Thrill kill versus domestic violence gone bad/question for both camps

Discussion in 'West Memphis III' started by madeleine, Feb 2, 2013.

  1. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This is for both camps (pro and anti WM3),I am really interested in your opinions.
    What makes you sure it was a thrill kill ?(wm3 did it)
    What makes you sure it was domestic violence gone bad/punishment that went too far/accident?(TH/others did it)

    history of the suspect? (TH/DE)
    what the crime scene tells?
    the autopsy reports?
    the suspects own words?

    TIA
     
  2. Loading...


  3. EntreNous

    EntreNous New Member

    Messages:
    1,096
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    there are several things that make me lean in the direction of TH.
    he has a history of violence toward people.
    he has a criminal history involving violence against people.
    dna found at the crime inside the knot of a child that did not live in his home.
    witnesses who placed him with the boys on that late afternoon.
    an alibi that cannot be corroborated by the person he claims he was with.
    depositions filed in court regarding his physical and sexual abuse of stevie.
    the twelve hours of questioning in his case against natalie pasdar, in which he responds with cackles, jeers and several, "so what?" comments regarding stevie's death and regarding facts he cannot wriggle out of.
    the fact that he had stevie's pocket knife in his possession after stevie's death.
    his strange behavior the night of the boys' murders, i.e. all the washing and cleaning and the fact that he did not notify pam of stevie having gone missing.
    the fact that the boys were all "hog tied" combined with the fact that TH had extensive experience in hog tying for carrying purposes.
    the fact that the boys' were hog tied after death, indicating the discovery site was not the location of the murders, nor could it have been the water from which they drowned.
    there is more, but it's too late/early for me to think as clearly as i'd like.
     
  4. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    from the jivepuppy site:

    Dr. Peretti notes a dramatic distinction. While Stevie Branch and Michael Moore show contusions around their binding abrasions on each limb, Christopher Byers has only a faint contusion on his left wrist and ankle. His right wrist "was not surrounded by contusion" and there is no mention of a contusion adjacent to his binding on his right ankle. This suggests Stevie Branch and Michael Moore were tied up with both shoelaces when alive while Chris Byers was not bound on his right side until after death or, at least, unconsciousness. He was bound on the left side with a white lace, on his right side with a black one.


    to me the binding evidence is one of the things that points away from the wm3 being guilty and points to a parent....the fact that at least 2 were tied up while being still alive looks like it was part of the punishment/torture.if the wm3 did it then this part would have played a big role(tied up>humiliation/torture,iirc that position is very painful) and Jessie would have mentioned it but it seems he had no clue about it (even confuses the details saying it was rope,doesn't even mention WHY they were tied up,etc)
     
  5. EntreNous

    EntreNous New Member

    Messages:
    1,096
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    my bad. i really shouldn't have posted being as tired as i was. i still don't think they were bound for torture, rather for transportation. the fact that CB suffered little to no contusions on his wrists and ankles says to me that his organs were in the active process of shutting down, (dying) as he was being tied. being unconscious would have nothing to do with the degree of the contusions.

    imho the boys were unconscious when they were tied, CB was already in the dying process.
     
  6. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    removing the laces from the shoes,tying the victims like they were found....this takes time...and this make me think that maybe they weren't attacked in the woods....also....if there were 3 attackers (wm3),each of them taking care of one victim....why were two of the boys (SB and CB) tied up with two different shoelaces (one black,one white)??dunno if i make myself clear or if i explained correctly what i mean.....this makes me think that maybe we are dealing with only ONE attacker.....
     
  7. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    also,odd that five socks and two pairs of underwear are missing
     
  8. Cappuccino

    Cappuccino Active Member

    Messages:
    3,552
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    38
    A wrist compass and a silver ID bracelet are also missing. Then there's Stevie's pocket knife, which Pam says she always assumed the killer took, and Terry says he took off his stepson before the murder.
     
  9. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I wanted to watch the A.Jones show once again because there was something I didn't hear before anywhere....they are suggesting Miskelley SR was fooled by the cops that he might get the 35.000 reward if he convinces his son to go down to the station and talk to the cops....is this true,do you know more about this?cause if it's true then IMO his dad played a big role in what happened next (confession)....
     
  10. claudicici

    claudicici Active Member

    Messages:
    2,921
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    oh Jesse definetely thought he would get that money for his daddy,no doubt in my mind...

    His dad even testified about that during Jesse's trial.
     
  11. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    it's just doesn't ring like a coincidence to me....he went to talk to the cops and the cops did whatever they wanted with him right after he had a talk about money with daddy....:banghead:
    what a bunch of NICE parents we have in this case,all of them....:puke:
     
  12. Cappuccino

    Cappuccino Active Member

    Messages:
    3,552
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Excuse me, but that's a bit harsh, isn't it? Victims and their families aren't always paragons of virtue, and defendants, (even guilty ones), and their families aren't always demons incarnate.

    Monsters and angels only exist in fairy tales, in real life we're all human.
     
  13. LunaticFringe

    LunaticFringe I know you're out there...

