Terry Hobbs - My Story

[Compassionate Reader]

MadamReporter, I've read the Bode DNA reports, and the closest thing to your claim I'm familiar with with is a hair which could be Terry Hobbs' or one of the many other people who share his mDNA, and which is labeled ""Hair from M. Moore ligature" documented here with no mention of if it was "found in the actual knot" or otherwise. Is there another hair which matches your description, or have you misunderstood the facts regarding the hair in the report I linked? Also, I recommend familiarizing yourself with the phenomena known as secondary transfer, and noting the variety of hairs with different mDNA noted in the the Bode report I linked that likely came other parents, friends, teachers and such people who traveled in the same circles as the children.

"Hair from M. Moore ligature" means "Hair in the knot." That's what a ligature is, after all. Yes, the mtDNA isn't exclusive to Hobbs. However, what mtDNA does tell us is that the hair belongs to Hobbs or to someone in his maternal line. Who else who was in West Memphis on May 5, 1993 and who was, by his own admission, at the scene fits the bill? Just curious.

As to the possibility that the Hobbs' hair is secondary transfer, although that is an outside possibility, it doesn't explain the Jacoby hair and it doesn't explain the unbelievable phenomenon of no biological samples from any of the convicted, even though two of them had much longer hair than Hobbs. (Boy, that ditch water was very selective in what it washed away!) Also, IIRC the Hobbs' hair is described somewhere as a beard (facial) hair. IMO, that makes secondary transfer less likely.

 

[reedus23]

"Hair from M. Moore ligature" means "Hair in the knot." That's what a ligature is, after all. Yes, the mtDNA isn't exclusive to Hobbs. However, what mtDNA does tell us is that the hair belongs to Hobbs or to someone in his maternal line. Who else who was in West Memphis on May 5, 1993 and who was, by his own admission, at the scene fits the bill? Just curious.

As to the possibility that the Hobbs' hair is secondary transfer, although that is an outside possibility, it doesn't explain the Jacoby hair and it doesn't explain the unbelievable phenomenon of no biological samples from any of the convicted, even though two of them had much longer hair than Hobbs. (Boy, that ditch water was very selective in what it washed away!) Also, IIRC the Hobbs' hair is described somewhere as a beard (facial) hair. IMO, that makes secondary transfer less likely.

Let us not lose site of the bigger picture either. I don't know if anyone is saying that that one piece of evidence is sufficient to convict him. What it is though is more than sufficient to make him a suspect and warrant a further investigation into him. As was said above, that evidence is more than was presented against all of the WM3 combined. What it also shows us in the bigger picture is that the WMPD absolutely dropped the ball by not interviewing him asap.

 

[kyleb]

"Hair from M. Moore ligature" means "Hair in the knot." That's what a ligature is, after all.

A ligature is "anything that serves for binding or tying up, as a band, bandage, or cord", not just the knot.

Who else who was in West Memphis on May 5, 1993 and who was, by his own admission, at the scene fits the bill?

It seems you'd have investigate millions of people to rightly answer that question as Tom Fedor, as the forensic seismologist at Echols' legal team's 2007 press conference, noted "approximately 1.5% of the population at large could be the source of that hair".

As to the possibility that the Hobbs' hair is secondary transfer, although that is an outside possibility

Secondary transfer of hairs between people who travel in the same circles isn't an outside possibility, it's a common occurrence. That goes for Jacoby as well as Hobbs, and likely at least a few other people who share their respective mDNA profiles.

the unbelievable phenomenon of no biological samples from any of the convicted, even though two of them had much longer hair than Hobbs.

One can rightly exclude the possibility that the samples which weren't tested or didn't provide results were from the convinced. On can't even rightly exclude the possibility that hair from scout cap "2S04-114-23 Hair from scout cap" in this report might be Baldwin's, regardless of the fact others have overlooked as much. Furthermore, longer hairs have more surface area for flowing water to exert force on and wash them away.

Also, IIRC the Hobbs' hair is described somewhere as a beard (facial) hair. IMO, that makes secondary transfer less likely.

That makes no sense. How do you even suppose one could rightly even conclude that a hair is from a beard or otherwise, and how do you figure beard hair would be any less prone to secondary transfer than other hairs?

