Oscar nomination for Paradise Lost 3?

Oscar nominations will be announced tomorrow morning (24 Jan 2012), and Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory is a frontrunner for a Best Documentary Feature nomination.

Todd and Dana Moore, parents of murder victim Michael Moore, wrote a public letter to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences urging them not to honor Paradise Lost 3.

TODD MOORE
DIANA MOORE
PO Box 721
2004 Main St.
Hughes, AR 72348

November 22, 2011

Chairman Robert P. Epstein
AMPAS
Awards Office
8949 Wilshire Blvd
Beverly Hills CA 90211

Re: Paradise Lost III: Purgatory

Dear Chairman Epstein and members of the Documentary Branch of the Academy:

We are Todd Moore and Dana Moore.

Our cherished eight-year-old son, Michael, was brutally murdered on May 5, 1993 by Jessie Misskelley, Damien Echols, and Jason Baldwin. Misskelley was tried and convicted in 1994. Baldwin and Echols were convicted by a separate jury later that year. All three entered Alford pleas to our son’s murder August 19, 2011. They are now, as they have been for the past 17 years, guilty as a matter of law. They have been guilty as a matter of fact since the moment water flooded Michael’s lungs after he was beaten, stripped, hogtied, and then discarded into a stream to drown.

Michael was the joy of our lives. In addition to our son, his murderers also tortured and slaughtered two other children, Christopher Byers and Stevie Branch. These three precious victims were classmates and friends, and their loss was a tragedy felt throughout the entire community.

We are horrified to learn that a documentary that glorifies Michael’s killers, Paradise Lost III: Purgatory, is among 15 documentaries being considered for an Academy Award. Because of public pressure that exploded due to gross misrepresentations of fact in two previous documentaries, Michael’s killers were unjustly able to enter into a plea agreement, were released from prison, and now pose additional threats to society. This third documentary further insulted the families of these three boys and may lead to further injustice. We implore the Academy not to reward our child’s killers and the directors who have profited from one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated under the guise of a “documentary film.”

We realize that documentaries have a point of view and advocate a position to some degree or another. As with the two before it, this film crossed the line into a cruel hoax that had real-life consequences larger than even those of us who still mourn our horrific losses. It is not art. This film is cynical and exploitative deception that compounds our pain needlessly and rewards those who inflicted it. It and the two films that preceded it are simply tasteless tabloid entertainment presented as social commentary.

We are private individuals. The directors, Bruce Sinofsky and Joe Berlinger, are aware of this because we refused to participate in their last two films. We appeared solely in the first film because the directors lied and told us their purpose would be to “protect children.” You can imagine our shock and disgust when the first film opened with gruesome and gratuitous images of the crime scene and remained exploitative and salacious until the credits rolled. It did nothing to promote child welfare. It did everything to support child killers and to benefit monetarily from a ghastly crime.

We were hardly the only people Sinofsky and Berlinger misled or manipulated.

Consider what happened to John Mark Byers. He was Christopher Byers’ adoptive father. Confrontations between Mr. Byers and Echols’ supporters at hearings were staged. Of course, Berlinger and Sinofsky were there to film these episodes. Berlinger and Sinofsky would transport Mr. Byers to the hearings and wire him for sound beforehand. Furthermore, Berlinger and Sinofsky maneuvered Mr. Byers and Echols’ supporters in order to film the anticipated confrontations. Later, after the cameras were packed away, Mr. Byers acted like a different person. Instead of being belligerent, he was affable. When asked about his change in demeanor, Mr. Byers stated that he was supposed to act that way when the cameras were present. Mr. Byers was quoted as saying he received $500 per hour for “exclusive interviews.”

These contrived “confrontations” and other distortions caused many viewers to believe Mark was the “real killer.” It had a terrible impact on his life. We brought this to the attention of HBO. Our complaint was ignored because these falsehoods proved lucrative.

The complete list of distortions would be a long one. The above example is illustrative of the manipulation and distortions that are prevalent throughout the entire Paradise Lost franchise. The films are bereft of ethics, principles, or factual accuracy and basis.

Publicity from the first two films did generate millions of dollars in donations. Much of that money went toward the defense’s investigation of the case. Not a single piece of exculpatory evidence was produced. In other words, between $10,000,000 and $20,000,000 has been collected, although no one knows the exact amount collected or how it was spent. In eighteen years, nothing was found to clear the names of the actual killers. Late last year, the windfall that went toward the legal defense resulted in the granting of an evidentiary hearing which was set to be held a few weeks from now. Instead, the murderers opted to initiate a plea negotiation with the State. As a result, they remain convicted of the deaths of three children.

We have to note that this situation is similar to the one that confronted the Academy when Capturing the Friedmans was nominated for Best Documentary Film of 2003. Two of the Friedmans’ sexual abuse victims presented another Open Letter to the Academy. Capturing the Friedmans had much more artistic merit and integrity than Paradise Lost III: Purgatory, yet it did not receive the award. The Academy made the right decision then, and we pray it does so this time as well.

Sincerely,

Todd Moore
Diana Moore

Not surprisingly, I support the Moores 100% on this. All three Paradise Lost films are extremely dishonest works which omit or misrepresent key evidence in order to glorify scumbags who tortured and murdered children for kicks. Other filmmakers should hold Berlinger and Sinofsky in disgrace, not honor them.

100 thoughts on “Oscar nomination for Paradise Lost 3?”

