Facebook Wars

So I get this message from Facebook.

You made a wall post that violated our Terms of Use. Among other things, posts that are hateful, threatening, or obscene are not allowed. We also take down posts that attack an individual or group, or advertise a product or service. Continued misuse of Facebook’s features could result in your account being disabled.

The only two wall posts I’ve made in the past month are this one on December 27 at the WM3 Truth Facebook page:

The “Damien Echols profile” page at wm3truth.com has been updated and greatly expanded.

Damien Echols profile

And this one on December 28:

Another wm3truth.com case history page updated. Did Jessie Misskelley recant his 6/3/93 confession right away, as supporters claim? No. He told his lawyers the same story for the next sixteen weeks. – DJK

Jessie Misskelley maintains guilt to his lawyers – Summer 1993

I suppose you could say that these posts are hateful in the sense that I hate people who beat eight-year-olds unconscious, tie them up, sexually assault them, torture them with a knife, carve off body parts, then drown them. Guilty as charged, I hate people like that.

Facebook obviously doesn’t have someone reviewing each wall post for violations. Users have to report specific posts. Facebook probably doesn’t even review each reported post. I doubt that an actual Facebook employee looked at those posts and said, “yes, that’s hate speech, we might need to ban the author”. Other admins on the WM3 Truth page have also been subject to repeated TOS violation reports. As far as I can tell, Facebook offers no way to appeal a violation charge or to report people making anonymous, bogus violation charges.

If the WM3 Truth Facebook page disappears soon, this is why.

This is not a free speech issue. Facebook owns the site, they set the rules. Ditto Wikipedia. That’s why I prefer to publish on a site that I own.

51 thoughts on “Facebook Wars”

  1. If this page had a “like” option like Facebook does, I’d like the hell out of this:

    I suppose you could say that these posts are hateful in the sense that I hate people who beat eight-year-olds unconscious, tie them up, sexually assault them, torture them with a knife, carve off body parts, then drown them. Guilty as charged, I hate people like that.

    It almost amuses me when people say Nons are “hateful.” Yeah, I hate child murderers and the people who support them, especially when they lie in order to justify it. In what alternate universe is that a bad quality.

  2. Supporters hate child murderers, too, especially those who are cowardly enough to allow three teenagers to pay with over half of their lives for crimes of which the teens are not guilty but the real murderer is. Personally, I resent when supporters are described as “defending child murderers.” In case you haven’t gotten the memo, supporters don’t think the WMFree are child murderers.

    As to nons being hateful, usually that refers to the language that I have seen most nons exhibit. From my experience, most nons can’t discuss the case without resorting to vile language and/or ad hominem attacks. IMO, that’s hateful.

    1. Many supporters appear to be immature, emotional thinkers whereas nons appear to more rational thinkers. Many supporters show signs of denial, idealization, omnipotence, projection, repression, splitting and suppression. (Citation, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV-TR, American Psychiatic Association). I am exhibiting most of them by writing this. : )

      The one defense mechanism that I have NEVER seen displayed by Echols is humor. He comes across as arrogant and totally devoid of humor (a lot of guys on Death Row are very funny, especially if you like real gallows humor). His face doesn’t look right when he smiles or tries to laugh, which can indicate the flattening affect of mental illness. I don’t like the guy, but I’ll take that one back because I don’t think he can help it (his lack of facial expression).

      1. “Many supporters appear to be immature, emotional thinkers whereas nons appear to more rational thinkers. Many supporters show signs of denial, idealization, omnipotence, projection, repression, splitting and suppression.”

        I would say many NONS appear to be immature, emotional thinkers whereas SUPPORTERS appear to be more rational thinkers. I believe that NONS show signs of denial, idalization, omnipotence, projection, repression, splitting and suppression.

        “The one defense mechanism that I have NEVER seen displayed by Echols is humor. He comes across as arrogant and totally devoid of humor (a lot of guys on Death Row are very funny, especially if you like real gallows humor). His face doesn’t look right when he smiles or tries to laugh, which can indicate the flattening affect of mental illness. I don’t like the guy, but I’ll take that one back because I don’t think he can help it (his lack of facial expression).”

        When you are on Death Row for a crime you didn’t commit, I don’t imagine that you feel too humorous. Even so-called gallows humor isn’t very funny if you are innocent of the crime for which you were sentenced to die. The reason that other Death Row inmates can exhibit that gallows humor is because most of them are justly on Death Row. Think about it. I’ve seen pictures of Damien smiling since his release. I’ll try to find one and post it.

        1. I haven’t heard him cracking any jokes since being released. Supporters have claimed he has an “excellent sense of humor” for years, even while on Death Row. If he’s a serious, moody, temperamental guy, than say he is. Don’t try to slice the pie both ways.