What it is though is more than sufficient to make him a suspect and warrant a further investigation into him

Or really? Is it also sufficient evidence to make the other 1.5% of the population or so which share his mDNA suspects? Does the other hair from the same ligature make anyone's whose mDNA is consistent it with a suspect? And what about the other hairs from other ligatures, and the various hairs made elsewhere? How exactly is any or even all of those hairs that could've wound up there through secondary transfer "more evidence" than even just one witness to Echols being near the scene of the murders covered in mud, let alone three such witnesses, a tape recorded confession, witnesses to other confessions, and the assortment of other evidence presented at the trials?

 

[Compassionate Reader]

A ligature is "anything that serves for binding or tying up, as a band, bandage, or cord", not just the knot.

However, if the hair was from the ligature, it was either embedded in the knot or stuck somehow in the shoelace.

It seems you'd have investigate millions of people to rightly answer that question as Tom Fedor, as the forensic seismologist at Echols' legal team's 2007 press conference, noted "approximately 1.5% of the population at large could be the source of that hair".

The point is that whoever left that hair had to be both in West Memphis on May 5, 1993 and in the maternal line of Hobbs. That's what mtDNA proves. Again, who fits the bill? (Hint: It can't be "millions of people" as the entire population of West Memphis back in '93 was about 35,000.)

Secondary transfer of hairs between people who travel in the same circles isn't an outside possibility, it's a common occurrence. That goes for Jacoby as well as Hobbs, and likely at least a few other people who share their respective mDNA profiles.

I know what secondary transfer means, but for it to occur, there would have to be contact at some point with the donor. So, it goes back to who the donor is, and it must be someone in Hobbs' maternal line who had contact with the boys and/or Hobbs. Again, who fits the bill?

One can rightly exclude the possibility that the samples which weren't tested or didn't provide results were from the convinced. On can't even rightly exclude the possibility that hair from scout cap "2S04-114-23 Hair from scout cap" in this report might be Baldwin's, regardless of the fact others have overlooked as much. Furthermore, longer hairs have more surface area for flowing water to exert force on and wash them away.

Yes, I believe that the three falsely convicted can be excluded as being the donors for any and all biological evidence collected - especially after the post-2007 testing was concluded. During that testing, the fiber evidence was totally debunked, and statements were also made that indicated that all three of the falsely convicted were excluded as the source of any and all biological data. Unfortunately, the link to the statement re: the exclusion of the three as donors of the biological samples has expired, but, at the time, I saw it. They have been excluded.

That makes no sense. How do you even suppose one could rightly even conclude that a hair is from a beard or otherwise, and how do you figure beard hair would be any less prone to secondary transfer than other hairs

Beard (facial) hair in a male is of a different texture than head or body hair. Facial hair is coarser. I believe that beard hair, due to its coarser nature, is less likely to fall off unwittingly. I would conclude that facial hair would have to be forced out. For example, if a person with a mustache were to bite a shoelace in order to break it, a mustache hair could more easily be dislodged and become either entwined in the knot subsequently tied or simply stuck in the shoelace.

 

[kyleb]

The point is that whoever left that hair had to be both in West Memphis on May 5, 1993 and in the maternal line of Hobbs.

Really? Why couldn't it be from someone who'd never been to West Memphis but wound up stuck on someone somewhere else who then came to West Memphis and then blew off them and onto the shoeless, or countless other scenarios?

It can't be "millions of people" as the entire population of West Memphis back in '93 was about 35,000.)

Yet anyone one of those millions of people can't rightly be excluded as having been in West Memphis on that day without investigating their whereabouts, not that one necessarily has to ever go someplace for a hair of theirs to wind up there.

I know what secondary transfer means, but for it to occur, there would have to be contact at some point with the donor.

You obviously don't know what secondary transfer means, as what you described is primary transfer. "Secondary transfer of hair occurs when a person transfers hair that is not his or her own to an object, place, or other person", as explained in the very first line of the abstract of the journal article I linked previously.

Beard (facial) hair in a male is of a different texture than head or body hair. Facial hair is coarser.

