Where is the exculpatory evidence we were promised?

[herb4]

Well, for one thing, the state has been fighting like hell to make sure the defense don't get to test anything

But, happily, they've been overruled by the Arkansas Supreme Court

I can't for a second imagine anyone thinking that Echols and his friends are guilty when they're going to these lengths to test EVERYTHING. It's the STATE that's fighting it; and they can't argue cost because the defense fund has agreed to pay for everything. Why are they fighting this and why is Echols pushing for it? No guilty person would do this.

Who would do this if they'd already successfully been released from prison and are free to move on?
Also, it's been like 10 years now since the Alford Pleas. Is anyone going to seriously post here and argue that three psychotic teenage child murderers made it a decade without any sort of similar incident? Or any violent incident at all?

What, do you people think the mental health treatment in the Arkansas State Penetentiary and its top tier Death Row psychiatric wing cured these dudes of their murderous impulses? Come the heck on now.

 

[k-mac]

Well, for one thing, the state has been fighting like hell to make sure the defense don't get to test anything

But, happily, they've been overruled by the Arkansas Supreme Court

I can't for a second imagine anyone thinking that Echols and his friends are guilty when they're going to these lengths to test EVERYTHING. It's the STATE that's fighting it; and they can't argue cost because the defense fund has agreed to pay for everything. Why are they fighting this and why is Echols pushing for it? No guilty person would do this.

Who would do this if they'd already successfully been released from prison and are free to move on?
Also, it's been like 10 years now since the Alford Pleas. Is anyone going to seriously post here and argue that three psychotic teenage child murderers made it a decade without any sort of similar incident? Or any violent incident at all?

What, do you people think the mental health treatment in the Arkansas State Penetentiary and its top tier Death Row psychiatric wing cured these dudes of their murderous impulses? Come the heck on now.

"I can't for a second imagine anyone thinking that Echols and his friends are guilty'

Well it's your prerogative to support them no question but its unreasonable to suggest it's ludicrous those who don't.

At the end of the day Echols and co are CONVICTED murderers.

Nothing is going to change that.

 

[herb4]

OJ SImpson is INNOCENT of murder too so I guess that ends the discussion of his guilt. Casey Anthony obviously didn't kill her daughter since she was not CONVICTED. All the times John Gotti was found NOT GUILTY obviously means he didn't order any of those murders. Wonderful logic.

Also, you didn't answer question. Because there is no good answer. I understand.

 

[cenazoic]

I don’t really have a dog in this fight, but Herb, your argument isn’t that great. It boils down to: “*I* can’t imagine a guilty person doing X, so therefore, they are innocent.”

I can imagine it, and I believe it’s frequently referred to as gamesmanship.

They have nothing to lose by this; they’ve served their time, reputations shot, etc.

They arguably have lots to gain, such as: vindication, or perhaps keeping their fan base engaged and money rolling in.

 

[k-mac]

OJ SImpson is INNOCENT of murder too so I guess that ends the discussion of his guilt. Casey Anthony obviously didn't kill her daughter since she was not CONVICTED. All the times John Gotti was found NOT GUILTY obviously means he didn't order any of those murders. Wonderful logic.

Also, you didn't answer question. Because there is no good answer. I understand.

You missed the point entirely by your follow comment.
Echols and co are CONVICTED MURDERERS.
stamped signed sealed delivered.

Just released and living in the community.

All the other cases you mentioned have zero compatibility to this case including but not limited to no conviction.

 

[herb4]

I don’t really have a dog in this fight, but Herb, your argument isn’t that great. It boils down to: “*I* can’t imagine a guilty person doing X, so therefore, they are innocent.”

I can imagine it, and I believe it’s frequently referred to as gamesmanship.

They have nothing to lose by this; they’ve served their time, reputations shot, etc.

They arguably have lots to gain, such as: vindication, or perhaps keeping their fan base engaged and money rolling in.

Seems like a stretch. Yhey could just as easily "keep the money rolling in" with or without pushing for DNA testing. No guilty person would ever do what they're doing, full stop. They have everything to lose.

 

[herb4]

You missed the point entirely by your follow comment.
Echols and co are CONVICTED MURDERERS.
stamped signed sealed delivered.

Just released and living in the community.

All the other cases you mentioned have zero compatibility to this case including but not limited to no conviction.

I see. So the only miscarriages of justice we're allowed to look at were ones that ended in a GUILTY verdict. For some reason.

How about The Central Park Five, Kimberly Long, Kevin Strickland or the Beatrice Six? Fermando Bermudez? Or do my examples have to include mutliple teenage defendants specifically accused of murdering young children? Maybe clarify the context I'm permitted to use to illustrate a comparison.

