Throughout this, I've noticed that the nons tend to do several 1.) During Jesse Miskelley's taped confession the police not only edited the tape, but left suspicious swathes during the tape, the timing of which is extremely suspicious (they break off without their clarification statement, and then the moment the tape starts rolling they suddenly had it.) 2.) That if a suspect is malleable enough they can be convinced they had actually done it (martin tancliff). Given that Jesse wasn't very smart, and was young, and was in custody and questioned for a long time (and this is before he was officially arrested, I wouldn't be surprised if the cops made him feel like a prisoner even before it was official) why couldn't he have been broken down to the point where he would be open to suggestion? 3.) Ignore that if Jesse's confession were true than a.) Several drunken teenagers were able to magically chase down and do all that stuff to the teens, than remove any physical evidence at night while they were drunk off their asses, and while their were search parties out (why didn't they hear the screams) b.) These drunken teens would be able to remove all primary transfer in such a way that secondary transfer would stay intact (and primary transfer clings for far longer than secondary transfer) c.) That the Prosecution deliberately tried to twist the testimony of people who claim they saw echols at the scene (they try to imply that it was jason baldwin. This implies that the woman in question couldn't even recognize her own neice, yet could magically recognize some kid she barely knew at night when he was wearing jet black clothes and see mud on the clothing WHILE SHE WOULD HAVE HAD ONLY SEVERAL SECONDS. d.) That even after the trial when Jesse "confessed" again that his statement was STILL wildly off from what happened. 4.) Ignore that even Peretti conceded that any knife could make the wound (and given that peretti wasn't even certified I'm not sure it's a knife at all) and that the only one who pushed the lake knife was the prosecutor with his "grapefruit" theory 5.) That terry hobbs should have been investigated right away simply because he was Stevie's stepfather (stepparents, parents and family friends are far more likely to kill their children as such they should have been the first suspects investigated) 6.) That given the circumstances (hobbs claims he never saw the kids that day, and these are active 8 year old boys constantly tying and retying their shoes) that the secondary transfer doesn't hold water for why his hair was there 7.) That given the circumstances (what are the chances of them coming into contact with hair that was similar yet not belonging to terry hobbs) why do people keep trying to claim it wasn't hobbs 8.) That Terry hobbs was a vicious ******* who beat his own children, and his wife, and who was testified against by his best friend and other family members 9.) That the testimony against Damien can have an innocuous explanation (he was trying to get people to shut up, he wanted to **** with them etc.) and that given the age of the witnesses and circumstances (he said she said) that the testimony might not be completely accurate or reliable?