Typically, yes. However, some people have rather course head or body hair, some have very soft facial hair, and even when one generally has soft or course hair in a particular region a few courser or softer hairs might also grow there. Hence the reason I doubt anyone even remotely qualified to evaluate such evidence claimed it is a beard hair.

 

[Alyssa2013]

I respect all of your opinions but IMO Terry Hobbs is a good suspect, and I say this for two reasons. The first being the two women who say that they saw Terry calling the boys shortly before they were found murdered and the second being that his hair was found in one of the ligatures. Although this obviously is circumstantial I still think it has bearing. Also, the bikes were found neatly placed outside which also suggests that somebody who knew them killed them. Yes, this is all pure speculation but it's better than having nothing. Also, everyone is quick to bring up the Bojangles story but that's also not as concrete as the evidence against Terry Hobbs. Also there has to be a motive involved and Hobbs, IMO, had the strongest.

 

[Alyssa2013]

Also just found this: http://www.refugeesunleashed.net/viewtopic.php?f=103&t=25226

I found it really interesting. Thoughts?

 

[reedus23]

I respect all of your opinions but IMO Terry Hobbs is a good suspect, and I say this for two reasons. The first being the two women who say that they saw Terry calling the boys shortly before they were found murdered and the second being that his hair was found in one of the ligatures. Although this obviously is circumstantial I still think it has bearing. Also, the bikes were found neatly placed outside which also suggests that somebody who knew them killed them. Yes, this is all pure speculation but it's better than having nothing. Also, everyone is quick to bring up the Bojangles story but that's also not as concrete as the evidence against Terry Hobbs. Also there has to be a motive involved and Hobbs, IMO, had the strongest.

A voice of reason. Didn't think hitting the Thanks button was enough.

 

[reedus23]

The point is that whoever left that hair had to be both in West Memphis on May 5, 1993 and in the maternal line of Hobbs. That's what mtDNA proves. Again, who fits the bill? (Hint: It can't be "millions of people" as the entire population of West Memphis back in '93 was about 35,000.)

Someone has to be in complete denial to argue that a KNOWN person with KNOWN connections to the boys on the night in question shouldn't be at a minimum questioned and investigated thoroughly. I don't care if you're 100% of the belief that the WM3 were guilty, to suggest such a person shouldn't have been thoroughly investigated is ludicrous.

 

[reedus23]

Also just found this: http://www.refugeesunleashed.net/viewtopic.php?f=103&t=25226

I found it really interesting. Thoughts?

Thanks for sharing. 2 thoughts. One, unless Arkansas has a different rule, I don't know if any of that holds any weight as evidence at a trial. Probably couldn't even come in as evidence. Second, though, I think such analysis can be helpful at the investigatory stage. I don't know the person making that assessment or their credibility/reliability, but it rings true with my common sense observations.

 

[kyleb]

two women who say that they saw Terry calling the boys shortly before they were found murdered

Are you referring to the three women discussed here? Perhaps familiarizing yourself with the details regard their statements discussed on that page might help alleviate your suspensions towards Hobbs.

his hair was found in one of the ligatures.

What makes you so confident that the hair is Hobbs' rather than one of the millions of other people who share his mDNA profile, and what leads you to assign such significance to that particular hair even though other hairs recovered from the ligatures and elsewhere which aren't consistent with Hobbs' mDNA demonstrate how common it is for people to wind up with others hairs on them?

the bikes were found neatly placed outside

Actually the bikes were recovered creek just downstream from the boys, as can bee seen in these photos. How did you come to believe otherwise?

Also just found this: http://www.refugeesunleashed.net/viewtopic.php?f=103&t=25226

I found it really interesting. Thoughts?

I'd have to see the videos which those notes are based on to rightly assess them. That said, here's some video of Echols flagrantly lying about his familiarity with the area in which the murders took place, much like he was caught doing on the stand during his trial.

Someone has to be in complete denial to argue that a KNOWN person with KNOWN connections to the boys on the night in question shouldn't be at a minimum questioned and investigated thoroughly.

Rather, I'm not in denial of the evidence which proved the there guilty beyond any reasonable doubt at their trials, let alone what has come out science then, and hence have no reason to grasp at straws to blame parents of the victims as others did with Byers before moving on to Hobbs.