          You would think having Lorri Davis all to himself for real would make a man seem happier and more upbeat. All those years of pent-up frustration at not being able to touch the woman who he claims to adore, yeah, I think he’d be cracking a few jokes and smiling for days.

        2. Is there a recorded case in history of anyone being convicted of anything because they didn’t have a sense of humour ?
          It’s the total irrelevance of some of the stuff that is put out about this case that astonishes me. ” Ooooh he looks a bit dodgy… he must have done it.”
          We might as well be sticking needles in them to see if they bleed or chucking them in duck ponds to see if they float.

    2. Compassionate Reader, your characterization of nons resorting to obscenity and ad hom attacks is not consistent with what i’ve witnessed over the past months in comment sections for case-related articles at Entertainment Weekly, Hollywood Reporter, American Spectator, Ain’t It Cool News, etc. The personal smears and occasional obscenity laden rants have as a rule emerged from the supporter side. Similarly on facebook recently a certain contingent of supporters took to creating non ‘parody pages’ which took personal photos of nons, even including a couple photos of private residences, and posted them with insulting and obscenity-laden captions. I’ve also seen multiple efforts to publicize the employer info of nons, along with threats to contact those employers. I’ve not seen anything remotely similar from the non side. Obviously these childish tactics are underhanded attempts to harass with the purpose of discouraging non activity.

      1. If you haven’t, I invite you to go to the Hoax site. I believe the author of this site recommends it. Any supporter who dares to disagree with the nons over there is called EXTREMELY OBSCENE names and is banned from posting.

        I personally know of at least three supporters who have been stalked and/or harassed on the job by nons. It was so bad that two of them had to change all of their phone numbers and one had to change numbers AND move. That’s pretty bad IMO.

        I’m sorry, but I’ve never seen that kind of vitriol from supporters. It may exist, but if it does, it is simply a reaction to the years of abuse that supporters have taken from nons. Now that the three are free, it seems to me that non attacks have ratcheted up considerably as the nons are angry about the release and the intelligent ones realize that there’s noting they can do about it but express their displeasure.

        I agree that these are childish tactics, and I personally don’t use them. However, don’t kid yourself. The non side has used them for years.

        1. AND move? Yeah, that would be if it is true. Thanks for the recommendation. I’ll check out the site. Sounds like the West Memphis PD themselves must be over there doing the monitoring.

          I’m not upset about them being released. I expected it. Money and clout bought off OJ unless you believe The Juice is an innocent man who was searching for the “real killers” when the bad juju finally caught up with him.

          I stand with the law: Karma. Ironically the release of the WM3 may be the best thing that has happened for non-believers in years. If you believe in Damien, Jason and Jessie (depending on if he feels like lying or telling the truth that day), the real killers are still out here. The bloody Mr. Bojangles may be planning on a second act. He was only waiting for the three to get out so he could stick it on them again.

        2. Any supporter who dares to disagree with the nons over there is called EXTREMELY OBSCENE names and is banned from posting.

          We can agree on one thing: the tone of debate on the Hoax frequently gets unnecessarily nasty.

          On the other hand, the Hoax board is more tolerant of supporters than the main pro-WM3 boards (WM3DB, WM3 Blackboard) are of non-supporters. Supporters with a thick skin are generally allowed to debate the case as long as they wish at the Hoax. The Blackboard openly declares that anyone voicing WM3=guilty views will be immediately banned.

        3. CR you are flat out lying when you say supporters are immediately banned over at the Hoax. It takes a hell of a lot to get banned there. A hell of a lot.

          Unlike the Blackboard, which you refer everybody to. Nons are simply not allowed there. And don’t tell me they get banned for being rude. They get banned the first time they make a post – no matter how polite – that is dissenting with the party line.

      2. Thank you, Fred. Well said and written. They reflect the men who they believe in. The followers of the Reverend Jim Jones were similar in their scare tactics from what I have learned over the years. Like attracts like. Zealots are a scary bunch. They hero-worship mortals and in this case, a mortal who I strongly believe (but do not know) is a psychopath with psychotic rage. I wonder if the Reverend Jones would be proud or jealous.

  3. With Paradise Lost 3 on the way, it is of the utmost importance that our group remains on FB. More people are going to start researching this case and we need to have a strong presence there. The FB drama between supporters and nons has reached epic proportions, and has been grueling for those of us who are very active on the WM3 truth page. Supporters have attacked me viciously over the past few weeks, but I’m not giving up. This cause is too important.

