Random things about this case...

New Posts

Jacoby never admitted to going that deeply into the woods. You said that the prosecution might argue that one of the boys could have picked up the Jacoby hair from the Hobbs house. However, the hair was not found on one of the boys but on a tree stump. There are only two ways it could have gotten there, IMO. It was deposited there by TH when he disposed of the bodies (TH picked it up when he was playing guitars with DJ between 5:15 and 6:30 according to Jacoby's deposition in the Pasdar civil case) or it was left there by DJ himself, which DJ rules out. The lame explanation that I have heard is that the wind blew it there. The TH hair can only be linked by mtDNA to 1.5% of the world's population, all of whom must have a common maternal ancestor. The DJ hair can only be linked to 7% of the world's population, all of whom must have a common maternal ancestor. The probability that both of these hairs would be found at the site where three dead bodies were found, none of whom had a common maternal ancestor with either TH or DJ is about 1/10th of 1%. So, Occam's Razor (all things being equal, the simplest explanation is usually correct) would lead us to believe that TH must have deposited both hairs. That's why I think the Jacoby hair is more incriminating. Really, it's that the two together limit the methods of arrival to, IMO, one. I know I'm rambling, but I hope I made some sense.:crazy:
 
Sorry if this has been discussed in the past but im interested if anyone knows any info.
in a police interview with T.H he says he worked for an ice cream place, that he sold ice cream.... now i also read that the 2 young guys that were also investigated at the time of the murders, the ones that fled and were then found later i think in California, that one of them also worked as an ice cream driver in the neighbourhood. Has a connection at all been made between him and T.H, as in do they know each other through work?
These 2 young guys in question also took polys and it showed deception when answering certain questions about the murders.
 
Compassionate Reader said:
Jacoby never admitted to going that deeply into the woods. You said that the prosecution might argue that one of the boys could have picked up the Jacoby hair from the Hobbs house. However, the hair was not found on one of the boys but on a tree stump. There are only two ways it could have gotten there, IMO. It was deposited there by TH when he disposed of the bodies (TH picked it up when he was playing guitars with DJ between 5:15 and 6:30 according to Jacoby's deposition in the Pasdar civil case) or it was left there by DJ himself, which DJ rules out. The lame explanation that I have heard is that the wind blew it there. The TH hair can only be linked by mtDNA to 1.5% of the world's population, all of whom must have a common maternal ancestor. The DJ hair can only be linked to 7% of the world's population, all of whom must have a common maternal ancestor. The probability that both of these hairs would be found at the site where three dead bodies were found, none of whom had a common maternal ancestor with either TH or DJ is about 1/10th of 1%. So, Occam's Razor (all things being equal, the simplest explanation is usually correct) would lead us to believe that TH must have deposited both hairs. That's why I think the Jacoby hair is more incriminating. Really, it's that the two together limit the methods of arrival to, IMO, one. I know I'm rambling, but I hope I made some sense.:crazy:
Click to expand...

The hair that is consistent with T. Hobbs is also consistent with 420 other people in West Memphis. The hair that is consistent with D. Jacoby is also consistent with 1,960 people in West Memphis. I think it's stretching it to say that the hair is "the TH hair," or "the DJ hair," seeing as how those two hairs are shared with almost 2,500 other West Memphians.

The fact that the hair consistent with T Hobbs was found on a shoe lace that most likely belonged to his stepson is certainly no grand revelation as one would expect hairs of family members to be found on items of clothing on other family members, and certainly not indicative that he is responsible for the murders.
 
