Evidence

Just want to take up where Robela and Graznik left off. I definitely can't see anything pointing to the boys being slain in the discovery area. I don't even see the the area as a dump site. Dumping the bodies here would have looked a lot less methodical IMO. I think the bodies were placed here after the initial search on May the 5th, and that they were in one or two different locations before being placed in the ditch. The position of the legs of two of the victims might suggest they were pressed into a concealed room like a manhole, storm drain, the boot of a car, or what I tend to believe at the moment, they were in shallow water in a different location and were pressed down to submerge them completely. This obviously took place before Rigor Mortis set in.

If the boys were submerged in a different water location, and possibly drowned there (COD Peretti two of the boys), this opens up a few questions for me.

- Would there be traces of the water they actually drowned in, in their lungs or stomachs ?
- Would that mean that the loss off water samples from the ditch, the failure to measure water
- temp. was another convenient loss like the blood samples from "Bojangles" ?

The ditch (culvert) was fed by excess rain water from the highway area if I'm rightly informed.
I would think that the biological consistency of the water was completely different to that of the ten mile bayou, or bayou diversion channel, or a swimming pool for instance.

Whoever placed the boys in the ditch, knew that there was sufficient water in the ditch to cover them. As the water level in the ditch was dependant on rainfall, this would suggest that the perp was in the area recently.

Interesting, wow. So someone brought the deceased boys and their three bikes and dumped them in the creek after the initial search. Did this man or men have a bus or large RV camper when he hauled all of this to the site?
 
No bus or large camper needed, a truck , or boot of a car is more than enough, see here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/25/n...-found-dead-in-trunk-of-car-in-yard.html?_r=0

The bikes were probably disposed of first, before the search.This may explain why the tyre marks of the bikes were present

So he dumps the bikes before the initial search, did he ride them from his car to the creek three different times? Maybe he took a joyride on one of the bikes through the trails of robin hood to explain the tire tracks? He either rides or walks the three bikes three different times and no evidence of footprints or bikes were found in the initial search. No witnesses to see him unload bike after bike, must have been at night. He then returns and carrys a body at a time from his car to the creek after the initial search. No witnesses or evidence of a trail found again. No more than a single hair found on the bodies that likely is terry hobbs.
 
To me, the legs don't signify anything other than rigor mortis. The bindings themselves could have caused those positions. If the rigor tells us anything, it's that the 2 boys were dead and even perhaps placed in the creek perhaps hour(s) before MM. If this was a dump site, there was at least 2 trips by the killer: first trip, to dispose of the first 2 victims; second trip, to dispose of MM, the clothes, and the bikes (although I suppose it's possible the bikes were disposed in the first trip, after the two victims). Disposing of the bodies would have, by far, been priority number one for the killer, before the bikes and the clothes.

Sasquatch, there were only 2 bikes -- children's bikes, on top of it -- so the killer (if it was just one person) could have just carried the bikes to the bayou in one shot. CB didn't have a bike that day. At one point, he had a skateboard, but it's unknown whether he had it with him at the time of the boys' disappearance.

I believe the bikes were disposed of last because the killer realized that the small creek were he had already placed the 3 victims and the clothes was getting too full to dispose of the bikes, so the bayou was a last resort to where he could dump the bikes. There is no way the killer wanted to take that risk of dumping the bikes in the bayou, when you had the Mayfair apartments overlooking that area, but he had no choice because he ran out of room in the discovery creek.

Also, there were no tire tracks found near the discovery creek. If the killer did have a truck or RV, he would have had to park it in the parking lot of the 76 Truck Stop and run the bodies to the creek, which would not have been ideal (because that area was also in view of the Mayfair Apartments), but possible.
 
JMB

http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/jmb1.html

WE SAW WITH HIS FLASHLIGHT SOME BICYCLE TRACKS RIGHT HERE. IT LOOKED LIKE 2 SETS OF BICYCLE TRACKS. AND HE MADE THE COMMENT, HE SAID, THAT LOOKS LIKE...I SAID YEAH, THAT LOOKS LIKE THE TRACKS RIGHT THERE. AND HE SAID, IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE THAT MAYBE THEY'RE HEADED IN THAT DIRECTION, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN DOWN TOWARDS WHERE THEY WERE FOUND.

DJ

http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/d_jacoby_int.html

Jacoby: I thank uh we all kinda of walked down toward the edge of the water it was a little grassy then all of a sudden it was just muddy uh I don't thank none of us really got in the mud. I remember myself when I seen it I walked down towards it I didn't step in the mud and I seen I thank it was tire tracks I'm pretty sure it was and I told the rest of em it look like they took their bikes threw the ditch right here but you could look to the other side and didn't see nothing coming out and I thought maybe they backed up

JH snr.

The Commercial Appeal
Friday, May 6, 1994

"I had to come back in here today to see it, to find out for myself how they got in here," said Hicks. A hunter, Hicks said he tracked the boys' bicycle tracks with a flashlight the night they disappeared, but lost the trail just feet from where they were later found.

Here are some interesting pics, including bicycle tracks:

http://thewm3.yuku.com/reply/7130/Re-Point-of-Curiousity-for-Me

.
Logic tells me, someone looking for a place to hide three bodies and two bikes would take the bikes first to check the area. If they met anyone, they could always say they were gathering their childrens bikes.
 
So he dumps the bikes before the initial search, did he ride them from his car to the creek three different times? Maybe he took a joyride on one of the bikes through the trails of robin hood to explain the tire tracks? He either rides or walks the three bikes three different times and no evidence of footprints or bikes were found in the initial search. No witnesses to see him unload bike after bike, must have been at night. He then returns and carrys a body at a time from his car to the creek after the initial search. No witnesses or evidence of a trail found again. No more than a single hair found on the bodies that likely is terry hobbs.