  1. It has to be so sickening to watch these 3 murderers gain notoriety and profit off of your very own child. I can’t even imagine. Disgusting. I wouldn’t even turn on the tv, for fear of seeing one of these disgusting convicts getting interviewed or posing with celebrities.
    WM3.org is accepting donations that will be split “3 ways” to help the men rebuild their life. I think we should have one in honor of the victims. There has to be something we can do for the Moores. I hope they know that there a lot of us who agree with them.

  2. A well thought out and presented letter that I pray the chairman and members respond to in accordance. I give the Moore’s much credit for standing up to the blatant disregard for the atrocity that has befallen their son and his two friends. I wish more would see through the layers of BS and recognize the injustice served by letting those three walk free; thus consigning the victim’s families and friends to watch them gain public praise and sympathy while enduring thier losses in dignity.

  3. Know one documentarian who doesn’t hold Berlinger and Sinofsky in high regard. When asked what he thought of their character, he said, “One would rape his mother while the other filmed it.” He added, “Berlinger and Sinofsky did for the West Memphis 3 what Leni Riefenstahl did for the Nazi Party.” Since (I assume) both Berlinger and Sinofsky are Jewish, the latter would really sting. I still wonder what is “higher emotional truth.”

    The Moores are in my thoughts and prayers.

  4. The Moores didn’t write that letter. I have heard that a disbarred attorney wrote it for them. Nevertheless, “Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory” is just as worthy of Oscar consideration as many other films that have won the award.

    1. The Moores lost their child. They have every right to say whatever they want to about Paradise Lost, 3 and it doesn’t matter if they wrote the letter or someone else did.

    2. This just shows you have no class whatsoever. Why would you put a berating comment under this agonizing letter? Oh, I know why. The murderers are more important to you than the victims or their families.

      It is wrong to have a debate over who wrote this letter. Obviously this is how the Moores feel. It is so wrong for you to trivialize their pain. Supporters are like a cult that follows Damien around. The Moores have to watch him getting richer and richer. It makes me sick.

      Debate somewhere else, not on this page. The Moores are in pain, and Damien’s cult just makes it worse.

  5. Compassionate Reader,
    You state that they did not write the letter and you “heard” that a disbarred attorney wrote it. Attorneys write letters on behalf of their clients all the time. You shouldn’t say that they did not write it, I’m quite sure that whether they had an attorney put it together for them, that they approved it and stand behind what it says fully.

  6. Hopefully this and other letters in support of it work to sway the Academy in denying this film and this version of events any further accolades and attention than they have received to date. From what I understand, the renowned Canadian filmmaker Atom Egoyan (The Sweet Hereafter) will be directing a film based on this story and there is another documentary, West of Memphis, currently making the rounds at festivals. I haven’t heard Egoyan’s slant on this, but I doubt seriously that he would break from the Hollywood orthodoxy on these killings, which says that the WM3 were completely innocent.

    I can imagine how galling it is for the Moores to watch coverage of the WM3, particularly Echols, doing the media circuit and talking about his future planned artistic works.

    The allegation in this letter about John Mark Byers receiving a $500 per hour “interview fee” and encouraged to act the role of nutjob is quite damning if it is on the record. Many scenes in all three films had a staged feel and the effect was obvious — in part two, the viewer was led to believe that John Mark Byers was really the one who had murdered the boys. Change the point of view in part three, present him as less crazy than he was in part two, and all of a sudden John Mark Byers is on the side of justice and it’s Terry Hobbs with blood on his hands.

    It’s Occam’s Razor time at this point, the simplest solution is the right one. In this case it’s that the ones responsible for these heinous crimes were the teens who had no credible alibis for the time of the murders, who confessed to it (while many of these are contentious, certainly Misskelley’s repeated confessions can’t ALL be dismissed… again Occam’s Razor), and were led by a guy who had savaged a dog in the years leading up to it and had a long history of documented psychopathic behavior.

    Unfortunately it seems under the ostensible end of combating a definite social ill — bullying and not accepting people who are a bit different — the Free WM3 campaign and its celebrity supporters have supported something far worse, the killing and grievous harm of children. They’ve been too keen to gloss over uncomfortable details and frame things in a way that tells a story they’re comfortable hearing.

  7. I wouldn’t even mind Paradise Lost receiving the Oscar for Best Documentary. Once the truth comes out, Hollywood will be seen for the fools they are.

    1. Norman Mailer and Susan Sarandon certainly found that out. Jack Henry Abbott, the object of Sarandon’s alleged lust, was a snake who showed how much of a snake he was once released. He is rumored to have hated the guts of both Mailer and Sarandon for being “follower fools.”

  8. Actually, many of you are going to feel like fools when all the evidence finally comes out as to what happened.

    Peter Jackson, director of Lord Of The Rings, poured millions into the WM3 Defense Fund and produced the “West Of Memphis” documentary currently being screened at Sundance. Jackson and his partner paid for all the DNA testing and investigations that have occurred during he past 5+ years.

    HOLD ONTO YOUR HATS, THINGS ARE ABOUT TO CHANGE.

    Jackson has uncovered 3 witnesses that have all passed polygraph tests that have testified that they have knowledge that Terry Hobbs committed the murders. Terry’s own nephew secretly sat on the basement stairs (with a friend) and overheard Terry confessing (months after the convictions) to his brother that he committed the murders and was very sorry for it. The nephew and friend have passed polygraph tests as to hearing this entire confession. There are other witnesses involved as well.

