My Theory

In my opinion, the theory is not believable for so many reasons.

*I don't think there is any way that 3 hogtied dead bodies could have been taken out of a manhole. How wide is the opening of this manhole? Maybe 2 feet? Are there pictures of it? I don't think that the boys ever played in the manhole. While the idea would seem very cool to little Ninja Turtle fans, 8 year old boys have big mouths. They would not have kept it secret, they would have bragged to all their friends, who would have begged/demanded to be taken there too. Lots of kids would have known about it.

*If there was enough water in the manhole for the boys to drown in while lying on their backs, why would Stevie pick that as a place to run away to? Would he sleep in the water? All of the boys shoes would have gotten soaked. Their parents would have gotten a little upset about them coming home in soaked shoes and would have demanded to know how they got that way.

*If Stevie was wearing red shorts, why would Terry go to so much trouble to try to change Stevie's clothes? Why wouldn't he have simply told his wife that Stevie came in and changed into red shorts if he did? Or just acted like Stevie must have come in and changed while he was gone/in the bathroom/wherever or gotten them from a friend if questioned about it after the boys were found? There is nothing weird or suspicious about it, I'm sure she would have thought nothing of it. After taking off the shorts and finding the pants too difficult to get back on, why would he think it would be easier or take less time to completely strip all 3 boys? How would animals have been able to injure Stevie's private parts with his clothes still on? You think they crawled under his shorts and underwear? Nevermind the fact that the certified forensic pathologist who saw the injuries in person, not just in pictures, testified that he and his colleagues did not think that they were caused by animal bites.

*How would he have the nerve to return to the manhole with the dead or dying boys in it so many times? There were so many people in the woods, what if someone followed him or caught him? I think he would have stayed as far away as possible while people where searching. Not only would he not want to be caught there, but he would be trying to guide people away from the manhole.

*Why would he need the bodies to be found to get on with life?

The last bit is pretty good, the theory is that the search was called off and everybody went home to sleep and that allowed Hobbs to sneak out and take care of the moving business. But that is very risky, while he might have known Pam was home asleep he wouldn't have known what JMB or the Moores or the police who knew about the missing boys by this point would be doing. Moving dead bodies near where they were last seen and with the police knowing this information is extremely risky. We know now that the police weren't really looking in that area at that time of night, but how could Hobbs possibly know that then?
 
The last bit is pretty good, the theory is that the search was called off and everybody went home to sleep and that allowed Hobbs to sneak out and take care of the moving business. But that is very risky, while he might have known Pam was home asleep he wouldn't have known what JMB or the Moores or the police who knew about the missing boys by this point would be doing. Moving dead bodies near where they were last seen and with the police knowing this information is extremely risky. We know now that the police weren't really looking in that area at that time of night, but how could Hobbs possibly know that then?

Were there alot of wild animals in those woods? I'm thinking not since the boys played in them but was wondering if TH thought perhaps the animals would take care of any evidence of murder and perhaps consume the boys :(
or perhaps he knew by not having the crime scene and only a "dump site" (I hate that expression) most if not all of the evidence of a crime would be missing.
For anyone who doesn't believe the manhole theory, you should really check out the BB. The pictures of the numerous abrasions and contusions totally fit!
 
Were there alot of wild animals in those woods? I'm thinking not since the boys played in them but was wondering if TH thought perhaps the animals would take care of any evidence of murder and perhaps consume the boys :(
or perhaps he knew by not having the crime scene and only a "dump site" (I hate that expression) most if not all of the evidence of a crime would be missing.
For anyone who doesn't believe the manhole theory, you should really check out the BB. The pictures of the numerous abrasions and contusions totally fit!

I found the BB last night and saw the comparison pics. Left no doubt in my mind what caused the abrasions and contusions.
 
I think that heavy wet clothing would actually have aided in keeping the bodies submerged, weighing them down, not causing them to float.

It would, but the clothes themselves would still pull upwards. Wrap something heavy in a piece of cloth and immerse it in water and you'll see what I mean. The heavy thing will be submerged, but the cloth will balloon out and up.

The ditch those children were put in wasn't very deep so I think the other poster might be right about that being the motive for removing the clothes. It could also have been done to stage the crime scene to look like a stranger killing, the same way Doug Mouser did to his stepdaughter after he killed her in temper.
 
