The West Memphis Less-Than-Three?

[reedus23]

I see yet another thread is derailed with 3rd grade arguments of "You're stupid." "No, you're stupid." When being stupid has nothing to do with this case, much less this thread.

 

[Bravo]

The State allowed the Alford Plea. Cant it just be? Let them live their lives. IMO they have paid ten fold for a Crime they didn't commit. It is what it is. I pray they find who killed those poor boys.

 

[Ausgirl]

Just to divert this thread back to its original topic once more...

I don't subscribe to the idea that if one is guilty, they're ALL guilty, and for several good reasons involving credibility on both sides of the divide.

I've been pondering - what if one actually is guilty? Or -one- is innocent? Is it possible that Echols -was- there, but not Jason? Or that Jessie was there, with a couple of different friends?

Does anyone think Jason, minus Echols, would be a suspect at all?

I think LG Hollingsworth is a brilliant candidate for an 'alternate' co-suspect for Echols, for a start. He was all over the place that night, is very dodgy - so much so that his own family suspected him.. His cousin-or-whatever Domini Teer is another one I find it easy to see as complicit, and both of them were with Echols that evening.

I also think Jessie is more than capable of bouncing a rock off a child's head in a fit of anger and killing them, and very likely to have panicked if he did so. I actually don't think he'd need help killing three kids, but he -would- need help covering it up. Jessie is on record as acting violently toward younger, smaller kids.. and he had friends living quite near the crime scene.

 

[reedus23]

Just to divert this thread back to its original topic once more...

I don't subscribe to the idea that if one is guilty, they're ALL guilty, and for several good reasons involving credibility on both sides of the divide.

I've been pondering - what if one actually is guilty? Or -one- is innocent? Is it possible that Echols -was- there, but not Jason? Or that Jessie was there, with a couple of different friends?

Does anyone think Jason, minus Echols, would be a suspect at all?

I think LG Hollingsworth is a brilliant candidate for an 'alternate' co-suspect for Echols, for a start. He was all over the place that night, is very dodgy - so much so that his own family suspected him.. His cousin-or-whatever Domini Teer is another one I find it easy to see as complicit, and both of them were with Echols that evening.

I also think Jessie is more than capable of bouncing a rock off a child's head in a fit of anger and killing them, and very likely to have panicked if he did so. I actually don't think he'd need help killing three kids, but he -would- need help covering it up. Jessie is on record as acting violently toward younger, smaller kids.. and he had friends living quite near the crime scene.

Regarding Jason, no. Of the 3, personally I think he seems to be the least likely. He is also the one that has the least amount of evidence against him, particularly since Carson's word is worth nothing at this point.

 

[OakieBoy]

Or 3 they weighed up the costs, considered the fact that the three child killers had already served 18 years, and considered taking a plea deal at the time would have likely led to a similar sentence and decided that the most time / cost effective thing to do was to simply accept admissions of guilt and release them for time served.

Precious resources could then be put to good use trying current criminals.

They also may have thought that they could be sure the M3 would not offend again given how fast they had been jailed. So even if they were guilty, they were not a threat in the future

 

[OakieBoy]

Just to divert this thread back to its original topic once more...

I don't subscribe to the idea that if one is guilty, they're ALL guilty, and for several good reasons involving credibility on both sides of the divide.

I've been pondering - what if one actually is guilty? Or -one- is innocent? Is it possible that Echols -was- there, but not Jason? Or that Jessie was there, with a couple of different friends?

Does anyone think Jason, minus Echols, would be a suspect at all?

I think LG Hollingsworth is a brilliant candidate for an 'alternate' co-suspect for Echols, for a start. He was all over the place that night, is very dodgy - so much so that his own family suspected him.. His cousin-or-whatever Domini Teer is another one I find it easy to see as complicit, and both of them were with Echols that evening.

I also think Jessie is more than capable of bouncing a rock off a child's head in a fit of anger and killing them, and very likely to have panicked if he did so. I actually don't think he'd need help killing three kids, but he -would- need help covering it up. Jessie is on record as acting violently toward younger, smaller kids.. and he had friends living quite near the crime scene.

Jesie would not be smart enough to clean up the place, put the sticks down in the mud to hold the bodies etc. If anyone acted alone it was Damien. He would be clever enough to plan the clean up, to think ahead and know there would be a search and that the bodies would float. The way the bodies were kept down though tells me it was someone who had a history of violence

 

[sloane7777]

I have a question not trying to derail this at all but in this day and age of exhuming and looking for DNA why haven't they retested with all the advances

 

[cherrymeg]

They also may have thought that they could be sure the M3 would not offend again given how fast they had been jailed. So even if they were guilty, they were not a threat in the future

Not a great babysitting recommendation lol. I don't think Jason Baldwin got a fair trial because he was paired with Echols. Whether Echol's was guilty or not he knew how to come off as guilty and play into people's fears. Baldwin alone probably wouldn't have been convicted.

 

[OakieBoy]

Not a great babysitting recommendation lol. I don't think Jason Baldwin got a fair trial because he was paired with Echols. Whether Echol's was guilty or not he knew how to come off as guilty and play into people's fears. Baldwin alone probably wouldn't have been convicted.

I'd pass.Whether guilty or not Echols is an attention seeking idiot and thought he was smarter than everyone else. I guess that is why he told cops how the killer would feel after etc. as a demonstration of how much he knew rather than any admission

 

[OakieBoy]

I have a question not trying to derail this at all but in this day and age of exhuming and looking for DNA why haven't they retested with all the advances

probaby do not want to open a new can of worms

 

[Userid]

I have a question not trying to derail this at all but in this day and age of exhuming and looking for DNA why haven't they retested with all the advances

For one thing, because there wasn't much DNA recovered. All they found (to my knowledge) was the blood-splattered necklace (which is not enough to test) and a stain on one of the boys' pants that is mixed with mud.

So to answer your question, there wasn't a lot of DNA found in the first place; and the small amount that was, isn't able to be tested.

But lastly, it's probably because everyone just wants this case to go away. The state, the defense, the WM3 -- everybody. It's incredibly sad, but true.

 

[sloane7777]

For one thing, because there wasn't much DNA recovered. All they found (to my knowledge) was the blood-splattered necklace (which is not enough to test) and a stain on one of the boys' pants that is mixed with mud.

So to answer your question, there wasn't a lot of DNA found in the first place; and the small amount that was, isn't able to be tested.

But lastly, it's probably because everyone just wants this case to go away. The state, the defense, the WM3 -- everybody. It's incredibly sad, but true.

Agreed , sadly someone got away with murder .