    The fact that Terry Hobbs’ hair was found inside a ligature on one of the bodies was no coincidence. Normal ‘transfer’ could have happened but everything is now pointing to the fact that he is indeed the murderer of those boys.

    Common sense also indicates that the WM3 are innocent. Case in point… Jason Baldwin REFUSED to take the Alford Plea deal FOR MONTHS before finally agreeing to it. The State already had approved the deal to let them plead guilty and walk free. Now why on earth would a GUILTY person not RUN to take the deal to get out of prison knowing that legally no matter what, even if other evidence was later discovered to uphold his original conviction, that he would NEVER GO BACK TO JAIL. He could never be retried.

    The answer is simple… they are without a doubt, 100% INNOCENT. Ignore all the other potential evidence of jury misconduct, not DNA or real evidence connecting any of them to the crime scene. Just the fact alone that Jason Baldwin WILLINGLY sat in prison for many more months rather than just signing the deal and walking free for life proves that he’s innocent. He initially refused to take the deal because he was willing to finally clear his name after being wrongfully imprisoned for 17 years on PRINCIPLE alone.

    All the fans of this site are in for a rude awakening. Terry Hobbs was not only the murderer, but he’ll eventually be convicted and the WM3 will be completely exonerated.

    1. Jason isn’t dumb. He knew if he said “Oh, I wanted to be exonerated but my BFF is gonna die…” that the supporters would just fall in love even more. What a stand up guy! That whole story is bullshit. I saw right through it at their press conference. I also saw Jesse being extremely uncomfortable and wanting to get the FUCK outta there. Jason even went so far as to put his arm around Jesse and give him a squeeze as it to say, “Hang in there buddy. We only have to lie a little bit longer…”

    2. You are leaving out all the facts in this case. And about the one that over heard him confess. Your leaving out the fact that had nephew told on the witnesses. There was a fight between all of them The witnesses sent a text to the nephew. The time frame in which he could have done these murders was too close . Sorry not buying the one man killing theory. And no blood at his home oh I forgot he was the curtains. What about the rugs and the chairs. Why didnt he use rope tape I dont see what you see

    3. I’m sorry, but I am seeing no real reason that you all think they did it besides Jessie Misskelly’s weird confessions, and some heresay? What else did we all miss?? I see no evidence at all listed on here.. Do you really think that when these three teenagers homes were searched that they would not have found one speck of blood, no mud..nothing? Do you really think an almost retarded kid could cover this stuff up?
      My big question is, why were these kids zeroed in on in the first place?
      Besides, you seem to be forgetting that the law is to prove they did it “beyond a reasonable doubt”,not to prove that they are innocent.
      You people are blind, and I don’t know why I’m wasting my time because none of you will ever change your minds.

  9. @Reality Check Not sure if you’re a supporter or a non.

    Even if those witnesses past their polygraphs, don’t you think their statements are still a bit fishy because of Jackson’s involvement with the case and the suspects?

    Why did these new witnesses wait so long to give this evidence? Wasn’t there a reward for new information? These witnesses also had a falling-out with Terry Hobbs’ nephew. Don’t you think that could have motivated their statements?

    So you’re saying based on these fourth-hand statements that Hobbs will be found guilty?

    And the hair doesn’t mean much, the defense has even said so. We don’t know which shoelace was used to tie each boy. And Hobbs’ hair could have been picked up by any of the boys hours or even days before the murders.

    1. I also think that Ellington gave an interview that he had not rec’d any of the “new evidence” from the defense team at all.

  10. Being very new to almost all the details of this case, I wanted to hear the facts and what more informed people had to say regarding such. However, It angers me to say this has proven very difficult because it seems the wm3 supporters will not rationally address the troubling points in their positions. I say this without really having any strong leanings to the guilt of the accused. First, after reading the multiple confessions of Misskelley,only a complete idiot could downplay or excuse them via mental capacity. They are just too compelling to brush aside. Second, I find it moronic to refuse to acknowledge that at the time of his arrest, Echols was a dangerously disturbed individual. To paint him as misunderstood or singled out due to style, and to portray the people of WM as a backward people on a witch hunt is arrogant and absurd. Even with this and other gaping holes in the stories of the wm3, I am not convinced of their guilt. My problem is I cant conceive of anybody being sure they are not.

  11. Wow, balderdash. And pardon me for even suggesting impropriety here “Reality Check” (and those quotation marks were most intentional) but it seems to me like you might be a paid PR hack for Peter Jackson’s big-budget documentary that he wants to see released without being shouted down by cogent arguments. Of all the sites on the subject, I find this the least shrill and the most informative. The webmaster here should be commended for not becoming shrill about what is obviously an emotional topic.

    If you read this site, you’ll know that the Terry Hobbs “confession” evidence has already been proffered. It’s based on old unreliable hearsay. I’m going to leave it to the earnest webmaster here to actually refer you to the URLs, but yes, it’s been denied and discredited, even by members of Hobbes’ own family. The only reason it’s coming up now, it seems to me, is because after Paradise Lost 3, the only viable villain left in this saga is Terry Hobbs. (The cynic in me says I’m glad Michael Moore’s parents didn’t agree to take part in the sequels)

    Had this discussion thread been going on after Paradise Lost 2, we would have been talking about Byers. The documentary was twisted to make him look like the murderer and he lived up to the role…. that is until he became a WM3 supporter in the next film. Then the crazy bible-spouting psychopath that he was portrayed to be became a voice for reason. Handy isn’t it? Now the “crazy hillbilly stepdad” role is being filled in by, in Paradise Lost: Purgatory, Terry Hobbs.