There were only two bikes. Two children's bikes could easily be carried by an adult in one trip.
 
There were only two bikes. Two children's bikes could easily be carried by an adult in one trip.


Ok but then there shouldn't have been any bike tire tracks recovered right?

JMB

http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/jmb1.html

WE SAW WITH HIS FLASHLIGHT SOME BICYCLE TRACKS RIGHT HERE. IT LOOKED LIKE 2 SETS OF BICYCLE TRACKS. AND HE MADE THE COMMENT, HE SAID, THAT LOOKS LIKE...I SAID YEAH, THAT LOOKS LIKE THE TRACKS RIGHT THERE. AND HE SAID, IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE THAT MAYBE THEY'RE HEADED IN THAT DIRECTION, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN DOWN TOWARDS WHERE THEY WERE FOUND.
 
The children were riding their bikes in the woods earlier that evening, that's why there are tire tracks.
 
It's important to note here that, simply because bike-tire tracks were found, in no way means the source of those tracks were the three boys in question. This was a popular wooded trail, which even contained a bike-jump for older boys to perform called Devil's Peak (at least, I'm pretty sure that's what it was called).

But yes, even if the boys were the source, they were seen entering the Woods at the entrance on McCauley street -- so they very well could have made them before the abduction.
 
Blood speckles on a pendant necklace that damien wore were a partial but not conclusive DNA match to one of three boys. Once they tested it, it was too late to test again. Not something you hear about in this case very often.

It wasn't a DNA match. It was an HLA DQ Alpha partial match - not much better than a blood type! There are more people with the same HLA DQ Alpha partial sequence than there are people with the same mtDNA!
 
It was interesting reading about the contact between the wmpd and the San Diego Police Dept. at the time of the investigation, concerning possible animal predation. This was yet another impeachment because the information was not disclosed to the defence.

http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/jm_writ_error_coram_nobis.pdf

http://ualr.edu/lawreview/files/2013/10/J.-Thomas-Sullivan-Disclosure-of-Scientific-Evidence.pdf

San Diego Union Tribune, May 11, 1993

Clark said the detectives in Arkansas told him they were unsure whether the three boys had been mutilated or if animals, perhaps turtles from the canal, were responsible for damaging the bodies

I can only imagine that it was Peretti's team who initiated this, I think Peretti knows a lot more than he should.
 
I cannot find the bite mark video that shows the marks most likely belonging to TH. The video that debunks some bite marks is all I can find.
Any help?
 
"Most likely"? According to whom?

A dentist working strictly off pictures and junk science, in all honesty.

Every time someone brings up this guy, I think of Stew the Dentist from the Hangover movies -- how he always tries to claim he's a "doctor," when he's really just a dentist.

I don't really mean to make fun of the guy, but people love to believe that he's some sort of forensic expert, and he's not. There's a major, major difference an everyday dentist and a forensic odontologist. Heck, there's a difference between a dentist and a regular odontologist.
 
Yeah I got the year wrong. It was all three victims birth year. That's the kind of thing that really chills you, because you know its important. Why was it in a lock box, why was the marble in the box why was the partial in the box. Why was SB's pocket knife in TH's knife collection.
I'm still catching up, but this screams TROPHIES to me.
 
From the 2009 declaration of Pamela Hobbs: BBM is mine

"65. Terry also had a strong fireproof lockbox which he locked and kept at the top of our closet. On one occasion in 2004, a boy Jo Lynn was dating pried open the box. The only thing in the box was Terry's partial denture, a little bitty necklace that had a 1984 penny on it, and a marble. Jo Lynn and I discussed why Terry would lock up a partial denture. The only explanation we could come up with was that he did not want anyone to compare his dental imprint to what some people believed were bite marks on certain victims of the Murders"

I have a strong suspicion that as JMB had a jewelry shop and made jewelry that he could have made this necklace. Perhaps to commemorate his adoption of CB. In an interview with Leeza Gibbons, JMB states that he even let CB make jewelry with him. This could have been one of the items they made together.

A possible reason why JMB hasn't spoken up about this necklace could be that he was protecting TH as JMB didn't care about his stepson either as evidenced in how he treated him. Maybe JMB knew of TH's involvement or maybe JMB just didn't care as he was acting as if CB was more of a liability to him, especially since CB's mother was voicing her concern that CB had been sexually abused. Now the necklace could have been a gift from any of the grandparents or parents. As JusticeSeeker35 and Lethalmatthew posit, this question needs to be asked of all of the relatives. JMO

This is all fantastic as an overview, but I wonder.... the necklace, could it have been a gift for CB since it has his birth year on the penny? I could see a kid wearing that, but it hasn't been mentioned he owned it so the other thought was it had been given as a gift. If he was being sexually abused then this could have been one of the possibly many grooming gifts given to him by his potential abuser (JMB).
 
I'm looking at this case (again ) and I'm wondering, if there was to be a new investigation, what would the actual evidence be? Is there anything concrete at all? (Except the Hobbs hair that can easily be dismissed with secondary transferring, unfortunately), what concrete evidence do we have?
I'm not counting on confessions or hearsay or something similar, because those can be easily ruled out.
IMHO there's nothing that could bring those 3 little boys justice: (
Such a horrible crime. Those 3 teenagers were convicted of a crime with no real evidence. I would hope by now , technology has advanced enough to recheck what dna they did find.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
247
Guests online
1,233
Total visitors
1,480

Forum statistics

Threads
589,163
Messages
17,914,809
Members
227,740
Latest member
snoopyxxoo31
Back
Top