WM3 are guilty- Evidence.

[zh0r4]

JM got some things right in his confessions (suspiciously more as the trial went on and more information came out) but he also got a whole lot wrong and in his last couple, is all over the place in regards to certain events. for example, his account of how he came into possession of the evan williams bottle varies quite a bit in his last two "confessions." a broken clock is still right twice a day

the blood on DE's necklace was not SB's blood. it was only ever tested for blood type. if i remember correctly, JB and SB shared the same blood type and JB used to wear that necklace often

At approximately 6:35 min in the “Paradise Lost” the lawyers receive additional DNA testing (after blood testing) including “D1S80 amplified and matched DE, then the DQ Alpha which matched SB and JB”. From my understanding of the video, the lawyers are stressing out because due to the DQ Alpha matching SB and JB, and JB & DE being BFFS, maybe they did some black metal friendship…blood letting? & if they included the necklace (which they found out about 2 months? into the trial), they would basically have to start over and give DE and JB a separate trial because the necklace implicated DE more? The prosecutor mentions he’s tired of this and doesn’t want to do that, so they chose to omit the necklace in the trial. To be fair, I don’t feel this was the ethical decision. Even though I personally feel JB is guilty, I feel he was done a judicial disservice by not getting a separate trial. I can’t say if I was on a jury and the necklace was included + DE and JB had separate trials I would have been able to convict JB beyond a reasonable doubt.

I mean I that would take some seriousness on their side. Like I feel like they thought on their feet. Either way false confessions from a mentally handicapped boy is not a confession. Honestly this police department is a **** show.

The mentally handicapped conundrum is an ongoing debate in criminology, specifically what IQ level one becomes incapable of taking responsibility for horrendous acts. MOO someone with 55 IQ is considerably more mentally disabled than someone with 70-75 IQ; JM had an IQ of 72 according to Wikipedia. Serial killer Otis Toole had an IQ of 75 and was sentenced to death (commuted to life). MR is technically below 70, so neither one of them are technically MR. IMO this can be a tactic by defense attorneys to defend indefensible acts, turn offenders into victims, and re-victimize real victims’ family via injustice. JMO there’s no correct or incorrect stance on this issue.

Intellectual disability - Wikipedia

Ottis Toole - Wikipedia

West Memphis Three - Wikipedia

 

[TheosDawn1981]

At approximately 6:35 min in the “Paradise Lost” the lawyers receive additional DNA testing (after blood testing) including “D1S80 amplified and matched DE, then the DQ Alpha which matched SB and JB”. From my understanding of the video, the lawyers are stressing out because due to the DQ Alpha matching SB and JB, and JB & DE being BFFS, maybe they did some black metal friendship…blood letting? & if they included the necklace (which they found out about 2 months? into the trial), they would basically have to start over and give DE and JB a separate trial because the necklace implicated DE more? The prosecutor mentions he’s tired of this and doesn’t want to do that, so they chose to omit the necklace in the trial. To be fair, I don’t feel this was the ethical decision. Even though I personally feel JB is guilty, I feel he was done a judicial disservice by not getting a separate trial. I can’t say if I was on a jury and the necklace was included + DE and JB had separate trials I would have been able to convict JB beyond a reasonable doubt.




The mentally handicapped conundrum is an ongoing debate in criminology, specifically what IQ level one becomes incapable of taking responsibility for horrendous acts. MOO someone with 55 IQ is considerably more mentally disabled than someone with 70-75 IQ; JM had an IQ of 72 according to Wikipedia. Serial killer Otis Toole had an IQ of 75 and was sentenced to death (commuted to life). MR is technically below 70, so neither one of them are technically MR. IMO this can be a tactic by defense attorneys to defend indefensible acts, turn offenders into victims, and re-victimize real victims’ family via injustice. JMO there’s no correct or incorrect stance on this issue.

Intellectual disability - Wikipedia

Ottis Toole - Wikipedia

West Memphis Three - Wikipedia

 

[TheosDawn1981]

IQ has a lot to do with this. I know people find this hard to understand. But I can see where he was confused, he is not a were this conundrum is. They are. Everything they did to him was leading to what they wanted him to say. And if you have ever worked with people like Jessie Misskelley it is a fact that they are usually on fringes of society and do not have anyone there to represent them. They are vulnerable from the minute they are born. You want a conundrum how did all the evidence catch on fire? Why in world would such people get an alford plea? Sorry but I am glad there people out their who can stand up for them. Because if they didnt alot more today would waste away in a jail. But I am going to hope off this thread. I am not trying to argue. This is a page for those who truly think I guess there was a sound a solid investigation. And these three boys woke up and committed the perfect crime. So I get it and will hop off this forum now.

 

[Catmommy]

deleted by me - just cause

 

[WyomingSkyAngel]

They didn't do it.

 

[sds71]

West Memphis Three granted access to evidence, will seek new DNA testing

 

[iluvmua]

It's a shame that John Mark Byers can't be here to hear this news.

At this point, I hope this new evidence does clear The WM3.

There will be a LOT of unhappy people if the new evidence says that they did it.

JMO

 

[DHT1339]

It's a shame that John Mark Byers can't be here to hear this news.

At this point, I hope this new evidence does clear The WM3.

There will be a LOT of unhappy people if the new evidence says that they did it.

JMO

i hope so too, but i just hope we (and more importantly the families) can finally find out exactly who did this

 

[AliceInPain]

At least two of them are guilty, I'm sure.
Easy for their lawyers to go in now with all the celeb donations and say, Whoo! Look what we found. Don't think so.
But yes, the most important thing is the truth is found so the families can heal. I doubt that will ever happen.
All jmo, don't shoot me.

 

[herb4]

It's a shame that John Mark Byers can't be here to hear this news.

At this point, I hope this new evidence does clear The WM3.

There will be a LOT of unhappy people if the new evidence says that they did it.

JMO

If the tests implicate even one of the WM3, obviously it's game over. I'll be unhappy but also willing to eat crow and "happy" knowing the case is solved. None of it will match the WM3 though.

 

[Springrain]

At least two of them are guilty, I'm sure.
Easy for their lawyers to go in now with all the celeb donations and say, Whoo! Look what we found. Don't think so.
But yes, the most important thing is the truth is found so the families can heal. I doubt that will ever happen.
All jmo, don't shoot me.

Yep...JMO.

 

[herb4]

Which ones and why? How can only two be guilty if that opinion is based on the state's case? Which one is innocent? I want to hear this theory and scenario outlined and described as a narrative.

I hope several of the people on this board ever serve on my jury should I ever be charged with a crime and go to trial.

At a bare minimum, we have reasonable doubt in both of the WM3 trials. Scott Ellington and the State of Arkansas seem to agree.

 

[herb4]

Easy for their lawyers to go in now with all the celeb donations and say, Whoo! Look what we found. Don't think so.

Easy for the state to frame 3 kids from dirt poor families using the entire funding of the state and local prosecutors when the accused had to rely on public defenders. "Easy" to INVESTIGATE suppressed and lost evidence (Bojangles blood?) when someone has the means is what you mean. What you should be mad about is how money pays for justice and how it took some film makers (who at first thought they were doing a documentary on 3 guilty teen killers) in order to document this travesty and call attention to it, regardless of how you feel about the verdicts, the Alford Pleas or the outcome. I watched PL1 and thought they had done it.

But I learned better.

Not the WM3's fault that the only people with money in a position to actually help happened to be famous and learned about the case. I guess Jason's mom should have scraped up her tips as a Denny's waitress or whatever and hired a good attorney. They all should have mortgaged their trailers, right? Our justice system routinely prosecutes and jails and executes poor people for no other reason (in many more cases that might make you comfortable knowing about) than being unable to afford food legal representation.

No one is saying everyone in jail or on death row is innocent or even deserves sympathy. I'm opposed to capital punishment personally and saying here that scales of justice shouldn't be balanced by stacks of cash and that especially goes for white collar (rich) criminals that take more from society than 1000 shoplifters but pay thier way out of it and do time in country club prisons. Sadly, it took financial backing from people like Peter Jackson, Johnny Depp and Eddie Vedder to at least START to get to the bottom of this.