    I tell you what, it’s easy to pick on men who seem barely literate and accuse them of a crime that would have been nearly impossible for a lone man to carry out. Then you can capitalize further when he can’t present a case because the guy has no verbal skills whatsoever. It’s bullying nonsense.

    If I were Baldwin, I would have held out for a full pardon as well because things were so obviously on their side. Let us meet an ugly reality of jurisprudence in America: You get what you pay for. And the WM3 had a tonne of justice bought for them. Because of ignorant celebrities, they had a sum donated to them into the millions of dollars for lawyers and experts who will earn their money by interpreting information in a manner that best suits their clients. (That they are still drawing from this neverending pile of love money from people who didn’t look into the case is sickening).

    In my opinion, the people pushing the fiscal buttons in Arkansas saw what they were up against and just said, “Yep, they did it, let’s get that on record, but eff it, it’s better that these three go free then for us to keep footing that increasingly extravagant bill. (And then maybe: Let’s hope for the best. At least one of them is remorseful.)”

    You run for election every four years, you start to get worried about what taxpayers might start worrying is coming out of their salaries, double that for a down economy as we have now.

    It’s an immoral decision, but an understandable one. I would hope you, reality check, are able to actually check in with reality whenever your fanciful notions are made to go up against the clear facts of this case (and I’m being brief):

    The MULTIPLE confessions. (Part B — The fact that Misskelly knew whom among these boys had been sexually mutilated)
    The fact that Damien Echols is a documented psychopath, who witnesses said butchered a sick dog shortly before the crime, but who is on record as having caused his parents fear and have had delusions about being christ.
    The dearth of alibis for all three of them.
    How difficult if not impossible it would be for a lone man — go ahead, and pick your favorite villain stepdad here — to murder these three boys.

    Maybe there were problems with the trial and due process, etc, but I doubt America and the world would have gotten up in arms about that.

    I reckon if they believed the West Memphis Three were guilty, they would have thought, rightly in my opinion, that they got what they deserved.

    I also think that they did get what they deserved and it’s only due to a judicial process warped by money that they got the result they did.

    Maybe it’s for the best that this is nominated. Sooner or later the conscience of Misskelley will get to him. It’s the tell-tale heart of this case. It won’t happen with Baldwin, whose been rehearsing his role ever since the conviction, or Echols, who is a psychopath, but Jessie one day will have it come back to him… the evil things he took part in on that day and he’ll talk.

    And he’ll say things in such a way that you won’t be able to denounce him as “a retard”.

    That day is coming. Enjoy the spotlight while it lasts, murderers.

  12. My comments are in reference to “Reality Check”, not the much faster contributors who replied while I was preparing my comments.

    1. Jesus already came back from the dead; just check any calendar and you can see how long ago. The year on calendars isn’t arbitrary. Or if you prefer, every time you write a check and date it, you’re acknowledging Christ in your own handwriting. And no, it’s not a scam or fable. If you think so, WHY DON’T YOU AND TWELVE FRIENDS get together and forever affect the course of humanity. Now that’s laughable…..

  13. Isn’t it interesting how the WM3 are fighting like hell to have more testing done, more investigation done, to keep this case wide open…they’re just setting themselves up for the fall, aren’t they? “That day” when Peter Jackson’s millions accidentally uncovers that they’re the true murderers and they can say, “Haha! We fooled you all!”

    You people are hopeless assholes. And your professed love for the “beautiful” murdered children is predicated on stubborness and bigotry rather than a pursuit of the truth.

    1. Joey,
      How, after all these years, and all this groundbreaking new evidence, is that we’ve seen or heard nothing that proves their innocence….ooooh, wait, I forgot, 3 dudes decided to come forward with allegations 18 years after the fact. You are an asshole as well, and I’m damn sure it’s the supporters who are really gonna be fooled…..because where the hell is all this damn evidence that’s gblow this case wide open????? Seems strange that none of it has come out yet.

      1. The WM3 are avowed to finding the “real murder(s)”, much like O.J. promised to do; and he assiduously searched for them on every golf course in Florida.

    2. See: Roger Keith Coleman. He fought to have everything tested. He was proven guilty with that further testing.

      And I thought they already had the evidence they needed? So they need more? I wonder how long supporters will buy this?

    3. Jesus already came back from the dead; just check any calendar and you can see how long ago. The year on calendars isn’t arbitrary. Or if you prefer, every time you write a check and date it, you’re acknowledging Christ in your own handwriting. And no, it’s not a scam or fable. If you think so, WHY DON’T YOU AND TWELVE FRIENDS get together and forever affect the course of humanity. Now that’s laughable…..

    4. The WM3 are avowed to finding the “real murder(s)”, much like O.J. promised to do; and he assiduously searched for them on every golf course in Florida.

