1. My take on the evidence. Damien certainly was different. I also think he's incredibly smart. He definitely had an interest in dark subjects. I think he liked to be shocking, not just for the sake of being shocking but to see how people react to the shocking. I think he played a game with it, almost like he was trying to demonstrate how predictable humans are.
Having said that, it is proof of absolutely nothing. There are plenty of people who live different lifestyles that don't commit murder, so living such a life is absolutely no proof of murder. Same can be said whether it's an interest in the occult, devil worshiping, satanism or death in general.
It goes without saying that repeating song lyrics and even coming up with some of your own words that happen to be dark, discuss death, devil worshiping or any other interest is proof of nothing as well. If it were proof of anything, I would suggest that Poe and Hitchcock would have been suspects in every murder committed during their time. Had the writings mentioned the victims by name and discussed what he was going to do to them, then I'd say the writings are relevant. As they are though, they are meaningless.
Not one item in this category of evidence establishes Damien committed the murders to the exclusion of others and certainly does nothing to remove any reasonable doubt.
2. The fibers evidence, even on their best day, did not point to Damien any more than they pointed to countless tens of thousands of people in the West Memphis area alone. When evidence is so generic, I don't know how anyone can argue that this evidence eliminates any reasonable doubt either.
3. Frankly, I think this was probably the highlight of the prosecution's case. From what I have gathered, the girls didn't run in the same crowds and didn't have an axe to grind. However, hearsay such as this, even if it does fall within an exception, is always problematic. Even if what they claimed was, in fact, said, how do we know if it wasn't said for shock value. Or because Damien was growing tired of all the suspicious looks? Not a whole lot different than Morgan throwing up his hands in frustration. So, even giving the prosecution the benefit of the doubt, this evidence may sway the needle but certainly does not sway it beyond reasonable doubt.
4. Hollingsworth's testimony is almost meaningless. Personally, I think they have serious credibility issues. Additionally, they would have only seen the persons for brief seconds. Finally, even if you give the prosecution the benefit of the doubt, seeing Damien and Domini on the road does not fit their theory and certainly does not establish that Damien murdered the boys as opposed to anyone else. Under that scenario, he was on the road with Domini...so what? And for the prosecution to then suggest that their own witnesses weren't accurate? That is almost the definition of creating reasonable doubt in and of itself than it is eliminating reasonable doubt.
5. The lake knife is as meaningless or more so than any other piece of evidence. There is absolutely ZERO evidence that this knife was Damien's or Jason's or Jessie's. Someone saying he owned a similar one does not establish that this one was his. At the end of the day, it is a knife that has ZERO ties to any of the WM3 and has ZERO ties to the crime itself. As such, the knife does not point towards Damien having committed the murders to the exclusion of others and if anything, does more to create reasonable doubt than to eliminate it.
6. The only stick that held any meaning was the stick that held the clothes down. However, neither that stick nor the others were tied to Damien in any way whatsoever. As for the other sticks, there is absolutely ZERO tying them to the crime. The prosecution could have found a stick in Oregon and said it could have created the same type of injuries and it would have as much meaning as the sticks introduced at trial. With absolutely ZERO tying the sticks(other than the one holding the clothes down) to the murders and even less tying the sticks to Damien, there is no reasonable argument that can be made that the sticks establish that Damien committed the murders to the exclusion of others and again creates more reasonable doubt as opposed to eliminating that doubt.
7. The wax is even weaker than the fiber. I could be wrong, but I think we all but eliminated the wax as evidence to consider when it was determined that the prosecution couldn't even establish that it was candle wax but only that it could be.
8. On 5/9, in answers to the questionairre, Damien said the boys were cut up. No other reference to any facts surrounding the murders. No reference to any such facts were made in Griffin or Durham's notes of 5/9. On 5/10, Damien again answered the questionairre and in those answers he said it wasn't an accident, the boys were mutliated, all 3 were cut up, one may have been worse than the others and they drowned. In the notes, Steve Jones told him testicles were cut off, urinated in mouth and put in water. In the same notes, says at least one may have been cut and that stones, candle, knife and crystals would be in the area. Ridge's report on interview and Ridge's report on Echols interview simply reiterate what was in the notes. There were no facts surrounding the murders discussed in the polygraph or in Durham's notes. Having gone through all of the investigative reports through 5/10, those are every statement attributed to Damien that concerned facts surrounding the murder.
So what confirmed details about the murder did Echols have? Obviously, there was tons of media coverage and even more rumors circulating. However, just one article is needed to demonstrate that everything stated by Damien had already been put in print. Here is just a portion of an article from the Commercial Appeal on 5/7:
MUTILATED BODIES OF 3 BOYS FOUND IN BAYOU
HUNT ON FOR SUSPECT IN W. MEMPHIS
By Richard Kelley The Commercial Appeal
Staff reporter Lloyd Holbeck and The Associated Press contributed to
this story.
Three 8-year-old boys were found slain Thursday, their bodies submerged in a drainage ditch.
West Memphis police would not comment on the cause of death, but an Arkansas State Police broadcast Thursday night said West Memphis police were investigating the abduction and sexual mutilation of three boys.
Police are searching for whoever killed three 8-year-old schoolmates whose submerged bodies were found Thursday afternoon in Ten-Mile Bayou.
An Arkansas State Police broadcast alerting regional authorities to the slayings said the hands of the boys had been tied behind their backs and that they had been sexually mutilated.
So when questioned on 5/9 and 5/10, was saying the boys were cut up an unconfirmed detail about the murders that Damien had knowledge of? NO
So when questioned on 5/9 and 5/10, was saying it wasn't an accident an unconfirmed detail about the murders that Damien had knowledge of? NO
So when questioned on 5/9 and 5/10, was saying the boys were mutilated an unconfirmed detail about the murders that Damien had knowledge of? NO Even the headline screams it.
So when questioned on 5/9 and 5/10, was saying the 3 boys were cut up an unconfirmed detail about the murders that Damien had knowledge of? NO
So when questioned on 5/9 and 5/10, was saying that one boy may have been cut up worse than the others an unconfirmed detail about the murders that Damien had knowledge of? NO It is a statement of the obvious first of all.
So when questioned on 5/9 and 5/10, was saying the boys may have drowned an unconfirmed detail about the murders that Damien had knowledge of? NO As that's a reasonable deduction from the article stating they had been placed in water.
So when questioned on 5/9 and 5/10, was saying that there would be stones, candles, knives or crystals at the scene an unconfirmed detail about the murders that Damien had knowledge of? NO because it is inaccurate.
Consequently, not only does the last item of evidence not point to Damien having committed the crimes to the exclusion of others, but it is flat out false. The prosecution putting forth evidence that is not only tenuous but false does nothing to eliminate reasonable doubt but creates even more of it.
In summary, working off of our 8 categories, 7 absolutely do not directly tie Damien to the murders to the exclusion of others even if every benefit of the doubt was given to the prosecution. Beyond that, such evidence was thin, filled with could be's instead of any meaningful connections, irrelevant or even flat out false. The 8th item, the softball girl's testimony may sway a needle, but it doesn't sway it to the point of saying Damien is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. With ZERO direct, physical evidence that directly ties Damien to the murders in any form or fashion, not only is it reasonable to have reasonable doubt, it is unreasonable to say otherwise.
And that is only based on the prosecution's case. The defense hasn't even put on any evidence yet.