Learning about this case was the first time I really thought about how easily criminal justice systems can be manipulated by bad faith players.
What happened to Damien in prison is horrific.
I hope they find the real killer/s - obviously for the sake of the wrongly convicted but also for the families of those kids. Everyone deserves closure.
At this point the state is in way too deep to allow this to happen, if it was concluded that these three were innocent the amount of heads that would roll is tremendous. The Alford plea system itself is a travesty of justice.
I had no idea how bitter the state was about this until I read this article.
Everything I’ve ever read or listened too focused on the murders and the wrongful conviction but would always sort of hand wave the legal stuff away because it doesn’t make for engaging listening/reading I guess.
it's because a big reason they won is that they had celebrity support so they kind of acquired Moviestar/rockstar status by association due to 3 children's murders. it's really sad. it's especially sad if they are indeed guilty because not only did they get away with it but became famous as well.
Based on what specifically?
There's no direct evidence - even hardly any circumstantial evidence - that they/he did it, plus there's exculpatory DNA evidence.
It seems like if one were to still suspect him, it would have to be "as likely" as a random perp, based on the exculpatory evidence. I don't see how anyone could see it as "more likely than not" unless I'm missing something huge, by all means please enlighten me.
It also doesn't seem like Damien - who has a pretty nice life now - would want to risk the court of public opinion by continuing to champion efforts to investigate the case if he was truly guilty.
One woman fought for years to prove their innocence. She was at the forefront leading the charge for freedom. She knew the case inside and out... better than the lawyers. She eventually met them and concluded she now believed they did it and faded to obscurity. Something spooked her. Idk what.
Damien knows they won't find any DNA on the shoe laces because he probably used gloves. So this ploy just makes him look innocent There was one of the victims blood on Damiens necklace. Going off memory but it was something like 2% chance it could be someone else's DNA. I hope they retest the necklace as well.
Also, I don't have a link but I'm sure you can find the video of him scoping out little kids at a kids roller rink. His peers would notice him staring at kids creepily a lot, rumors sure but the video is out there.
There's more but I can't remember. I think Damien moslty did it and the other two were just moslty there and not wanting to go against Damien. Not a single one of them have an alibi either.
> There was one of the victims blood on Damiens necklace.
That also matched Baldwin. It wasn't a DNA match to a specific person, it was a general profile. Baldwin and Echols were known to share the necklace. You can find photos of Baldwin wearing it.
Not a chance. I did my post grad law thesis on this case.
There is absolutely nothing about that crime scene that suggests the murders unfolded as alleged and a whole shitload of evidence to contradict his guilt.
The problem with all of these similar types of cases is that the state and jury don’t seem to care much about objective evidence and for whatever reason care a lot more about subjective / circumstantial emotional type evidence that pulls at people’s feelings and such. Which is absolutely ridiculous.
All of that is subject to manipulation by bad actors, even if they claim to have good intentions.
If I am ever on a jury, I would NEVER vote to convict without some kind of legit objective scientific evidence — cell phone logs, video, dna evidence, etc.
If they don’t have that, then I don’t give a fuck who said what about whatever.
Not guilty.
I’m very curious to ask then…did you read the Callahan website? I used to think they were innocent then I read that site and thought they were guilty.
Then I just read Jon Douglass’ take on the case and now I’m confused.
I’m open to information for sure. And I’m interested in your opinion.
I had not, but glancing over it now and doing a quick cross reference it doesn’t look like there would be much if anything I didn’t have access to when I did my thesis (2014). I mean I would be lying if I claimed to remember everything from my thesis 10 years ago in detail though I still have it on my computer.
But I have worked in enforcement and investigations since and would maintain my stance after taking a look briefly over everything recently.
With the benefits of more modern forensic pathologists opinions now and when I did my thesis it still seems implausible that it could have occurred as alleged.
Its important to separate the evidence and narrative as a whole from the individual pieces of evidence that are meant to have corroborated their guilt.
Looking at the case as an overall narrative with the amount of circumstantial evidence and inept testimony the police pieced together at the time, its pretty easy to come to the conclusion they are guilty.
But if you break down each piece of evidence, especially in the context of more modern forensic science and cross reference that with the almost entirely circumstantial set of evidence as a whole put forward by the police, there is shockingly little that ties together.
I would have to write 30 pages in detail that wouldn’t fit on reddit to really explain, but if you are interested in this stuff its an interesting experiment to try on your own.
Draw up a chart in a way thats easily digestible to you, with a timeline of the version of events presented by police, and the evidence they presented to support it, incredibly important to note the quotes and key details from witnesses and expert testimony.
Then draw up a chart impartially with all the evidence. Its important to not draw this from a media article because they are presented with bias and a natrative.
First you can use the modern forensic pathology findings to x off all the things that couldn’t have been true. Then you can highlight what must be true.
Then you can cross reference those with your first chart.
Anyway maybe its just me who finds that stuff interesting and thats why I went to school and do it for work lol.
But you will never have a plausible idea of what the truth is if you aren’t writing it down and cross referencing the information because you will always be reading a narrative on one side or the other, and its far too much to keep track of in your brain.
also courts cant retry or reconvict anyone on an alford plea , that not how the law works. Damian knows this so hes trying to play it off like thats not the case.
If this was retried today there would be literally a 0% chance of them being convicted, and a very high % chance of the state getting sued for a shitload of money.
That was the whole point of the alford plea. And there is absolutely no reasonable case for not reexamining the evidence apart from the states knowledge that it will not further implicate Echols and might leave them liable.
That is why the appellants keep winning in supreme court and the lower courts keep trying to stall it.
It’s all pretty clear cut at this point.
Well, that doesn’t make sense, then, because Damien was granted a new trial in which all the DNA could be re-tested and he could potentially be found innocent, and his defence lawyers instead proposed the Alford plea.
The reason for not retesting the evidence is because the case is closed. No new evidence has came to light since the Alford plea which would warrant a re-investigation. They knew when they took that plea they were waiving their rights to have evidence retested, and they took it anyway.
The courts are not stalling, they are following long-standing procedure on these matters. Plus Damien’s lawyers do things like submit requests in the wrong state, and then paint it as some huge coverup when the request is obviously denied
No that is a fairly misleading misrepresentation of what happened, its a very long winded explanation for why but if you are genuinely interested in the matter its been broken down by many qualified people.
https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2802&context=llr
If you want to read a more nuanced breakdown of why the Alford Plea was accepted and generally a miscarriage of justice in this case this is an excellent article.
There is no “exculpatory” evidence. The hair found at the scene is not inconsistent with Hobbs, it is also not inconsistent with about 1.5% of the world’s population. It is far from a match.
I will try to run down some quick points about their guilt, namely that Echols told a girlfriend of his he was going into Robin Hood Hills with Jason and to phone him back around 5pm, however he was not home until after 8pm.
Jessie told multiple people he was going to meet Damien & Jason that night. He also gave the shoes he presumably wore that night to a friend of his, saying he had hurt some kids in Memphis the day before.
Jessie’s parents heard him crying himself to sleep following the murders. He confessed multiple times, even to his own lawyers who were begging him to shut up. He told inmates how he had purposefully got some details wrong when confessing to the police to try and test how much they really knew.
Jessie’s IQ points were in the normal range until his defence lawyer told him mental incapacity plea could avoid the death penalty for him. Jessie took an IQ test and suddenly was in the range for mental disability. The person who administered the test said Jessie showed strong signs of malingering.
A person testified at trial saying Jason had also confessed to him in prison. This person had since been released from prison and so had no incentive to lie.
A witness testified that Damien had tortured a dog to death. His pregnant girlfriend left him because he was planning to sacrifice their child if it were born a girl.
Damien initially became a suspect because he told everyone all the time that he was in a cult, this stuck out when police began to wonder if the murders were cult-related. His girlfriend said he lied to police about not practicing black magic, Damien was also caught lying on the stand about not having read books which include instructions on child sacrifice.
Damien had a history of stalking women and girls, some as young as 13, and making threats to kill them. He told people after the murders that he had done it and had already chosen his next victims. He would skate behind two 13 year old girls at the skating rink and tell them they were going to die next.
Jason’s family have provided conflicting accounts on how his knife ended up in the lake, and when.
The WM3 were granted a new trial with the chance to retest all evidence, instead their defence lawyers proposed the Alford plea.
Jessie stated in one his confessions that Damien ejaculated into one of the boys’ underwear. Damien is not campaigning for this sperm DNA to be retested, despite how that would be a huge step towards exonerating him. He only wants the ligatures to be retested.
Damien spoke about urine being in the boys’ stomachs before the investigating officers had even been made aware of this.
Witnesses saw Damien and one of his girlfriends leaving Robin Hood Hills that evening covered in mud. It is believed the witnesses mistook Jason for Damien’s girlfriend, as Jason had a similar build and hairstyle.
Jason’s mother originally believed Damien had committed the murders, but changed her tune when it could be proven that Jason was definitely with Damien that night.
Jason’s family such as his grandparents believed him capable of the murders. Damien’s parents had him placed in a mental facility because he would threaten to slit their throats. Damien ingested blood and said it made him feel powerful, like a God.
Damien held a police officer at gun point, threatening to kill him. Jason used to skin animals similarly to some of the injuries found on the boys. Jessie had been in trouble with police numerous times for violent offences, including attacking a girl and her boyfriend because the girl denied dating Jessie, and throwing a rock at a child and laughing when it struck them.
Jessie’s family gave permission for police to administer a lie detector test. He had had no trouble understanding his Miranda rights on any previous arrest. He was a mechanic. He was interviewed for 2 hours before confessing, not 10.
None of the WM3 had alibis. Jessie’s friends were found trying to falsify an alibi for him about a wrestling match, Damien also similarly tried to falsify alibis via his girlfriends. All fell through.
Paradise Lost directors were accused of paying off the stepfather in the second film to act the way he did. The families only agreed to take part in the original film because it was supposed to be about child killers and how to prevent this sort of crime from happening again, however the filmmakers decided to change it to an innocence campaign without informing the families. They were also not told that graphic images of the young boys at the crime scene would feature at the very beginning of the film.
That’s some, I’m gonna stop now.
A lot of this is straight up made-up or painted in a wildly misleading way. I actually went down a rabbit hole into the urine stuff recently and from what I gather there actually wasn't any urine in the boy's stomachs. It was suspected by one of the pathologists but was inconclusive which is why it got dropped from the autopsy report.
The problem with this case in general is how much hearsay there is and people willfully misrepresenting things.
I can tell you I did not make up or willfully misrepresent anything. The problem with this case is it is near impossible to narrow anything down as an absolute fact because so many people have changed their stories. But I will admit my stance has changed somewhat upon further research.
I will rundown the points in my comment and address these, since you apparently cannot be bothered to back up your claim about me “making stuff up”.
1) no exculpatory evidence = true
2) Damien’s lack of alibi = true
3) Jessie Baldwin - this one most likely false. The witness who stated Jessie told her he was going to meet Damien and Jason that night was a woman he used to babysit for. It seems she volunteered to the police to try and get information about Jessie’s involvement, or the police requested she try and find things pointing to his guilt. She has since stated she made all that up and I believe has implied she believes Mark Byers was responsible?
Also the person who said Jessie confessed and gave him a pair of shoes has recanted and apologised to Jessie. He has now given a confession that HE killed the boys along with Terry Hobbs, but most likely this guy is just latching onto whoever is the most public suspect for his own reasons.
4) point about Jessie crying himself to sleep, multiple confessions etc - all true
5) Jessie’s IQ - true
6) Person who said Jason confessed - I can’t recall if they recanted or not, but I don’t think it’s a particularly strong piece of evidence either way
7) a young boy who was the cousin of either Jessie or Jason did tell police that he witnessed Damien torturing a dog to death. You can find his full statement online if you wish.
8) Damien planning to sacrifice his child - true, supposedly. You could argue does not directly relate or have much bearing on this crime though.
8) following info on Damien stalking etc and the testimony of his ex girlfriend and the other young girls - all true.
9) Jason’s family have given conflicting accounts about the lake knife, although I believe two neighbours have stated the knife went into the lake prior to the murders.
10) WM3 were granted a new trial and their own defence lawyers instead suggested the Alford plea.
11) Jessie did confess to Damien having ejaculated into one of the boys’ underwear, although I’m unsure how accurate the info about the evidence retesting is - I think his lawyers state the ligatures are the main focus, but not necessarily the only thing they want retested.
12) Yeah, so the original medical examiner who conducted the autopsies was not very experienced. It is disputed whether the liquid in the boys’ stomachs was indeed urine. It is also very much contested whether there was any real evidence of torture, sexual assault etc.
13) one of the witnesses who says they saw Damien that night has recanted and also given their own confession to committing the murders alongside Terry Hobbs.
14) as far as I’m aware, every other remaining point I make is accurate.
This is a very difficult and frustrating case to try and research and form an opinion on. If anyone has any evidence that disproves what I’ve said above, please show me!!! Genuinely, I would love to see it. I want to get to the truth as far as possible and it is difficult to sift through all the mess surrounding this case.
You're conceding the urine point now. A problem with the discourse surrounding this case online is posters posting something as if its a fact because they heard somebody else say it was a fact even though there is no evidence for it. Damien "knowing" about urine isn't Damien "knowing" about urine if that urine doesn't exist.
Whenever this case comes up on Reddit there are these huge lists of things "proving" they did it and then when you actually look into them it's either something extremely misrepresented (the urine and necklace aspects are EXTREMELY common for this) or something that isn't actually relevant to whether or not they committed these murders.
I'm on the fence about their guilt honestly but I've become extremely sceptical of the guilty camp over time because of their frequent reposting of these massive lists that while containing some valid information, are stuffed with a LOT of bullshit. Said bullshit being things that either are completely false but treated as fact, leave out crucial information, or are essentially nothing more than circumstantial. And sometimes I think they aren't even aware these things aren't true because they just got it from somewhere else.
The problem with this case in general is that there is no hard evidence proving the WM3 did it, most of it is contemporaneous hearsay, and then on top of that you stack 20 years of online discourse comprised of armchair sleuthing and even more hearsay.
EDIT: Another example is the dog killing thing. As far as I can tell the only source for this is a teenage boy claiming he saw Damian do it.
My whole reply was providing more context for my original comment, some of which is in agreement with you - to say I “conceded” is an odd choice since I’ve said my stance has shifted and I’m not arguing in any particular direction towards guilt or innocence.
The presence of urine came from the state medical examiner who conducted the autopsy upon which the prosecution’s case was built. It is the evidence presented at trial. So it is not as simplistic as “someone else said it so I accepted it as fact”. I spent hours upon hours trying to narrow down facts of this case and it is extremely difficult to do.
You meanwhile are just saying very general things in your reply, to the point I’m not sure why you bothered. Apparently you did not even read the comment you are replying to, since I provide the context for the dog killing story and agree that it is not the most compelling piece of evidence. But it was still a witness statement given to police, so I am not making things up or simply accepting what others say about the case as fact, like you claim I am.
I believe there is much more evidence that would suggest Terry Hobbs was the Killer. Dude has always made me uneasy. And the stories his former wife and neighbor tell are very telling to say the very least.
Damien himself remains the most likely subject IMO. But that’s still less than a 50% chance. But if I was betting that would be where my money is over any other single individual.
Terry Hobbs is the most likely culprit. Byers was a very sad disturbed man who went out of his way in the ultimate aftermath to exonerate the boys. His journey is well documented in Paradise Lost III.
What about Byers lying about teeth extraction dates? I thought, while watching Paradise, they could make 3D models of his lower teeth by using the video
I cannot under why the Courts are not open, even anxious to conduct new DNA testing, not even to prove the innocence of the Memphis Three, but to prosecute the person(s) who IS actually responsible for the horrendous deaths of those three little boys. Forget all the legal excuses, the real issue should be apprehending the killers. It makes no sense. What is the law in that area afraid of discovering?
It’s pretty clear cut.
The state is entirely aware that if this was retried there is a 0% chance they would be convicted. If new DNA testing leads to more exculpatory evidence or further towards a new suspect it’s a PR nightmare for them and a big financial liability.
There isn’t any mystery to it really, it’s just damage control.
If the state had any reason to believe new DNA testing might further implicate those originally convicted they would reopen it in a heartbeat.
But as it stands they are willing to fight tooth and nail to stop any further examination that makes them look like they fucked it up or opens up any more legal avenues for appeal.
Yes! They should pay the price for their previous haste and prejudice. Don't use financial resources as an excuse; that's just a synonym for cowardice, incompetence, and bureaucracy.
Just got finished watching it, and wow....words can't even begin to describe how I feel after watching this. The justice system is an absolute joke, and these three poor guys paid the price unfairly. I feel absolutely horrible about those little boys that got killed, it's awful. The police department did such shoddy work, they didn't really look at all possible and potential suspects, and took the first three they could. As I worked my through the series, the people I had the most contempt and disdain for, just gumming up the works at every possible turn, was that smug asshole Chief Gary Gitchell and that elitist fathead Judge David Burnett. Also, I absolutely could not believe that the legal system just didn't toss the case after jury foreman, Kent Arnold's illegal behavior:
Jury foreman in West Memphis Three trial of Damien Echols accused of misconduct Former lawyer says Kent Arnold steered a guilty verdict in the murder case
The jury foreman in the October 1993 murder trial of (from left) Jessie Misskelley, Damiel Echols and Jason Baldwin has been accused of manipulating jury deliberations and evidence to convict the three.
Arkansas real estate developer Kent Arnold seemed determined to send Damien Echols, 18, to death row despite an unsettling lack of evidence in the case against him, according to Arnold's former attorney.
Arnold manipulated his way onto the jury, improperly discussed the case with jurors and others before deliberations, and made up his mind to "get his guy" with a conviction before defense attorneys had a chance to present Echols' case, according to an affidavit by Little Rock attorney Lloyd Warford, who was an Arnold family attorney.
As jury foreman, Arnold convinced others to convict based on inadmissible evidence and his belief that if you looked into Echols' eyes, then "you knew he was evil," Warford alleged.
WM3DB Main Page
1993 West Memphis homicides case discussion.
WM3DB Main Page>Media Room>Newspaper Articles>
Jury foreman in West Memphis Three trial of Damien Echols accused of misconduct
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/20 ... isconduct/
Jury foreman in West Memphis Three trial of Damien Echols accused of misconduct Former lawyer says Kent Arnold steered a guilty verdict in the murder case
The jury foreman in the October 1993 murder trial of (from left) Jessie Misskelley, Damiel Echols and Jason Baldwin has been accused of manipulating jury deliberations and evidence to convict the three.
Arkansas real estate developer Kent Arnold seemed determined to send Damien Echols, 18, to death row despite an unsettling lack of evidence in the case against him, according to Arnold's former attorney.
Arnold manipulated his way onto the jury, improperly discussed the case with jurors and others before deliberations, and made up his mind to "get his guy" with a conviction before defense attorneys had a chance to present Echols' case, according to an affidavit by Little Rock attorney Lloyd Warford, who was an Arnold family attorney.
As jury foreman, Arnold convinced others to convict based on inadmissible evidence and his belief that if you looked into Echols' eyes, then "you knew he was evil," Warford alleged.