    1. You’re right. This cause is too important. However, NOTHING will put the WMFree back in prison unless they violate their SIS orders. Supporters are determined to see that that doesn’t happen. And, supporters are vigilantly working to get the three exonerated. Oh, and BTW, we get attacked, too. Speaking personally, I can take it. This cause is too important.

      1. Working on exoneration? May I ask if supporters are funding it like they did the release? I wondered how Damien, Jason and Jessie planned to keep the cash flow. Now the fight’s not over, the struggle is still on, so keep sending your coins to Lorri D. and the WM3.

        In fairness to D & Double J, they were brought up with a welfare mentality. They were sent to prison, which state-supported them. Damien moved out of the trailer park into the penthouse with the same aspirations. He’ll live off his wife and their rich, celebrity friends. He’ll write a book here and there, but the main cash flow will come from other people’s pockets. The only good thing about rich, famous people is how easily they can be duped. Damien plays them brilliantly.

        1. Hubris,

          Your “hubris” is astonishing! You don’t know these men or Lori personally, yet you accuse them of misuse of funds. You know nothing about the supporter movement, except what people like the author of this site and other non sites have led you to believe, yet you condemn us and imply that we are blindly giving money to a cause that is misusing our contributions. You accuse Damien of “playing” people, yet you offer no real evidence of any of your accusations. “Hubris” is definitely your “hamartia.” Guess what? They’re free, and you can’t do a thing about it. Eat your heart out.

  4. In case you haven’t gotten the memo, supporters don’t think the WMFree are child murderers.

    CR, maybe you should let the WM3 see that memo. If I was a supporter, I’d feel really let down that the WM3 decided that being found not guilty wasn’t all that important after all. Or maybe they just realized it was next to impossible. Touché.

    1. They decided that, since they could maintain their innocence through the Alford Plea, it would be much more pleasant to work for exoneration from the outside of prison than from the inside of prison. Supporters, for the most part, aren’t “let down” at all by the Alford Plea. We wanted the guys free, and we got what we wanted. However, we now realize that freedom isn’t enough, which is why we are diligently working for exoneration.

      As to the silly notion that a verdict of not guilty would have been “next to impossible,” please let me remind you that even Scott Ellington, in the GQ article IIRC, said that he would have had his “ass handed to” him at the hearing and the subsequent trial. He chose instead to eat that nasty “maggot sandwich” and agree to the Alford Plea.

      Don’t delude yourself. They would have been found not guilty at a new trial, but, as Jason said, “They were trying to kill Damien.” IMO, he wasn’t just talking about execution. Damien was dying a slow death as a result of the conditions on Death Row in conjunction with the “special” treatment he personally received.

      So, although it was not perfect, the Alford Plea freed the men. Damien is now in a much better environment and is (hopefully) growing stronger all the time. Jason and Jessie, as free men, also have many more options than those provided as prisoners of the State of Arkansas. I think that they are much better off now. I do wish that Jessie would leave Arkansas, but that’s another story.

      1. For someone at death’s door, Damien seems to be healthy enough to travel the world, has seemingly mastered a pool stick, but not a fork, visited Disney Land, and is basically having the time of his life on everybody’s income, but his own.

        Shouldn’t he be in a hospital bed, receiving fluids and recuperating if he was truly that sick? The night he was released, didn’t he go to a rooftop party in their honor? He seemed alive and well in those pictures.

        By the way, how’s his Mom these days? Has he even visited her considering she it TRULY ill and not just pretending to be for sympathy from supporters? Of course, that doesn’t stop the WM3 group from sticking their hands out asking money from supporters for her, now does it? It’s a perpetual meal ticket and they’re gonna ride that gravy train for all its worth.

        And yeah – they’re free – free convicted child murderers with a snowball’s chance of getting exonerated – so, umm, congrats on that.

        1. “For someone at death’s door, Damien seems to be healthy enough to travel the world, has seemingly mastered a pool stick, but not a fork, visited Disney Land, and is basically having the time of his life on everybody’s income, but his own ”

          I didn’t mean to imply that Damien was “at death’s door” just that his health had deteriorated while incarcerated. However, thanks to friends who have seen that he received proper medical and dental care, he is doing much better now. Handling a pool cue doesn’t require the dexterity that handling a fork does, IMO. However, I believe that, by now, he has remastered the fork, too. If Damien has traveled around some since his release, I think that he and Lori are entitled to some fun. Let’s call in a long-overdue honeymoon.

          “Shouldn’t he be in a hospital bed, receiving fluids and recuperating if he was truly that sick? The night he was released, didn’t he go to a rooftop party in their honor? He seemed alive and well in those pictures. ”

          I’m going to assume that much of this is sarcasm. His condition didn’t require hospitalization, just some proper nutrition and dental work. Thankfully, the supporter movement saw to it that his medical and dental needs were handled.