I really don't know much at all about this case but I did watch the interview with TH and yes, he claims he met MB that night for the first time.... He referred to MB as being burly and looking like a Shaggy DA..JMHO

I find that strange that these 3 boys played together and live close to one other,but the parents did not know each other..hmm
 
One of the boys-I am not sure which one-did tell a classmate he was going to his secret hideout in the woods the day they went missing.
As for the reason TH moved the bodies-I really do not think the boys were KILLED INSIDE the manhole,I think they were killed somewhere in the woods and thrown down in the manhole as a hiding spot-the injuries on top of the heads look they came from hitting the bottom of the manhole head first.Th must have used the manhole as a hiding spot until he came back to move them to a spot in the woods and that is when the animals got to the bodies,then TH went to see where everyone was and waited until possibly 5 am to moved them to the creek..it was said TH could have made at lease 3 trips to the woods that night.JMO
I also found out last night that SOMEONE between 2007-2011-I think-there is so may dates I may make a tiny mistake,but anyways..someone did a repair job on the manhole and no one can figure who or why..the repair was in one spot-not whole manhole..I found that to be interesting.
I am still trying to find out if the manhole has ever been tested with Luminol in the last 18 yrs!
I went to BB and was thinking about why TH would move the bodies-and I know this is going to sound far-fetch but I wanted to get it out there..
Do we know if Stevie has any life insurance on him,maybe TH needed him to be found to claim the money-I know far-fetch
Maybe he wanted them found for the mothers sake-he did not want them going through the trauma of day after day of not knowing or finding where thier sons are,-I know TH does not sounds like a KIND,THOUGHTFUL man,but you never know!
Maybe HE did not want to spend HIS time looking day after day for the boys-he seems kinda lazy to me.
 
We've discussed the whole running away thing on the BB. I am in a minority on that one. I base my belief on Pam saying in an interview somewhere that Stevie kept telling her he loved her that morning before going to school. I've always asked (and I asked Pam's sister, Sheila, who was ambivalent because she didn't live in the house), "What happened between Terry and Stevie on May 4th?" Sheila's best guess was that it could have had something to do with a scout trip that Stevie wanted to go on and Terry was refusing to go. IIRC, his grandfather, Jackie Hicks, Sr., ended up going on the trip.

Some people on the BB believe that Chris was running away, too. That is one explanation for two backpacks. Remember, Mark admits to spanking him that day for something. Maybe it was breaking into the house. IIRC, when Chris got home, no one was there. Mark was gone to take Ryan to be a witness at court in a hit-and-run case. I'm not sure where Melissa was. So, Chris broke into the house. When Mark got home, he punished (spanked) Chris for it and told him to clean up the patio and not to leave it. He went back to pick Ryan up. While he was gone, Melissa became inattentive and Chris left, leaving his skateboard in the street for Ryan to find later. So, Chris could have been angry with Mark and decided to join Stevie in running away.

There are so many layers to this thing that it's unbelievable. However, I'm not totally "sold" on the whole running away idea. I just saw it as an explanation for the backpacks. Like someone (Nova ?) said, you try to explain every little thing when you come up with a theory. Some of the things that happened (like possibly Mr. Bojangles) could just be some of life's weird coincidences.

Now I might be opening up a can of worms. Is everyone aware of the Warford affidavit? Is this something that anyone would like to discuss?

Lloyd Warford is an attorney who swore out an affidavit that remained sealed for some time in which he claims that Kent Arnold, the jury foreman in the Echols/Baldwin trial, illegally introduced Jessie's 6/3 statements into the deliberation. Since Jessie had refused to testify against Damien and Jason, Burnett (in a fit of sanity) had ruled that Jessie's statement was inadmissible. Apparently, Arnold felt otherwise.

Here's a link to the affidavit:

http://wm3org.typepad.com/blog/2010/10/affidavit-of-lloyd-warford-.html

(BTW, if anyone has a better version of this, please provide a link.)

ETA: This affidavit is the basis of the jury misconduct issues in the case. It's one of the things that Judge Laser was supposed to decide as part of the evidentiary hearing. It's really a moot point now, but it is another example of the problems with the criminal justice system in Arkansas.


CR-I remember hearing about this and I was not a happy camper with that juror!
 
Were there alot of wild animals in those woods? I'm thinking not since the boys played in them but was wondering if TH thought perhaps the animals would take care of any evidence of murder and perhaps consume the boys :(
or perhaps he knew by not having the crime scene and only a "dump site" (I hate that expression) most if not all of the evidence of a crime would be missing.
For anyone who doesn't believe the manhole theory, you should really check out the BB. The pictures of the numerous abrasions and contusions totally fit!

Well I think they fit because they do resemble things like rebar patterns, but it is far from definitive that thats what they are. Its easier to see the patterns once its pointed out to you also, but I've seen other don't buy the manhole theory make different overlays that show they very well might not be rebar patterns... its just to vague to say one way or the other.
 
I found the BB last night and saw the comparison pics. Left no doubt in my mind what caused the abrasions and contusions.

Do some more research though before buying everything you read on BB. While in the long run I think many of the members there have good intentions I just really question the intentions by some of the main players over there.
 
I'm not going to say a lot about this, but the BB has recently suffered some problems. I trust the facts there. However, there are unfortunately some political maneuverings going on that I dislike intensely!

Just a couple of things:

1) As to the red shorts, Pam told LE when the missing persons report was filed that Stevie was wearing jeans. As was pointed out, one of the few things that Terry Hobbs has been consistent about is that he did not see the boys at all. However, if he is the murderer, he knew that Stevie had on red shorts. If the house was locked when they left at 4:45 to take Pam to work, how could the red shorts be explained? That's why I believe he took Stevie's jeans to the site and tried to change his clothes. Remember, both Michael's and Chris' pants were found inside out while Stevie's pants were found right side out.

2) Amanda is a sad story. She has been in trouble with the law since becoming an adult. She has children, and I believe that Pam is basically raising them. She was only 4 years old at the time this all happened, and I'm sure that all the ensuing events have hurt her tremendously. She claims that Terry didn't do it, but, like I said, she was only four at the time. As to where she was during all of the machinations, most of the time she was probably with the Jacoby's. Some of the time Terry could have just left her in the car (when he just made a quick check on things). Once Pam got home (9:30), obviously she was with Pam. Also, Pam's parents came to help in the search. They, or at least Pam's mother, Marie, could have helped take care of her. However, during the critical time of the murder, I believe that she was with Jacoby and/or his wife.

3) (I know I said a couple, but I just thought of something else; sue me!) Pam has stated in an interview somewhere that Michael and Stevie had been friends for quite some time. Chris was a more or less recent edition to the circle because he had a crush on Amanda. That could explain why Terry and JMB had never met before. Even in a small town, there are people that you don't know!
 
Question for Compassionate Reader or anyone that might know something.......

I read something the other day that I hadn’t heard before (sorry don’t remember where I saw it) the two bikes were said to have had damaged front wheels when they pulled them out of the water if what I read is true. That got me thinking that it MIGHT be possible that the boys were hit by a car head on and maybe even intentionally in order to knock them off the bikes. Just a thought and I wondered if you had been involved in any discussions about how or why the bikes were in that condition…..
 
Now I might be opening up a can of worms. Is everyone aware of the Warford affidavit? Is this something that anyone would like to discuss?

Lloyd Warford is an attorney who swore out an affidavit that remained sealed for some time in which he claims that Kent Arnold, the jury foreman in the Echols/Baldwin trial, illegally introduced Jessie's 6/3 statements into the deliberation. Since Jessie had refused to testify against Damien and Jason, Burnett (in a fit of sanity) had ruled that Jessie's statement was inadmissible. Apparently, Arnold felt otherwise.

Here's a link to the affidavit:

http://wm3org.typepad.com/blog/2010/10/affidavit-of-lloyd-warford-.html

(BTW, if anyone has a better version of this, please provide a link.)

ETA: This affidavit is the basis of the jury misconduct issues in the case. It's one of the things that Judge Laser was supposed to decide as part of the evidentiary hearing. It's really a moot point now, but it is another example of the problems with the criminal justice system in Arkansas.

I'll jump into this can of worms with you!

As I've stated ad nauseum, I'm sitting firmly on the fence. However, my contention for a new trial has always been this. Yes, there's DNA testing. Yes, there's possibly new evidence. But juror misconduct and ONLY juror misconduct is the reason I believe the 3 deserved a new trial AT THIS POINT. I'm still researching this case along with a myriad of other things called life right now. And I admit that I don't know NEAR the amount of info that you guys do. I'm still reading and learning. But, when I read this affidavit, well...it really p****d me off. This is the only reason that I'm fine with 3 convicted killers (and they are convicted killers regardless of innocence or guilt) walking the streets today. At least until I can get off this dang fence on one side or the other! :)
 
That's why I believe he took Stevie's jeans to the site and tried to change his clothes. Remember, both Michael's and Chris' pants were found inside out while Stevie's pants were found right side out.

Were Stevie's pants still zipped/buttoned like the inside out pants? TIA!
 
One of the boys-I am not sure which one-did tell a classmate he was going to his secret hideout in the woods the day they went missing.
As for the reason TH moved the bodies-I really do not think the boys were KILLED INSIDE the manhole,I think they were killed somewhere in the woods and thrown down in the manhole as a hiding spot-the injuries on top of the heads look they came from hitting the bottom of the manhole head first.Th must have used the manhole as a hiding spot until he came back to move them to a spot in the woods and that is when the animals got to the bodies,then TH went to see where everyone was and waited until possibly 5 am to moved them to the creek..it was said TH could have made at lease 3 trips to the woods that night.JMO
I also found out last night that SOMEONE between 2007-2011-I think-there is so may dates I may make a tiny mistake,but anyways..someone did a repair job on the manhole and no one can figure who or why..the repair was in one spot-not whole manhole..I found that to be interesting.
I am still trying to find out if the manhole has ever been tested with Luminol in the last 18 yrs!
I went to BB and was thinking about why TH would move the bodies-and I know this is going to sound far-fetch but I wanted to get it out there..
Do we know if Stevie has any life insurance on him,maybe TH needed him to be found to claim the money-I know far-fetch
Maybe he wanted them found for the mothers sake-he did not want them going through the trauma of day after day of not knowing or finding where thier sons are,-I know TH does not sounds like a KIND,THOUGHTFUL man,but you never know!
Maybe HE did not want to spend HIS time looking day after day for the boys-he seems kinda lazy to me.
To an 8 year old, a secret hideout could be a big tree or small clearing, behind a dumpster, a pile of leaves, any place really. I'd think a hideout as cool as a ninja turtle manhole would be described to all of their friends. I have a young son and he would never be able to keep something like that to himself. Kids that age might keep it from parents, but not from other kids.
Is there confirmation and specifics as to the repairs made to the manhole? Has it ever been officially searched? Are there any pictures of this specific manhole, the outside and/or the inside, specifically the ladder and the opening? I understand that there were multiple manholes in the area. I do not think one person could have possibly gotten 3 hogtied boys out of the manhole unless the opening was a lot wider than any manhole I've seen. I honestly don't think 2 or 3 people could have done it without a lot more trauma to the boys.

I don't think life insurance was collected on any of the boys. I don't think Terry would risk getting caught moving his murder victims in order to spare his wife trauma. Nothing about the way the boys were found would give the parents reason to think that they weren't tortured. I obviously never knew these children or their families, but it still causes me real physical pain to read about what was done to them.

I'm not going to say a lot about this, but the BB has recently suffered some problems. I trust the facts there. However, there are unfortunately some political maneuverings going on that I dislike intensely!

Just a couple of things:

1) As to the red shorts, Pam told LE when the missing persons report was filed that Stevie was wearing jeans. As was pointed out, one of the few things that Terry Hobbs has been consistent about is that he did not see the boys at all. However, if he is the murderer, he knew that Stevie had on red shorts. If the house was locked when they left at 4:45 to take Pam to work, how could the red shorts be explained? That's why I believe he took Stevie's jeans to the site and tried to change his clothes. Remember, both Michael's and Chris' pants were found inside out while Stevie's pants were found right side out.

2) Amanda is a sad story. She has been in trouble with the law since becoming an adult. She has children, and I believe that Pam is basically raising them. She was only 4 years old at the time this all happened, and I'm sure that all the ensuing events have hurt her tremendously. She claims that Terry didn't do it, but, like I said, she was only four at the time. As to where she was during all of the machinations, most of the time she was probably with the Jacoby's. Some of the time Terry could have just left her in the car (when he just made a quick check on things). Once Pam got home (9:30), obviously she was with Pam. Also, Pam's parents came to help in the search. They, or at least Pam's mother, Marie, could have helped take care of her. However, during the critical time of the murder, I believe that she was with Jacoby and/or his wife.

3) (I know I said a couple, but I just thought of something else; sue me!) Pam has stated in an interview somewhere that Michael and Stevie had been friends for quite some time. Chris was a more or less recent edition to the circle because he had a crush on Amanda. That could explain why Terry and JMB had never met before. Even in a small town, there are people that you don't know!
Did Pam or Terry say the door was left locked? I'd think they'd leave it unlocked for Stevie, in case he came home while they were gone.

Has Amanda spoken about what was going on that evening? I've forgotten how old she was, but the police should have interviewed her.

I don't find it at all hard to believe that TH and JMB had never met. There are a lot of parents out there who see no need to meet their kids' friend's parents.

I'll jump into this can of worms with you!

As I've stated ad nauseum, I'm sitting firmly on the fence. However, my contention for a new trial has always been this. Yes, there's DNA testing. Yes, there's possibly new evidence. But juror misconduct and ONLY juror misconduct is the reason I believe the 3 deserved a new trial AT THIS POINT. I'm still researching this case along with a myriad of other things called life right now. And I admit that I don't know NEAR the amount of info that you guys do. I'm still reading and learning. But, when I read this affidavit, well...it really p****d me off. This is the only reason that I'm fine with 3 convicted killers (and they are convicted killers regardless of innocence or guilt) walking the streets today. At least until I can get off this dang fence on one side or the other! :)
They should have gotten new trials based on that. It stinks that the prosecutor decided to let them go free rather than attempting a new trial. I think they are guilty, but I'd rather see them retried and found not guilty than allowed to go free with an alford plea. The state didn't want to spend the money, and now if DNA to match the convicted is found, I don't think their defense is going to share that info.
 
It would, but the clothes themselves would still pull upwards. Wrap something heavy in a piece of cloth and immerse it in water and you'll see what I mean. The heavy thing will be submerged, but the cloth will balloon out and up.

The ditch those children were put in wasn't very deep so I think the other poster might be right about that being the motive for removing the clothes. It could also have been done to stage the crime scene to look like a stranger killing, the same way Doug Mouser did to his stepdaughter after he killed her in temper.

They wouldn't pull upward for very long, just until they had absorbed a bit of water. If they laid in a manhole for hours with enough water to drown them while lying on their backs as the theory says, their clothes would have been fully soaked.
 
Question for Compassionate Reader or anyone that might know something.......

I read something the other day that I hadn’t heard before (sorry don’t remember where I saw it) the two bikes were said to have had damaged front wheels when they pulled them out of the water if what I read is true. That got me thinking that it MIGHT be possible that the boys were hit by a car head on and maybe even intentionally in order to knock them off the bikes. Just a thought and I wondered if you had been involved in any discussions about how or why the bikes were in that condition…..

I've not heard/read that report. It's an interesting theory, but I can't add to your query.
 
There are pics of the a manhole and its repairs and paint job done on it at BB under the STRANGE thread.
I hope I did not sound insenstive when I wrote TH threw the boys in the manhole as I would never say anything that would hurt anyone here at WS or BB or anywhere on the net.I am sorry if I sounded that way.I was just trying to get an understanding of what happened to them.I am sad that they had to go through what they did and not get to live their lives out to adulthood.I really want justice for them and hope to god the real killer is caught someday or we at least find out the truth.
 
Thanks, I found it. Wish there were pictures of the inside. I definitely do not think TH could have gotten the boys out of that opening in the manner described in the op theory.
 
I have watched a couple of documentaries on this case, but that's pretty much all I've done until last couple of days. To be honest, I believed the WM3 were wrongly convicted but that they would get no reprieve. Thank goodness they are getting another chance.

After reading here, I'm learning so many new things about the circumstances surrounding this case and as always appreciate the postings of those who have spent much time researching facts and documents.

Just a couple of thoughts on CR's theory. I didn't know quite what to think about the whole TH going to the manhole and getting after Stevie and his two friends. If he was hitting them, wouldn't it be kind of difficult for one man to control 3 kids? Then again, if TH was abusive to Stevie and the other two boys knew about it they may have been too afraid or stunned to act quickly enough. I'm not sure I understand the extent of the injuries to the boys. Did they die from being beaten or did they drown in the 6 inches of water? If I understand the theory correctly, the beating occurred around 6:30 or 7pm? And then TH left the kids, who are assumed to just be unconcious, for nearly 2 hours before going back to check, and when he went back they were all dead? They must have all had serious head trauma. Then when TH found them dead, he started the process of tying up and moving the bodies?

OK, I, too, find it somewhat of a leap to think he's carrying the bodies up a ladder, then about 200 yards away. 2 football field lenghts is not a short distance in that situation. The idea of a second adult seems quite plausible, but who would it be? This bojangles person--perhaps TH found some homeless guy and offered to pay him to help him out. The guy accepts and assists TH in the staging of the crime/body moving thing. Afterwards, TH shoots the guy. But why wouldn't the dude tell someone in the restaurant? Perhaps he thought he would end up in jail so he kept his mouth shut, but then he disappeared. IDK, obviously, I'm just throwing ideas out. I haven't read this entire thread yet, and have yet to visit any of the suggested websites for transcripts. Does LE now have TH DNA and is that how they know the hairs belong to him? At what point did TH give up his DNA, and was a court order necessary to get it from him? The clothing thing is kind of weird. Some of the stuff seems like it doesn't make a lot of sense, but then again, a person who has killed 3 children cannot possibly be a rational person. Sorry for the long post, I'm just trying to get my thoughts together and more clear.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
145
Guests online
866
Total visitors
1,011

Forum statistics

Threads
589,930
Messages
17,927,814
Members
228,004
Latest member
CarpSleuth
Back
Top