  14. Kelly,

    You don’t “prove” innocence, you “prove” guilt, and guilt has never been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. “But, but, but two juries agreed they’re guilty!” Well one we know was null and void, being that the Jury Foreman was a fucking ringer and self-appointed hero. And the other was due in no small part to a bogus confession. “But, but, but he confessed a million times!” Question for all you stubborn nons out there: Is there such thing as a false confession? Seriously. Real question. Do you believe that false confessions EVER happen? Wiki “false confession,” or Google it, and peruse some of the case histories. You will find that there is an ENORMOUS amount of false confessions, even multiple false confessions, in the recent history of American crime. Fine, I won’t play the “low IQ retard card,” I’ll just call Jessie a fucking idiot, dumb kid, ignorant redneck hick who was scared, and bullied, whether it was 12 hours of interrogation (“But, but, but”) or 12 minutes of interrogation. FALSE CONFESSIONS HAPPEN, and to deny that is to cast yourself in the Creationist lot, the flat earther lot. Don’t deny objective facts, it’s unbecoming. Lastly, I didn’t mention the 3 dudes, you did, all I’m saying is there are a lot of people working hard behind the scenes to further uncover truths about what happened that night…isn’t it interesting that it’s the “murderers.” Are you going to deny all the extensive DNA testing they’re spearheading? What do you think, if it’s discovered that those three guys have their DNA all over the crime artifacts it will then be hushed up and brushed under the rug? Honestly, Kelly, and whoever else is creeping around out there, what do you think?

    1. Sure, there are false confessions. That doesn’t mean these are false confessions. Most of the time, people do not implicate themselves in a triple child murder unless they were actually there. It’s much less likely that he would continue to implicate himself after his arrest and conviction. And extremely less likely that the things he said would match the physical evidence, and that the whiskey bottle would be found exactly where he said he broke it.

      The jurors didn’t find his first confessions false. And they did not even know about the later ones.

      As for the Echols/Baldwin jury — one thing I find very interesting is that the words Jessie Misskelley were crossed out. That means the jury realized it was not supposed to consider that as evidence. Which is why they removed it from the list. So while I agree that it is troublesome, I do not think that Supreme Ct. would have overturned the verdict for jury misconduct. In fact, they did not.

        1. Huh?

          I’m just saying you shouldn’t assume these confessions are false just because false confessions can happen. These confessions instead fit with a lot of the details of the crime — the cut on Steve Branch’s face, finding Michael away from the other two, the emasculation, the blood type found on Damien’s necklace, the “no more beer” comment made by Damien, the time gap in all three’s alibis, the whiskey bottle being right where he said it would be… I could go on.

          The only reason you think these confessions are false is that you WANT them to be. I used to be in your camp — but if you remove the emotion and prejudice and just step back and look at the picture as a whole, there is no denying that the WM3 committed this crime.

    2. And then Jesse was smart enough to put even more details in confessions 2, 3, and 4? If he was so mentally handicapped I see no way he is capable of making these things up, or memorizing them for that matter. No, I don’t think many “False confessions” happen AFTER they are incarcerated. Jesse appeared to be in mental pain, and he wanted help. Like I’ve said before, the confessions AFTER he was found guilty were not “LED”. And even a person with an average IQ could not memorize details and answer the questions the way he did. Stidham almost seems like he is trying his hardest to try and “lead” him again but more often than not, Jesse didn’t follow.

      1. Hey, Stacia, note I checked all the typical supporter shit about “low IQ” and “mentally handicapped” at the door. Not that I disbelieve it, per se, but I didn’t want to give you that out. Still, you took it. HE WANTED OUT OF PRISON. So he confessed a bunch of times. When it came down to it, when he was faced with the possibility of life in prison, or at least getting out after many years, he decided he’d stick with life in prison because he realized (with the help of his mother) that LYING WAS NOT RIGHT. So, when it counted, he DIDN’T confess. This was long before Paradise Lost brainwashed all us Hollywood liberals and Echols groupies.

        1. Y ou still can’t explain why a person with such a low IQ could actually memorize all of these details from his trial and the newspapers, etc. Yet he was so mentally deficient he thought confessing 3 more times would get him out of jail? Not falling for it. Makes no sense whatsoever.

          He realized that “Lying was not right”? I think he realized he would get his ass kicked while being incarcerated for being a “snitch”. I believe that’s what his Daddy told him.

          1. What’s to fall for, you mongolid? How high is your IQ? TRIVIA: If Jessie had done what the state was DESPERATE for him to do and confess against Damien and Jason, would he or would he not have received a reduced sentence? Or what…is that a trick question? And for someone who doesn’t want to give his low IQ much credit, you sure harp on it enough. Tell me, Stacia, since you’re such an expert in the field: what’s the exact correlation between IQ and memory, and just how much can a person of Jessie’s given IQ actually remember? What a lark…

    3. Actually Joey, once someone has been tried and convicted, it is on them to PROVE INNOCENCE. The guilt only has to be proven for a conviction, but to overturn that conviction, innocence has to be proven, You were wrong

    4. Proof is not found beyond a shadow of a doubt. It is a reasonabke doubt.

      Please point me to one other case with multiple onfessions before and after conviction? I cannot find one other abywhere. I do believe in false confessions, btw. Just not all of these confessions.

    5. Your right. The the awful thing about experts in the crime field two will never agree and we are only hearing what they want you to hear. DNA from a person that was a step father that the other children played at . Come on . Ex wife that has accused Mr hobbs of serval things and went back to live with him. But know there is money involved she jumped on the bandwagon. Mr Byers jump were ever he can get attention and money.

  15. Thanks for the example, Lucielle. It’s nice to have a non actually offer a bit of support for their arguement rather than “But, but, but Damien killed a dog!” I wasn’t familiar with the Coleman case and I just took a look at it (very briefly, obviously). It sounds like an interesting case that merits more research. And yes, it certainly seems to be a case of a guilty man protesting his innocence and the DNA ultimately proving him guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. That said, he was a man on death row who had nothing to lose by sticking to his story of innocence. Maybe he was crazy and really thought he was innocent, I don’t know. But the point is, the WM3 are out now, and they’re fighting as hard as ever to have themselves exonerated. It doesn’t do them much good to fight for the truth, only for the truth to be revealed, and lo and behold it was them all along. If I was them, and I was really guilty, I would lay verrrrry low, kind of like Terry Hobbs, and just want all the fuss to die down. But maybe that’s just me.

    1. As long as people are paying them, they are going to keep searching for the “truth.” And right now, they have a movie coming out that they need to hype. This is just a money train at this point.

      1. Money Train, Woody Harrelson, Wesley Snipes, good flick. Paradise Lost 3 is a good flick too, just got nominated for an Oscar. DogIsYourName, you’ve got the personality of a dead moth, and the logic of a Christian fundamentalist. Don’t pretend you’ve got an interest in the “truth” yourself. You wouldn’t know the truth if it was shoved up your ass, being that your head is already there.

          1. Another great argument by you? Was that a question? Yes, to answer your question, another great argument by me. The WM3 is out of prison, everyone but the mongoloids agree they’re not guilty, Bruce and Joe just scored an Oscar nomination, and you’re a dunce. Life is good, what can I say.

          2. Joey, no point in arguing with these people who just WANT to believe that they are guilty. Unless there is an actual video tape proving that they did NOT do it, they’ll keep going.
            This “website” speaks for itself. I laughed when I read what they have under “The Case against the WM3” .

          3. Now I regret even replying to dumb- ass Joey. He probably doesn’t even know what a Mongoloid is. And btw, nobody has used that term for years..but he wouldn’t know that.

    2. You should look more into RKC case. He was the anti death penalty crowds poster boy. He even got a cover story in TIME. He professed his innocence to the end and demanded further testing bc he was a sociopath. IMO.

      What you don’t understand is that even if all 3 of the guys confess, even if there is evidence that comes to light proving beyond any and all doubt they can NEVER be tried for this crime again. Damien could be tried for purjury, but that is all. (See Mel Ignatow case for a tragic example of this) It would be double jeopardy.

  16. I commented on CR’s post and then realized that this page has indeed become another debate page. ~sigh~

    Utterly tasteless in my opinion to debate on the same page as the Moore’s letter. You supporters look like selfish idiots who could care less about anybody else’s pain.

  17. Wah, wah, wah. Typical non. I have news for you: reality can be a cold, heartless place. Sometimes the world just sucks, but that’s how it goes. I feel absolutely awful for everyone impacted by this tragedy, particularly the parents of the three children who were brutally murdered, and the parents of the three children who were robbed of 18 years of their lives. But yes, ESPECIALLY the ones who will never get to see their kids again. That said, I believe that the truth matters, and I don’t care whose feelings the truth hurts. People ask Richard Dawkins, “Why do you go around trying to shove your athiesm in the face of the religious? People need religion. People need that hope. Why are you against it?” And he says, “Because it’s not true!” Sorry, the universe doesn’t owe us any “meaning” for life, it doesn’t owe us happiness, it doesn’t owe us anything. We’re born, we live, we die, end of story. Cold hard facts. If the Moore’s can’t accept that the state fucked them over by railroading the WM3 rather than fully investigating their son’s murder, they’ll just have to suck it up, because the world doesn’t care.

    1. Typical Supporter. You really think you can talk the Moores into joining your cult? Thank God the Moores accept the truth and continue to fight for their son.
      And you don’t care whose feelings you hurt?

      That speaks for itself. Makes me sick you would actually hound the Moores into thinking their child’s murderer is innocent and deserves the fame and money he is receiving “to re-build his poor little life”. Soon they will actually work and take care of themselves. HA! We’ll see how long that takes! I’m sure the WMFree will be milking this for the rest of their lives.

      And to compare a child’s murder to Atheism? What the fuck…

      1. I don’t give a flung fuck if the Moores join our cult or if they join the Diner’s Club. It’s irrelevent. I would hardly call them objective parties in all of this.

        I don’t care whose feelings I hurt? Are you fucking comatose? Are you for real? Are you really that fucking dense? Let’s be clear: I think the WM3 are innocent, you think they’re guilty. There’s obviously an impasse. But don’t think the rhetoric doesn’t cut both ways, you funny little simpleton. For 18 years you and your ilk (note I’ll be classy and refrain from calling you a cult) did nothing but smear 3 innocent men. You don’t believe they’re innocent? Cool, that’s your choice, that’s your preference, that’s your right. But when you call them murderers (and all kinds of other colorful descriptors) don’t think for one second that doesn’t hurt their loved ones. “Makes me sick.” Get off your fucking high horse you fucking hypocrite. You’re standing on a sinking ship fighting a losing battle. Wave the white flag and retain a little dignity.

        Oh, and I’m sorry, I didn’t know comparisons were off the table. I’ll stick to literalism, perhaps you can understand that better.

          1. Spoken from a true Mongoloid/funny little simpleton/ comatose/dense /hypocritical guy who cares more about the GUILTY 3 men more than the victim’s families.

            I admire you for not saying the word “cult”. Bravo!

          1. @Joey Not sure how that’s a checkmate. The state prosecutor was wrong to agree to their Alford Plea. The parents of the victims and many people who believe the WM3 are guilty are very upset about this. He wasn’t prepared to go up against their high-paid lawyers and millions. He was wrong. That doesn’t prove the WM3 are innocent. Your move.