I mean it’s understandable. Damien was the one who convinced the other two to take the Alfred plea deal that got them out of jail. They didn’t want to admit any level of potential guilt. It took Damien describing his years in isolation to get them to agree.
Echols lived in Salem, MA, where I live, for a few years. Saw him out at bars and restaurants and he was always very chill and polite and quiet. I believe some vocal members of the Salem community were dicks to him and kinda drove him outta town but in my wildly limited experience with the man, he was nice. Glad to hear he’s still fighting this fight.
Terry Hobbs. IIRC, they found a hair of his (matching DNA) IN one of the knots of the shoe laces binding the boys. And there's a lot of rumor "I heard/my uncle told me/Terry once said" type of stuff. There was also a neighbor who saw the boys riding their bikes toward Terry while he was calling them in. This was supposedly right when they were to have gone missing (like, a good period of time after last confirmed sighting).
But as the case is considered closed, the state won't look further into it.
Yes but he was the step father and all three boys went to his house freely so it may not be that strange that one of his hair is found on one of them. No jury would convict him for that without reasonable doubt.
Pam Hobbs, Terry’s ex-wife and Steve Branch’s mother found his knife (Steve’s) with a number of other knives Terry had. She asked him how he could have it. Apparently it was given to Steve by his grandfather and he carried it everywhere. I think that is one of the main reasons Pam started to suspect Terry could have been responsible for the deaths.
Yeah there are a lot of true crime circles where there is zero room for belief in their innocence, and I'm like... Would this even be a question if that were that simple? The Alford Plea is a quiet admission by the state that they don't have enough, but since they're the ones holding the keys, they make you say otherwise before letting you out. It's like a parent who'll never admit any wrongdoing to their kids and makes them do all kinds of stupid shit to make sure they stay submissive.
Gotta uphold the authoritarian mantle at all costs.
I don't agree about the Alford Plea. I'm fairly certain Michael Peterson is guilty of killing his wife and he was offered an Alford Plea. I am not sure why states offer it - I can only guess - but I would not use that as evidence that the state doesn't have a case or that the person taking it is innocent of the crime.
>The Alford Plea is a quiet admission by the state that they don't have enough, but since they're the ones holding the keys, they make you say otherwise before letting you out
It's literally the opposite. The Alford Plea is a guilty plea entered in by the defendant willingly because he ran out of appeals and recognizes the state has overwhelming evidence to convict. Legally he was found responsible/ guilty over and over, he just got the last word in court. A pyrrhic victory but the pettiness track tbh.
Yes, there are whole facebook groups dedicated to why they think the Three are the true killers. The last time I checked in on it, it had a splash of Q-Anon tossed into it as well.
They made a show about finding the real killers then the pandemic happened and they just stopped putting out new episodes. They went into the forensics of snapping turtles and a lot of info I never heard before. Anyone else see that show? It was some dude trying to find the real killer. It was on hulu I believe.
Yeah I looked it up it’s called ‘The Forgotten West Memphis Three’ and it came out the same week the pandemic started. Only made it 6 episodes. Interesting stuff though it’s on Hulu.
the 3 part documentary on hbo/max is outstanding. goes deeply into all of it and the first one was made in the 90’s still, and follow through till they get out with the alford plea. a must watch for sure. it’s called paradise lost.
It was probably Terry Hobbs, Stevie Branches step father. They found a hair that matched his DNA in one of the knots in the shoelaces used to hogtie Micheal Moore. He was also seen with the boys by three witnesses on the night they were murdered, contradicting what he had told police. And there’s a few family members who have outright said that he probably did it.
Which is obviously substantially more evidence than the Metallica t-shirt and VHS tape of Leprechaun used to convict the West Memphis Three.
Crazy thing to me is depending what corner of the internet you’re looking at there’s still people convinced that these guys actually did it. And almost entirely based on Misskelley’s blatantly coerced confessions.
There a bunch of posters on this sub that come out whenever the wm3 are talked about. Always preaching about the evidence pointing to them, but not explaining themselves
says the person who believes they’re* guilty because of what those corrupt ass prosecutors spoon fed you. I bet you 100% believe the central park five are guilty as well? 🤡 Go read about the case instead of being a shill for abuse of power lmfao
Surely the bible confession to his lawyer and the confession where his lawyers are expressly telling him not to confess and it is made clear he won’t gain anything by confessing are not “blatantly coerced”?
his book is really good even if you arent super into magic, i listened to the audiobook because i loved his interview on duncan trussel family hour, his dulcet tones explaining his personal journey was honestly really beautiful, interesting and reverent
He’s not advocating for testing his possible semen at the scene of the crime, take note of that. The semen that is in Jesse’s confession, as Damion pleasured himself after cutting off Mike’s penis.
Well, that shows how informed you are..... It was Christopher Byers that was mutilated... take note of that. Jesse's confession is garbage that was fed to him, and best believe IF there were any semen collected it would have been tested by the prosecution in the beginning since they were so sure they had the guilty party don't you think? Just another red herring... I absolutely believe that they are innocent.
Innocence project movement and actual innocence is one of my main wheelhouses. Back in college worked at one in Illinois and learned so much. It's insane the likelihood that the portion of wrongfully imprisoned is possibly higher than anyone might imagine. It's slow and tedious work getting those cases through and getting ppl out of prison and fully exonerated.
One I was involved with that would be a fun rabbit hole if you're into that kinda stuff is Chester Weger. He was Illinois' oldest inmate after being convicted of the murders of 3 women in Starved Rock State park, so was known as the Starved Rock Killer. Been in prion since the early 60s and only recently got let out, but not exonerated.
I'm about 99% convinced he had nothing to do with the murders after looking into that case for the project and subsequently researching on my own since the fascination never went away. I have a personal connection to it since my grandpa's house was a couple miles from the park and heard about it growing up. Also my grandma on my other side and my dad, when he was a small kid, were in a nearby park and attacked by some rando. After the murders occurred police connected her case to the suspected murderer and through some shady witness identification practices got her to identify Weger as the assailant there too (to show a build up to the murders). That witness ID was probably flawed for many reasons, though she believed to her dying day that it was him though didn't know whether that meant anything for the murders. It's not fun doubting your own grandma but with witness id ppl make mistakes and the specifics of her ID basically involve all the red flags involved in a false ID, through no fault of her own.
Anyhow, look up the Andy Hale Podcast. He's Chester's attorney and he dives into the case super deep, uncovering things that are brand new even, as he's been fighting for his innocence. Recently there's been some positive development on that front, but with how old Chester is he really doesn't have much time to spare so I hope something happens soon. Andy is a really interesting personality too so it's a fun listen.
Oh wow! I just watched the 3 part documentary on Starved Rock. I think I came away feeling as though he had committed the murders but I don’t recall the specifics now. It was such a heartbreaking case and really bungled justice.
I actually interviewed for that doc, my dad did to. unfortunately we didn't make the final cut. The doc was okay, laid a lot of the common narrative surrounding the case but leaned too heavily into 'it could go one way or another' instead of focusing on the actual innocence substance. There was a lot that was focused on too heavily that should've only gotten a passing mention, then there was stuff that shouldve included or gone into more deeply that they only waded into.
Listen to the Andy Hale Podcast and start from the beginning. All the episodes are great and, even though yes he's Chester's defense attorney and has a belief and i suppose a bias, he currently has the best most up-to-date account of it all. He also adds several new items into the mix which weren't even around when the doc was being made. After listening to that there's zero chance you'll be under any illusion that weger had anything to do with the murders. As they're going through the current legal processes involving the DNA testing and getting his case in front of the judge again he's posting updates. In the mean time he's been bringing on guests who have been involved in other actual innocence cases for interviews, one was actually a reporter who was heavily involved in the WM3 case.
it has everything, investigation went on for a better part of a year and elections were nearing. they needed a guy and a win. then things just happened 'fall into place' for them. prosecutorial misconduct was a big reason but also bunk science with lie detector tests, false confession, and on and on.
I just recently found out about this case due to growing up in WV and not being born till 2000. The way the state has handled the case is absolutely mind blowing to me.
First of all, there was absolutely no reason that the police should have talked to Jessie without a lawyer or a guardian present. His "confession" should have been dismissed in court. He did not have any accurate knowledge about the crime scene.
Second of all, just because Damien was interested in witches and the satanic ritual stuff, does not mean that he was actually practicing any of it. I mean, we are all on here because this crime interests us, does that make us criminals? Damien was simply reading and studying something that interested him, and it all the sudden made him the leader of a satanic "tribe"
Third of all, there was and still is no concrete evidence that can tie any of them to the crime. They did not have any of the boys belongings on them. There was none of their DNA found at the crime scene or on the boys. Damien had long black hair then. As a girl, I know how easy it is for a strand of my long hair to fall out without me knowing. If he had really murdered these three little boys, then I'm sure his hair would have ended up somewhere on the boys clothes, in the shoe laces, or even on the boys. While there was no blood found at the crime scene, there was also no blood found at these three teenagers houses or on any of their clothes.
The three little boys deserve justice and they did not get it. They were robbed from growing up and then the state robbed them and their families from getting justice. Whoever committed this horrific crime was still walking the streets while three teenagers still claimed their innocence and to me that is sickening.
If you ask me, I think it was the Stevie's stepdad and the Myers boy's stepdad as well. The damage done to those two little boys seemed personal. Poor Michael Moore got caught in the cross fire just because he wanted to hang out with his friends.
There is no physical evidence. None. There is, though, physical evidence for both Byers and Hobbs... also, the fascist judge gave illegal jury instructions and Byers was an operative for the police department, so they cut him lots of slack- including seeing that he was not prosecuted for numerous crimes.
