I've Changed My Opinion

This case needed to be reopened - still does. Hobbs was searching in the area but didn't see anything. Nothing about this case never made sense from the beginning . Grandstanding from the prosecution because of their widespread satanic panic which the media reported worldwide. It was so convincing to everyone at the time that no matter what the evidence would have been all they focused on was bed knob and broomsticks.

Real evidence and investigation never was followed up with.

I don't know who did this heinous crime but satanic rituals? Not buying it.



Sent from my SM-G530W using Tapatalk
 
Nope, never proclaimed the confessions were the "end all be all". And I'm aware they were inadmissible. We'll have to disagree that "there is nothing that directly ties anyone to this crime.". We obviously gleaned very, very different information and conclusions from the trial transcripts, the evidence presented and all the info on Callahan's. The reason "we" are in this position is because of celebrity, Hollywood, f'ed up celebrities with millions of dollars who are lovestruck by Damien Echols and a worldwide fanbase of the WM3. If those "documentaries" were never made, none of this would have happened. They were disingenuous, sensational and sexy to some (messed up) people. The confessions were absolutely validated by the other evidence. Hence the guilty verdicts and the subsequent guilty pleas.

Comparing JMK's confessions (which had zero other evidence to back it up - AND was disproven) is ridiculous. Completely different ball park. There was a huge amount of evidence to back up JM's confessions, and NOTHING has been disproven about the guilt of the WM3. JMK was proven to be in a different state and DNA ruled him out. JM and the other 2 child killers were in fact in WM at the time of the crimes, and they were NOT ruled out by DNA.

I'm not comparing the two confessions to one another -- I simply used that confession to illustrate my main point that a confession alone isn't enough; it has to be proven/disproven. Just because he/they was/were in WM at the time doesn't "prove" his confession that they committed this particular act that particular day credible, and if you can't see/acknowledge that utterly simplistic fact, there's no point in discussing it at all.

Whether you want to admit it or not, there isn't enough to definitively prove that the WM3 (or anyone: TH, LGH etc.) committed this crime. There is zero evidence at the scene, other than hairs that don't point to the WM3. That "evidence" like the evidence that "absolved" JMK in the JBR case, is a pointless red herring, considering the DNA profile in the JBR case could simply be a composite of two (not just one) individual. So again, the comparison fits.
 
Just give me, I don't know, a half dozen examples of evidence introduced at trial that points to any of the 3 convicted to the exclusion of others. I'll make it easier. It didn't even have to be introduced at trial.

I know you're asking Dogmatica, but I gave you that on the other page.

There are things that point to the WM3, whether you want to admit it or not. Nothing "confirms" they did it -- granted -- but there are things that point to them as much as anybody else in this case, in all honesty. Might not be saying much, but it's true.
 
Hi All, total newbie here after finding this amazing forum from TKS and just watched Paradise Lost tonight. Had a few amateur thoughts on WM3 and wanted to throw them out there to see if I'm totally off base:

1: after becoming so engrossed in The Killing Season, something jumped out at me immediately at the very beginning of Paradise Lost before I even knew much info about the story: the documentary starts out by saying the boys' bodies were found behind a truck wash correct? This just jumped out at me after the episode of TKS about long haul serial killers and the proximity of the dump site to the truck wash/stop.
2. i know they said the boys must have known the killer(s) because how could one killer subdue 3 energetic young boys? And the fact that the probably actual initial crime scene was never discovered because there was lack of blood evidence where they recovered the bodies made me start thinking that maybe it was indeed a long haul trucker and the initial scene was in the back of a semi. maybe he lured the boys in by saying hey wanna see something cool? and what 8 yr old boy doesn't think a semi truck is cool? I would think even if MB or TH were the killer, they would have stumbled upon the original scene and/or SOME kind of blood evidence in that town by now.
3. I do think it would have been someone who has killed before to leave no trace evidence and cover their tracks so well. I don't think any of those teenage boys could have been smart enough to completely cover their tracks.

