Where is the exculpatory evidence we were promised?

[dogmatica]

Also important to remember - although the WM3 were granted this hearing - instead THEY approached the Prosecution with the Alford Plea. Not the other way around. Why? Because they knew damn well the Evidentiary Hearing would NOT exonerate them.

 

[sistersleuth]

The purported "exculpatory evidence" was the entire basis for the evidentiary hearing they were granted and going to receive. Of course instead of going ahead with the hearing, the WM3 plead guilty. Of course supporters will say "but they were going to kill Damian", and so "they HAD to take the Alford Plea". But that doesn't preclude them from presenting this so called exculpatory evidence to the public and media after their release. Shockingly, they never have.

https://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBl...mien They lied, they have nothing but guilt

 

[Simply Caustic]

The purported "exculpatory evidence" was the entire basis for the evidentiary hearing they were granted and going to receive. Of course instead of going ahead with the hearing, the WM3 plead guilty. Of course supporters will say "but they were going to kill Damian", and so "they HAD to take the Alford Plea". But that doesn't preclude them from presenting this so called exculpatory evidence to the public and media after their release. Shockingly, they never have.

https://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBl...ing on. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dogmatica]

I did wonder why they weren't shouting it from the rooftops, upon their Alford Plea and release. Never a huge follower of this case, so until
I saw this post it slipped my mind entirely.

Very likely what they were counting on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's exactly what they were counting on. That their loyal followers would just forget about the fact they never did end up proving their innocence or proving who the "real" killer(s) were. If I were a supporter, I would be furious. Echols and Baldwin have shown nothing but disrespect and mockery for their own fans. They plead guilty, got released, then slithered away like the snakes that they are. Disgusting.

 

[Cher Lockhomes]

There are however people who don't give a damn about Johnny Depp, Alford pleas, media hype, and people who's sight does not go beyond Black & White. People who are not fans,followers, groupies, not even supporters. Just plain people with a good portion of common sense who have faith in a justice system that promises every woman and man a fair trial. 24 years ago these three guys did not get a fair trial and that's all there is to it. Why on earth would we be here debating it otherwise ?

 

[dogmatica]

There are however people who don't give a damn about Johnny Depp, Alford pleas, media hype, and people who's sight does not go beyond Black & White. People who are not fans,followers, groupies, not even supporters. Just plain people with a good portion of common sense who have faith in a justice system that promises every woman and man a fair trial. 24 years ago these three guys did not get a fair trial and that's all there is to it. Why on earth would we be here debating it otherwise ?

They did get a fair trial. And if they felt they didn't, they would have gone ahead with the evidentiary hearing, gotten a NEW trial, presented the exculpatory evidence, been set free, sued for millions and been vindicated.

By taking the Alford Plea - they admitted that even if they DID get a new trial, they'd be convicted again. And there is no exculpatory evidence.

They knew damn well if there was an evidentiary hearing and a subsequent retrial, they'd be right back in the can, where they belong.

 

[reedus23]

They did get a fair trial.

Very questionable.

And if they felt they didn't, they would have gone ahead with the evidentiary hearing, gotten a NEW trial, presented the exculpatory evidence, been set free, sued for millions and been vindicated.

So, what you are saying is that if you did absolutely nothing wrong but you were targeted before any true investigation and you were arrested despite countless other leads not having been followed up on and then you were subjected to a flawed trial in front of a flawed judge and were convicted despite no physical evidence linking you to the crime because remember, you didn't do it. You were then sentenced to death, in part because black is your favorite color. In other words, you didn't do it but the system failed you at every single turn, and you are telling me that you would then trust the system to work fairly for you when faced with an option of certain release from not just death row but prison all together or relying on the system to do the right thing.

And there is no exculpatory evidence.

See, this is where so many bashers lose me. The first part of your statement was correct. This part has nothing to do with an Alford Plea. It makes you sound like because the facts don't fully support your position that you have to over exaggerate to make your point.

 

[dogmatica]

So, what you are saying is that if you did absolutely nothing wrong but you were targeted before any true investigation and you were arrested despite countless other leads not having been followed up on and then you were subjected to a flawed trial in front of a flawed judge and were convicted despite no physical evidence linking you to the crime because remember, you didn't do it. You were then sentenced to death, in part because black is your favorite color. In other words, you didn't do it but the system failed you at every single turn, and you are telling me that you would then trust the system to work fairly for you when faced with an option of certain release from not just death row but prison all together or relying on the system to do the right thing.

That fictitious scenario has nothing to do with the case at hand.

ETA:

If one were only to watch Paradise Lost and take that as the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and not do any independent research and critical analysis of the actual evidence, court transcripts, Callahan's, the 500, the multitude of confessions, etc. etc., then one might believe that disingenuous narrative. But that was an HBO movie. Not an actual representation of the actual facts.

 

[dogmatica]

See, this is where so many bashers lose me. The first part of your statement was correct. This part has nothing to do with an Alford Plea. It makes you sound like because the facts don't fully support your position that you have to over exaggerate to make your point.

What's a "basher"? There is no exculpatory evidence. If there was, the WM3 would use it to exonerate themselves. A lack of DNA is not exculpatory. And a giant celebrity fan base insisting you're innocent isn't exculpatory either. The DA has stated "our door is open. If you have legit evidence that points to your innocence or to another perp, let's see it". Obviously not verbatim - but that's the gist.

The claim that this has nothing to do with the Alford Plea is neither here nor there. Not sure what the point of that assertion is.

 

[Userid]

Reedus, they did say they have exculpatory evidence and they've yet to release it, correct? Your other points are fair enough, but I don't really see how that's exaggeration.

 

[LordYAM]

The purported "exculpatory evidence" was the entire basis for the evidentiary hearing they were granted and going to receive. Of course instead of going ahead with the hearing, the WM3 plead guilty. Of course supporters will say "but they were going to kill Damian", and so "they HAD to take the Alford Plea". But that doesn't preclude them from presenting this so called exculpatory evidence to the public and media after their release. Shockingly, they never have.

https://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBl...elt it was enough to release them immediately

 

[LordYAM]

Another problem is that Jessie's confession was barred from consideration at Damian's trial...yet it was used anyway. that alone should have gotten the verdict thrown out. Arnold broke the law using it

 

[LordYAM]

Also no they had every reason to take the plea even though they were innocent. Even if they'd won the state would have dragged it out

 

[LordYAM]

People seem to think that everything is clear cut and that the media would actually care once someone's released; a lot of the times they don't. People have a block when it comes to accepting how bad things really can be

 

[Troyce]

Firstly, they were drinking. We all know people whose drinking can either make them violent, sweet as sugar, etc...we don’t know how alcohol affected these boys.
My biggest sway was the whiskey bottle. Jesse said he smashed a branded bottle when he was coming home from RH hills. The police found said bottle right where he claimed it would be.
I’ve read Jesse’s confessions, they seem too detailed & consitent for a lower than average intelligence to create repeatedly. If you say his intelligence is normal then there’s your answer....in his confessions.

 

[dogmatica]

Firstly, they were drinking. We all know people whose drinking can either make them violent, sweet as sugar, etc...we don’t know how alcohol affected these boys.
My biggest sway was the whiskey bottle. Jesse said he smashed a branded bottle when he was coming home from RH hills. The police found said bottle right where he claimed it would be.
I’ve read Jesse’s confessions, they seem too detailed & consitent for a lower than average intelligence to create repeatedly. If you say his intelligence is normal then there’s your answer....in his confessions.

Supporters attempt to explain away the whiskey bottle with this gem of reasoning: there were hundreds of those same bottles scattered everywhere in that area.

Of course that's completely untrue. They found THE whiskey bottle exactly where Misskelley said it was - because he threw it there, after committing child murder along with Echols and Baldwin. It's truly astounding how supporters attempt to explain things away - by simply denying facts. Fortunately the real world just doesn't work that way.

 

[Catmommy]

I've gone back and forth and the more I've read and seen and researched the more convinced I am that LE may have made mistakes but they damn sure got the right perps. The Alford Plea, after all the legal jockeying and bringing conspiracy theorist actors and singers to their defense just iced the cake. The WMIII: No, we never did it. Yes, a jury of our peers would find enough evidence to convict us. Yep, we all agree on that. Fair caught. We've done our time. Let us out. And you can keep on guessing if that's what you need to do.

 

[dogmatica]

I created this thread back in 2016. It's 2019, and shockingly, they're still...what, sitting on this exculpatory evidence? Building up our suspense? Teasing us?

Nope. They're hoping everyone forgot about it. Because it doesn't exist.

 

[Userid]

I created this thread back in 2016. It's 2019, and shockingly, they're still...what, sitting on this exculpatory evidence? Building up our suspense? Teasing us?

Nope. They're hoping everyone forgot about it. Because it doesn't exist.

Yes, it's quite obvious that was complete hogwash; there was never any "exculpatory evidence" and there never will be. The only things that might shed light on this case are TH's new book and particularly, Frank Peretti's book (he said a while back he plans on writing a book, but only after he retires). I'm really looking forward to Peretti's book, as he'll finally have a chance to defend himself against the utter slander he faced in the documentaries -- it will be nice to finally hear both sides and not just one.

 

[dogmatica]

Yes, it's quite obvious that was complete hogwash; there was never any "exculpatory evidence" and there never will be. The only things that might shed light on this case are TH's new book and particularly, Frank Peretti's book (he said a while back he plans on writing a book, but only after he retires). I'm really looking forward to Peretti's book, as he'll finally have a chance to defend himself against the utter slander he faced in the documentaries -- it will be nice to finally hear both sides and not just one.

I didn't know Hobbs was writing a book.

Agree about Peretti.