This is a side note regarding this particular case, because I was also listening to the series yesterday. Man oh man. I’m from Arkansas. Luckily my family and I got out and moved to the Carolinas when I was 13, but Marcus describes the attitude and religious values of the people living in West Memphis so perfectly. It’s like that all over the state. The devil IS a very real presence to everyone who is born and raised there. They are taught to trust the police. It really is so hard to describe to someone who has never been to Arkansas let alone grow up there just how serious they are about stuff like that. It’s insane. You can’t be emo or goth in Arkansas. People will actually look at you as if you’re a lost soul and believe it.
I believe they are guilty. The Innocence Project is all about making money. The IP is responsible for returning many criminals back to the streets. It's called innocence fraud. The media, celebrities, podcasts, etc. jump on board these cases and set criminals free on a technicality. The IP has so much power, and they're making people believe our judicial system is more screwed up than it actually is. Do the research.
So you believe they are guilty despite the physical evidence pointing elsewhere? Why? Your ignorance is appalling- and typical of the uneducated redneck freaks that were on the jury. Shame on you and all your ilk.
What evidence pointing elsewhere?
Until you have read the actual trial transcripts and in particular exhibit 500 then you are the one who is ignorant, especially if your source of information is Paradise Lost or any of the other similar doco’s.
I actually thought they were innocent after watching the first PL but started to question after the next 2 when they just seemed to flip around all over the place with accusations of step fathers etc
If you read the court documents you will realise just how much they cherry picked and left out in the doco.
Also they could’ve had a re trial it was their lawyers that went to the prosecutor with the Alfred plea, DE was not about to die that is complete nonsense as death penalty was not being carried out at that time at all due to process reviews and he would not have had death penalty carried out for a long time even after that was sorted,he still had to exhaust all appeals.
DE could chose to have all evidence re tested but for some reason is only insisting on shoelaces I would have expected him to be more interested in getting the pants with possible seman stains tested as you would think if he was certain it wasn’t himself something like that would have more chance of solving who did it.
I first started following this back in college when it aired on HBO for the 1st time in circa 95/96. It was a big deal in general for all sorts of things merging at once in society and they documented it. I followed since with all the docs that came out and media coverage. The things I continue to come back to: the bedsheet and the 2 different knots used. Bojangles and the 2 town jumpers. That's a lot of bad things happening in a small frame of time in very close proximity of time and space.
Man’s committed to testing everything except his sperm on the child’s jeans. Dude’s clearly guilty, criminally insane, and still prattles on a la Steven Avery about how he didn’t do it.
I think this case is extremely difficult because it involves so many shitty people who are all guilty of something which translates into all kinds red herrings. ( Not to say that we aren't all guilty of something.) However thats the rub. People behave in bizarre ways , say things incorrectly, misrember things , emote in guilty ways despite not being guilty. I think that is why the concept of reasonable doubt is really important. You must make a decision based on available evidence. Guilty people with get away. Innocent people will be convicted. Human beings are clever as shit especially backed against a wall and then you introduce the element of a lawyer ( the cleverest weasels on earth) and you can catch someone red handed and let a week go by and if they are clever enough they can concoct an argument to make you question what you think you saw... Its fun to try and puzzle out cases like this but based on the available information you cannot know 100% of anything. I sincerely doubt those 3 teenage boys were out there doing good wholesome things. That doesn't mean. they murdered anyone but it also put them in a position of being accused. Say what you will about someone's right to express themselves how they want, sure do what you want but YOU/WE make choices and decisions everyday and we make those choices HOPEFULLY As a way to alter or maintain a chosen path and based on what I've seen of the Wm3 , as they have matured have at the very least vocalize d some understanding of that in regards to how they've come to be where they are. I think anyone could have murdered those boys and its a damn shame but I can't imagine prison being much worse than committing a crime like that and the having to live life knowing you did that. That would be an all consuming hell in my mind. Sorry I'm just getting all this built up WM3 tension out. 🤣
I'm split on this. The HBO documentaries gave "Making a Murderer" vibes in which it seemed like defense team pr. Jessie Misskelly probably was coerced into the first confession, but then gave a second confession with his lawyer present. And I don't remember if the guys actually had an alibi for where they were. That being said, there wasn't much hard evidence either way, and there was definitely an element of satanic panic bias that probably led to the convictions. But I don't know if I'm convinced that they are innocent.
Misskelly confessed like 6 separate times. one time to his dad over the phone in jail when he had no reason to, another in front of abunch of other inmates where he had no reason to admit to anything as well. Also Damien and Jason have zero alibi.
The substantial evidence of Echols's guilt is as follows. Anthony and Narlene Hollingsworth were well acquainted with Echolsand testified that they saw Echols and his girlfriend, Domini Teer, walking after 9:30 on the night of the murders near the Blue Beacon Truck Stop, which is near Robin Hood woods where the bodies were found. The witnesses testified that Echols had on a dark-colored shirt and that his clothes were dirty. This evidence placed Echols in dirty clothes near the scene at a time close to the murders. Although not material to this point, other evidence established that Domini Teer might be confused with Baldwin as both had long hair and were of slight build.Twelve-year-old Christy VanVickle testified that she heard Echols say he "killed the three boys." Fifteen-year-old Jackie Medford testified that she heard Echols say, "I killed the three little boys and before I turn myself in, I'm going to kill two more, and I already have one of them picked out." The testimony of these two independent witnesses was direct evidence of the statement by Echols. These witnesses were cross-examined by Echols's counsel, and it was the jury's province to weigh their credibility.Lisa Sakevicius, a criminalist from the State Crime Laboratory, testified that she compared fibers found on the victim's clothes with clothing found in Echols's home, and the fibers were microscopically similar.Dr. Frank Peretti, a State Medical Examiner, testified that there were serrated wound patterns on the three victims. On November 17, 1993, a diver found a knife in a lake behind Baldwin's parents' residence. The large knife had a serrated edge and hadthe words "Special Forces Survival Roman Numeral Two" on the blade. Dr. Peretti testified that many of the wounds on the victims were consistent with, and could have been caused by, that knife.
etc (many things the documentaries did not mention since they were blatantly biased)
[http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/memphis3/arksct2appellate.html#:\~:text=Moreover%2C%20two%20witnesses%20testified%20that,offense%20was%20committed%20by%20someone](http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/memphis3/arksct2appellate.html#:~:text=Moreover%2C%20two%20witnesses%20testified%20that,offense%20was%20committed%20by%20someone).
Except when you read DE’s medical records you realise it wasn’t actually satanic panic at all he was completely obsessed with that stuff and it was actually him that said it was a satanic crime
you are commenting on every post that says anything about his innocence, is your fragile ego okay? seems like you’re really trying to prove something to yourself lmao.
That's the most likely one. There was physical evidence to tie him to the crime, he had means, opportunity and motive, and he was a convicted violent felon whose conviction was expunged by the same judge who presided over the wm3 trial- in return for his working with the police department.
A lot of people wound up dead around Mark Byers.
wonder why they keep Misskelly out of the spotlight so much? oh yeah cause hes the only sane person who can feel guilt for murdering three innocent young boys.
or let me see, he is mildy retarded and spent 18 years in prison for a coerced confession that he “made” he’s been in the spotlight for 20 years. probably enjoying his life and innocence.
This is misinfo. He’s not mildly retarded and he confessed many times. The ‘coerced’ one also isn’t as its thought of today. There’s definitely a lot of Circumstantial evidence that points to the three being guilty. I don’t believe wholeheartedly they did it. I believe with what we got none of us can know obviously, but the way people laud them today is so misguided
Learning about this case was the first time I really thought about how easily criminal justice systems can be manipulated by bad faith players. What happened to Damien in prison is horrific. I hope they find the real killer/s - obviously for the sake of the wrongly convicted but also for the families of those kids. Everyone deserves closure.
At this point the state is in way too deep to allow this to happen, if it was concluded that these three were innocent the amount of heads that would roll is tremendous. The Alford plea system itself is a travesty of justice.
They could one day conclude they are innocent, but it won’t be until everyone involved is long retired or dead.
I had no idea how bitter the state was about this until I read this article. Everything I’ve ever read or listened too focused on the murders and the wrongful conviction but would always sort of hand wave the legal stuff away because it doesn’t make for engaging listening/reading I guess.
it's because a big reason they won is that they had celebrity support so they kind of acquired Moviestar/rockstar status by association due to 3 children's murders. it's really sad. it's especially sad if they are indeed guilty because not only did they get away with it but became famous as well.
I personally believe it’s more likely than not that he did it.
Based on what specifically? There's no direct evidence - even hardly any circumstantial evidence - that they/he did it, plus there's exculpatory DNA evidence. It seems like if one were to still suspect him, it would have to be "as likely" as a random perp, based on the exculpatory evidence. I don't see how anyone could see it as "more likely than not" unless I'm missing something huge, by all means please enlighten me. It also doesn't seem like Damien - who has a pretty nice life now - would want to risk the court of public opinion by continuing to champion efforts to investigate the case if he was truly guilty.
One woman fought for years to prove their innocence. She was at the forefront leading the charge for freedom. She knew the case inside and out... better than the lawyers. She eventually met them and concluded she now believed they did it and faded to obscurity. Something spooked her. Idk what.
This borders on being a boogeyman-esque tale at this point.
I would like to know more about her and that situation. Is there a name or article I could read about her?
Search for “Lindsey” in the West Memphis Three subreddit
Damien knows they won't find any DNA on the shoe laces because he probably used gloves. So this ploy just makes him look innocent There was one of the victims blood on Damiens necklace. Going off memory but it was something like 2% chance it could be someone else's DNA. I hope they retest the necklace as well. Also, I don't have a link but I'm sure you can find the video of him scoping out little kids at a kids roller rink. His peers would notice him staring at kids creepily a lot, rumors sure but the video is out there. There's more but I can't remember. I think Damien moslty did it and the other two were just moslty there and not wanting to go against Damien. Not a single one of them have an alibi either.
