WM3 are guilty- Evidence.

[DHT1339]

Here's a question I can't answer. If Echols and the them are guilty then why...WHY on earth would they continue to press the state to test all of the remaining evidence? That makes zero sense.

If they did it, spent 20 some years in prison and finally got out, they'd get as far from that evidence room as humanly possible. Yet it's the state and the WMPD that seems to want that stuff to go away.

if they were actually guilty there's no chance in hell the state would've ever released them. i'm talking even the slightest bit of evidence

 

[iluvmua]

if they were actually guilty there's no chance in hell the state would've ever released them. i'm talking even the slightest bit of evidence

I just hope whoever did it, they have evidence and the perp(s) go to trial.

(Not talking about the WM3)

JMO

 

[Leo St.John]

If they were guilty they wouldn't be seeking to retest the evidence that would just prove they were guilty. I think they are innocent and strive to prove it so they can be fully and truly exonerated and put the real killer or killers behind bars. The victims, their families and the WM3 deserve for the truth to be told.

I also don't think the authorities would be acting so shady if they thought the WM3 were really guilty. They know these men are innocent and don't want the truth of their botched investigation and rail roading of three innocent teenagers to come out.

 

[Leo St.John]

If they were guilty they wouldn't be seeking to retest the evidence that would just prove they were guilty. I think they are innocent and strive to prove it so they can be fully and truly exonerated and put the real killer or killers behind bars. The victims, their families and the WM3 deserve for the truth to be told.

I also don't think the authorities would be acting so shady if they thought the WM3 were really guilty. They know these men are innocent and don't want the truth of their botched investigation and rail roading of three innocent teenagers to come out.

 

[sk716]

Heard JB on an older podcast a few days ago, I think if he was willing to spend more time in front of cameras and microphones he'd be a much better representative of the trio. JB just looks like somebody's middle aged nerdy dad and he's pretty good at verbalizing his thoughts and he understands his case.

 

[UltRight]

Somewhat controversial take here...

This case never should have gone to trial; there was not enough evidence, and as is the case in almost all mysteries, the forensics was bad and done by inexperienced officers. They contaminated the scene early and destroyed evidence almost systematically. This is typical of police departments which normally encounter easy, obvious cases.

I did not find the evidence compelling; I think, however, that the WM3 are guilty as Hell.

I should add, of course, that I am a lifelong metalhead. I do not think heavy metal inspires people to commit murders, but like occultism, white nationalism, drugs, etc. it attracts a fair share of mentally unhinged people, like in these cases:

[redacted]

I do not believe the evidence offered against TH and others. It is even more unconvincing than the evidence against the WM3. It was created to provide an alternate explanation based on widespread ignorance of DNA evidence, like the Central Park 5 misdirection.

I disagree with John Douglas that this case shows a practiced serial killer. One boy was mutilated, and the killing involved a frenzied attack with a sexual motive. This does not resemble the overkill usually found with family members, which usually involves erasing the face or making multiple frenzied fatal stabs.

Were I on the jury, I would have voted against guilt simply because I do not think we should convict people based on witness testimony alone. But I think they're guilty af.

 

[DHT1339]

Somewhat controversial take here...

This case never should have gone to trial; there was not enough evidence, and as is the case in almost all mysteries, the forensics was bad and done by inexperienced officers. They contaminated the scene early and destroyed evidence almost systematically. This is typical of police departments which normally encounter easy, obvious cases.

I did not find the evidence compelling; I think, however, that the WM3 are guilty as Hell.

I should add, of course, that I am a lifelong metalhead. I do not think heavy metal inspires people to commit murders, but like occultism, white nationalism, drugs, etc. it attracts a fair share of mentally unhinged people, like in these cases:

[redacted]

I do not believe the evidence offered against TH and others. It is even more unconvincing than the evidence against the WM3. It was created to provide an alternate explanation based on widespread ignorance of DNA evidence, like the Central Park 5 misdirection.

I disagree with John Douglas that this case shows a practiced serial killer. One boy was mutilated, and the killing involved a frenzied attack with a sexual motive. This does not resemble the overkill usually found with family members, which usually involves erasing the face or making multiple frenzied fatal stabs.

Were I on the jury, I would have voted against guilt simply because I do not think we should convict people based on witness testimony alone. But I think they're guilty af.

just curious what makes you think they are "guilty af" if by your own words you think there isn't enough evidence?