          2. Honestly, I am still not completely convinced either way. However the logic of “they’re innocent because Arkansas let them walk” is tantamount to the logic of “they are guilty because they admitted the prosecution had enough evidence”; neither apply in and of themselves. We must logically pursue more real evidence, without bias or preconceived mindsets. This case will never be closed until indisputable, real evidence proves who the murder(s) are. We all should be working together for that one common goal, without exchanging barbs.

        1. Joey, they are not innocent men. They had a chance to prove it in court and they could not. (IMO they could not, otherwise why take a plea? To fight for exoneration in NZ? To see if they could find the real killer at the Oscars? Or Disneyland? C’mon) They chose to take a plea to the state instead of proving in open court that they are innocent.

          Also, “cult?” Have you seen some of the supporter sites? HAve you seen their facebook pages? *That* my friend is cult like behavior.

          1. Arkansas didn’t “let them walk” Joey. They plead guilty and were released with “time served.” They are also on probation for 10 years. This is not a case of exoneration.

  18. You guys have already brainwashed Pam and JMB. Can’t you leave the rest of these grieving parents alone? Of course not. Because the all-mighty truth will prevail!

    Well, we’re all still waiting.

  19. Waiting for what? Arkansas let them out of prison, let them walk free. You’re probably waiting for Christ to walk the earth again too. Enjoy your wait.

    P.S. Haha, good one, I don’t know what Mongolid means. You know, Stacia…you’re something else. A real tribute to the human race. “Brainwashed.” What an asshole.

      1. You’re welcome. I’ll give you attention allllll day long.

        They did plead guilty. You can call them guilty. Ain’t gonna change the facts on the ground. The facts:

        *The WM3 are Free

        *The investigation continues, funded entirely by the WM3 and their supporters

        *Mounting evidence, be it circumstancial, admissible, credible, or remarkable continues to stack up against one particular individual…who, it just so happens, has a violent past (much more so than Damien ever did), who skipped town shortly after the murders, who was never investigated (which, you gotta admit, is a bit of boner), and who any expert would tell you should have been THE FIRST (along with the other parents) to be THOROUGHLY vetted.

  20. I would just like to say thank you to wm3truth for running a great discussion board and not just banning me. Believe it or not, I was not even accepted to the new WM3 Blackboard, where all the supporters huddle, probably because once or twice I pointed out that Mark Byers isn’t a saint. Maybe I’ll be banned from here, my comments expunged from the record, but I hope not. And so long as I’m not I’ll continue to be grateful to the admin(s) here for allowing me to post freely.

    1. I want to post it again in case you missed my reply above, Joey. You’re wrong about the only thing that needs to be proven is guilt. Once someone has been tried and convicted, it is on them to PROVE INNOCENCE. Again, guilt only has to be proven for a conviction, but to overturn that conviction, innocence has to be proven. I wanted to reitereate bc you seem so smug with all your responses yet you clearly don’t really know what you are talking about

    2. Glad you left, Joey. You were your own worst enemy and it showed just how ignorant most supporters can be. You were a shining example of how they operate. That you were banned from the Blackboard only shows just how boring and stupid you really are. For a supporter to get banned from their own turf, is funny as hell. I hope you look within yourself and find that you COULD be a nice person and not choose to remain a complete asshole that you are at this moment.

  21. Personally I think we should all try and refrain from name – calling. I’m sure as hell gonna try!

    My mongoloid ass has to make some dinner! 😛

  22. Stacia, I like you, and I won’t ever call you a name again.

    Kelly on the other hand…you’re right. The guys are fighting for their exoneration right now, fighting to clear their names, and fighting to get the killer(s) if not only for justice for the three boys, than also for revenge due to their wrongful imprisonment.

  23. I love how the supporter sheep ignore 4 confessions from Jesse Misskelley, directly from the mouth of an accused person who is admitting taking part in the triple murder. Yet immediately use the word of the (follow closely now) three friends of the son of the brother of Terry Hobbs 18 years later as scripture. You idiots love to compare 1994 to a witch hunt, and don’t even have the common sense to realize you are conducting one in the present day on Terry Hobbs.

  24. A far as Oscar Nominations are concerned. Let us see what these “documentaries” have shown us, or more importantly, not shown us.

    doc·u·men·ta·ry  (dky-mnt-r)
    adj.
    1. Consisting of, concerning, or based on documents.
    2. Presenting facts objectively without editorializing or inserting fictional matter, as in a book or film.
    n. pl. doc·u·men·ta·ries
    A work, such as a film or television program, presenting political, social, or historical subject matter in a factual and informative manner and often consisting of actual news films or interviews accompanied by narration.

    1. Misskelley’s multiple post conviction confessions. We all know supporters disredard them, however they did occur. The only reason they aren’t mentioned is because it would raise questions about the threes supposed innocence, i.e, 100% biased storytelling.

    2. Never is it mentioned that Damien was admitted to mental health institutions 3 times, or that he was deemed by the state of Arkansas to be so mentally ill he was provided disability payments. So he was disturbed enough to be seen by the state as unfit to be employed. Berlinger and Sinofsky have no problem rifling through Byers/Hobbs past, yet cannot seem to show the same diligence with the main suspects/focal points of the entire investigation. Bias

    3. As an addition to the above post, exhibit 500 anybody? Supporters can’t deny the 500 paints a portrait of an individual who could potentially commit a crime of this nature, I mean Damien was a pretty sick pup prior to the murders, it’s not heresay or rumor, it’s documented fact, written down in 500, is it ever brought up? Bias

    4. Luminol photos, shows blood where Jesse claims the murders occured, yes I know luminol wasn’t allowed in trial in 1994, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t bear mentioning. They seem to prefer the no blood at crime scene angle much more for some reason. Bias

    5. Some seriously flawed alibis for all 3, especially Damien, who can’t keep straight from one day to the next exactly if it was mom or dad who picked Jason himself and Domini up in a car the day of the murders.