Again, total newbie here just developing my sleuthing skills and thought I would throw a few random thoughts out to get some feedback.
 
Hi Justa, welcome -- always great to see new faces. The activity for the WM3 board on Websleuths isn't really what it used to be, but it jumps up every now and then.

1. Yes. They were found behind both a truck wash (immediately next to, in the patch of woods) and a Truck Stop (just west of the truck wash). I also made the connection to TKS -- to me, it's still very possible.

2. Yes. This has been proposed many times over. It actually even makes more sense considering how close the Truck Stop parking lot was to the dump site. If a truck was parked in the last spot in the 76 Truck Stop lot (not to be confused with the Blue Beacon Truck Wash), they could have hauled the bodies from the truck to the creek.

3. I used to be convinced that there was no way the WM3 could have committed this crime, but after years of research and not strictly believing everything presented in the docs, I can't rule out either one or even all of them as being responsible. I believe JM -- out of all 3 -- could be involved before the other two. I know you'll want to know why I say that, and honestly, I've gone it ad nauseum so many times that I simply don't have the power to rehash it right now, but just search this site and you'll find why. To give two quick reasons, one is because JB's alibi that he cut his Uncle's lawn with DE and DT at the time of the murders falls completely flat and makes zero sense. His Uncle himself doesn't corroborate it, for one; for two, DE and DT said they walked to the laundrymat a couple blocks away to get picked up from JB's Uncles', even though the Uncle had a working phone at the time and DE had been allowed in the house before by the Uncle. Plain and simply, they knew they had been seen at the laundrymat, and had to incorporate it into their alibis, even if the reason (they only went to use the phone there) made zero sense. They went to meet up with LGH and/or to launder clothes. Second reason: JM confessed something like 6 separate times to police, and in 2 to 3 of those confessions, he did so in the presence of his lawyers, against their wishes. If (and I stress, if) he was coerced in his first confession, there was absolutely zero coercion in the multiple, subsequent confessions JM gave completely willingly to authorities. There are a plethora of other reasons like I said, but those are just a couple why I can't definitively rule out the WM3 as perpetrators.
 
Thanks for the welcome USERID! I'm catching up on the many comments in the thread to learn more. I do agree with the doubt about the WM3 and JM. My only point of contention about JM being the killer is that with his IQ and "simple" demeanor, do you think he would be smart enough to wipe all evidence like that? I see DE as more of the cunning/planning type. I suppose anything is possible. Thanks again for your insight.

love this forum and so happy I found a like minded place for my "weird" hobby and obsession into true crime and serial killers. My family just doesn't get it lol.
 
I haven't posted on this thread for awhile but little Stevie, Michael and Chris are often in my thoughts.
 
Thanks for the welcome USERID! I'm catching up on the many comments in the thread to learn more. I do agree with the doubt about the WM3 and JM. My only point of contention about JM being the killer is that with his IQ and "simple" demeanor, do you think he would be smart enough to wipe all evidence like that? I see DE as more of the cunning/planning type. I suppose anything is possible. Thanks again for your insight.

love this forum and so happy I found a like minded place for my "weird" hobby and obsession into true crime and serial killers. My family just doesn't get it lol.

Yeah, my fault -- should have clarified: I feel like JM out of the three was the one most likely involved, with either one or both of the remaining WM3, or two (or even more) completely different people/teenagers. I agree -- he definitely could not have done this crime alone -- he would have had to have help. One thing to note that, before his confession, he initially said that 2 other boys were with him that day, before saying DE and JB were with him. I always thought maybe he simply was scared to say who he really committed the crime with, so he inserted whoever he could think of, eventually landing on DE and JB.

Hah, yeah I find when I say, "I'm interested in true-life crime mysteries" as opposed to "I'm interested in serial killers and unsolved murders," I get a much better (i.e. less frightened) reaction when I put it that way, lol.

Also, these are the two best sites to investigate the crime:

http://www.jivepuppi.com/

http://callahan.8k.com/
 
Hi, Arkansan here. I had a nice long reply typed out. Also, I'm new. HI! But I keep getting logged out, and told I'm not allowed to reply.
Anyways, before I get logged out again. tl: dr version I was a teen around the WM3 age when this happened and have been totally convinced of their innocence. Until West of Memphis. I started to feel manipulated. Started researching things not biased towards the WM3. Trial docs, interviews, other sites and now I'm a fence straddler.
Also, OP, sorry my state ruined an entire region of the country for you, but if you are that big of a baby, because of a few hypocrite rednecks (which I've had to deal with my whole life) then maybe it's best you went home to your momma.
 
Try this again:
Here are just a couple of links from the other side. That are way biased towards the WM3 are guilty. I know they are biased, but all the Paradise docs, West of Memphis and most books you read are biased towards WM3 are innocent. The first link to a site (more more of just a collection of facts) is called West Memphis Facts and it kind of summarizes WM3 Truth and callahan.3k
Have a great day, everyone.
 
Try this again:
Here are just a couple of links from the other side. That are way biased towards the WM3 are guilty. I know they are biased, but all the Paradise docs, West of Memphis and most books you read are biased towards WM3 are innocent. The first link to a site (more more of just a collection of facts) is called West Memphis Facts and it kind of summarizes WM3 Truth and callahan.3k
Have a great day, everyone.

Facts can't be biased - they are either facts or not. You have linked to facts.
 
Interesting to see this thread continues to be the more active recent thread about this case. It's a bit sad though because the level of interest in this case continues to wane. I can't say that's wrong or unfair. Many people are convinced the Memphis Three are innocent, and they've been free for a few years now. Still, nobody is currently serving time for the murder of these three boys.

I've continued to read the various transcripts, theories, and also monitored the behavior of the Memphis Three since they've been released, and I continue to think they are the most likely perpetrators of this crime. There was evidence that tied them to the general area where the boys were killed, so they had the opportunity and lacked any sort of alibi that'd rule out that possibility. All other theories lack having three people together to commit these murders, and there's a good reason for that: West Memphis is a small town to begin with, and the area where the boys were killed was pretty much in the woods. It's not like you'd find groups of three suspects falling out of the trees. The area may have been near a truck stop, and there's always the possibility of some random serial killer truck driver killing three boys, but that theory or others like it would have significantly less probability of being true.

The biggest obstacle to overcome if you believe in the innocence of the West Memphis III is the multiple confessions of Jessie. So much has been made of the fact that Jesse was in special education and has subnormal intelligence and this therefore led to a false confession. The problem with that argument is its a double edged sword. A person who attended special education and has a subnormal IQ would be more likely to go along with two others in a group to commit a serious crime. Said person would then be more likely to truly confess to said crime upon pressure by the police and also with the guild of retrospect. In other words, the argument of a false confession by Jessie because of this lack of intelligence, while a possibility, also can be used as evidence that he'd be more likely to participate in the murder of three boys under the instruction and peer pressure of two other teens. If Jessie is easily led by the police, he's also easily led by two other teenage boys, perhaps more so.

The other concern here is that Jason Baldwin provided an alibi that he was mowing a lawn at the time of the murder. That alibi proved to be false. Why would somebody innocent of a crime attempt to provide a false alibi? Evidence also indicates that Jason Baldwin's mom was concerned that Jason might be involved in the crime. Taken alone, one can argue he was a kid being stupid, and he simply had a mom who didn't give him the benefit of the doubt, but when you add it to the confession it raises questions.

The problem with the West Memphis Three case is there's no "smoking gun", no one piece of evidence or DNA that proves the case. In order to consider the guilt of the West Memphis Three, you need to compile the evidence and then ask yourself how likely it would be those three teens were innocent. When it's added together, it just doesn't seem that likely. I think that's been the flaw in reasoning that takes place with those who claim these three are innocent. I'm not sure, if I went through the evidence and I was a juror, I could convict these three without reasonable doubt. But I can certainly say, in the freedom of a forum, that those three teens more than likely killed those three boys.
 
^ Your 4th paragraph, for me, has always been the biggest problem with the WM3. JB's own uncle doesn't corroborate his alibi on mowing the lawn that day. On top of that, DE and DT (who evidently went to watch their friend mow a lawn, which in and of itself is befuddling) say they had to walk to the laundromat that was literally a stone's throw away from JB's uncle's to get picked up by DE's parent; even though JB's uncle owned a working phone and that DE was always allowed in the uncle's home. There was absolutely zero reason why they would have had to walk to the laundromat to call and get picked up, but they said that's exactly what they did. Why? Most likely because they knew they had been spotted at the laundromat and had to incorporate it in their alibi in order to avoid suspicion. Remember, there were reports that LG had stated he "laundered" clothes.

It was also reported that JB, immediately after the crimes, traded weapons for cassette tapes -- these weapons were an ice axe and a curved sword w/sheath.

People like to poo-poo the JM confessions, but the truth of the matter is, he does get many things right. Yes, there are inaccuracies (which he explains were purposeful in order to throw off detectives, which makes sense in and of itself, but I digress), but he was right about which particular victim received which particular injuries, particular injuries that were never reported (such as the ear-pulling), and his route home from the crime scene, among other things I can't think of off the top of my head.

That said, and what makes this case so difficult, is that: could this have really been the murder site? Could this have been enacted by 3 teenagers, who were able to leave practically zero evidence, shoe prints, foot prints, and minimal amounts of blood at the scene?
 
At the end of the day, the police and prosecutors badly botched this case by focusing on the occult theory and failing to use the Misskelley confession to gather more evidence that could tie the WM3 to the crime. If they would have taken a step back and not rushed this one, they may well have developed a solid case against the WM3. We'll never know.
 
^ Maybe. The WM3 weren't arrested until the end of June (if I'm not mistaken); the crime occurred on May 5th. Contrary to popular belief, there were a plethora of other suspects the WMPD looked into and/or ruled out in that time. I can't necessarily blame the WMPD by acting quickly once the confession was given -- otherwise, you'd risk the chance of remaining perps (JB and DE) fleeing.

But I agree with the point that the investigation was botched to an extent. There were many areas where the WMPD displayed incompetence.
 
^ Your 4th paragraph, for me, has always been the biggest problem with the WM3. JB's own uncle doesn't corroborate his alibi on mowing the lawn that day. On top of that, DE and DT (who evidently went to watch their friend mow a lawn, which in and of itself is befuddling) say they had to walk to the laundromat that was literally a stone's throw away from JB's uncle's to get picked up by DE's parent; even though JB's uncle owned a working phone and that DE was always allowed in the uncle's home. There was absolutely zero reason why they would have had to walk to the laundromat to call and get picked up, but they said that's exactly what they did. Why? Most likely because they knew they had been spotted at the laundromat and had to incorporate it in their alibi in order to avoid suspicion. Remember, there were reports that LG had stated he "laundered" clothes.

It was also reported that JB, immediately after the crimes, traded weapons for cassette tapes -- these weapons were an ice axe and a curved sword w/sheath.

People like to poo-poo the JM confessions, but the truth of the matter is, he does get many things right. Yes, there are inaccuracies (which he explains were purposeful in order to throw off detectives, which makes sense in and of itself, but I digress), but he was right about which particular victim received which particular injuries, particular injuries that were never reported (such as the ear-pulling), and his route home from the crime scene, among other things I can't think of off the top of my head.

That said, and what makes this case so difficult, is that: could this have really been the murder site? Could this have been enacted by 3 teenagers, who were able to leave practically zero evidence, shoe prints, foot prints, and minimal amounts of blood at the scene?

In terms of the alibi, you really bring up a good point. Ironically, the alibi puts them under suspicion because it admits all three were together at the time of the murder. This also puts them in the vicinity of the murder site around the window of time when the murders likely took place (I say likely because the police botched the handling of the bodies, so time could not be narrowed down as much as it should have been).

As for the murder site, the lack of physical evidence is the biggest challenge. Any evidence against the West Memphis Three is mainly circumstantial. One possibility for the lack of evidence would be that the kids were murdered somewhere else and then dumped at the site where they were found after the fact. Those who support that theory could not only argue for the lack of evidence at the scene, but also the fact that there were many search parties in Robin Hood Hills, and yet they could only locate the bodies the next day. Of course, the numerous search parties would also make dumping of the bodies difficult without being seen, but it'd be possible (with a combination of skill and luck). I'll say this much, if the boys were killed at a different location and then disposed of at the site where they were found later on, I believe that'd rule out the possibility that the West Memphis Three were the perpetrators.

The other possibility is that at least one of the West Memphis Three was smart, and all three of them were lucky about the murder site. Between the heat and the fact that the murder took place near water (assuming that's where it took place), it would make for a combination of biological factors that would destroy evidence. As for the lack of blood, they didn't even test for blood until 2 days after the bodies were found, and the bodies weren't even found until the next day. That's almost three days for blood to coagulate and for the bulk of the blood (plasma) to evaporate. So many people act as if NO blood was found at the site where the victims were found. A fair amount of blood was found, just not as much as you'd normally expect at a murder site where the victims were brutalized.
 
^ Agreed with everything here -- if this was a dump site strictly, the WM3 are most likely innocent. If this was both the murder site and dump site, they are most likely guilty. There were luminol markings that lit up around the discovery culvert, like you say (many people do undermine this, just like JM's IQ) -- but I'll also admit, I would expect much more blood around the scene, particularly from CB's and SB's injuries (which in my opinion, where caused by the same pointed-object-type weapon). I've always wondered if perhaps the attack was committed while in the water, hence the lack of blood on the surrounding grounds. It would also be an easy way to keep the victims quiet: by dunking their heads anytime they began to scream.

Honestly, I'm a fencie. I can't say for sure who I believe committed this crime, but I will say this: TH is low on my list; the WM3 (especially JM) are high, as is TC and OB. Don't get me wrong: he should have been thoroughly investigated -- all of the parents (steps and biological) should have been -- but I think many supporters jumped too quickly on the PL3 band wagon on that one. For me, there is more evidence that points to the WM3, than there is TH. The bite mark evidence is bunk and the wound extends past the cropped area all the way to the temple.

People have supposed that the crime occurred somewhere else in RHH, or even the Bill Grill Woods across the highway. There were bicycle tire tracks and foot prints that led into the water pipe that ran beneath the highway and fed into the discovery culvert, which many people attributed to the victims. It's interesting, but I can't fathom this. Another is that, the crime occurred in a manhole in RHH (which there were many, near the discovery culvert). But I believe the WMPD did search these manholes and nothing was ever found. If this was a dump site, the victims were attacked in a completely different area/structure that was a drive away; and they were driven to the area. Then again, the lack of automobile tire tracks in the area goes against this.

So it basically boils down to this: do you think it's fishier that there were no car tire tracks found; or fishier that there wasn't more blood found? It's sort of like a "pick your poison" scenario. Because if these murders occurred elsewhere within RHH, and the victims were carried to the discovery culvert, there would have been a boat load of evidence leading back to the murder site and that would have been incredibly risky.
 
I know you're asking Dogmatica, but I gave you that on the other page.

There are things that point to the WM3, whether you want to admit it or not. Nothing "confirms" they did it -- granted -- but there are things that point to them as much as anybody else in this case, in all honesty. Might not be saying much, but it's true.

I actually agree with that 100%
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
245
Guests online
1,056
Total visitors
1,301

Forum statistics

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