    Messages:
    1,495
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Going off in a different direction here.I know I've said this before.If this was a thrill kill why were there no stab wounds if indeed Jason had a knife?I would think that they would have been stabbed to death...even if someone had found Stevie's knife,I would expect more knife wounds.Why use fists and sticks if there is a knife at the scene?Wouldn't a thrill kill involve more torturing with a knife?And the possibility that two knives could have been used if Stevie had his as Pam claimed he always carried it with him?
    I don't think Stevie had his knife with him that day though.

    Just my thoughts.
     
  14. Nova

    Nova New Member

    Messages:
    19,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't remember Misskelley Sr. telling Jesse to lie to get the reward. I thought that was a vague idea (tell the cops what they want to know and get a new truck for Daddy) cooked up by Jesse. No?
     
  15. claudicici

    claudicici Active Member

    Messages:
    2,921
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    It wasn't Jesse's Daddy who put that in his head.Here's Mr.Misskelley SR's testimony during jesse's trial where he mentioned Jesse was going to buy him a truck.
    http://westmemphisthreediscussion.yuku.com/topic/2377

    It was the police officer:

    "A: Mike Allen was, and Jessie was joking about the, he said, forty thousand dollar reward. He said if Jessie, if they get a conviction out of this that Jessie would get the forty thousand dollar reward and he's gonna buy him a new truck. And Jessie's laughing and said "No I'm not either." He said "I'm gonna buy my daddy a truck and I'm gonna take his old one."
     
  16. terekaugelt

    terekaugelt New Member

    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have been following this for a long time before deciding to start posting.
    I am committing plagiarism here from a poster from some site than I simply do not recall, so I apologize. But the idea was so brilliant it is worth distributing. This is the gist: everybody thinks that three different knots mean three different perpetrators. While actually, three teenagers would have been virtually certain to use the same, the standard, the basic knot. The poster whose name I have forgotten just led us to the situation when members of any - including temporary - school team would be tying their shoelaces: everybody would be using the standard knot.
    So the three different kinds of knot, some of them not so frequently used, would indicate ONE person familiar with the variety of knots in existence but actually not used by the general population. In their warped mind, the perpetrator would follow exactly the same reasoning that has, unfortunately successfully, misled so many commentators and has also figured in the official treatment of the case: multiple knots mean multiple killers. Actually, multiple knots mean exactly the opposite: ONE killer well acquainted with more than the standard knot. TH had the knowledge through his slaughterhouse experience (very few ordinary people actually know more than the basic knot). He also knew that pigs and other animals would be hogtied for comfortable transportation.

    He was seen calling Steve to his house - with the other two just one the spot. I feel it very easy to visualize all three entering the house. Once they were in there, they were trapped in a closed (and probably locked) space. So if TH was enraged (probably because of his constant complaints about Pamela paying more attention to Stevie than him, to which the kissing of a Mexican - is admit I have to verify this - could only added) he would have three boys physically unable to escape. I have difficulty to accept the theory of "they were paralyzed with fear and unable to run away", but physical impossibility to escape makes total sense.
    I know there is the manhole theory - BTW also predicated on the three captured in a closed space, i.e. unable to escape. But I still have to find convincing evidence that TH, in a rage, did not just kill all three in his own home (hence the frantic cleaning and laundering), and later transported them to the ditch. This would also account for the fact that some items (underwear and others) were not carefully hidden with the help of poles - nobody is perfect, so something was left behind that he either got rid of later or, like in the case of the knife, just put among his own possessions, with the story that a "responsible parent" would not allow his son (stepson, actually) to have a knife on him.

    But back to the basic point: the very fact that the knots were different definitely points away from the WM3 and to ONE person well acquainted with the more unusual kinds of knot.
     
  17. Compassionate Reader

    Compassionate Reader New Member

    Messages:
    2,352
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The missing clothing is still one of the mysteries of the case. Did the socks and underwear simply float away or did the killer keep them as trophies of a sort? And that's only one of the mysteries! Did TH actually go to work on May 5, 1993 or, as suggested in an article in the Commercial Appeal some time back, was he absent from work that day? (I'll check later for a link on that.) It seems that mysteries continue to plague this case. I guess we'll just have to continue to practice patience!
     
  18. Sunday

    Sunday Insidious Menace

    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I agree with your point. I think that anyone who may have experience tying different knots for different purposes (farmer, fisherman, slaughterhouse worker, etc) would do so in this instance w/out giving it a second thought, hence the multiple knots.

    There is no way that these 3 boys would go down without a good fight, or without running away, which is why I believe the perpetrator was an authority figure (i.e., parent or step-parent). That is the only instance where I believe they would be compliant, even in light of the deaths of their friends, especially if their parents all knew one another. Not sure if TH's friend was involved in the murders, but most definitely in the disposal of the bodies.

    F-ing shame those 3 kids were railroaded and lost a better portion of their lives for something they had nothing to do with. Sickening.
     
  19. Ausgirl

    Ausgirl Enough Is Enough!

    Messages:
    6,481
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Here's my take on the multiple knots: none of them are terribly complex. I know how to tie all three of those knots. I use them often, because I do things with yarn for a hobby. But I learned them in school.. I can even recall the little mnemonic sayings for tying a square knot I learned in grade school... So I don't think the knots conclusively point to specialised knowledge of knots, nor particularly give any great direction toward one party's guilt or another.

    I am well in two minds over whether this crime was 'domestic' or not. I think there's ample reason to tilt the evidence at hand for one side or another.
     

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