          “By the way, how’s his Mom these days? Has he even visited her considering she it TRULY ill and not just pretending to be for sympathy from supporters? Of course, that doesn’t stop the WM3 group from sticking their hands out asking money from supporters for her, now does it? It’s a perpetual meal ticket and they’re gonna ride that gravy train for all its worth.”

          Damien and the others have requested that their relationships with family be private unless they choose to reveal them. I guess some people will continue to question these things, no matter what is said. IMO, they need to be allowed to reestablish their relationships with family at their own speed and in their own way. I do know that the supporter movement is taking care of Damien’s mother’s medical needs.

          “And yeah – they’re free – free convicted child murderers with a snowball’s chance of getting exonerated – so, umm, congrats on that.”

          You’re entitled to your opinion, and I’m entitled to mine. I believe that the convictions were unjust. Also, I believe that, as soon as the defense presents all of their information to Ellington, if he is a man of his word, the case will be reopened, the WMFree will be exonerated and the real killer will be investigated, arrested, tried and convicted of the crimes for which the WMFree unjustly spent over eighteen years of their life in prison.

          1. “I didn’t mean to imply that Damien was “at death’s door” just that his health had deteriorated while incarcerated. However, thanks to friends who have seen that he received proper medical and dental care, he is doing much better now. Handling a pool cue doesn’t require the dexterity that handling a fork does, IMO. ”

            Are you saying that a few hours after being released from prison – Damien was able to make a recovery after being in such a bad state of health? You did see the pictures from the rooftop party, didn’t you? You’ve got to admit, that is a pretty fast turn-a-round.

            And I disagree on the dexterity need to hold a cue stick – you need to hold the stick with one hand and hold/aim with the other hand and hit a little ball with the point of the stick – so in order to play properly you need to have a good bit of coordination/dexterity – more so than grabbing a fork and shoveling food in one’s mouth – but we can agree to disagree on that.

            “Damien and the others have requested that their relationships with family be private unless they choose to reveal them. ”

            I can understand that – otherwise the supporters will realize that they are really self-absorbed jerks.

            “I didn’t mean to imply that Damien was “at death’s door” just that his health had deteriorated while incarcerated. ” …
            “Also, I believe that, as soon as the defense presents all of their information to Ellington, if he is a man of his word, the case will be reopened, the WMFree will be exonerated and the real killer will be investigated, arrested, tried and convicted of the crimes for which the WMFree unjustly spent over eighteen years of their life in prison.”

            So why didn’t they wait a few months and present this fantastic evidence to a judge? Why present an Alford Plea saying the state had enough evidence to convict? You said yourself that Damien wasn’t in immediate danger of dying, didn’t you?

        2. I remember how Damien described how bloody his socks were in prison. I also remember when he could not remember the ages of the three victims. If I was an innocent man convicted and sentenced to die on Death Row for three murders that I had an alibi for, I would have remembered those little boys’ ages. They were the same age after all. Not that much to remember. Then again, Damien only seems to remember what’s important. What’s important is of course Damien.

          You go, Christina and Val. Tell it like you see it, then call it on ’em. They have an “act” all right, but thank God and goodness there are those who see straight through it. I believe a couple of juries did, too.

          1. Juries CAN BE WRONG. That’s why we have an appeals process. Since the guys are free (on time served for a triple homicide – does that make ANY sense?), it doesn’t really matter what anyone thinks about an “act” or anything else. IMO, the only people “acting” in this case were the police and the prosecution. Their “act” so misled the juries that they caused three innocent men to spend over 18 years in prison. Too bad they can’t sue the State when (not if) they are exonerated. Oh, I forgot. That’s one of the reasons that the State accepted the deal – so they couldn’t be sued. How could they be sued if the guys were guilty anyway? If the State feared a lawsuit, that means that they feared that a new jury would return a correct verdict of not guilty. Again, my bad. I forgot that the AG of Arkansas, Dustin McDaniel, has decreed that Arkansas doesn’t convict innocent people.

  5. Yes, CR, you’re right. Nothing will get these murderers back in prison except for another offense.

    I for one will be more than happy to not get the chance to say “I told you so” and “we won” which is a popular supporter mantra since the 3’s release. I’m not a praying person but I hope with all by being that the violence of Echols and Misskelly, excluding the murders since there’s no point going back and forth, is either something they outgrew or something they learned their lesson about in their 18 years in prison.

    1. I am sure that your prayers will be answered. Although I don’t believe that these men are responsible for the murders of Christopher, Michael and Stevie, I do believe that anyone who spends eighteen years in prison (ESPECIALLY for a crime that they did not commit) will be very careful in what they say and do so that they don’t have to go back.