pufnstuf,

You're just thinking simple percentage matches. Remember, the TH hair, if it doesn't belong to Terry Hobbs, must belong to someone who has a common maternal ancestor with Terry Hobbs. The same is true with David Jacoby. That's what mitochondrial DNA means. For the Hobbs hair (which, by the way, TH doesn't deny as being his), even if there are 420 people in WM with a common maternal ancestor with TH, were any of them known to be at the discovery ditch on the night of May 5th and into the morning of May 6th? Also, TH denies having seen the boys at all on May 5th. So, how did the hair get there? Eight year old boys retie their shoes many times during the day, so, it's unlikely IMO that the hair was there for an extended period of time while the boys were alive, and since it was a beard hair, it's even less likely that it's innocent transfer IMO. And, of course, I'm sure you know that the hair was not found in the ligature of his step son, but in the ligature of Michael Moore. That would mean that the hair withstood being pulled out of the eyelets of the shoes before it was used to tie Michael. However, even if his hair is innocent transfer, as he claims, what about the Jacoby hair? This hair is not innocent transfer. It was not found on any of the victims but on a tree stump. Jacoby saw the boys from a distance when TH went to his house shortly after dropping Pam off at work and played guitars for about an hour (this is according to Jacoby's deposition in the Pasdar case which contradicts Hobbs' statement that he was searching for Stevie at the time Jacoby says they were playing guitars). Also, Jacoby denies entering the RHH woods to the point where the discovery ditch is located during his searching. The logical explanation to me is that TH picked up the DJ hair while they were playing guitars and later deposited it at the discovery ditch when he was moving the bodies from the scene of the crime to the discovery site. He tied the boys' bodies, like he learned working in a slaughterhouse, so the bodies could be easily transferred from the scene of the crime (probably IMO a manhole in the BB woods) to the discovery ditch. While tying Michael, he used his teeth either to cut the shoelace or to tighten the knot. That's when the beard hair became entwined in one of the ligatures used to bind Michael. The Jacoby hair was possibly deposited on the tree stump when TH sat down to rest for a minute between the two trips that I believe he made to transport the bodies. That's when Jacoby's hair fell off onto the tree stump. I know that I wasn't there and can't be 100% sure of what happened, but until someone gives me a more logical explanation that what I've presented, I'll stay with the theory I just presented. It's just impossible to imagine that three teen aged boys, one of whom was "pukin' drunk" by his own statement, could have committed these murders and left absolutely no evidence to show they were there. The only physical evidence found at the discovery site is linked to a step father who was never investigated by the WMPD until 2007 when the DNA evidence was revealed. The only parents questioned at the time of the crime were both of the Byers, Dana Moore and Pam Hobbs. Todd Moore was out of town and Terry Hobbs was not at home when the police came calling, and the police never followed up until, as I said, 2007 when the mtDNA was matched to TH. Much of what we know about the past violent actions of TH is because he attempted to sue Natalie Maines Pasdar of the Dixie Chicks for defamation of character. At that time, her lawyers did what the WMPD didn't or wouldn't do; they investigated Terry Hobbs. Read the deposition of Mildred French from that case. That will give you an idea of the kind of man TH is. In fact, if you want to know more about this case, please join our discussions at www.wm3blackboard.com. The Manhole Theory, which I alluded to, is discussed there, with what I feel is very compelling evidence of its truthfulness.
 
Whoa... wall of text.

First of all, "simple percentages" or not, the fact remains that the hair that is consistent with T. Hobbs is also consistent with 420 other people in West Memphis. The hair that is consistent with D. Jacoby is also consistent with 1,960 people in West Memphis. THAT is a simple fact, based on the population of West Memphis.

I'm fully aware of what mitochondrial DNA is. It doesn't change the fact that, based on percentages and the population size of WM at the time of the crime, a total of 2480 West Memphians could have shared the mtDNA of those two hairs.

As for the the shoelace being found on Moore, what proof do you have that it was Moore's shoelaces that tied up Moore, and Branch's shoelaces that tied up Branch?

The rest of your post is sheer conjecture, so I won't bother to respond to all that.

Thanks for the invitation to the blackboard site, but I'm well versed in the facts of this case.
 
pufnstuf said:
Whoa... wall of text.

First of all, "simple percentages" or not, the fact remains that the hair that is consistent with T. Hobbs is also consistent with 420 other people in West Memphis. The hair that is consistent with D. Jacoby is also consistent with 1,960 people in West Memphis. THAT is a simple fact, based on the population of West Memphis.

I'm fully aware of what mitochondrial DNA is. It doesn't change the fact that, based on percentages and the population size of WM at the time of the crime, a total of 2480 West Memphians could have shared the mtDNA of those two hairs....
Click to expand...

I can't do the math myself, but the odds that artifacts from both TH and his friend were found at the scene are less than the odds of either one being found alone. Does this make sense? As I said, I can't calculate what the new odds would be.

More important, however, is that neither the state nor the defense can find any DNA or hairs from the defendants.
 
As a retired math teacher, I'll discuss probabilities, not percentages, for a moment here. The probability of either of two independent events occurring, denoted P(A or B), is calculated by adding the probabilities of either of the events occurring, denoted P(A) + P(B), which is what pufnstuf did above with numbers, I assume based on the population of WM at the time of the crime. That is not what we have here. What we have here are two independent events that both occurred. The probability of two independent events happening, denoted P(A and B), is calculated by multiplying the probability of each event occurring separately, denoted P(A) * P(B). The probability for the TH hair is 1.5%, or 0.015. The probability for the DJ hair is 7%, or 0.07. Therefore, the probability of both hairs being deposited is (0.015)(0.07) which is 0.00105 or slightly more than one-tenth of one percent. So, the math is off on pufnstuf's example. The population of WM needs to be multiplied by 0.00105, not two different sub populations added together. However, since two different DNA profiles are involved, we have to find someone who could have deposited both hairs or some way to place two different people at the discovery site on May 5th. It's not simply a matter of determining how many people in WM could have contributed the hairs. You need opportunity for depositing the hair. TH admits that he was there. DJ does not. Also, remember that the DNA on both hairs excludes all three of the WM3 as the contributor of either hair.
 
Thanks so much, CR! Logically, I knew the probability was less than merely adding the probability of each event, but I had no idea how to construct the correct equation.

On this subject, you were snarked at by some poster recently for your long posts. I just want to add that I feel exactly the opposite: I am very grateful for the time and energy you put into providing info here.

People who know a lot or who understand complex matters SHOULD make longer posts, if you ask me. Nobody is forced to read anything here.
 
Okay, I have a question that will probably prove me to be a nincompoop, but here goes: How could one guy, Terry Hobbs, take complete control of three apparently healthy, normal eight-year-old boys by himself? Did I miss anything? So far, I've spent about 5 hours reading about this case....
:waitasec:
 
Dixiecat,

This is a theory expounded by a poster at www.wm3blackboard.com, a supporter board. It's called The Manhole Theory.

The three little boys were avid followers of Teenaged Mutant Ninja Turtles, a group of cartoon characters who live in the sewers of Manhattan. They were known to play in the manholes in the area. In fact, Terry Hobbs himself alluded to this fact when he mentioned (during the Pasdar deposition I believe) that Chris' brother, Ryan, supposedly went to search the manholes when the boys were missing. The theory is that Terry Hobbs, angered because Stevie had not returned home when Terry saw Stevie and his friends in the neighbor's backyard at about 6:30 pm (a fact which Terry denies), followed the boys to their manhole hideout. They were in the manhole, and Terry, descending to discipline Stevie, blocked their escape. When Terry's discipline got out of control, he accidentally killed Stevie and killed the other two boys because they were witnesses to the crime. You can read more about this theory here:

http://www.wm3blackboard.com/forum/index.php?board=59.0

According to the conclusion of the theory, Terry returned to the manhole in the wee hours of May 6th and moved the bodies, apparently because he was afraid that there would be evidence in the manhole to link him to the murders. He hogtied the boys (not in the normal manner, but wrist to ankle, like he had learned to tie hogs when working in his father's slaughterhouse) and transported them a few hundred feet from the manhole to the discovery ditch, carrying Stevie and Chris together and then Michael probably with the clothes, explaining why Michael's body was in a slightly different location than the other two. He removed their clothing because Pam had mentioned that Stevie was wearing blue jeans but Stevie had actually changed into red shorts. When he couldn't redress the body in jeans, he simply removed all of the clothing from all of the boys, placing the clothing in the ditch, too, pushed down with sticks. Remember, Stevie's jeans were right side out while the other two boys' jeans were inside out, as they would be if they had been removed from the bodies quickly. The jeans found at the scene which belonged to Stevie were supposedly brought there by Terry (to redress Stevie) and submerged with the other clothing.

This is a very brief outline of the theory. If you have further questions, please ask. I subscribe to the theory myself, but please read and make up your own mind.
 
And if you don't go for the manhole theory, Dixiecat, there's always the possibility that the murderer had a gun. You can control any amount of victims with a gun.

I think there was a 9mm found thrown into the bayou shortly after the murders.
 
Cappuccino said:
And if you don't go for the manhole theory, Dixiecat, there's always the possibility that the murderer had a gun. You can control any amount of victims with a gun.

I think there was a 9mm found thrown into the bayou shortly after the murders.
Click to expand...

If there were no shots fired, why would the perp throw the gun away?

But, I had been thinking that the boys were lose, out in the open when the perp(s) first discovered them... that's what made me wonder whether one person could have controlled all three. The manhole idea does make sense, but I'm still 'in the woods,' so to speak. That psych history of Damien's is very compelling. JMHO
 
Maybe there were shots fired. Some of the searchers did report hearing noises that sounded like gunshots that night, and remember Mr. Bojangles with his bleeding arm.

OTOH, maybe the gun in the bayou has nothing to do with the murders, and the murderer merely threatened them with a gun, and kept hold of the gun.
 
That psych history of Damien's is very compelling. JMHO
Click to expand...

I agree. Its very compelling evidence that Damien was diagnosed as a psychotic NOS, a wide ranging diagnosis which can include everything from post natal depression to homicidal mania. However, even if Damien is at the more dangerous extreme of that scale, his psych history is in no way compelling evidence against the West Memphis Three - note the bolded word.

The entire case for the prosecution depends on these three having committed the crime together, and Damien's psych history doesn't offer any evidence that Jessie or Jason are capable of such a crime. The usual explanation from non-supporters is that there was a cult leader/follower relationship between Damien and the other two, a weak response which won't fool anybody who has read Jessie's confessions.

Jessie describes Jason as the most violent of the three. It is Jason who wields the knife, and Jason who genitally mutilates Christopher Byers, and Michael Carson testified the same. That is definitely not a description of a sheep like cult follower, its a description of someone who is a viscious psychopath in his own right. So where is Jason's incredibly disturbing psych history? Unless you find one, Damien's psych history is as useful to the prosecution as a fart in a space suit.
 
Dixiecat,

What Cappuccino said about the gun (a 9 mm being found and reports of possible shots being fired during the night of May 5th) agrees with the information I have read, too. However, I think that the explanation for the shots is different. I believe that the shots were fired to scare the boys who were searching away from the manhole where the three bodies were concealed.

As to Damien's psych history, I hate to sound like a broken record, but I've taught many students who said the same types of things (in some cases, almost the identical things) that Damien said. Some of them even spent time in mental institutions. This is not pleasant to discuss, but sometimes mental health personnel will "gild the lily" so to speak in order to admit juveniles who simply need a place to stay for a while, especially poor kids who might just need nourishment. I know this sounds drastic, but it does happen, unfortunately.

Think about this, if Damien had been a serious threat to society, would the hospital have released him as quickly as they did? Damien was improperly medicated for bipolar disorder. The medication he was given (Impramine, I think) has since been shown to cause outbursts such as Damien had, especially in teens, and IIRC has been removed from the approved drugs for teens. I have no doubt but that Damien was a strange teen. I have seen teens just as strange, but they didn't become murderers, although many of them threatened to murder, especially their parents!