 

[yakohone]

It's probably not a popular opinion but I tend to think they are more than likely guilty let's say 70/30 convinced. I can't say this for sure, but it's mainly because Jessie's confessions which there were a lot of them one in particular which one can listen to on YouTube with his lawyer practically begging him not to say anything.

I understand he is not the smartest person in the room but confessions are a strong part of any case. Maybe it's just me but I felt like he possibly felt remorse and was doing what he thought at the time was right. A simple mind yes but maybe (possibly) a mind so simple as he was thinking he was doing the right thing not thinking of the legal consequences. If it was one confession I could go along with the coerced confession (As it has happened on occasion), but it wasn't one confession it was like five confessions at least three are on YouTube. He sounds slow but not as some put it retarded.

Other than that and this is just my personal observation the fascination of the case and the reason this is being discussed even today is the larger than life character of Damien Echols. I think if it was just another normal odd looking character like Jessie or Jason this case wouldn't have attracted all of the publicity it did especially from celebrities. Damien is the rockstar now not the other two that should tell you something of his allure.

I admit past Jessie's confessions and Damien's past disturbing troubles especially in Oregon there is not a lot of physical evidence. In the end I wish the documentaries were a little less biased and gave a less biased view of the case. It's over now and the truth whether they did it or not they will likely go to the grave with it. The real sad part is the three little boys who died age 8 they are gone forever and where barbarically killed, they have become just a footnote in the story.

 

[AliceInPain]

sbm

It's probably not a popular opinion but I tend to think they are more than likely guilty let's say 70/30 convinced.
..........
Other than that and this is just my personal observation the fascination of the case and the reason this is being discussed even today is the larger than life character of Damien Echols. I think if it was just another normal odd looking character like Jessie or Jason this case wouldn't have attracted all of the publicity it did especially from celebrities. Damien is the rockstar now not the other two that should tell you something of his allure.
.........

I agree with you on this.
They were people I could have hung out with back when and I was a punk/ goth myself in the '80s and early '90s, so to me it has nothing to do with their looks or whatever music or culture they were into.
There's just - imo - something unpleasant about Damien, from then until now.
I don't know if they were guilty or not, but I'm like you, 70/30. Maybe even 80/20. I think he was a "leader type" (with that I mean good at manipulating other people - and good at pretending he's not) back then and still is.
There is something else too. "Unpleasant" is the only word I can think of except a few psychology terms I'm not qualified to use, but I'm sure there's a better one...
I get the same vibe from Jon Venables.

 

[k-mac]

The biggest travesty in this case IMO is the cry me a river for poooooooooor.... little.... damien.....


3 Little boys were mutilated!!!!!!

Say their names Damien!!!!

He can't do it. Never...Not once.

nuff said.

 

[ACG2x]

if they were actually guilty there's no chance in hell the state would've ever released them. i'm talking even the slightest bit of evidence

This is categorically false IMO. The State was looking at a new trial for a case that at the time was 20 years old. What happens in 20 years is evidence goes stale, witnesses recollections fade or change or they outright pass away and circumstances modify.

From the State's perspective: They were looking at a loud and expensive re-trial of defendants who had already served 18 years and had a chance to put the case entirely to bed with no extra expense to taxpayers and they still get the guilty plea in the eyes of the law. So when the WM3's legal team approached them with the Alford deal, it would've been very attractive. Costs them no extra money, no time and resources to retry a 20 year old case when there are fresh cases every day. Plus juries are unpredictable so if there is an NG verdict, then the WM3 could financially sue the state for wrongful imprisonment which costs more.

From the WM3's perspective: The new evidence they claimed to have had or wanted to have wasn't yielding exonerating results. There likely would be a retrial, but trials are always a toss-up and if convicted again, there was no tomorrow. If they lost on re-trial, Damien would almost assuredly be executed and Jesse and Jason would spend the rest of their lives in prison. This was their chance to get their clients out of jail so when the evidence didn't yield anything that could've done that, they took the legal route to spring their clients and look for new avenues to clear their name with the threat of execution not lingering.

The Alford deal made sense for both sides because it avoided a retrial where nothing is guaranteed and both sides avoided a loud and expensive trial that they may have ended up in the same place to begin with. That's why when the WM3's attorneys brought it to the State, they were willing to make the deal.

State gets a guilty plea and they can shut the door on the case from a legal sense. The WM3 cannot sue the State for wrongful imprisonment and the WM3 get out of jail where they can take any private avenue they wish to exonerate themselves, or just go about their lives. Literally everyone gets something they desired here. That's why they were let out - don't get it twisted.