 

[Cappuccino]

Its a shame the West Memphis police didn't move on to Hobbs after they'd finished with Byers.

 

[Alyssa2013]

I still think that the two women did see Terry Hobbs that day and, if that is true, he lied about not seeing his son that day. Which is very significant IMO. And yes, Hobbs' hair might have been secondarily transferred, but there's still reasonable doubt there. About the bicycles, I had no idea that they had been recovered downstream. I guess I read somewhere that they had been found neatly placed near the scene, but now I see that I was wrong about that. I think that the Echols video is irrelevant now because not only were all three boys released and cleared, I personally believe that they are all innocent. Just as you still cast reasonable doubt on them, I do the same for Hobbs. And besides, what motive did these boys have for killing Christopher, Stevie, or Michael? For fun? I don't buy it. The cases against these boys were flimsy in the beginning and that's why they are now free. Now we can move onto those that actually had the strongest motives to commit the crime, and, personally, I'd like to see the focus now be completely on Terry Hobbs. There are many reasons why I consider him a suspect and not just the ones I listed before. He had many inconsistencies in his story of where he was the day of the murders. You'd think someone would remember a day that significant. Also, he was incredibly violent (accusations of abuse supported by his daughter, ex-wife, and a woman who claimed to have been sexually molested by him). This definitely does not exclude him from committing an act such as murder as he's had a criminal past. The list goes on.

 

[kyleb]

Its a shame the West Memphis police didn't move on to Hobbs after they'd finished with Byers.

I doubt that would've stopped the blame the parents bandwagon from sinking their teeth into Hobbs, as it's not like it stopped them from doing as much to Byers.

I still think that the two women did see Terry Hobbs that day

But you haven't even bothered to familiarize yourself the information on the page regarding this which I linked in my previous post though, have you? I mean if you had surely you wouldn't still be getting the number of women who've made the claim wrong, eh?

And yes, Hobbs' hair might have been secondarily transferred

And again, it might not even be Hobbs' hair.

all three boys released and cleared

The three were released, but they were never cleared. Rather, they plead guilty in exchange of being sentenced to time served and ten years suspended imposition of sentence.

And besides, what motive did these boys have for killing Christopher, Stevie, or Michael?

Well, that's a complicated and inherently speculative matter, but see the quote in my signature for starters, and the pages Damien Echols profile, Jason Baldwin profile, and Jessie Misskelley profile provide considerably more evidence in that regard.

The cases against these boys were flimsy in the beginning and that's why they are now free.

The cases against the three are far more sold than many people's understandings them are.

 

[reedus23]

What makes you so confident that the hair is Hobbs' rather than one of the millions of other people who share his mDNA profile, and what leads you to assign such significance to that particular hair even though other hairs recovered from the ligatures and elsewhere which aren't consistent with Hobbs' mDNA demonstrate how common it is for people to wind up with others hairs on them?

It's actually only hundreds in the West Memphis area, if that. And given that one of those was a step father of one of the deceased children, yeah, it might be worth looking into.

Rather, I'm not in denial of the evidence which proved the there guilty beyond any reasonable doubt at their trials, let alone what has come out science then, and hence have no reason to grasp at straws to blame parents of the victims as others did with Byers before moving on to Hobbs.

IMHO it is denial to assert it wasn't poor investigatory work when they failed to investigate Hobbs. Byers should have been and was looked into. Hobbs should have been but wasn't looked into. The harsh reality is that LE has to look into those closest and they didn't do that. They can also do that without throwing out "blame" as you say because there is a difference between blaming someone and investigating someone.

 

[reedus23]

I doubt that would've stopped the blame the parents bandwagon from sinking their teeth into Hobbs, as it's not like it stopped them from doing as much to Byers.

In your efforts to hold steadfast to your beliefs, you completely miss the point.

But you haven't even bothered to familiarize yourself the information on the page regarding this which I linked in my previous post though, have you? I mean if you had surely you wouldn't still be getting the number of women who've made the claim wrong, eh?

Surely you don't have to flame. You want a good debate about something, do it. No need to flame.

And again, it might not even be Hobbs' hair.

Ahhh, so all the more reason to investigate him closer to find out.