Unless you're comfortable with the idea of the State and the Government being able to jail and execute poor people on the strength of testimony from "doctors" like Dale Griffis and State Prosecutor forensic Grapefruit experts who've heard of heavy metal music and know how evil it is.

 

[iluvmua]

Would the State be able to re try them if in fact, the evidence comes back and points to them?

 

[iluvmua]

Which ones and why? How can only two be guilty if that opinion is based on the state's case? Which one is innocent? I want to hear this theory and scenario outlined and described as a narrative.

I hope several of the people on this board ever serve on my jury should I ever be charged with a crime and go to trial.

At a bare minimum, we have reasonable doubt in both of the WM3 trials. Scott Ellington and the State of Arkansas seem to agree.

If anyone is innocent, it would probably be Jessie. JMO

 

[sk716]

At least two of them are guilty, I'm sure.
Easy for their lawyers to go in now with all the celeb donations and say, Whoo! Look what we found. Don't think so.
But yes, the most important thing is the truth is found so the families can heal. I doubt that will ever happen.
All jmo, don't shoot me.

You're acting like the attorney just busted into the evidence room unguarded and planted things. You get that the lawyers would have had an escort, likely an Arkansas State Police Trooper, in the evidence room to protect the State's interest and make sure nothing was tampered with, right?

One thing about the State of Arkansas that I can state as an unequivocal truth, the State will cover it's own butt, that's ASPs job.

 

[sk716]

Would the State be able to re try them if in fact, the evidence comes back and points to them?

Technically, they pled guilty on the Alford and got time served, so I don't think so.

 

[sk716]

Easy for the state to frame 3 kids from dirt poor families using the entire funding of the state and local prosecutors when the accused had to rely on public defenders. "Easy" to INVESTIGATE suppressed and lost evidence (Bojangles blood?) when someone has the means is what you mean. What you should be mad about is how money pays for justice and how it took some film makers (who at first thought they were doing a documentary on 3 guilty teen killers) in order to document this travesty and call attention to it, regardless of how you feel about the verdicts, the Alford Pleas or the outcome. I watched PL1 and thought they had done it.

But I learned better.

Not the WM3's fault that the only people with money in a position to actually help happened to be famous and learned about the case. I guess Jason's mom should have scraped up her tips as a Denny's waitress or whatever and hired a good attorney. They all should have mortgaged their trailers, right? Our justice system routinely prosecutes and jails and executes poor people for no other reason (in many more cases that might make you comfortable knowing about) than being unable to afford food legal representation.

No one is saying everyone in jail or on death row is innocent or even deserves sympathy. I'm opposed to capital punishment personally and saying here that scales of justice shouldn't be balanced by stacks of cash and that especially goes for white collar (rich) criminals that take more from society than 1000 shoplifters but pay thier way out of it and do time in country club prisons. Sadly, it took financial backing from people like Peter Jackson, Johnny Depp and Eddie Vedder to at least START to get to the bottom of this.

Unless you're comfortable with the idea of the State and the Government being able to jail and execute poor people on the strength of testimony from "doctors" like Dale Griffis and State Prosecutor forensic Grapefruit experts who've heard of heavy metal music and know how evil it is.

WMPD and Crittenden County Courts framed and railroaded those kids in the middle of the Satanic Panic. That was a seriously messed up time. A lot of just bat-guano crazy crap being thrown around court rooms with "experts" on something that didn't actually exist. How does one get certified in fiction from a seminar?

I've never met Former Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel personally, but I am a big fan. Not just because the WM3 wouldn't be out right now if McDaniel didn't want them freed. It was under McDaniel's tenure that someone came up with the Alford idea and McDaniel let it happen. He was the AG, he could have shut it down for giggles. Every AG that proceeded him just ignored the problem.

 

[Cappuccino]

Would the State be able to re try them if in fact, the evidence comes back and points to them?

No. Double jeopardy rules prevent a retrial from the states side. The only way there could be a retrial is if the convictions are vacated.

 

[herb4]

Here's a question I can't answer. If Echols and the them are guilty then why...WHY on earth would they continue to press the state to test all of the remaining evidence? That makes zero sense.

If they did it, spent 20 some years in prison and finally got out, they'd get as far from that evidence room as humanly possible. Yet it's the state and the WMPD that seems to want that stuff to go away.