      My main concern is, and always has been, justice. If the three freed men are, in fact, innocent of these murders, then a killer is on the loose and has been for over 18 years. Don’t get me wrong. I think these murders were not random acts of violence but rather the cold, calculating acts of a desperate man who started out disciplining his step son and ended up killing him and two of his friends. IMO, that killer needs to pay for his crimes.

      1. John Mark Byers? Now the other step-dad? Why not say they did it together? It would make more sense. They were both angry step-dads who started murdering their step-sons and their friend. Everybody knows John Mark had to have done it because he was “so weird” and “scary.” He may have sometimes worn black and listened to heavy metal, not to mention while mysteriously murdering his wife, too.

        How did Terry get away with it for so long? All these years, the supporters said it was one man: John Mark. Now it is suddenly, thanks to all-powerful DNA, Terry. Supporters jumped from one band wagon to another too quickly. They should have continued to suspect John Mark was in on it. They should have been openly accusing Terry of it right alongside John Mark for 18 years.

        One supporter told me that she is convinced Terry eluded the police for so long only because he had such a minor role in PARADISE LOST. I wish I was joking about this, but I’m not. Everybody outside of Arkansas knows the police would have nabbed Terry and he would have confessed if he had gotten a little bit more face time on camera.

        1. “John Mark Byers? Now the other step-dad? Why not say they did it together? It would make more sense. They were both angry step-dads who started murdering their step-sons and their friend. Everybody knows John Mark had to have done it because he was “so weird” and “scary.” He may have sometimes worn black and listened to heavy metal, not to mention while mysteriously murdering his wife, too. ”

          The evidence suggests that the only parent involved was Terry Hobbs. Please get your facts straight. Mark Byers is not a step parent. He adopted Christopher, which is why Christopher carried the Byers name. And Melissa died of a broken heart, like Mark said.

          “How did Terry get away with it for so long? All these years, the supporters said it was one man: John Mark. Now it is suddenly, thanks to all-powerful DNA, Terry. Supporters jumped from one band wagon to another too quickly. They should have continued to suspect John Mark was in on it. They should have been openly accusing Terry of it right alongside John Mark for 18 years. ”

          However, the evidence against Terry was not revealed until 2006. I can only speak for myself, but, as I have said before, I follow the evidence. At first the evidence seemed to point to Mark. However, DNA is much more conclusive than the circumstantial evidence against Mark (which is really non existent). Only a fool wouldn’t look at new information in a murder case.

          “One supporter told me that she is convinced Terry eluded the police for so long only because he had such a minor role in PARADISE LOST. I wish I was joking about this, but I’m not. Everybody outside of Arkansas knows the police would have nabbed Terry and he would have confessed if he had gotten a little bit more face time on camera.”

          That’s simply not true. I don’t know why “Teflon Terry” has eluded the police for so long, but I have a sneaking suspicion that it won’t last. The wheels of justice sometimes grind exceeding slow, but they grind exceeding fine!

      2. Yes, CR, I’ve ready your detailed theory on websleuths dot com. I suggest you copyright that story before Egoyan starts production on his movie. After all, he can’t adapt Mara’s book the way it was written, because it points the finger at a different step-father. If your adapted “manhole theory” makes it into the shooting script, you and/or Paid should be entitled to some bucks.

        1. I’m not looking for bucks, just justice. And, as I told Hubris, please get your facts straight. There was only one step father in this case, Terry Wayne Hobbs. Mark Byers adopted Chris, making him an adoptive father, not a step father. IMO, that’s a world of difference. One man was willing to make a commitment to his wife’s child. The other was not.

          1. Your hair-splitting aside, part of the adoption process is the biological father’s permission. Not that it matters to me personally, but it could be that adoption was not on the table as a possibility for Hobbs, i.e. it could have had nothing to do with a lack of interest on his part, as you imply.

  6. DNA, in and of itself, does not prove someone did or did not murder someone. DNA doesn’t prove Terry or his friend were at the scene of the crime when the crimes were committed. Terry has an alibi that so far has yet to be proved false.

    Many murder cases are circumstantial. Pieces put together to solve the puzzle. Just tossing out a guess as to motive, what motive would Terry and his friend have to murder three little boys in such a horrific way?

    If there was a history of abuse (and there likely would have been), would it have gone unnoticed for years? Bruises and broken bones on children are usually very upsetting to anyone around a child who may be abused. Stevie seemed to have people around him who loved him and would have noticed.