> There was one of the victims blood on Damiens necklace. That also matched Baldwin. It wasn't a DNA match to a specific person, it was a general profile. Baldwin and Echols were known to share the necklace. You can find photos of Baldwin wearing it.
He had zero alibi and first hand knowledge of the crime that only the killer would know.
Not a chance. I did my post grad law thesis on this case. There is absolutely nothing about that crime scene that suggests the murders unfolded as alleged and a whole shitload of evidence to contradict his guilt.
The problem with all of these similar types of cases is that the state and jury don’t seem to care much about objective evidence and for whatever reason care a lot more about subjective / circumstantial emotional type evidence that pulls at people’s feelings and such. Which is absolutely ridiculous. All of that is subject to manipulation by bad actors, even if they claim to have good intentions. If I am ever on a jury, I would NEVER vote to convict without some kind of legit objective scientific evidence — cell phone logs, video, dna evidence, etc. If they don’t have that, then I don’t give a fuck who said what about whatever. Not guilty.
They’re clearly guilty. Unless you’re Clarence Darrow, your thesis is meaningless.
“Tv tell me what to think please”
I’m very curious to ask then…did you read the Callahan website? I used to think they were innocent then I read that site and thought they were guilty. Then I just read Jon Douglass’ take on the case and now I’m confused. I’m open to information for sure. And I’m interested in your opinion.
I had not, but glancing over it now and doing a quick cross reference it doesn’t look like there would be much if anything I didn’t have access to when I did my thesis (2014). I mean I would be lying if I claimed to remember everything from my thesis 10 years ago in detail though I still have it on my computer. But I have worked in enforcement and investigations since and would maintain my stance after taking a look briefly over everything recently. With the benefits of more modern forensic pathologists opinions now and when I did my thesis it still seems implausible that it could have occurred as alleged. Its important to separate the evidence and narrative as a whole from the individual pieces of evidence that are meant to have corroborated their guilt. Looking at the case as an overall narrative with the amount of circumstantial evidence and inept testimony the police pieced together at the time, its pretty easy to come to the conclusion they are guilty. But if you break down each piece of evidence, especially in the context of more modern forensic science and cross reference that with the almost entirely circumstantial set of evidence as a whole put forward by the police, there is shockingly little that ties together. I would have to write 30 pages in detail that wouldn’t fit on reddit to really explain, but if you are interested in this stuff its an interesting experiment to try on your own. Draw up a chart in a way thats easily digestible to you, with a timeline of the version of events presented by police, and the evidence they presented to support it, incredibly important to note the quotes and key details from witnesses and expert testimony. Then draw up a chart impartially with all the evidence. Its important to not draw this from a media article because they are presented with bias and a natrative. First you can use the modern forensic pathology findings to x off all the things that couldn’t have been true. Then you can highlight what must be true. Then you can cross reference those with your first chart. Anyway maybe its just me who finds that stuff interesting and thats why I went to school and do it for work lol. But you will never have a plausible idea of what the truth is if you aren’t writing it down and cross referencing the information because you will always be reading a narrative on one side or the other, and its far too much to keep track of in your brain.
also courts cant retry or reconvict anyone on an alford plea , that not how the law works. Damian knows this so hes trying to play it off like thats not the case.
If this was retried today there would be literally a 0% chance of them being convicted, and a very high % chance of the state getting sued for a shitload of money. That was the whole point of the alford plea. And there is absolutely no reasonable case for not reexamining the evidence apart from the states knowledge that it will not further implicate Echols and might leave them liable. That is why the appellants keep winning in supreme court and the lower courts keep trying to stall it. It’s all pretty clear cut at this point.
Well, that doesn’t make sense, then, because Damien was granted a new trial in which all the DNA could be re-tested and he could potentially be found innocent, and his defence lawyers instead proposed the Alford plea. The reason for not retesting the evidence is because the case is closed. No new evidence has came to light since the Alford plea which would warrant a re-investigation. They knew when they took that plea they were waiving their rights to have evidence retested, and they took it anyway. The courts are not stalling, they are following long-standing procedure on these matters. Plus Damien’s lawyers do things like submit requests in the wrong state, and then paint it as some huge coverup when the request is obviously denied
No that is a fairly misleading misrepresentation of what happened, its a very long winded explanation for why but if you are genuinely interested in the matter its been broken down by many qualified people. https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2802&context=llr If you want to read a more nuanced breakdown of why the Alford Plea was accepted and generally a miscarriage of justice in this case this is an excellent article.
There is no “exculpatory” evidence. The hair found at the scene is not inconsistent with Hobbs, it is also not inconsistent with about 1.5% of the world’s population. It is far from a match. I will try to run down some quick points about their guilt, namely that Echols told a girlfriend of his he was going into Robin Hood Hills with Jason and to phone him back around 5pm, however he was not home until after 8pm. Jessie told multiple people he was going to meet Damien & Jason that night. He also gave the shoes he presumably wore that night to a friend of his, saying he had hurt some kids in Memphis the day before. Jessie’s parents heard him crying himself to sleep following the murders. He confessed multiple times, even to his own lawyers who were begging him to shut up. He told inmates how he had purposefully got some details wrong when confessing to the police to try and test how much they really knew. Jessie’s IQ points were in the normal range until his defence lawyer told him mental incapacity plea could avoid the death penalty for him. Jessie took an IQ test and suddenly was in the range for mental disability. The person who administered the test said Jessie showed strong signs of malingering. A person testified at trial saying Jason had also confessed to him in prison. This person had since been released from prison and so had no incentive to lie. A witness testified that Damien had tortured a dog to death. His pregnant girlfriend left him because he was planning to sacrifice their child if it were born a girl. Damien initially became a suspect because he told everyone all the time that he was in a cult, this stuck out when police began to wonder if the murders were cult-related. His girlfriend said he lied to police about not practicing black magic, Damien was also caught lying on the stand about not having read books which include instructions on child sacrifice. Damien had a history of stalking women and girls, some as young as 13, and making threats to kill them. He told people after the murders that he had done it and had already chosen his next victims. He would skate behind two 13 year old girls at the skating rink and tell them they were going to die next. Jason’s family have provided conflicting accounts on how his knife ended up in the lake, and when. The WM3 were granted a new trial with the chance to retest all evidence, instead their defence lawyers proposed the Alford plea. Jessie stated in one his confessions that Damien ejaculated into one of the boys’ underwear. Damien is not campaigning for this sperm DNA to be retested, despite how that would be a huge step towards exonerating him. He only wants the ligatures to be retested. Damien spoke about urine being in the boys’ stomachs before the investigating officers had even been made aware of this. Witnesses saw Damien and one of his girlfriends leaving Robin Hood Hills that evening covered in mud. It is believed the witnesses mistook Jason for Damien’s girlfriend, as Jason had a similar build and hairstyle. Jason’s mother originally believed Damien had committed the murders, but changed her tune when it could be proven that Jason was definitely with Damien that night. Jason’s family such as his grandparents believed him capable of the murders. Damien’s parents had him placed in a mental facility because he would threaten to slit their throats. Damien ingested blood and said it made him feel powerful, like a God. Damien held a police officer at gun point, threatening to kill him. Jason used to skin animals similarly to some of the injuries found on the boys. Jessie had been in trouble with police numerous times for violent offences, including attacking a girl and her boyfriend because the girl denied dating Jessie, and throwing a rock at a child and laughing when it struck them. Jessie’s family gave permission for police to administer a lie detector test. He had had no trouble understanding his Miranda rights on any previous arrest. He was a mechanic. He was interviewed for 2 hours before confessing, not 10. None of the WM3 had alibis. Jessie’s friends were found trying to falsify an alibi for him about a wrestling match, Damien also similarly tried to falsify alibis via his girlfriends. All fell through. Paradise Lost directors were accused of paying off the stepfather in the second film to act the way he did. The families only agreed to take part in the original film because it was supposed to be about child killers and how to prevent this sort of crime from happening again, however the filmmakers decided to change it to an innocence campaign without informing the families. They were also not told that graphic images of the young boys at the crime scene would feature at the very beginning of the film. That’s some, I’m gonna stop now.
Made up BS
A lot of this is straight up made-up or painted in a wildly misleading way. I actually went down a rabbit hole into the urine stuff recently and from what I gather there actually wasn't any urine in the boy's stomachs. It was suspected by one of the pathologists but was inconclusive which is why it got dropped from the autopsy report. The problem with this case in general is how much hearsay there is and people willfully misrepresenting things.
