Search results

Wow. Lots to unpack here. I'll make an effort post about it when I have more time but I encourage anyone who listens to this to also listen to the Pasdar deposition and the Dimension films interviews. Both are easy to find. Thanks for doing this though and also the pushback on the "blood type...

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...

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.

What one has to do in order to begin to really see the problems some of us have with Hobbs and his statements is watch: His WMPD interview, his Pasdar deposition and David Jacoby's interview with Bob Ruff. Any rational person will immediately begin to spot several issues and conclude that...

One thing to remember about the 97% match with the Hobbs hair is that even if it isn't a match, it had to be from someone within his lineage; at least IIRC. So I'd say that really narrows it down and puts an end to this talk about x number people in the population. We're not talking about the...

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...

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...

A varying IQ isn't that shocking. It's an inexact science to begin with and any good lawyer is going to use the one that best serves their client.

Mark was a good suspect and did himself no favors in the docs but, over time, and the more I took a good look at it, his timeline just never worked out for me and am 100% convinced of his innocence. If he'd had anything to do with it, I highly doubt he would have publicly changed his stance on...

Agreed. I'd like to see that smile myself

that would have been great. Let's do that, judge, like the defense is requesting. Let's assume it's all a dog and pony show centered around nothing but optics and publicity on Damien's part and the evidence testing request is slanted. I still don't see why he'd bother with all this. He's...

He wouldn't. He's innocent.

Real quick, do you consider the OJ case solved too?

"Running off at the mouth" is not a capital offense. <modsnip> My point stands. If Damien knew there was a chance in hell that there was a hair, a fingernail or a drop of sweat o an of that crime scene evidence, no damned way he pushes the issue now that he's out.

Damien gets plenty of attention (books, public speaking, interviews, hob knobbing with celebrities). Opening up a can of worms by DNA testing evidence that he KNOWS will very likely implicate him (or the other two convicted) after finally getting off death row goes beyond "attention seeking"...

I think by "skeptical" the person meant "nothing has been proven and you need to tread lightly with allegations like that because it can ruin lives and, like it or not, people WILL sometimes makes stuff up to hurt someone. I'm a strong proponent of believing victims myself but am not ready to...

Why would Echols and his lawyers....WHY on earth....would they continue to press the state to test all of the remaining evidence? That makes zero sense to anyone with a functioning brain. If Echols were involved in any way, spent 20 some years on death row and finally got out, he'd get as far...

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...

Agree to disagree, DHT but that's cool. Too bad the cops "lost" the blood evidence so we could compare it to the recently released items that the Echols' team gained access to. Someone is covering up something. Pam Hobbs and Mark Byers were denied access to the evidence, up to and including the...

Was it Lorrie Echols? If so, I'll need a citation. If not, then your anecdote, while interesting, has nothing to do with this case in any way whatosever.