    As to John Mark Byers, I stand corrected. I can admit it when I’m wrong. I know someone who was “adopted” by a “step-father.” She still considers her adoptive father her step-father. In any case, John Mark was not the young boy’s biological father (not that he claimed to be). Did his “conversion” to becoming a supporter have any bearing on how you previously judged him?

    Unless someone credible comes along who can explain everything and claims to have committed the murders beyond a shadow of a doubt, I believe the unholy three are guilty. Their motive would have been thrill kill. Ted Bundy said where you feel safest is where a sociopathic predator will open a window of opportunity.

    Released or not, they will never be “free” men. A karmic injustice is eventually righted. Damien is arrogant and narcissistic. He is also cunning. He likely knows he can milk Lorri Davis, his celebrity friends and supporters for cash flow. He likely will and is. Time will tell his tale like it will the rest of us.

    Since I believe he is guilty, I don’t believe Damien will confess again because he doesn’t assume responsibility for anything that he’s done. His personality disorders are severe enough that once the spotlight fades and the money stops flowing in, he may well strike back. I have yet to hear him admit to having a flaw in a credible fashion.

    My guess, based only on my experience with sociopathic and non-sociopathic inmates, is at least one of them will reoffend and end up back in jail/prison. There are plenty of statistics out there to support offenders repeating. I’m too lazy to look them up right now.

    Even if they were innocent going in, their innocence would have long ago been lost in prison, where they have spent 18 years. These men are used to an institution taking care of them, not taking care of themselves. Their adjustment to society should be interesting to watch and observe … from a safe and far distance.

  7. “DNA, in and of itself, does not prove someone did or did not murder someone. DNA doesn’t prove Terry or his friend were at the scene of the crime when the crimes were committed. Terry has an alibi that so far has yet to be proved false. ”

    Have you read David Jacoby’s statement for the Pasdar trial? Jacoby was Hobbs’ alibi, but Jacoby doesn’t back up Hobbs’ timeline. As Mark Byers asked, “Then how did their hairs get there? They didn’t fly in on Harry Potter’s wand, did they?”

    “Many murder cases are circumstantial. Pieces put together to solve the puzzle. Just tossing out a guess as to motive, what motive would Terry and his friend have to murder three little boys in such a horrific way? ”

    I know that murder cases are often tried based on circumstantial evidence. However, we now have DNA which should be considered. Personally, I don’t think David Jacoby had anything to do with the murders. I think his hair WAS secondary transfer. I think Hobbs picked it up on his clothes when he was at Jacoby’s playing guitars and deposited it later when he moved the bodies from the manhole to the drainage ditch. As to motive, Hobbs resented the time Pam spend with Stevie, so he would not be upset if Stevie were out of the picture. In fact, he left Pam temporarily about two weeks after the murders because, according to him, she couldn’t “just get over” Stevie’s death. What I think happened is discipline gone wrong followed by elimination of the witnesses. Then, animals predated on the bodies, making the crimes appear to have a sexual element that wasn’t really there and leading to the whole “Satanic cult ritual” focus by the WMPD.

    “If there was a history of abuse (and there likely would have been), would it have gone unnoticed for years? Bruises and broken bones on children are usually very upsetting to anyone around a child who may be abused. Stevie seemed to have people around him who loved him and would have noticed.”

    They did. Stevie reported his abuse to some of his aunts. Pam took Amanda to the doctor because she suspected that Amanda was being abused sexually. The doctor’s report, which came out about the time of Stevie’s funeral IIRC, said that Amanda had been “penetrated.” Stevie’s penis showed “banding” that appeared to be an old wound. Also, Stevie was described as “a highly sexualized child.” The abuse wasn’t physical, it was sexual. Then, there’s the whole Mildred French incident. She called the police because Terry was abusing his first wife and child. So, to punish her, Terry breaks into her home while she was in the shower and gropes her breasts. Terry’s aberrations were noticed, just not recognized by the WMPD. I wonder why?

    ” As to John Mark Byers, I stand corrected. I can admit it when I’m wrong. I know someone who was “adopted” by a “step-father.” She still considers her adoptive father her step-father. In any case, John Mark was not the young boy’s biological father (not that he claimed to be). Did his “conversion” to becoming a supporter have any bearing on how you previously judged him? ”

    I changed my mind about JMB when the report about the DNA came out. When I am wrong, I will admit it. I was wrong about JMB. As to how I come to my conclusions in this case, I follow the evidence instead of trying to make the evidence fit my theory.

    “Unless someone credible comes along who can explain everything and claims to have committed the murders beyond a shadow of a doubt, I believe the unholy three are guilty. Their motive would have been thrill kill. Ted Bundy said where you feel safest is where a sociopathic predator will open a window of opportunity.”

    I believe that a credible explanation has been offered. It was developed after much research, and it answers all questions. It is the Manhole Theory. If you have never heard of it, check it out:

    http://www.wm3blackboard.com/forum/index.php?board=59.0

    I believe the sociopath who waited for his opportunity was Terry Hobbs.

    “Released or not, they will never be ‘free’ men. A karmic injustice is eventually righted. Damien is arrogant and narcissistic. He is also cunning. He likely knows he can milk Lorri Davis, his celebrity friends and supporters for cash flow. He likely will and is. Time will tell his tale like it will the rest of us. ”

    They will be “free” men when (not if) they are exonerated. The karma train is going to catch up with Terry Hobbs, though. When Damien was a teen, he was arrogant and narcissistic, I will agree. However, I don’t believe he’s that way now. (BTW, that attitude is not unusual in teenagers.) I don’t see Damien as cunning, either. I see him as intelligent and creative. I think he has a bright future as a writer. Then he won’t need celebrity help with living expenses and the like.

    “Since I believe he is guilty, I don’t believe Damien will confess again because he doesn’t assume responsibility for anything that he’s done. His personality disorders are severe enough that once the spotlight fades and the money stops flowing in, he may well strike back. I have yet to hear him admit to having a flaw in a credible fashion.”

    Damien can’t confess “again” because he never confessed the first time! He has assumed responsibility, as much as he could, for his son, Seth. As to his mental health, when he was a teen, I think that he suffered from some level of depression. However, I believe that right now he is no more neurotic than anyone else who spent over 18 years on Death Row for a crime that he didn’t commit. I don’t think he’s psychotic at all. Time will tell, but I believe that Damien will be a productive member of society.

    “My guess, based only on my experience with sociopathic and non-sociopathic inmates, is at least one of them will reoffend and end up back in jail/prison. There are plenty of statistics out there to support offenders repeating. I’m too lazy to look them up right now.”

    I know all about recidivism. However, since these three never “offended” to begin with (at least not seriously), I don’t see that as a problem. Again, time will tell the tale.

    “Even if they were innocent going in, their innocence would have long ago been lost in prison, where they have spent 18 years. These men are used to an institution taking care of them, not taking care of themselves. Their adjustment to society should be interesting to watch and observe … from a safe and far distance.”

    These are not the first people to be falsely incarcerated. Tim Masters was in prison for 25 years IIRC. Do you believe that he will go back? These three have a wonderful support system to help them to readjust to society. Once they are exonerated, I believe that they will do well. Until then, there are a sizable minority of people who think as you do and who will not give them the chance to have a normal life. If allowed to do so, I am sure that they will do just fine. Right now I’m sure that they will work hard to get exonerated. And, their hard work will be rewarded.

    1. CR, they are not and were not “wrongfully incarcerated.” The fact that it has happened to others doesn’t make it so for the WM3.

      They had a chance to prove their innocence, they had a chance to show all of this new exculpatory evidence and to be vindicated by the court system, but they chose to take a deal to the state mere months before their chance.

      There are not enough words for you to parse on the internet that will change the fact that these men pled guilty to this crime after 18 years of claiming innocence.

      1. THEY STILL MAINTAIN THEIR INNOCENCE. That’s what happens with an Alford Plea. It wouldn’t have been “mere months” before the trial. The evidentiary hearing which would have ordered a new trial was “mere months” away, true. However, the State would have needed time to prepare their case. The trial was AT LEAST a year away, and it could have been years. You want to spend a minute on Death Row for a crime THAT YOU DID NOT COMMIT when you could be out, free, enjoying life with your spouse? You want to trust a justice system that has already cost you half (or more) of your life to get it right this time?

        There are not enough words for you to parse on the Interned that will change the fact that these men are innocent (and free) and took an Alford Plea so that they could prove their innocence from the outside.

        1. “…the State would have needed time to prepare their case. The trial was AT LEAST a year away, and it could have been years. ”

          El wrongo. Could not have been years. If ordered, the new trials would have had to begin in 9-12 months, according to the Arkansas Speedy Trial statute. – https://courts.arkansas.gov/rules/rules_crim_procedure/index.cfm . If new trials had been ordered, Rule 28.1 would’ve kicked in and the new trials would’ve had to begin within 9-12 months (comparable to the 8-10 months between the arrests and the original trials). If the defense sought continuances, those aren’t counted against the state, but in that case, any delays would’ve been the fault of the defense, not the state.

        2. There are a *ton* of guilty people who maintain their innocence. The fact these guys are allowed to say “I am innocent” means absolutely nothing except they can attempt to save face to the people that have been funding them (and now their lifestyle).

        3. And these men had a chance to prove their innocence. There is no amount of parsing of words *you* can come up with that will change the fact that *they* took the deal to the state. If they had confidence of their chances at trial, you better believe they would have rolled the dice on it. But they didn’t.

  8. Okay we all get it… everyone on this site is sad, that’s nons and believers!!

    These guys where convicted and now are free… Get over it and get a life for fucks sake!!

    I think they did it, but I wouldn’t dedicate my whole life to it, I actually have other things to do…

    I can imagine all the people who waste their life/time worrying about this case have very sad and lonely lives and this case gives them a reason not to shoot themselves in the face…

    1. Speaking for myself, I don’t have a “sad and lonely” life. Since I am retired, I have found it rewarding to work in some small way to right a wrong. That’s why I spend time on this case. IMO, the nons simply want to whine and complain. I don’t understand why they continue to spout their misinformation.

        1. 1. Jessie’s statements were accurate in any way except things that were public knowledge.

          2. Damien’s psychological history is proof that he is a murderer.

          3. Jason is a “good liar.”

          4. Jessie is not mentally challenged.

          5. The wounds to the boys were caused by knives and fists.

          6. The trials were fair and unbiased.

          7. The jury foreman didn’t taint the jury.

          That’s off the top of my head. I’m sure that there are a lot more inaccuracies here. As I have said before, my biggest problem with this site is when opinions and personal interpretations of evidence are presented as irrefutable facts.

      1. I have often thought CR doesn’t have a life. She is on the net practically 24/7 dominating as many boards as she can with this stuff.

        CR I believe you need some professional help for your obsession with Damien Echols.

        1. No, you just need to realize she pretty much handed it to you and the other NONS like she always does.

          Once a hater always a hater.

          Preach on CR.

    2. I wish that were possible, but there are those of us that are close to those of the victims families that are outraged at the release and are doing what we can WITH those family members to try and get the truth out there.

      There is no getting over it for them, this IS their life

  9. ex·on·er·at·edex·on·er·at·ing
    Definition of EXONERATE
    EXONERATE transitive verb
    1: to relieve of a responsibility, obligation, or hardship
    2: to clear from accusation or blame

    ———Can one truly be exhonerated if he pleads guilty of his own free will to murder charges?
    ———Is Jason following an important clue that he believes will lead to his exoneration by visiting Disneyland?
    ———Will biased docudramas/books really convince the powers that be to change multiple convictions into fairytale endings?

  10. Let both sides put their fighting aside for a moment. After reading scores of pages pro and con, I had yet to see on Facebook a memorial page for the kids who died in this horrible crime, so I have started a page under Robin Hood Hills Children’s Memorial Page on Facebook. Needless to say, this is not a debate page, so let’s lay down our arms for a second and pay our respects by joining or “liking” this page and maybe saying a few words. Thanks!

  11. (let me first say I do not know if the WM3 are guilty or not, I follow the case as an outside observer only)

    A few things about this YouTube video:

    The prosecution having such a strong case they wouldn’t need to introduce blood evidence linking Damien to one of the victims. This is downright laughable. The prosecutors, in the first Paradise Lost documentary, were explaining to the parents of the victims that without Misskelley’s confession it would be a tough case. If they had blood evidence linking Damien to a victim there is no absolutely zero doubt that it would have been introduced.

    2. Semi-related to #1, but if the case was so strong why did the current prosecutor, upon releasing the Wm3, say something to the effect of it would have been difficult to convict the Wm3 with the evidence that existed? I know you could say because of the work the documentaries did, but in my opinion the media role in the first trials played an even bigger influence.

    3. The polygraphs. It’s amazing such a quack “science” is used today. More often than not it is used to intimidate people. Many true scientists agree that polygraphs are unreliable at best, especially when dealing with a teenager who is scared to death being accused of a heinous crime.

    Again, I don’t know who committed this crime, and the video does point out some good counter evidence to the docs, but those three things are important to note.

  12. <Is Jason following an important clue that he believes will lead to his exoneration by <visiting Disneyland?

    Oh, come on. Nobody said that he has to be personally investigating the case 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Fact is, HE doesn't need to personally investigate the case at all, ever. That's what the legal and forensic experts are for. That doesn't mean that he's not passionately committed to the real murderer being brought to justice. It's simply laughable to insist that if Damien or Jason attend a movie screening, they are violating their terms of release. I had a neighbor who had "work" as a term of his release from prison. In his case, as I am sure it is with most, the courts find work to be anything that is a productive way of spending one's time. He did volunteer work. Promoting a film is work, believe it or not. Just because YOU don't like the content of the films doesn't mean they don't have value and that promoting them doesn't have value.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *