Affidavit of Officer John Slater

Discussion in 'West Memphis III' started by DHT1339, Apr 26, 2020.

  1. DHT1339

    DHT1339 Active Member

    Messages:
    125
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Affidavit of John P. Slater

    To me, this is one of the most important parts of this entire case and its not something you ever hear about at all. Slater and his supervisor, Lt. Fred Boskey entered the woods at a little past 6 AM from the dead end on McAuley and crossed the pipe bridge into the area of the ditch leading up to the bayou and searched for 30 minutes on the morning of 5/6/93, finding nothing. This, of course, is the same area the bodies were found later that day

    Slater: "If the bodies had been present at the time we searched the area, I am confident that we would have located them. We were thoroughly examining every part of the area, including every part of the ditch feeding into the bayou, and were assisted by our heavy-duty flashlights and the fact that some predawn light was available. "

    There's a few things to take away from Slater's affidavit. First of all, Slater's affidavit is from 2001, when the WM3 had been in prison 7 years already and at that time, I don't believe he was working for WMPD anymore. Either WMPD had not allowed him to make these statements previously for whatever reason OR, Slater/Boskey half assed their search that morning and completely missed the bodies, so this is Slater's attempt to cover that up.
    If Slater/Boskey did in fact search that area thoroughly on that morning and found no bodies, then it certainly lends credence to the theory that the discovery site was not the murder site. There's also a phone conversation someone on the tapatalk forum had with Slater in which he claims the water level was low that morning (gives a lot of credibility to his statement in my opinion) He also has a lot to say about JMB and the WMPD's handling of the case in that conversation. Very, very interesting stuff. Slater and Bosley, Why search Ditch at that time of morning.
     


  2. fr brown

    fr brown Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    898
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Except that the way the first body was discovered was by someone in the water stumbling over it and dislodging it. He hadn't seen it and he was almost on top of it. The searcher was in the water because a floating sneaker had been spotted. That's the way it is portrayed at any rate.

    Also, I think the cause of death for one or more of the boys was drowning. The murderer brought them back and drowned them, or drowned them somewhere else? The theory is needlessly elaborate.
     
  3. DHT1339

    DHT1339 Active Member

    Messages:
    125
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    43
    yeah that's what i've read as well. which is why i mentioned that this affidavit could've simply been slater's way of covering his ass because they completely missed everything during their search that morning. that would've really been his only reason to lie. if what he's saying is true then oh boy, it opens up a myriad of possibilities

    SB and MM's autopsy listed multiple injuries and drowning as cause of death. CB's lists multiple injuries but no drowning
     
  4. MrRoboto

    MrRoboto New Member

    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    3
    That water was filthy. There's no way you would see a body submerged by walking by! Even if you would suspect the boys were submerged there you would not see them ,
     
  5. Kennedy Jo

    Kennedy Jo Member

    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Well here is my take from watching WM111 last night on TV. They are very Pro WM111. However how could one man, one person, attack and kill three little boys? He attacks one and the others would run away. Yes the water was muddy. No way you could see a body in it.
     
  6. DHT1339

    DHT1339 Active Member

    Messages:
    125
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    43
    if hobbs did act alone, i don't think it would have been impossible for him to have subdued and then killed the boys

    he was someone the boys knew and trusted. kids that age do not want to get in trouble for anything, so for that reason alone they would've been inclined to obey him. i feel like if the boys had encountered stranger(s) in the woods, it would've been a lot harder for them to commit the crime because they would have had to somehow get the boys to come close and what's the first thing kids are taught at that age? don't talk to strangers. they would've been inclined to run away at the first sight of a strange person in the woods. i've always felt like the killer(s) was someone the boys knew for those reasons

    if hobbs didn't act alone then who else was involved? there's the puzzle theory but i'm not so sold on that one. of course there's the WM3 but as we all know, the evidence against them is very inconsistent
     
  7. Kennedy Jo

    Kennedy Jo Member

    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I still don't think little boys would stand by and watch anyone hurt one of their friends, no matter if they knew him or not.
     
  8. DHT1339

    DHT1339 Active Member

    Messages:
    125
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    43
    yeah i totally get that their first reaction upon seeing someone get hit would've been to run

    or it would've been to just freeze out of shock at what they had just seen. if it was someone they knew and trusted, seeing that would've been shocking. maybe they thought that running away would've brought them an even worse punishment. i believe one of the boys had defensive wounds which could've indicated a struggle with the killer(s)
     
  9. fr brown

    fr brown Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    898
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Maybe the guy had one of them tie the other two up. We know that GSK would have the woman tie the man up. The couples would comply in the hope they would both escape with their lives. Sometimes they didn't.
     
  10. Userid

    Userid Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,178
    Likes Received:
    1,127
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Honestly, I always thought these cops said this to cover their butts. I'm not saying they were involved, but obviously, they wouldn't want to admit that they failed to find the bodies -- so they make it out to have been impossible to spot them, when in reality, they simply failed to see them and/or really didn't look very hard in that area.

    I guess my point is, their statement really proves nothing one way or the other. The bodies very well could have been there when they searched.

    Two of the knots were quite sophisticated. I realize the boys were boy scouts, but nevertheless. Only the knots on CB were simple half-hitches (that really anyone could tie), but the yellowish abrasions around the bindings indicate that he was tied after he had already passed. The abrasions on the other two were more purple, indicating that blood was still flowing through the body and to the affected areas of the bindings.
     
    fr brown likes this.

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice