The Off-Topic (but loosely related) Thread

Discussion in 'West Memphis III' started by Ausgirl, Nov 26, 2013.

  1. Ausgirl

    Ausgirl Enough Is Enough!

    Messages:
    6,481
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In the quest to keep threads on-topic, I thought this might help, for when interesting but only loosely related stuff pops up in a thread..

    To kick it off -- claudicici (cheers) and kyle, watching the Friedman case doco. This is seriously messed up stuff... Is there a thread for this case here on WS?

    I am seeing similarities and differences.. but if there's a thread/forum for this already I won't go on about it here.

    Thanks for the link, anyhow, it sure is fascinating watching this thing unfold. Sick and weird - and so terrible for the kids who were harmed via porn and abuse both - but fascinating.
     
  2. Loading...


  3. claudicici

    claudicici Active Member

    Messages:
    2,921
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Thank you for starting this thread.I couldn't find one about the case on Websleuths.
    After reading Kyle's link about the re-investigation I see where he is coming from.I've never heard about the case but watching the documentary ( and I will still call it a documentary,because it literally is based on family documentation and interviews) affected me a great deal.
    I now see they left out a great deal of information but for me it was clear from the beginning that Arnold was absolutely guilty ,I was less sure about Jesse until after I read Kyle's link.I do think there are similarities between Jesse and Damien because they're both rather unlikable characters (at least for me).Narcisissts for sure .Watching the documentary I was convinced however that Jesse was abused as well,so wether or not he participated in the actual crimes did not seem the focus to me.
    To me this was about a family completly being destroyed by this manipulator.I felt a great deal of compassion for the mom but I kept thinking ,did she really not know anything,was she really not able to protect these children?
    I felt horrible about how her own children turned against her and took the side of their abuser.
    Other than Jesse/Damiens personality similarities this case was based on children as the only witnesses and we don't know how much or how little of the statements could have been influenced by the police.Just like Jesse's confession and a number of other statements from the West Memphis case some of the statements seem too out there to be believed and do not match the facts of either case.
    However there are obvious differences between the two cases.There is plenty of evidence that Arnold is a pedophile capable of each sickening offense in the Friedman case.
    There is no evidence that links the WM3 to the crime IMO.
    I also think both documentaries Paradise Lost and Capturing Friedman have in common that they let the viewer make up there own minds.Most people watching Paradise Lost come to the conclusion the WM3 are innocent.I just can't see anyone who watches the Friedman documentary would think Arnold is innocent.And even though now I know the producer believes in Jesse's innocence ,I did not.
     
  4. Ausgirl

    Ausgirl Enough Is Enough!

    Messages:
    6,481
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    0
    claudi, I'll comment properly tomorrow.. but this is interesting, meantime...

    [video=youtube;qjYWOZgMbHQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjYWOZgMbHQ[/video]
     
  5. claudicici

    claudicici Active Member

    Messages:
    2,921
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    That truly is irresponsible film making IF you watch in order to try to figure out guilt/innocence.The tag line suggests that the movie did want the viewer to watch for that reason and in that case it's manipulation.On the other hand if you watch it to see how the family is torn apart than it makes sense to leave out certain things and just tell the story in bits and pieces just like he did because that's how the family members each had their own distinct tragedy and there was so much denial and struggle between wanting to believe Arnold because they all truly love him and facing the horrible truth.
    Paradise Lost did not leave out any evidence on the other hand so I really don't think it's fair to compare the two.
     
  6. kyleb

    kyleb New Member

    Messages:
    1,048
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    One particularly notable parallel between the movies regarding the two cases is the fact that both leave out subsequent documented confessions from the respective Jessies. The confession to Giraldo in the case of Friedman, and the confessions to Stidham both before and after pleading innocence, the spontaneous confession to the sheriffs deputies who took him back to prison after being convicted, the confession to Stidham yet again a few days later, and the confession to the prosecution against the advice of counsel in the case of Misskelley. Also, even in playing Misskelley's clarification statement for his initial confession in PL3, it's flagrantly misrepresented with selective editing:


    Paradise Lost 3 Purgatory 2011 - YouTube

    Here's the relevant portion of the transcript with the omitted portion of the conversation in red:

    And of course the audio is available for anyone to hear Misskelley insistently explain the timing of the attacks himself in terms he understands, cutting Gitchell off twice to do so. But that portion of Misskelley's clarification statement doesn't fit the narrative of the police leading him to the right time, and hence was edited out, and for the same reason the fact that Misskelley initially identified the time of the murders by stating "all of this stuff happened that night" was simply omitted from all the PL series and West of Memphis.

    Anyway, there's a mound of other evidence omitted, distorted, and outright denied throughout the PL movies and WoM. Can anyone else here provide other examples?
     
  7. primitivefuture

    primitivefuture New Member

    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Anybody have a link to watch capturing the friedmans online? Ive checked documentaryheaven.com, netflix, and a couple of others. I haven't watched it since it came out, and this conversation is making me want to have another look.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  8. kyleb

    kyleb New Member

    Messages:
    1,048
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    One can find multiple options for watching the movie here.
     
  9. Ausgirl

    Ausgirl Enough Is Enough!

    Messages:
    6,481
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's on youtube, in parts and subtitled in Spanish, lol.. is where I saw it.

    kyle - Misskelley being led to the correct time is not a 'narrative' - is a blatantly obvious fact, no matter how you spin it. He starts at 9am -- they lead him to 7pm. He says the kids got off their bus... this is completely ignored. Etc, etc. It's annoying when people won't admit Echols lied? Well, it irks the heck outta me when people can't admit this was blatant coersion. Because.. well, it IS pretty blatant.

    claudi, the comparison with Echols struck me when Jessie was acting the fool outside court... I aqree with majority of your post earlier, re the cases. I don't see these two cases as adequately comparable, except in that they both had docos made which did various degrees of glossing over negative points.

    Personally - the difference is - in the Friedman case, I do not doubt guilt. In this one, I do.

    Friedman's brother kind of freaked me out all through that doco.. He is in some very deep denial..
     
  10. primitivefuture

    primitivefuture New Member

    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I found it available on Hulu with no commercial breaks, in case anyone else is looking for it.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  11. kyleb

    kyleb New Member

    Messages:
    1,048
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm the one quoting the confession here, not spinning vague and inaccurate claims about it.

    Here's an example of blatant coersion:

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGehXjsuuqs#t=6358"]Evidence of Revision (4 of 6) The RFK assassination as never seen before (full movie) - YouTube[/ame]

    Misselley's interview was nothing of the sort.
     
  12. Ausgirl

    Ausgirl Enough Is Enough!

    Messages:
    6,481
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Misskelley was totally led to answers the police wanted him to give. You can actually observe it happening, as the interview progresses. It could not be MORE obvious.

    And to make it LESS obvious would require a spin.
     
  13. Ausgirl

    Ausgirl Enough Is Enough!

    Messages:
    6,481
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thanks, PF! The subs were kind of distracting, lol.
     
  14. primitivefuture

    primitivefuture New Member

    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I imagine they would be. I'm about an hour into it and I find the content of the movie itself to be distracting without any outside factors added on. I've had to rewind a few of David's quotes because they were so inappropriate/in denial of the situation that I wasn't sure I'd heard him correctly.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  15. UdbCrzy2

    UdbCrzy2 New Member

    Messages:
    1,509
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't know how much clearer that Kyleb can make this <mod snip> <mod snip>


    J-Joe Calvin
    B-Brent Davis
    M-Jessie Misskelley
    D-Daniel Stidham
    G-Greg Crow


    J- Okay I have the recorder on.

    B- I have turned the other recorder on for purposes of this tape we are at the office of Joe Calvin, attorney, it is 8:02 p.m. on February 17, 1994, present in the room is Greg Crow.

    G-Present

    B-Jessie Misskelley, Jr.

    M-Present

    B-Dan Stidham

    D-I am here

    B-Joe Calvin

    J-Present

    B-and myself, Brent Davis, now Jessie before we start would you raise your right hand, do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god.

    M-Yes sir I do

    B-Now for purposes of the records I want it to reflect that number one that Mr. Stidham and myself have talked with Judge Burnett and have advised him of the proceedings and after discussing this with him, he approved or said that we could take a statement with Mr. Misskelley&#8216;s attorneys present.

    D-Over my objections

    B-Over Mr. Stidhams objections. Also, for Mr. Misskelley's benefits that this statement will be taken with a grant of use immunity approved by the court which means that anything in this statement can not be used in any proceedings against Jessie Misskelley Jr., in the future, down the road or whatever. Also, for the record, and Mr. Stidham can add to this, it is my understanding that any statement that Mr. Misskelley gives will be against the advice of his attorneys, Mr. Stidham and Mr. Crow.
    http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/jm_feb17.html
     
  16. Ausgirl

    Ausgirl Enough Is Enough!

    Messages:
    6,481
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Lol. I did the same thing.

    I found Arnold's wife and brother both really interesting. Particularly what the brother 'doesn't remember' (as opposed to saying 'that never happened'.. ).

    Interesting too, how the males of the family 'gang up' against the mother.. really strange. I wonder how many child molesters have families with that dynamic, where the mother is to some degree or other on the 'out'.
     
  17. kyleb

    kyleb New Member

    Messages:
    1,048
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Again Misskelley initially identified the time of the murders by stating "all of this stuff happened that night" before going into his nonsense about noon. It's right there in the transcript for everyone to see for themselves, and the audio is available as well. That transcript also contains Misskelley demonstrating his utter lack of understanding of time in terms of names and numbers:

    To ignore such evidence is spin. Also:

    That's simply false.
     
  18. gheckso

    gheckso New Member

    Messages:
    201
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    How does this explain his lack of understanding of time. He didn't know the time "right now" so what, I don't know the time "right now". He even tries to explain why as his dad woke him this morning. Using this for evidence why he cannot tell the difference between 9am and 9pm is a stretch.


    JESSIE: I didn't go to school
    RIDGE: These little boys
    JESSIE: They skipped school
    RIDGE: They skipped school?
    JESSIE: They were going to catch their bus and stuff, and they were on their bikes and so,


    The children were at school
    Going to catch the bus with their bikes, okay...

    GITCHELL: Now, did you say that the boys skipped school that day, these little boys did?
    JESSIE: Yes, they were going to catch, they were going somewhere and like I said, Damian and nem left before I did, I told them that I would meet them there and stuff, and it was early in the morning and so, they went ahead and met me, they went on up there and then I come up later on behind them.
    GITCHELL: What time did you get there?
    JESSIE: I got there about 9
    GITCHELL: In the morning?
    JESSIE: Yes
    GITCHELL: Wednesday morning?


    The children were at school
    Surely he knows what morning is.
    He might have a little trouble with time, but 12 hours difference?

    JESSIE: Well after, all of this stuff happened that night, that they done it, I went home about noon, then they called me at 9 o'clock that night, they called me.
    RIDGE: And what did they tell you on the telephone?

    RIDGE: Okay, they killed the boys, you decided to go, you went home, how long after you got home before you received the phone call? 30 minutes or an hour?
    JESSIE: Uh, silent an hour
    RIDGE: An hour after you got home, so they were there for a lot longer
    JESSIE: Yes
    RIDGE: When he called you on the phone, did he say that he had just got in?
    JESSIE: When he first called me, he said, how come you left, and said, I couldn't stand it, I had to do something else


    So he was home at noon, saw and participated in the killing, and got a phone call about an hour later, by my count, that's 1:00pm. Puts our TOD back a little.

    JESSIE: And after I left they done more.
    RIDGE: They done more
    JESSIE: They started screwing them again


    He is Omniscient it seems

    These are his words (and I use that loosely) not mine.
    RIDGE: A little patch of woods
    JESSIE: A little patch of woods


    This is a poorly made narrative IMO
     
  19. kyleb

    kyleb New Member

    Messages:
    1,048
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Please check what I bolded there.
     
  20. gheckso

    gheckso New Member

    Messages:
    201
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And ignore what I have bolded? Gotchya.
     
  21. kyleb

    kyleb New Member

    Messages:
    1,048
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No, don't ignore it, take it for what it most obviously is: evidence that Misskelley had no comprehension of the concept of noon.
     

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