    6. Damien’s courtroom behavior, whether you believe in the guilt, innocence, or sit firmly on the fence in regards to the convicted in this case, the way Damien acted during the trial, blowing kisses and winking at the parents of the murdered boys, can only be interpreted one way, evil. Damien likes to claim he was a smartass as a way to explain away his behavior in 1994, yeah, I used to be a smart ass as well, I’m quite positive I wouldn’t mock murder victims parents in any situation, let alone one in which my life was literally on the line, and I am supposed to be “innocent”.

    I have talked with supporters enough to know nothing I say can sway the way you feel about this, and I must admit I have grown weary about arguing the circumstances of this tragedy. It might be different if they were still behind bars, but they aren’t. They are busy continuing the pursuit of money drained off of three dead boys, as we can see by Damien’s producing credit in Peter Jackson’s upcoming West of Memphis docu shit. What happened to attempting to find the “real killers”? Maybe Damien and Peter thought the perpetrators were on the set of the hobbitt in New Zealand, or were employed at Disney Land? It might be time to just accept that in my opinion, three murderers were set free on the back of a misguided filmaking duo, celebrity ignorance, and a crazy lady who managed to fall in love with a death row teenager she saw on tv. What a wonderful world we live in.

  25. Todd Moore, father of Michael Moore
    Diana Moore, mother of Michael Moore
    Stevie Branch, Sr., father of Stevie Branch, Jr.
    Terry Hobbs, stepfather of Stevie Branch, Jr.

    My suggestion for face book. Is to put the facts that no one got to see the real facts in the case. Dameim medical records. And Jessie and Jason real profile and the just say innocent or guilty . Let everyone know that these 3 were not hunted down because they dress different. And let them know all about the religion of Aleister Crowley. And how some of the writing so happened to be underlined. All of them were prep for court. Dameim lawyer would have gone over and over on his anwers to explain away the evidence.

  26. I think a good way to show how we really feel instead of posting on this board would be to:
    1. Cut off HBO if you are paying for it.
    2. Not go see any of the new movies that will be coming out in regards to WM3.

    By watching this garbage we are inadvertently funding the WM3 campaign.
    The only reason I’m willing to read about it on the internet is it’s free.
    I DO have pay channels….I have HBO, Showtime and Encore. I am disgusted with HBO for co-signing on these documentaries. The innocence/ guilt of the 3 in guestion is highly questionable and it is disgusting and irresponsible that they would air this. I’m not even going to mention the nude, murdered bodies of the children in the begininng. Unfortunately, I love some of HBO’s other stuff like ‘Homeland’, ‘True Blood’, and ‘Boardwalk Empire’…but you know what… I can live without them!

    1. True Blood is pretty ridiculous. Boardwalk Empire is pretty average.

      But Game of Thrones is where HBO will get me. Great show.

  27. I am very happy for the Moores and all the families involved in this tragedy. Deep down I have a feeling a lot of people question and doubt the “innocence” of these three men instead of celebrating propaganda to make money off the unenlightened.

    My best to them.

  28. It’s well made but a little too biased. The authorities did screw up and leave doubts. I’m leaning towards their guilt nowadays. The amount of lies told on the stand by Echolsd in particular, leave me in a position where I can’t believe a word he says. The slow (ish) dude’s confession to HIS OWN LAWYER (remember that…his own lawyer) was also telling. The numeerous witnesses. I could go on, but you know the story.

    The film makers should be ashamed that they took sides so early on. Three little boys were brutally murdered and they should think of that first.

    There IS a possibility that they actually did it.

    I would like to see a film maker make a doc that is unbiased on this tragic story. I don’t think either you guys here, or HBO can be trusted to do that.

    One in which TOUGH questions are asked of all those convicted and accussed. Perhaps letting each party choose some questions for their counterparts. One in which a level amount of evidence for and against is shown.

    Who knows, someone could slip up (if Echols actually agrees to not knowing what questions are coming as I’ve read he only gives interviews with ‘pre planned questions’).

  29. Can we all sign a petition against stations like HBO (Canada & USA) who air this bias garbage?

    I just watched 5 min of Paradise Lost 3 to try to understand how these movies could be so effective at wooing celebrities and justice. I turned it off after seeing the exploitative garbage showing those poor dead boys. It made me feel sick and disgusted. It was the worst thing I have ever seen! I couldn’t image what the Moores must have felt. What I want to know is, how is this legal? How is this not considered child pornography? and how on earth were they able to get crime footage? Isn’t that evidence or some sort?

    Anyway, I think they are guilty and it made me feel rage to see the film makers taking a side and reminding me, the viewer of the horrible crimes the 3 they were looking to exhonerate committed.

  30. I just saw PL3 for the first time. What a piece of garbage. Guilt or innocence aside, it wasn’t even that good.

    What I got from it was at the end when they took the Alford Plea, Ellington made it clear he believed they were guilty, but thought they would probably get a new trial in December and be acquitted. Two reasons why he didn’t want them acquitted – 1. They could sue the state for millions and 2. They would then be innocent in the eyes of the law.

Leave a Reply

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