Dog gone.

[Compassionate Reader]

Nova,

I believe you may be onto something. I've often wondered why so many non supporters keep saying that the convictions haven't been overturned in over 17 years like that proves something. Since, except for the few cases where the case went before the Arkansas Supreme Court, all past appeals have been heard by the original trial judge, it was highly unlikely that he would have overturned his own court's actions. I guess it's possible that a casual observer of the case doesn't know that. With the recent jury misconduct allegations, I think it's entirely possible that attitudes in WM are changing now. I believe that so many of the people there really wanted the Three to be guilty because it meant "Case Solved and we can feel safe" because the kids convicted weren't really important. That attitude, plus the "Satanic panic" at the time, were powerful reasons for the original convictions IMO. I hope (and firmly believe) that, with the new evidence that will be presented at the hearing, those attitudes will be changed and justice will finally be served and the Three will be freed. Hopefully, the guilty party will also be incarcerated, too. Those little boys need justice as well as the men in prison.

 

[iluvmua]

I guess Damien, Jessie & Jason STUPIDLY made themselves look Guilty by acting like they did and confessing to something they did not do.

If you did not commit a crime WHY in the World would you confess that you did? even if you were just joking? Most people would not joke about killing three little boys.
and act the way Damien did during his trial?

and How come NONE of the three showed any emotion when all three Guilty verdicts were read? unless they are the emotionless type.


They have the right three, they've had PLENTY of time to arrest Terry Hobbs & his friend, David Jacoby.

 

[Fishmonger Dave]

That's funny. I could have sworn they're still in prison and have lost every appeal since 1996.

Are you seriously not aware that Judge Burnett was reversed on every single point on 11/4/2010 and that the Arkansas Supreme Court has remanded for a hearing where "all" evidence will be considered? http://www.dpdlaw.com/DamienHearing.PDF http://www.dpdlaw.com/JasonHearing.PDF http://www.dpdlaw.com/JessieHearing.PDF

You could'a sworn, huh?

Supporters had a field day with John Mark Byers. Then they moved on to Terry Hobbs as "the real killer".

So Dave, when Hobbs doesn't pan out, who will you go after next? I'm putting my money on Dana Moore. After all, you're running out of stepfathers.

You are, of course, aware that this is a handy way of avoiding the evidence? His DNA ... Jacoby's DNA ... his statements to Nelson about finding the bodies ... the three neighbors who saw with the boys on the day they were killed (in contrast to his claim that he never saw them that day at all) .... his attempts to use Jacoby, Mark and Dana to set up an alibi for him (none of whom back him on the times) .... his open lies during his depositions .... a sneaker print that matches his size .... :liar:

Oh, no, much easier to discuss the fact that some supporters accused Mark. As you know, I didn't - I got a lot of guff for standing up for him, and the same DNA that exonerates the WM3 clears him ... and, oh yeah, is a large piece of the evidence that points to the guy who killed Michael, Stevie and Chris.

I guess Damien, Jessie & Jason STUPIDLY made themselves look Guilty by acting like they did and confessing to something they did not do.

If you did not commit a crime WHY in the World would you confess that you did? even if you were just joking? Most people would not joke about killing three little boys.

Why not ask Jim Trainum, a Washington DC detective who took a false confession and now travels around speaking on the topic? http://www.camajorityreport.com/index.php?module=articles&func=display&aid=2306 (link is funny...you sometimes have to hit it twice, but it works).

Or how about that Jessie's statements have never come anywhere close to aligning with reality and the forensics? http://www.dpdlaw.com/jmstatements.htm Look. Read. Think. :Benny_monkeysmilies

and act the way Damien did during his trial?

Because he was cocky teenager? Because ... well I'd love to know how someone "should" react to being accused of killing three kids?

and How come NONE of the three showed any emotion when all three Guilty verdicts were read? unless they are the emotionless type.

Again, how "should" someone react to be cleared in your books? Hmmm, here's a clue - watch Melanie McGuire as she prays and winces and cries on the reading of the guilty verdict - [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQZnc58mwlg[/ame] (jump to 0:52) . Guess that clears her as far you're concerned? BTW, she's guilty as sin - http://melaniemcguirerightlyconvicted.yuku.com/directory <--- That's a Yuku board I run to ensure her supporters' myths are uncovered. Check it out - see the difference between real evidence and common sense logic that supports a truly guilty, rightful conviction and compare it to the WM3. Or read about Mumia, another guilty XXXX with a deluded supporter movement - http://www.danielfaulkner.com/ .

And round out your reading at the Innocence Project, check out the 230+ DNA exonerations .... almost 1/3 of which involved false confessions. .... which I guess is impossible since "no one would confess to a crime they didn't commit", right? :banghead: http://www.innocenceproject.org/know/Browse-Profiles.php .... or read the cases where false confessions played a part - http://www.innocenceproject.org/understand/False-Confessions.php . Spend a little time educating yourself on the issue - your question ("If you did not commit a crime WHY in the World would you confess that you did?") is legitimate -- but there is an answer to it if you'll take the time to read and understand with an open mind.

They have the right three, they've had PLENTY of time to arrest Terry Hobbs & his friend, David Jacoby.

I've heard talk, but am not convinced there's anywhere near enough evidence to responsibly implicate David Jacoby. And with Hobbs, well, the bell will toll eventually. After the hearings in the spring when the WM3 are released, we'll see what happens.

 

[iluvmua]

So when will the trials be? 2012, 2013??

 

[iluvmua]

Ok, if the WM3 did not kill Stevie, Chris, & Michael and JMB did not do it and Terry Hobbs and his friend did not do it then who did?

 

[Fishmonger Dave]

Ok, if the WM3 did not kill Stevie, Chris, & Michael and JMB did not do it and Terry Hobbs and his friend did not do it then who did?

You can makes a case against five potential people -

1- The WM3. You know the arguments; I won't review them here. There is no "gotcha" item and no piece of "evidence" that stands up to scrutiny.

2 - Mark - based primarily on his behavior, and the Kershaw knife. It's a weak case and one I never bought, but it's an argument. There is no "gotcha" item and no piece of "evidence" that stands up to scrutiny.

3 - Hobbs - You've seen the arguments here and they're on the blackboard in a lot more detail. There's the Jacoby DNA as the biggest piece of forensics and .....

Between these three, by far the strongest case is against Hobbs. Trying to view it objectively as an attorney, I'd say there's probable cause to arrest him and I'd accept a neutral, fair jury's determination (e.g., not one with Kent Arnold or his ilk) as to whether the State can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

If not any of the above, then we're looking at a drifter / serial killer / trucker who was in the area, but I'm leaning (obviously) toward Hobbs - I'll resist the urge to again say why.

So when will the trials be? 2012, 2013??

Hearings (before Judge Laser, not a jury) are expected in April / May 2011. Then the State will have to decide whether to retry or admit they made a mistake in 1993. If no retrial, out by June. (That could obviously change in hearings don't happen until the summer). If retrial, then we're looking at the fall of 2011.


BTW, I don't think McGuire's reaction says she's guilty. The point is that you can't tell from a reaction - you can tell by competent, reliable evidence that stands up to scrutiny.

 

[ziggy]

False confessions: try poor Michael Crowe who confessed to stabbing his little sister in the home while the parents slept down the hall.

I know it's hard to believe but it DOES happen. In order to learn the actual truth you have to be open to all truths. This is one.

Another one is you absolutely cannot tell if a person is guilty by how they react. Some just compartmentalize as a coping mechanism and feel like where they are and what is happening is not real. This happens especially with kids - Did you ever see the King brothers when their verdict was read? A recent interview with them said they just felt like they were in a daze and it wasn't real. That can happend with the guilty and the innocent alike. It's a poor mechanism for detecting the truth about a person.

Teenagers have incredibly poor judgment and make stupid, off-handed and inappropriate comments all the time. When was the last time you hung around any teen age boys being themselves or looked through their texts?

yeah.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Another false confession: the man in Illinois (Fox?) who confessed falsely of murdering his own daughter until DNA exonerated him some months later. IIRC, Illinois ended up paying him a large settlement for false imprisonment.

Another example of lack of reaction on a false guilty verdict: Lindy Chamberlain in Australia ("The dingo took my baby" case) who was convicted partially based on her actions and reactions in court. She was later exonerated when the clothing that she claimed the baby was wearing was found years later. She spent about five years in prison at hard labor and had a child while in prison when she was totally innocent. The people didn't want to lose the tourism at Ayres Rock which they feared would happen if it became known that a dingo killed a baby.

And Ziggy, you're so right about teenagers. As a former teacher, I know how they can act and react. Many times, they conceal their true feelings just so they will look "cool." Anyone who has studied this case for any length of time knows that Damien had a persona to uphold. Yes, it was stupid for him to act like he did at the trial. He freely admits that now. But, teenagers often say and do stupid things. That doesn't make them guilty of murder.

 

[Nova]

I guess Damien, Jessie & Jason STUPIDLY made themselves look Guilty by acting like they did and confessing to something they did not do.

If you did not commit a crime WHY in the World would you confess that you did? even if you were just joking? Most people would not joke about killing three little boys.
and act the way Damien did during his trial?

and How come NONE of the three showed any emotion when all three Guilty verdicts were read? unless they are the emotionless type.


They have the right three, they've had PLENTY of time to arrest Terry Hobbs & his friend, David Jacoby.

Jason never confessed. A cellmate--with much to gain by cooperating--claimed Jason did, that's all. Even prison officials say it didn't happen.

Damien never confessed. Not in any fair sense of the word. He may have made sarcastic comments in front of some other kids, comments that seemed to implicate him in the crime. And why not? He knew he had nothing to do with the murders and wouldn't be convicted.

Jessie confessed to a story fed him by LE, detail by detail, until it matched the forensics known at the time. Trouble is: those forensics have almost all turned out to be false. So Jessie's story matches the known facts now even less than it did in 1994.

 

[Nova]

False confessions: try poor Michael Crowe who confessed to stabbing his little sister in the home while the parents slept down the hall.

I know it's hard to believe but it DOES happen. In order to learn the actual truth you have to be open to all truths. This is one.

Another one is you absolutely cannot tell if a person is guilty by how they react. Some just compartmentalize as a coping mechanism and feel like where they are and what is happening is not real. This happens especially with kids - Did you ever see the King brothers when their verdict was read? A recent interview with them said they just felt like they were in a daze and it wasn't real. That can happend with the guilty and the innocent alike. It's a poor mechanism for detecting the truth about a person.

Teenagers have incredibly poor judgment and make stupid, off-handed and inappropriate comments all the time. When was the last time you hung around any teen age boys being themselves or looked through their texts?

yeah.

(Emphasis added.)

I couldn't agree more with Ziggy here. Whether its the WM3, the Ramseys or Amanda Knox, I ignore all testimony as to how a bereaved person is "supposed to act".

I come from a family where the family business used to be a funeral home. Nobody ever cries over a death (especially not in public), nobody ever acts unnerved. And most oddly, nobody holds funerals; they are seen as "shows" staged for civilians. Fortunately, we've had no suspicious deaths over the years, as I'm sure we'd all look guilty to somebody.

 

[Mary456]

I believe that so many of the people there really wanted the Three to be guilty because it meant "Case Solved and we can feel safe"

But how could they feel safe if the "real killers" were still out there?

Their children could be next.

Even if you believe Dr. Spitz, who testified that large dogs killed the boys, then tied them up and put them in the water, wouldn't you want the right dogs taken into custody?

 

[Mary456]

I believe that so many of the people there really wanted the Three to be guilty because it meant "Case Solved and we can feel safe"

But how could they feel safe if the "real killers" were still out there?

Their children could be next.

Even if you believe Dr. Spitz, the "Godfather of forensic pathology", who testified that large dogs killed the boys, wouldn't you want the right killer - canines taken into custody?

I would.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

IMO, your levity is totally out of place. However, I will address your one semi-serious point. The parents could feel safe if they believed that the right people were in jail. That's why the town clung to the Three as the culprits, and why some people still do. Many in WM now, looking at the newly revealed DNA results and other evidence that has come forth since the original trial, are rethinking their opinions. Unfortunately for those unwilling to look at the new results and/or evidence, their "head in the sand" attitude has allowed the real killer to remain free for over 17 years. There have been no more murders of small boys because the boy the killer wanted to kill is dead. Some of his actions since the murders really give one pause. He left his wife about two weeks after the murders, leaving her to deal with her grief alone. He believed she should "just get over" the death of her son. Later, when he returned and his wife's brother and father found out that he was beating their sister and daughter, he prepared for their impending visit by loading his gun with hollow point bullets and lying in wait for them. He shot his then-brother-in-law who later died of his wounds. He quit his job because he just couldn't stand all the sympathy he was receiving from his coworkers. Later, when his mtDNA was found at the discovery ditch, he told a tale that his wife at the time of the crime (they'd since divorced) refuted of seeing a "black bum" near the discovery ditch on the day of the crime. This IMO is a blatant attempt to cast the blame elsewhere. (Obviously, he got the story from the mysterious Mr. Bojangles who wandered into a nearby restaurant at about 9:00 pm the night of May 5th bleeding and dirty. When the WMPD were called to the scene, the report was taken through the drive-thru window. The manager called the police back to take scrapings of the blood he left in the Ladies' Room, which the WMPD lost.) Finally, in a futile attempt to get people "off my trail" (his own words), he tried unsuccessfully to sue Natalie Maines Pasdar and the Dixie Chicks for defamation of character. This action on his part led to the type of investigation into his character and actions at the time of the crimes that the WMPD should have conducted back in 1993 or 1994. This investigation has brought forth additional testimony and witnesses that further incriminate him in the crimes. It wasn't dogs that killed the boys; it was an enraged stepfather IMO. There is much more hard evidence to support this theory than there is to support the WM3 as the killers.

 

[Mary456]

Jason never confessed. A cellmate--with much to gain by cooperating--claimed Jason did, that's all.

Please clue me in. What has Michael Carson gained from testifying?

 

[Compassionate Reader]

The point is that Carson was told the story by his counselor. Then, when the counselor found out that Carson was going to testify, he went to the defense to tell them that he told Carson what Carson was going to testify Jason told him. Of course, Burnett wouldn't let the defense call the counselor to corroborate this statement so it didn't make it to trial. Carson went to CA and tried to become a police informant there. However, the arrangement didn't last very long because, IIRC, too much of his "information" was later proven to be false.

 

[Mary456]

You are, of course, aware that this is a handy way of avoiding the evidence? His DNA ... Jacoby's DNA

That DNA could also belong to about 90 million other people. There's no match to Hobbs or Jacoby, and you know it, Dave.

the three neighbors who saw with the boys on the day they were killed (in contrast to his claim that he never saw them that day at all)

Let's take a peek at Jamie Ballard's affidavit:

The next day (May 6), I saw Ryan at school...I said something like, "What, I just saw your brother last night playing in my backyard!"

Ryan didn't go to school on May 6th, so she couldn't possibly have told him that she saw Chris the night before. Nor did Ryan relay this bogus conversation to police when questioned about Chris's whereabouts on May 5th.

a sneaker print that matches his (Hobbs') size

You call this evidence against Terry Hobbs? You can't be serious. Ahahahaaaaaa!

 

[Compassionate Reader]

The mitochondrial DNA on the hair found in the ligature binding Michael Moore matched Terry Hobbs to a 97.5% degree of accuracy. That means that only 1.5% of the world's population could have contributed that hair, and that whoever did contribute the hair must have a common maternal ancestor with Terry Hobbs. This person would also have to have been at the site, or have been in contact with someone who later went to the site, on May 5th. The mitochondrial DNA on the hair found on the tree stump near the discovery ditch matched David Jacoby to a 93% degree of accuracy. That means that only 7% of the world's population could have contributed that hair, and that whoever did contribute the hair must have a common maternal ancestor with David Jacoby. This person would also have to have been at the site, or have been in contact with someone who later went to the site, on May 5th. Terry Hobbs admits to having been in and out of those woods all night long on May 5th. David Jacoby admits to having played guitars with Terry Hobbs on the early evening of May 5th. What does that tell you? This and the other information that has come out about TH tells me that TH is responsible for the deaths of those three little boys.

ETA: And the sneaker print is more evidence than they have on the WM3.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

It is not a baseless rumor. Below please find a link to Jason Baldwin's Writ of Error Coram Nobis. If you will begin reading at the bottom of page 9, you will find the information about Michael Carson, and this is the Michael Carson that testified against Jason.

http://www.wm3blackboard.com/forum/index.php?topic=3744.0

 

[Peanut Monkey]

What astounds me about this is the passion of the various factions and how people are so dug into their positions and beliefs.

The so-called evidence against these guys is, at best, fanciful, frivolous, gauzy or merely suspicious. The evidence against the stepfather is more than enough for him to be put on trial - his DNA, his friend's DNA (wow...only a 96% chance it's a match), his history, his timelines, his attempts to create an alibi -- has anyone here who thinks these guys are guilty actually taken the time to read Terry Hobbs' interviews with the West Memphis Police, the Deminsion Films crew, and the depositions he gave in his slander suit? I stopped after a couple of hours because, well, it gets boring - there's no question to this case, no issue, and the only mystery is how people claim that these trials were fair or the result accurate.

I'm just amazed that this debate is continuing and that there isn't a unanimous call to free the guys and arrest the stepfather.

Kudos to the Arkansas Supreme Court for its ruling this fall, and I hope the hearings will not just clear up any questions but will truly clear the names of the these guys.

And I sincerely hope that pride doesn't prevent the State from prosecuting this Terry Hobbs guy, who should NOT be walking around free.

 

[iluvmua]

I don't think the WM Police Department are keeping these guys in jail to save their own butts. IF they know these guys are Truly Innocent then why not release them?

I'm sure there is MUCH more that the WM Police Department knows about the WM3 then they have released to the public.

IF they know that Terry Hobbs and David Jacoby are Guilty of this crime then what's keeping them from being arrested?

I just don't think Terry Hobbs or his friend had anything to do with the murders.

What would be Terry's Motive to kill not only his Stepson but his Stepson's friends?