Back in 1993, Damien was IMO a highly intelligent young man trapped by poverty in a life that he found unbearable. When you read some of his adult writings, you can see his intelligence shining through. He still has some unusual ideas, but he is not a murderer. He is merely someone who marches to the beat of a different drummer than many of the rest of us.
 
I just now finished watching both HBO docs-- Paradise Lost 1 & 2. I have a couple of comments:
~JMB appears to be a strange and violent individual.
~No doubt, THOSE ARE TEETH MARKS!
 
DC,

They're teeth marks, alright, but IMO they're animal teeth, not human teeth. I've seen the mark compared to the mouth of an alligator snapping turtle - very favorably, too. Also, certified forensic pathologists have ruled out a human bite mark in favor of animal predation.

Yes, JMB did act very strangely at the time. He was distraught with grief, and he's a flamboyant personality any way. Trying to attribute this crime to him is IMO no different than those who try to point to Damien's strange behavior at the trial and say, "See? He did it!"

The key to the solution of this crime, like all crimes, is in the evidence or lack of evidence. To date, no evidence definitely linking the WM3 to the crime has been produced. OTOH, evidence pointing to another suspect has been produced, and said suspect's alibi has fallen apart, too. Remember, in a case of murder, what the prosecution really wants is means, motive and opportunity. Examine the known and undisputed facts in the case and see what you discover. I would give you my opinion, but I'd be accused of "spoon feeding" you and not letting you form your own opinion.

ETA: If you want a website where all aspects of this case are discussed in great detail, I suggest you check out www.wm3blackboard.com. It's a supporter site, but it contains discussions of all aspects of the case, as I said.
 
@Dixiecat - grief has an angry stage, and I'd imagine if someone loses a relative to murder that angry stage would be quite severe. I think that's what Byers was going through when he was being filmed. I don't know much about the man, but I wouldn't judge him on his behaviour in the HBO docs, especially not the first one.
 
I would suggest reading some more, then going back to watch PL2 again if you like.

JMB did EVERYTHING the WM police told him to do. He took the stand, he took a lie detector. Yes he acted out but everyone mourns differently. When I watch PL2 and even now when I see JMB talk about the case, I see a very hurt and sometimes very confused individual. He went from hating the WM3 to supporting them and IMO that takes a lot of guts. The documentaries ruined his reputation in West Memphis. The man did nothing but cooperate with police. That is something that TH hasn't really been doing. Even if he didn't commit these murders, he could at least try to prove himself.

I say do research for yourself and go look at Callahans. If you like, read over a supporter website and read over a non supporter website (although they get kind of trashy and vulgar) and just draw your own conclusions. When the new evidence comes out in the trials, we will see then what else the defense team has on the case. Right now just work with what is out there, and most of that information is at callahans.
 
Okay... I'm on Callahan's and going through it with a fine-tooth comb. I've started with the opening statements on the B/E trial. One observation is that, compared to the Anthony trial, this one seems kinda mickey mouse, to me. Also, in looking at the arial photos of Robin Hood Woods I can see how really small that area is-- I'm in Eastern Kentucky and, at least where I live, we prolly wouldn't call that "woods" at all. Frankly, I don't see how those boys could have been killed at the ditch-- if they screamed even a little bit-- and not been heard by people in the surrounding areas... JMHO

A few more observations:
~PH sounded a little fishy to me when she was describing where TH was during the search.
~What about that "fourth" kid seen by one of the witnesses (forget his name) going into the woods, along with the "spiked blonde" boy, the two bikes, and the skateboard?
I'm sure I will find these answers someplace, but I hope some of y'all know off the top of your head???
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 131 more.
Total: 3,386 (members: 132, guests: 3,254)

Online statistics

Members online
132
Guests online
3,254
Total visitors
3,386
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,499
Messages
17,969,917
Members
228,788
Latest member
Soccergirl500
Back
Top