are the results of that testing? If the case isn't closed, why is false information being disseminated? Second, the Attorney General of Arkansas (McDaniel) didn't stand for re-election. I believe it was because he couldn't due to term limits (although there was a sex scandal in which he was involved). The new Attorney General (again, taking office in January) is Republican as is the new Governor. Since the old AG and Governor are Democrats, it's possible that the new ones would be willing to look at this case as a way to embarrass their outgoing political foes.

The long and the short of it is - January or February might be a good time to "do something" about all of this, IMHO.

Yeah! TVS would have been great! A shame they cannot be asked to consider a case that leaves the main suspect free! That case has not gone 'cold' it never even reached the starting line.

As CR says, the key to this is with the DA, Prosecutor Ellington. Some, including me, had great hopes in him. Something tells me that, on getting to sit behind his new desk and get briefed he learnt something that put him off even pretending to try to achieve justice in this case!

Whether a new Governor and AG will be of help is to be seen. I just hope that possible documents relating to this case are not destroyed in the time it takes for them to start their new jobs - January? Mad! Lots of leeway for corrupt practices.

Who is the new AG? I thought that one of the candidates got kicked out on the grounds of 'voter fraud' - registered for voting in too many other places and not in AR!

It is a great shame that, given the political climate of America at the moment and the very nature of the mid-terms, that no republican supporters got their guys to bring up the very peculiar use of the Alford Plea. When I tried to push that idea I was rather firmly told that it was a bad time to contact politicians as they were in the run up to the elections. That is exactly the time to raise hot issues! I gather the turn out was not that high and that many do not 'hold with politics'. Sad. This case has too many hints of political expediency in my view.

The FOI suit was not to get evidence back so much as it was to be allowed to see the evidence! Neither of the two had ever been asked to identify any of the clothing found as belonging to which kid. Also, had they been allowed to see it it would indicate the case was considered closed, denied the chance...then not closed.

Unfortuantely the results of the suit were muddled in that one party saying still might be on-going whilst another saying it was closed. Anyway they were not given any access at all. Very odd.

I think that the wmpd were more frightened about what might NOT be there than them seeing anything that did not make sense! But nothing to back this feeling up.

What the suit did reveal was that Ellington was not doing as he said he would, in terms of following up on any possible new leads.

Early on Pam had made some comment that if they were finished with Stevie's bike she would not mind having it back for his sister's children to use - she had custody of them back then. I think she still does, but not sure.

Thw whole situation was a farce given how many 'totally-unconnected-to-the-case' people had been allowed in to see evidence before! But thank goodness we have cally's as a resource!

AGettler said:

I got in contact with the West Memphis P.D.

Click to expand...

That's a really good move, you deserve credit for that!!

"I got in contact with the West Memphis P.D."

Sooooo, I just want to be clear on this , Did you get any indication in the voice tone that any other avenue other than the WM3 would be considered, Im gonna go with "no"

sloane7777 said:

"I got in contact with the West Memphis P.D."

Sooooo, I just want to be clear on this , Did you get any indication in the voice tone that any other avenue other than the WM3 would be considered, Im gonna go with "no"

Click to expand...

No. At first I got the impression that the detective was surprised I called and perhaps he was a little blunt (annoyed?) about the case being closed. It was then I realized the Alford Plea was in effect with the WM3 and I apologized to him for not remembering this. After that, he was friendly and told me about only the prosecutor can re-open the case. In the meantime, no work on behalf of the WMPD is being done on this case according to him.

Cher Lockhomes said:

That's a really good move, you deserve credit for that!!

Click to expand...

Thank you This case, and I am sure it is the same with most of us, bothers me to no end and I want resolution.

On a side note, I have a call in with the Jon Benet Ramsey hotline to recommend the Vidoq Society as well. They have not returned my call :gaah:

AGettler said:

Thank you This case, and I am sure it is the same with most of us, bothers me to no end and I want resolution.

On a side note, I have a call in with the Jon Benet Ramsey hotline to recommend the Vidoq Society as well. They have not returned my call :gaah:

Click to expand...

I am surprised they have never been asked on these two cases!

sloane7777 said:

I am surprised they have never been asked on these two cases!

Click to expand...

I'm not. LE has to invite them. No LE dept who have so monumentally effed a case up wants a roomful of revered experts pawing their trash. Snowball's chance in hades of VIDOCQ *ever* getting an invite from either, IMO.

About as much chance as anyone living to witness that prosecutor man up and do the right thing.

Ausgirl said:

I'm not. LE has to invite them. No LE dept who have so monumentally effed a case up wants a roomful of revered experts pawing their trash. Snowball's chance in hades of VIDOCQ *ever* getting an invite from either, IMO.

About as much chance as anyone living to witness that prosecutor man up and do the right thing.

Click to expand...

I believe Ausgirl is correct. Vidocq would be able to point out how awful the investigations were and the cops don't want that. The detective in charge of the JB Ramsay case was a narcotics detective, not a homicide detective if I recall John Douglass' words correctly.

This case will never be reopened. The murderer could walk in to the PD and confess and they would say "this case has been solved already, have a nice day..."

MzOpinion8d said:

This case will never be reopened. The murderer could walk in to the PD and confess and they would say "this case has been solved already, have a nice day..."

Click to expand...

It worries me to think, this could have already happened. Maybe that's why some people say the WMPD "have to protect THem"

Unless something monumental happened, that would cause enourmous public outrage, I don't think it will ever get re-opened either.

Cher Lockhomes said:

It worries me to think, this could have already happened. Maybe that's why some people say the WMPD "have to protect THem"

Click to expand...

That quote seems to be brought up a lot, not just around here. I don't actually see what's so problematic with it, if we assume that TH is innocent until proven guilty?! I mean, it's a little odd, but not damning?!