The three were released, but they were never cleared. Rather, they plead guilty in exchange of being sentenced to time served and ten years suspended imposition of sentence.

I asked it before and I'll ask it again, if anyone is familiar with Arkansas law. Part of the plea documents refer to the fact that upon release, the WM3 received a "suspended imposition of sentence". Where I am at the effect of a suspended imposition of sentence is that IF you do your time (10 years in this instance) without violating the terms of the agreement, then the underlying guilty plea is wiped clean as if you never pled guilty in the first place. If this is the case in Arkansas as well, that means come August 19, 2021, they will NOT have been considered to have pled guilty EVER as far as the law is concerned. If asked under oath, "Have you ever been convicted of or pled guilty to a felony or misdemeanor?" the honest answer would be "No.". If that is the case, does it change your view or perception of the agreements reached?

The cases against the three are far more sold than many people's understandings them are.

Entitled to your opinion but I would suggest otherwise. What I don't understand and what I see as weakening your position is your absolute refusal to acknowledge the even the most basic problems with this case. I would respect your opinion more if you held firm to your belief that they are guilty no matter what yet at the same time acknowledged the relative lack of evidence against the WM3 or the poor investigation that surrounded this case or even the fact that a prosecutor would NEVER release 3 people he deemed dangerous or actually guilty of the crimes.

 

[Cappuccino]

I doubt that would've stopped the blame the parents bandwagon from sinking their teeth into Hobbs, as it's not like it stopped them from doing as much to Byers.

It might have stopped Byers himself from suspecting Hobbs though.

 

[kyleb]

It's actually only hundreds in the West Memphis area, if that.

Yet one doesn't rightly have to ever go to an area for their hair to wind up there. Do you not comprehend this fact, or are you simply intent on ignoring it?

And given that one of those was a step father of one of the deceased children, yeah, it might be worth looking into.

I contend the effort would be better spent getting mDNA samples from the other parents of the boys along with their friends, teachers, and others who traveled in the same circles as them. At least a couple of those people likely have mDNA consistent with some of other hairs recovered from the scene, perhaps even other hairs from the ligatures, and that would go a long way toward taking the wind out of the sails those of you who've gotten so worked up over a hair.

IMHO it is denial to assert it wasn't poor investigatory work when they failed to investigate Hobbs.

Sure, but again your opinion is biased by your denial of the evidence uncovered against the three who were convicted and eventually plead guilty to the murders.

there is a difference between blaming someone and investigating someone.

There's also a difference between investigating someone and making wildly inaccurate statements about evidence to cast suspension on someone, such as the comment which got this line of discussion started:

Terry Hobbs' hair was found in the actual knot of the ligature that was used to bind Byers.

Granted, that's not outright blame, but here's an example of that from another thread:

I said that the affidavits accurately identified the killers. It could have been Hobbs and Jacoby alone or all four mentioned.

And you've seen seen other examples of outright blaming a parent, I know because [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9585605#post9585605"]I've showed examples before[/ame] of Echols and Baldwin blaming Byers.

You want a good debate about something, do it.

A good debate requires both parties to be familiar with the facts of the matter being discussed, and can't rightly occur when one party shows no interest in accurately recounting even the simplest of facts.

If that is the case, does it change your view or perception of the agreements reached?

No, I've figured it might be the case, but have never seen reason look into the matter to find out one way or the other.

It might have stopped Byers himself from suspecting Hobbs though.

Byers' jumping on the blame the parents bandwagon after getting run over by it is on him, as people are ultimately responsible for their own decisions.

 

[Cappuccino]

Part of the reason Byers suspects Terry Hobbs of killing his son is that the WMPD assured him back when they were questioning him in '93 that all the parents were being questioned the same. So he assumed for years that all parents had been cleared. When he found out in 2007 that Hobbs had never been questioned at all, that along with the DNA results, prompted him to suspect Hobbs of being the murderer.

They also didn't question the Jacoby's until 2007, despite Bobbi Jacoby being Stevie Branch's regular child minder.

 

[gheckso]

Sure, but again your opinion is biased by your denial of the evidence uncovered against the three who were convicted and eventually plead guilty to the murders.

Is that what they did?