Sorry if I misunderstood your point but you seemed to be arguing that because the WM3 were convicted, then that's the end of the story. I was posting examples where a verdict was NOT the end of the story and that sometimes the system gets it wrong. Sometimes they even rectify it

 

[iluvmua]

At this point, I just want this solved.

 

[Catmommy]

At this point, I just want this solved.

Actually, it was as a matter of record.

 

[k-mac]

Sorry if I misunderstood your point but you seemed to be arguing that because the WM3 were convicted, then that's the end of the story. I was posting examples where a verdict was NOT the end of the story and that sometimes the system gets it wrong. Sometimes they even rectify it

bbm

Not as many as you would like to believe "thinks the system got it wrong" in this case.
The convictions will never be overturned.
I am good with this status quo.

The only miscarriage of justice was 3 little boys being murdered and not given their right to life.

 

[tezi]

bbm

Not as many as you would like to believe "thinks the system got it wrong" in this case.
The convictions will never be overturned.
I am good with this status quo.

The only miscarriage of justice was 3 little boys being murdered and not given their right to life.

Exactly!!!

While I don't think all three are guilty of the murders, I do think two of the three are. The one I believe is NOT GUILTY is Jason Baldwin. He was the one who really didn't want the Alford Plea, he wanted to have a new trial granted. I think he felt pressured to go along because Damien Echols "was dying." I also think he had a verifiable alibi.

Please don't throw any rocks, LOL This is JMO.

 

[tezi]

Seems like a stretch. Yhey could just as easily "keep the money rolling in" with or without pushing for DNA testing. No guilty person would ever do what they're doing, full stop. They have everything to lose.

They have NOTHING to lose. Except for the money, if there is anyone contributing. They can't be tried again, even if the DNA matches any of the three. Some of us have seen through Echols and we aren't buying what he is trying to sell. I firmly believe in Echols and Miskelley's guilt. I do not for one second believe Jason Baldwin is guilty.

OJ SImpson is INNOCENT of murder too so I guess that ends the discussion of his guilt. Casey Anthony obviously didn't kill her daughter since she was not CONVICTED. All the times John Gotti was found NOT GUILTY obviously means he didn't order any of those murders. Wonderful logic.

Also, you didn't answer question. Because there is no good answer. I understand.

O.J. was NOT found innocent, he was found "not guilty," BIG DIFFERENCE!

I am not even going to discuss Casey Anthony.

As for John Gotti, it has been proven time and time again, that Sammy "The Bull" Gravano bought off jurors in at least one of his cases. Gotti also pleaded guilty in an earlier case involving a shooting and a death. Took a reduced charge, did a bit in prison, and got out. And Gotti had Gravano do the hits, Gotti just ordered them, after Gotti took over the Gambino family.

JMO, IMO, and MOO

 

[k-mac]

Exactly!!!

While I don't think all three are guilty of the murders, I do think two of the three are. The one I believe is NOT GUILTY is Jason Baldwin. He was the one who really didn't want the Alford Plea, he wanted to have a new trial granted. I think he felt pressured to go along because Damien Echols "was dying." I also think he had a verifiable alibi.

Please don't throw any rocks, LOL This is JMO.

You make a fair argument tezi.

I often wonder how pressured the other ones felt or didnt feel.
Whether it started as just mucking around bullying and escalated or the little fellas found themselves sort after prey :-(

 

[abams]

Seems like a stretch. Yhey could just as easily "keep the money rolling in" with or without pushing for DNA testing. No guilty person would ever do what they're doing, full stop. They have everything to lose.

They have absolutely nothing to lose with the publicity stunts. Private lab testing finds possible exculpatory evidence? More book and speaking deals. Private lab testing finds possible incriminating evidence? Not necessary to turn over or ever be made public and besides, the state cannot retry them for a crime they're already guilty of.

 

[DHT1339]

yeah, even though i believe they had nothing to do with this crime, that stance would quickly change if even the slightest bit of DNA evidence came up linking them to the murders. i'll gladly admit that i was wrong in return for finally getting an answer in regards to who killed those boys and i know 99% of the other supporters feel the same way

 

[sds71]

Arkansas Supreme Court rules for West Memphis Three defendant Damien Echols for additional DNA testing

The Arkansas Supreme Court has ruled in favor of additional DNA testing of West Memphis Three evidence.

www.kark.com

Arkansas Judiciary

The official web site for the Arkansas Supreme Court provides information about cases, oral arguments, opinions, orders, dockets, history and technology services that improve public access by supporting Arkansas’s courts and criminal justice agencies.

opinions.arcourts.gov

 

[iluvmua]

I hope something comes from this DNA.

At this point, I don't care if they did it.

What's the probability of them being exonerated if the DNA comes back as not matching any of them?