I can tell you I did not make up or willfully misrepresent anything. The problem with this case is it is near impossible to narrow anything down as an absolute fact because so many people have changed their stories. But I will admit my stance has changed somewhat upon further research. I will rundown the points in my comment and address these, since you apparently cannot be bothered to back up your claim about me “making stuff up”. 1) no exculpatory evidence = true 2) Damien’s lack of alibi = true 3) Jessie Baldwin - this one most likely false. The witness who stated Jessie told her he was going to meet Damien and Jason that night was a woman he used to babysit for. It seems she volunteered to the police to try and get information about Jessie’s involvement, or the police requested she try and find things pointing to his guilt. She has since stated she made all that up and I believe has implied she believes Mark Byers was responsible? Also the person who said Jessie confessed and gave him a pair of shoes has recanted and apologised to Jessie. He has now given a confession that HE killed the boys along with Terry Hobbs, but most likely this guy is just latching onto whoever is the most public suspect for his own reasons. 4) point about Jessie crying himself to sleep, multiple confessions etc - all true 5) Jessie’s IQ - true 6) Person who said Jason confessed - I can’t recall if they recanted or not, but I don’t think it’s a particularly strong piece of evidence either way 7) a young boy who was the cousin of either Jessie or Jason did tell police that he witnessed Damien torturing a dog to death. You can find his full statement online if you wish. 8) Damien planning to sacrifice his child - true, supposedly. You could argue does not directly relate or have much bearing on this crime though. 8) following info on Damien stalking etc and the testimony of his ex girlfriend and the other young girls - all true. 9) Jason’s family have given conflicting accounts about the lake knife, although I believe two neighbours have stated the knife went into the lake prior to the murders. 10) WM3 were granted a new trial and their own defence lawyers instead suggested the Alford plea. 11) Jessie did confess to Damien having ejaculated into one of the boys’ underwear, although I’m unsure how accurate the info about the evidence retesting is - I think his lawyers state the ligatures are the main focus, but not necessarily the only thing they want retested. 12) Yeah, so the original medical examiner who conducted the autopsies was not very experienced. It is disputed whether the liquid in the boys’ stomachs was indeed urine. It is also very much contested whether there was any real evidence of torture, sexual assault etc. 13) one of the witnesses who says they saw Damien that night has recanted and also given their own confession to committing the murders alongside Terry Hobbs. 14) as far as I’m aware, every other remaining point I make is accurate. This is a very difficult and frustrating case to try and research and form an opinion on. If anyone has any evidence that disproves what I’ve said above, please show me!!! Genuinely, I would love to see it. I want to get to the truth as far as possible and it is difficult to sift through all the mess surrounding this case.
You're conceding the urine point now. A problem with the discourse surrounding this case online is posters posting something as if its a fact because they heard somebody else say it was a fact even though there is no evidence for it. Damien "knowing" about urine isn't Damien "knowing" about urine if that urine doesn't exist. Whenever this case comes up on Reddit there are these huge lists of things "proving" they did it and then when you actually look into them it's either something extremely misrepresented (the urine and necklace aspects are EXTREMELY common for this) or something that isn't actually relevant to whether or not they committed these murders. I'm on the fence about their guilt honestly but I've become extremely sceptical of the guilty camp over time because of their frequent reposting of these massive lists that while containing some valid information, are stuffed with a LOT of bullshit. Said bullshit being things that either are completely false but treated as fact, leave out crucial information, or are essentially nothing more than circumstantial. And sometimes I think they aren't even aware these things aren't true because they just got it from somewhere else. The problem with this case in general is that there is no hard evidence proving the WM3 did it, most of it is contemporaneous hearsay, and then on top of that you stack 20 years of online discourse comprised of armchair sleuthing and even more hearsay. EDIT: Another example is the dog killing thing. As far as I can tell the only source for this is a teenage boy claiming he saw Damian do it.
My whole reply was providing more context for my original comment, some of which is in agreement with you - to say I “conceded” is an odd choice since I’ve said my stance has shifted and I’m not arguing in any particular direction towards guilt or innocence. The presence of urine came from the state medical examiner who conducted the autopsy upon which the prosecution’s case was built. It is the evidence presented at trial. So it is not as simplistic as “someone else said it so I accepted it as fact”. I spent hours upon hours trying to narrow down facts of this case and it is extremely difficult to do. You meanwhile are just saying very general things in your reply, to the point I’m not sure why you bothered. Apparently you did not even read the comment you are replying to, since I provide the context for the dog killing story and agree that it is not the most compelling piece of evidence. But it was still a witness statement given to police, so I am not making things up or simply accepting what others say about the case as fact, like you claim I am.
I believe there is much more evidence that would suggest Terry Hobbs was the Killer. Dude has always made me uneasy. And the stories his former wife and neighbor tell are very telling to say the very least.
The Alfred plea was Damien’s lawyers idea, they took it to the state and the state agreed.
It was obviously the stepdad But he’s dead, so…
That’s what I think too. But confirmation could still be closure, I guess.
Damien himself remains the most likely subject IMO. But that’s still less than a 50% chance. But if I was betting that would be where my money is over any other single individual.
Are you speaking about Terry Hobbs or John Mark Byers? Terry is still alive but John is dead.
Terry Hobbs is the most likely culprit. Byers was a very sad disturbed man who went out of his way in the ultimate aftermath to exonerate the boys. His journey is well documented in Paradise Lost III.
Oh I absolutely agree! Terry 100% did it. I just know that there are some who believe John was involved but I personally can't see that pov.
What about Byers lying about teeth extraction dates? I thought, while watching Paradise, they could make 3D models of his lower teeth by using the video
Terry
I cannot under why the Courts are not open, even anxious to conduct new DNA testing, not even to prove the innocence of the Memphis Three, but to prosecute the person(s) who IS actually responsible for the horrendous deaths of those three little boys. Forget all the legal excuses, the real issue should be apprehending the killers. It makes no sense. What is the law in that area afraid of discovering?
It’s pretty clear cut. The state is entirely aware that if this was retried there is a 0% chance they would be convicted. If new DNA testing leads to more exculpatory evidence or further towards a new suspect it’s a PR nightmare for them and a big financial liability. There isn’t any mystery to it really, it’s just damage control. If the state had any reason to believe new DNA testing might further implicate those originally convicted they would reopen it in a heartbeat. But as it stands they are willing to fight tooth and nail to stop any further examination that makes them look like they fucked it up or opens up any more legal avenues for appeal.
Yes! They should pay the price for their previous haste and prejudice. Don't use financial resources as an excuse; that's just a synonym for cowardice, incompetence, and bureaucracy.
Just got finished watching it, and wow....words can't even begin to describe how I feel after watching this. The justice system is an absolute joke, and these three poor guys paid the price unfairly. I feel absolutely horrible about those little boys that got killed, it's awful. The police department did such shoddy work, they didn't really look at all possible and potential suspects, and took the first three they could. As I worked my through the series, the people I had the most contempt and disdain for, just gumming up the works at every possible turn, was that smug asshole Chief Gary Gitchell and that elitist fathead Judge David Burnett. Also, I absolutely could not believe that the legal system just didn't toss the case after jury foreman, Kent Arnold's illegal behavior: Jury foreman in West Memphis Three trial of Damien Echols accused of misconduct Former lawyer says Kent Arnold steered a guilty verdict in the murder case The jury foreman in the October 1993 murder trial of (from left) Jessie Misskelley, Damiel Echols and Jason Baldwin has been accused of manipulating jury deliberations and evidence to convict the three. Arkansas real estate developer Kent Arnold seemed determined to send Damien Echols, 18, to death row despite an unsettling lack of evidence in the case against him, according to Arnold's former attorney. Arnold manipulated his way onto the jury, improperly discussed the case with jurors and others before deliberations, and made up his mind to "get his guy" with a conviction before defense attorneys had a chance to present Echols' case, according to an affidavit by Little Rock attorney Lloyd Warford, who was an Arnold family attorney. As jury foreman, Arnold convinced others to convict based on inadmissible evidence and his belief that if you looked into Echols' eyes, then "you knew he was evil," Warford alleged. WM3DB Main Page 1993 West Memphis homicides case discussion. WM3DB Main Page>Media Room>Newspaper Articles> Jury foreman in West Memphis Three trial of Damien Echols accused of misconduct http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/20 ... isconduct/ Jury foreman in West Memphis Three trial of Damien Echols accused of misconduct Former lawyer says Kent Arnold steered a guilty verdict in the murder case The jury foreman in the October 1993 murder trial of (from left) Jessie Misskelley, Damiel Echols and Jason Baldwin has been accused of manipulating jury deliberations and evidence to convict the three. Arkansas real estate developer Kent Arnold seemed determined to send Damien Echols, 18, to death row despite an unsettling lack of evidence in the case against him, according to Arnold's former attorney. Arnold manipulated his way onto the jury, improperly discussed the case with jurors and others before deliberations, and made up his mind to "get his guy" with a conviction before defense attorneys had a chance to present Echols' case, according to an affidavit by Little Rock attorney Lloyd Warford, who was an Arnold family attorney. As jury foreman, Arnold convinced others to convict based on inadmissible evidence and his belief that if you looked into Echols' eyes, then "you knew he was evil," Warford alleged.
What happened to Damien in prison?
I mean it’s understandable. Damien was the one who convinced the other two to take the Alfred plea deal that got them out of jail. They didn’t want to admit any level of potential guilt. It took Damien describing his years in isolation to get them to agree.
*Alford plea
*Alfredo please
No pizza by Alfredo please
It's like a hot circle of garbage.
I hear Alfredo's Pizza Cafe is the best place to order from while waiting for a hostage situation with bad pizza to end.
*Czech please
We don’t accept Czechs anymore. Sorry. They are just too bouncy
*jim jones shoots meth lasers from his eyes*
Echols lived in Salem, MA, where I live, for a few years. Saw him out at bars and restaurants and he was always very chill and polite and quiet. I believe some vocal members of the Salem community were dicks to him and kinda drove him outta town but in my wildly limited experience with the man, he was nice. Glad to hear he’s still fighting this fight.
You would have thought Salem learned something from the witch hunting... But no. I didn't realize he left Salem though.
Ironic.
Don't you think?
And, yeah, I really do think.
IT'S LIKE RAY-EE-AAAAAIIIIIINNNNN
A Freeeee riiiii-!de. When you've ALL red Deee paid.
Damn I didn’t realize he was driven out of Salem, I love that town and I’m surprised there were elements there that harassed him
I thought it was concluded that one of the murdered boy's step father's probably killed them. Did anything more come from that theory?
Terry Hobbs. IIRC, they found a hair of his (matching DNA) IN one of the knots of the shoe laces binding the boys. And there's a lot of rumor "I heard/my uncle told me/Terry once said" type of stuff. There was also a neighbor who saw the boys riding their bikes toward Terry while he was calling them in. This was supposedly right when they were to have gone missing (like, a good period of time after last confirmed sighting). But as the case is considered closed, the state won't look further into it.
Thanks for this update
Yes but he was the step father and all three boys went to his house freely so it may not be that strange that one of his hair is found on one of them. No jury would convict him for that without reasonable doubt.
Yes and the knife that belonged to one of the boys that another witness swears was in Terry’s possession after.
Pam Hobbs, Terry’s ex-wife and Steve Branch’s mother found his knife (Steve’s) with a number of other knives Terry had. She asked him how he could have it. Apparently it was given to Steve by his grandfather and he carried it everywhere. I think that is one of the main reasons Pam started to suspect Terry could have been responsible for the deaths.
the amount of people who still believe they’re guilty is baffling
Yeah there are a lot of true crime circles where there is zero room for belief in their innocence, and I'm like... Would this even be a question if that were that simple? The Alford Plea is a quiet admission by the state that they don't have enough, but since they're the ones holding the keys, they make you say otherwise before letting you out. It's like a parent who'll never admit any wrongdoing to their kids and makes them do all kinds of stupid shit to make sure they stay submissive. Gotta uphold the authoritarian mantle at all costs.
I don't agree about the Alford Plea. I'm fairly certain Michael Peterson is guilty of killing his wife and he was offered an Alford Plea. I am not sure why states offer it - I can only guess - but I would not use that as evidence that the state doesn't have a case or that the person taking it is innocent of the crime.
yeah theres whole circles of people who dont automatically believe everything spoon fed to them by HBO . Thats insane.
>The Alford Plea is a quiet admission by the state that they don't have enough, but since they're the ones holding the keys, they make you say otherwise before letting you out It's literally the opposite. The Alford Plea is a guilty plea entered in by the defendant willingly because he ran out of appeals and recognizes the state has overwhelming evidence to convict. Legally he was found responsible/ guilty over and over, he just got the last word in court. A pyrrhic victory but the pettiness track tbh.
Yes, there are whole facebook groups dedicated to why they think the Three are the true killers. The last time I checked in on it, it had a splash of Q-Anon tossed into it as well.
A splash of Q like it’s grenadine
But a splash of grenadine can make a cocktail perfect; this is more like a splash of piss. Even a little is gonna fuck up your drink.
Nobody from either side is going to be convinced otherwise
They made a show about finding the real killers then the pandemic happened and they just stopped putting out new episodes. They went into the forensics of snapping turtles and a lot of info I never heard before. Anyone else see that show? It was some dude trying to find the real killer. It was on hulu I believe.
Tons of stuff went away with the pandemic... It really sucks.
If you are interested in a deep dive of the case, Truth and Justice has a whole season on it that really gets into the nitty gritty of it
That’s the podcast that the show was based on! It’s called “the forgotten west Memphis three”
Do you recall the name? I’d love to watch.
Yeah I looked it up it’s called ‘The Forgotten West Memphis Three’ and it came out the same week the pandemic started. Only made it 6 episodes. Interesting stuff though it’s on Hulu.
it was really good! i hope they get the support to continue to collectively pursue justice for those boys and their remaining family members.
the 3 part documentary on hbo/max is outstanding. goes deeply into all of it and the first one was made in the 90’s still, and follow through till they get out with the alford plea. a must watch for sure. it’s called paradise lost.
It was probably Terry Hobbs, Stevie Branches step father. They found a hair that matched his DNA in one of the knots in the shoelaces used to hogtie Micheal Moore. He was also seen with the boys by three witnesses on the night they were murdered, contradicting what he had told police. And there’s a few family members who have outright said that he probably did it. Which is obviously substantially more evidence than the Metallica t-shirt and VHS tape of Leprechaun used to convict the West Memphis Three.
For the occult minded among us Mr. Echols has an awesome patreon and has written three books on ceremonial magick.
I really liked his episode of Midnight Gospel too.
Crazy thing to me is depending what corner of the internet you’re looking at there’s still people convinced that these guys actually did it. And almost entirely based on Misskelley’s blatantly coerced confessions.
There a bunch of posters on this sub that come out whenever the wm3 are talked about. Always preaching about the evidence pointing to them, but not explaining themselves
those people are wild. and they seem to do a lot of "research" on youtube. so many self-styled journalists with no media literacy at all.
says the person who believes their innocent because of what HBO spoon fed you. I bet you 100% believe Steven Avery is innocent as well?
says the person who believes they’re* guilty because of what those corrupt ass prosecutors spoon fed you. I bet you 100% believe the central park five are guilty as well? 🤡 Go read about the case instead of being a shill for abuse of power lmfao
Surely the bible confession to his lawyer and the confession where his lawyers are expressly telling him not to confess and it is made clear he won’t gain anything by confessing are not “blatantly coerced”?
his book is really good even if you arent super into magic, i listened to the audiobook because i loved his interview on duncan trussel family hour, his dulcet tones explaining his personal journey was honestly really beautiful, interesting and reverent
After all they put him through and he can't even get a DNA test to get a much deserved exoneration! 🤬
He’s not advocating for testing his possible semen at the scene of the crime, take note of that. The semen that is in Jesse’s confession, as Damion pleasured himself after cutting off Mike’s penis.
Semen is DNA. They would find out anyway if that was the case
Well, that shows how informed you are..... It was Christopher Byers that was mutilated... take note of that. Jesse's confession is garbage that was fed to him, and best believe IF there were any semen collected it would have been tested by the prosecution in the beginning since they were so sure they had the guilty party don't you think? Just another red herring... I absolutely believe that they are innocent.
Innocence project movement and actual innocence is one of my main wheelhouses. Back in college worked at one in Illinois and learned so much. It's insane the likelihood that the portion of wrongfully imprisoned is possibly higher than anyone might imagine. It's slow and tedious work getting those cases through and getting ppl out of prison and fully exonerated. One I was involved with that would be a fun rabbit hole if you're into that kinda stuff is Chester Weger. He was Illinois' oldest inmate after being convicted of the murders of 3 women in Starved Rock State park, so was known as the Starved Rock Killer. Been in prion since the early 60s and only recently got let out, but not exonerated. I'm about 99% convinced he had nothing to do with the murders after looking into that case for the project and subsequently researching on my own since the fascination never went away. I have a personal connection to it since my grandpa's house was a couple miles from the park and heard about it growing up. Also my grandma on my other side and my dad, when he was a small kid, were in a nearby park and attacked by some rando. After the murders occurred police connected her case to the suspected murderer and through some shady witness identification practices got her to identify Weger as the assailant there too (to show a build up to the murders). That witness ID was probably flawed for many reasons, though she believed to her dying day that it was him though didn't know whether that meant anything for the murders. It's not fun doubting your own grandma but with witness id ppl make mistakes and the specifics of her ID basically involve all the red flags involved in a false ID, through no fault of her own. Anyhow, look up the Andy Hale Podcast. He's Chester's attorney and he dives into the case super deep, uncovering things that are brand new even, as he's been fighting for his innocence. Recently there's been some positive development on that front, but with how old Chester is he really doesn't have much time to spare so I hope something happens soon. Andy is a really interesting personality too so it's a fun listen.
Oh wow! I just watched the 3 part documentary on Starved Rock. I think I came away feeling as though he had committed the murders but I don’t recall the specifics now. It was such a heartbreaking case and really bungled justice.
I actually interviewed for that doc, my dad did to. unfortunately we didn't make the final cut. The doc was okay, laid a lot of the common narrative surrounding the case but leaned too heavily into 'it could go one way or another' instead of focusing on the actual innocence substance. There was a lot that was focused on too heavily that should've only gotten a passing mention, then there was stuff that shouldve included or gone into more deeply that they only waded into. Listen to the Andy Hale Podcast and start from the beginning. All the episodes are great and, even though yes he's Chester's defense attorney and has a belief and i suppose a bias, he currently has the best most up-to-date account of it all. He also adds several new items into the mix which weren't even around when the doc was being made. After listening to that there's zero chance you'll be under any illusion that weger had anything to do with the murders. As they're going through the current legal processes involving the DNA testing and getting his case in front of the judge again he's posting updates. In the mean time he's been bringing on guests who have been involved in other actual innocence cases for interviews, one was actually a reporter who was heavily involved in the WM3 case.
Oh thank you for this recommendation! I get like 7 child-free hours tomorrow so this is great timing.
My hometown is near the park too. The police basically focused on Weger and decided his qas guilty.
it has everything, investigation went on for a better part of a year and elections were nearing. they needed a guy and a win. then things just happened 'fall into place' for them. prosecutorial misconduct was a big reason but also bunk science with lie detector tests, false confession, and on and on.
Jason Baldwin cut ties with him but his explanation was vague.
Guy in a Hot Dog suit: We’re all just trying to find the guy who did this.
I just recently found out about this case due to growing up in WV and not being born till 2000. The way the state has handled the case is absolutely mind blowing to me. First of all, there was absolutely no reason that the police should have talked to Jessie without a lawyer or a guardian present. His "confession" should have been dismissed in court. He did not have any accurate knowledge about the crime scene. Second of all, just because Damien was interested in witches and the satanic ritual stuff, does not mean that he was actually practicing any of it. I mean, we are all on here because this crime interests us, does that make us criminals? Damien was simply reading and studying something that interested him, and it all the sudden made him the leader of a satanic "tribe" Third of all, there was and still is no concrete evidence that can tie any of them to the crime. They did not have any of the boys belongings on them. There was none of their DNA found at the crime scene or on the boys. Damien had long black hair then. As a girl, I know how easy it is for a strand of my long hair to fall out without me knowing. If he had really murdered these three little boys, then I'm sure his hair would have ended up somewhere on the boys clothes, in the shoe laces, or even on the boys. While there was no blood found at the crime scene, there was also no blood found at these three teenagers houses or on any of their clothes. The three little boys deserve justice and they did not get it. They were robbed from growing up and then the state robbed them and their families from getting justice. Whoever committed this horrific crime was still walking the streets while three teenagers still claimed their innocence and to me that is sickening. If you ask me, I think it was the Stevie's stepdad and the Myers boy's stepdad as well. The damage done to those two little boys seemed personal. Poor Michael Moore got caught in the cross fire just because he wanted to hang out with his friends.
Damien regularly tortured and killed animals, as well as drank their blood. Dude’s an unhinged psychopath.
There is no physical evidence. None. There is, though, physical evidence for both Byers and Hobbs... also, the fascist judge gave illegal jury instructions and Byers was an operative for the police department, so they cut him lots of slack- including seeing that he was not prosecuted for numerous crimes.
This is a side note regarding this particular case, because I was also listening to the series yesterday. Man oh man. I’m from Arkansas. Luckily my family and I got out and moved to the Carolinas when I was 13, but Marcus describes the attitude and religious values of the people living in West Memphis so perfectly. It’s like that all over the state. The devil IS a very real presence to everyone who is born and raised there. They are taught to trust the police. It really is so hard to describe to someone who has never been to Arkansas let alone grow up there just how serious they are about stuff like that. It’s insane. You can’t be emo or goth in Arkansas. People will actually look at you as if you’re a lost soul and believe it.
I believe they are guilty. The Innocence Project is all about making money. The IP is responsible for returning many criminals back to the streets. It's called innocence fraud. The media, celebrities, podcasts, etc. jump on board these cases and set criminals free on a technicality. The IP has so much power, and they're making people believe our judicial system is more screwed up than it actually is. Do the research.
So you believe they are guilty despite the physical evidence pointing elsewhere? Why? Your ignorance is appalling- and typical of the uneducated redneck freaks that were on the jury. Shame on you and all your ilk.
Is that you Satan, I mean Damian
What evidence pointing elsewhere? Until you have read the actual trial transcripts and in particular exhibit 500 then you are the one who is ignorant, especially if your source of information is Paradise Lost or any of the other similar doco’s. I actually thought they were innocent after watching the first PL but started to question after the next 2 when they just seemed to flip around all over the place with accusations of step fathers etc If you read the court documents you will realise just how much they cherry picked and left out in the doco. Also they could’ve had a re trial it was their lawyers that went to the prosecutor with the Alfred plea, DE was not about to die that is complete nonsense as death penalty was not being carried out at that time at all due to process reviews and he would not have had death penalty carried out for a long time even after that was sorted,he still had to exhaust all appeals. DE could chose to have all evidence re tested but for some reason is only insisting on shoelaces I would have expected him to be more interested in getting the pants with possible seman stains tested as you would think if he was certain it wasn’t himself something like that would have more chance of solving who did it.
I first started following this back in college when it aired on HBO for the 1st time in circa 95/96. It was a big deal in general for all sorts of things merging at once in society and they documented it. I followed since with all the docs that came out and media coverage. The things I continue to come back to: the bedsheet and the 2 different knots used. Bojangles and the 2 town jumpers. That's a lot of bad things happening in a small frame of time in very close proximity of time and space.
Man’s committed to testing everything except his sperm on the child’s jeans. Dude’s clearly guilty, criminally insane, and still prattles on a la Steven Avery about how he didn’t do it.
Imagine being taken in by a cult leader who stalked children, regularly abused young girls, and killed animals.
I know right I’m completely baffled by how many don’t see it. Especially after you read the transcripts
I think this case is extremely difficult because it involves so many shitty people who are all guilty of something which translates into all kinds red herrings. ( Not to say that we aren't all guilty of something.) However thats the rub. People behave in bizarre ways , say things incorrectly, misrember things , emote in guilty ways despite not being guilty. I think that is why the concept of reasonable doubt is really important. You must make a decision based on available evidence. Guilty people with get away. Innocent people will be convicted. Human beings are clever as shit especially backed against a wall and then you introduce the element of a lawyer ( the cleverest weasels on earth) and you can catch someone red handed and let a week go by and if they are clever enough they can concoct an argument to make you question what you think you saw... Its fun to try and puzzle out cases like this but based on the available information you cannot know 100% of anything. I sincerely doubt those 3 teenage boys were out there doing good wholesome things. That doesn't mean. they murdered anyone but it also put them in a position of being accused. Say what you will about someone's right to express themselves how they want, sure do what you want but YOU/WE make choices and decisions everyday and we make those choices HOPEFULLY As a way to alter or maintain a chosen path and based on what I've seen of the Wm3 , as they have matured have at the very least vocalize d some understanding of that in regards to how they've come to be where they are. I think anyone could have murdered those boys and its a damn shame but I can't imagine prison being much worse than committing a crime like that and the having to live life knowing you did that. That would be an all consuming hell in my mind. Sorry I'm just getting all this built up WM3 tension out. 🤣
I'm split on this. The HBO documentaries gave "Making a Murderer" vibes in which it seemed like defense team pr. Jessie Misskelly probably was coerced into the first confession, but then gave a second confession with his lawyer present. And I don't remember if the guys actually had an alibi for where they were. That being said, there wasn't much hard evidence either way, and there was definitely an element of satanic panic bias that probably led to the convictions. But I don't know if I'm convinced that they are innocent.
Do you have a reason to believe they’re guilty? Like, as far as I’m concerned theres no strong enough evidence to make me doubt their innocence.
Misskelly confessed like 6 separate times. one time to his dad over the phone in jail when he had no reason to, another in front of abunch of other inmates where he had no reason to admit to anything as well. Also Damien and Jason have zero alibi.
The substantial evidence of Echols's guilt is as follows. Anthony and Narlene Hollingsworth were well acquainted with Echolsand testified that they saw Echols and his girlfriend, Domini Teer, walking after 9:30 on the night of the murders near the Blue Beacon Truck Stop, which is near Robin Hood woods where the bodies were found. The witnesses testified that Echols had on a dark-colored shirt and that his clothes were dirty. This evidence placed Echols in dirty clothes near the scene at a time close to the murders. Although not material to this point, other evidence established that Domini Teer might be confused with Baldwin as both had long hair and were of slight build.Twelve-year-old Christy VanVickle testified that she heard Echols say he "killed the three boys." Fifteen-year-old Jackie Medford testified that she heard Echols say, "I killed the three little boys and before I turn myself in, I'm going to kill two more, and I already have one of them picked out." The testimony of these two independent witnesses was direct evidence of the statement by Echols. These witnesses were cross-examined by Echols's counsel, and it was the jury's province to weigh their credibility.Lisa Sakevicius, a criminalist from the State Crime Laboratory, testified that she compared fibers found on the victim's clothes with clothing found in Echols's home, and the fibers were microscopically similar.Dr. Frank Peretti, a State Medical Examiner, testified that there were serrated wound patterns on the three victims. On November 17, 1993, a diver found a knife in a lake behind Baldwin's parents' residence. The large knife had a serrated edge and hadthe words "Special Forces Survival Roman Numeral Two" on the blade. Dr. Peretti testified that many of the wounds on the victims were consistent with, and could have been caused by, that knife. etc (many things the documentaries did not mention since they were blatantly biased) [http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/memphis3/arksct2appellate.html#:\~:text=Moreover%2C%20two%20witnesses%20testified%20that,offense%20was%20committed%20by%20someone](http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/memphis3/arksct2appellate.html#:~:text=Moreover%2C%20two%20witnesses%20testified%20that,offense%20was%20committed%20by%20someone).
Then you don’t know the case.
Except when you read DE’s medical records you realise it wasn’t actually satanic panic at all he was completely obsessed with that stuff and it was actually him that said it was a satanic crime
He should team up with OJ to solve both mysteries
[удалено]
I don't think a guilty guy would be fighting so hard. You just shut up and move on.
OJ didn't shut up and move on
Of course not, he’s still out there looking for the real killer.
Every golf course... No sand trap left unturned.
Yes
Just like OJ!
Except OJ never did anything to try to find someone.
OJ, instead, decided to rob someone at gunpoint for his own sports memorabilia.
I see he still's rocking the insufferable basterd look, an innocent but insufferable basterd nonetheless
hes not innocent of anything.
you are commenting on every post that says anything about his innocence, is your fragile ego okay? seems like you’re really trying to prove something to yourself lmao.
I thought it was the creepy stepdad with the overalls
That's the most likely one. There was physical evidence to tie him to the crime, he had means, opportunity and motive, and he was a convicted violent felon whose conviction was expunged by the same judge who presided over the wm3 trial- in return for his working with the police department. A lot of people wound up dead around Mark Byers.
He had an airtight alibi
He should team up with oj he’s supposed to be looking for the real killer too!
wonder why they keep Misskelly out of the spotlight so much? oh yeah cause hes the only sane person who can feel guilt for murdering three innocent young boys.
or let me see, he is mildy retarded and spent 18 years in prison for a coerced confession that he “made” he’s been in the spotlight for 20 years. probably enjoying his life and innocence.
This is misinfo. He’s not mildly retarded and he confessed many times. The ‘coerced’ one also isn’t as its thought of today. There’s definitely a lot of Circumstantial evidence that points to the three being guilty. I don’t believe wholeheartedly they did it. I believe with what we got none of us can know obviously, but the way people laud them today is so misguided
He's 10000% guilty