Columns by Todd Moore and Terry Hobbs

Todd Moore (father of murder victim Michael Moore) and Terry Hobbs (stepfather of murder victim Steve Branch) have both written guest columns for the Jonesboro Sun this summer.

On June 6, the Sun published a willfully ignorant editorial titled “Justice Unserved”. Todd Moore’s guest column ran on June 12.

Father of WM3 murder victim certain who killed 3 boys
by Todd Moore

I am the father of West Memphis triple murder victim Michael Moore. I am writing this in response to your editorial in the June 6 edition of The Sun titled “Justice Unserved.” It has always been my opinion that justice was served when Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley were convicted in 1994 for the brutal murder of my son and his friends.

The three men who slaughtered my son were convicted by two juries that found them guilty in 1994. Despite this, the Arkansas Supreme Court generously granted the murderers the opportunity for a new evidentiary hearing to be held Dec, 5, 2011, to show evidence they claimed proved their innocence. They could have been granted a new trial to prove these claims of innocence. Instead of presenting their “new evidence” in open court last December, they opted to plead guilty to the murders in August 2011 in exchange for time served.

Second District Prosecuting Attorney Scott Ellington agreed to accept the defense’s plea offer for vague reasons we still don’t understand. Family members learned of the deal only at the last minute. The district attorney was new to the case. But whatever the rational, this continued to make the convicts guilty as a matter of law.

The defense team avoided sharing the results of the tests of everything with us by preemptively entering a guilty plea for their clients. Thanks to the plea deal, we may never know exactly what the defense found when the evidence was retested. Absence of DNA evidence does not prove the West Memphis Three (WM3) are innocent. The killers washed most of the evidence away in the water- filled ditch where they drowned my son. There was plenty of other evidence to convict them in 1994 without positive DNA. Most murderers are convicted without DNA evidence.

The defense attorneys for the WM3 had nearly 20 years to find “the real killer” and failed to do so. After nearly two decades and untold millions in donated funds spent, the best they could do was find a hair that may or may not have belonged to Terry Hobbs, step- father of victim Stevie Branch. It was allegedly found on a shoelace used to tie my son. It has never been proven to actually belong to Terry Hobbs.

Even if it was Terry Hobbs’ hair, that fact would prove nothing. Our sons were best friends, and my child spent considerable time in Terry Hobbs’s home and could have picked up the hair on his shoe. This would be “secondary transfer” and makes the hair of no probative value. The defense has even admitted as much. Terry Hobbs did not murder my son. No credible law enforcement official believes so. Neither did Mark Byers, Mr. Bojangles nor any of the other defense red herrings.

Contrary to your editorial, it is not up to police or the prosecutor to continue to look for “the real killer.” The real killers were arrested and charged back in 1993, were found guilty in 1994 and then admitted their guilt in 2011 after getting a lucky break. To his credit, Prosecutor Ellington has stated many times that his door is open to any new leads and evidence presented to him by the WM3 defense teams.

So far, nothing compelling enough to reopen the case has been presented to him. District Attorney Ellington stated as much the day your editorial appeared. This means despite the defense’s grandiose claims prior to the pleas, not one iota of credible evidence has been presented to show their clients’ innocence or even to view the convicted as anything less than what they are as a matter of law and as a matter of fact: guilty.

The WM3 defense team has been well-funded by numerous celebrities who were misinformed by the biased “Paradise Lost” documentaries. These one-sided films left out nearly all of the evidence that demonstrated the guilt of the WM3. They caused thousands of people to support the release of the convicted child killers with a very limited unndcrstanding of the actual facts of the case.

Mr. Wessel, it appears that you, like so many others, got most of your misinformation about this case from these inaccurate documentaries. If you would take the time to dig a little deeper and actually read the case file documents, you would know that there was ample evidence to convict these three men for murdering my son. These documents are readily available on websites such as www.callahan.8k.com.

Here are just a few examples of what was omitted from the documentaries:

• Jessie Misskelley confessed to the crime at least five times to police, prosecutors, even his own attorneys with his hand on a Bible. Misskelley confessed the first time after less than four hours of police questioning. That questioning was done with permission from his father. He continued to repeatedly confess in the year that followed.

• Damien Echols amassed a mental health record 500 pages long in the years immediately prior to the murders. In his own handwriting, he classified himself as a “homicidal, suicidal, schizophrenic, sociopath” just a months before he brutally murdered my son.

• Read Damien Echols’ current Twitter account to discover his deep-seated interest in skulls and the occult. There he also recently described artwork depicting a man sawing off his own arm as “breathtaking.” In addition, Echols is obscenely profiting off the death of my son by selling his narcissistic books, promoting his self-serving movie, and tattooing murder groupies with his “mark.” For two hundred dollars, you can have this sociopath tattoo an “X” on your arm. These Twitter posts and money-making schemes are a slap in the face to me, my family and my dead son.

• The movies omit the fact that these three men had no alibis. Damien Echols’ and Jessie Misskelley’s alibis completely fell apart on the stand in the 1994 trials. Jason Baldwin’s attorneys didn’t even bother to present an alibi.

• Fibers consistent with a robe in Jason Baldwin’s home and a shirt in Damien Echols’ home were found on the victims. Blue candle wax found on Chris Byers’ shirt was consistent with candle wax found in Damien Echols bedroom.

• The crime lab found that three different knots were used to hogtie the three victims with their own shoelaces. This points toward multiple killers rather than one killer. Witnesses say that Mr. Bojangles, the disoriented man near the crime scene that night, had a cast on one arm. No one person could have subdued and hogtied three energetic young boys–not Terry Hobbs and certainly not the one-armed Mr. Bojangles.

• A knife that could have been used in the murders was found in a lake behind Baldwin’s home. It was a unique knife with a place hold a compass on the end that witnesses described as similar to one owned by Echols.

• A car full of eyewitnesses placed Echols near the crime scene, covered with dirt, on the night of the murders.

• Numerous friends, acquaintances and cell-mates came forward with tales of confessions from all three defendants.

Throw out one or even several of those facts, and there would still be enough to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

I sat through those trials. The basic facts need to be put out there. Otherwise, it makes a mockery of my son’s short life.

Then on July 15, the Jonesboro Sun ran a letter from Capi Peck called “Investigate Hobbs”. The Sun published Terry Hobbs’ response on July 26.

Stepfather of WM3 victim says attacks unconscionable
By Terry Wayne Hobbs

The numerous falsehoods and distortions contained in Capi Peck’s letter of July 15 make it is difficult to decide where to begin. I’ll just start with her most outrageous implication. I obviously had nothing to do with the murders of my beautiful stepson, Stevie Branch Jr., and his beloved friends Christopher Byers and Micheal Moore. No legitimate law enforcement officer ever has made this unconscionable claim.

Damien Echols, Jessie Misskelley and Jason Baldwin always have been guilty of those gut-wrenching atrocities. Two juries convicted Echols, Misskelley and Baldwin in 1994. Last August, those convicts stood before the world and, despite whatever spin is put on it, conceded they slaughtered these precious children. Yet, Ms. Peck considers the convicted child killers worthy of her friendship and support.

I can’t tell whether Ms. Peck’s next major falsehood is an outright lie or a simple ignorance of the law. Judge Laser did not “let the WM3 out of prison because a jury hearing all the evidence available would acquit them.” It was the exact opposite. Judge Laser allowed the three killers to enter pleas after he was convinced there was a factual basis to do so. In other words, quite contrary to what Ms. Peck wrote, the judge took the Alford pleas only because he felt the murderers could be found guilty again if their cases went to trial.

Ms. Peck’s version of the events of May 5, 1993, is a complete distortion of what actually happened. The West Memphis Police Department did not consider me a suspect for a very good reason — there was absolutely no basis for them to do so. Further, the police located and arrested the actual murderers. Juries convicted the reasonable parties. The killers later entered pleas that made them guilty as a matter of law. These facts are incontrovertible to anyone but a conspiracy theorist.

Ms. Peck was a cog in the West Memphis Three propaganda machine that generated millions of dollars purportedly to fund the defense. By some estimates, as much as $10 million to $20 million was raised. Ultimately, the money simply reaffirmed the three child murderers are indeed the guilty parties, yet let them walk out of prison.

Prosecutor Scott Ellington recently said the defense has not brought forward a single shred of evidence that would justify the reopening of this case. That must be difficult to explain to gullible donors who were told new evidence would be presented at hearings and would result in new trials. Instead, millions of dollars reportedly spent to investigate and develop new evidence led to three pleas. A year after these plea bargains, the killers remain just as they have been since the day they butchered Stevie, Michael and Christopher.

Most legal observers agree Misskelley wouldn’t have been granted a new trial due to his multiple confessions. Echols and Baldwin would have faced uphill battles due to the evidence against them, including their own admissions of guilt. This is likely why all three decided to plea out rather than go forward with the evidentiary hearings. From news accounts, the defense team subsequently sent Prosecutor Ellingon a “West of Memphis” DVD and unsworn hearsay declarations that would be inadmissible in an Iranian court of law. Apparently $20 million won’t buy as much as in the past.

I previously have been held to be a public figure and therefore am somewhat vulnerable to libelous attacks such as the one Ms. Peck launched on your editorial page. Let me suggest in closing that if anything should be investigated, it isn’t me as the defense’s latest (and probably not last) red herring suspect. No, the focus should be on what actually happened to the millions raised that allowed the murderers to roam the streets but in the process didn’t purchase one iota of exculpatory evidence. That is the true scandal here. There never will be an exoneration because the actual killers were investigated, arrested, convicted and finally conceded they did it. No governor in his or her right mind would issue pardons either.

I understand Capi Peck is a wonderful baker. She should stick to pastries and leave law enforcement, legal proceedings and fundraising for legitimate causes to those more capable and skilled than she is. Ms. Peck, please allow those of us who truly mourn for the actual three victims, some closure. Stevie’s horrific murder devastated me, my ex-wife and our daughter. We deserve peace no matter how much additional money can be generated exploiting this precious boy’s death. That is a matter of simple decency and actual justice. If you have any sense of shame at all you will come to realize as much.

It is the right thing to do — even if it requires someone to bake more after murder groupies no longer blindly throw money into the bill.

Note: the Jonesboro Sun put both these guest columns behind a pay wall. This site does not have permission to reprint them. If the Sun asks me to remove them, I will.

151 thoughts on “Columns by Todd Moore and Terry Hobbs”

  1. Thanks for posting this. I do like that both letters address the fact that a year after promising to “prove their innocence”, they haven’t done anything but goof off and party. Donors would be right in asking what happened to their money.

    1. Yeah, fuck those guys. If I were them, I’d never leave the house! Unless, of course, I was investigating, and in that case I’d never leave West Memphis! And these sons-a-bitches have the nerve to goof off and party?!? Just what the hell do they think they are — free?!? Puuuuuuuulease.

      Keep preaching the gospel, Brother Brando!

      1. Seems to me they would want to do as they promised. After all, they are convicted child murderers. If a guy is falsely imprisoned, and a falsely convicted felon for such a horrible crime, wouldn’t you want to take a break from all the hobnobbing and get down to business?

        It’s like OJ’s search for the “real killer”. He never bothered looking because there was nobody to find.

        1. Yeah, it might be like OJ’s search in that he never bothered looking because there was nobody to find…or, you know, they might be trying to live a little life. I’m sorry, but if (in a hypothetical world) we all KNOW they’re innocent (and I’m not saying we’re living in this hypothetical world, just work with me here), I think it would be ridiculous for us to expect them to spend 24/7 hunting down the real killer(s). Just patently ridiculous! I think it would be fair to expect that it would always be on their mind, and that they would spend either a few hours a day, or a few days a week, or a week out of the month, dedicating themselves to the case…but to expect that they should not only disregard the 18 years they spent in prison, but also the remaining years of their lives, all for the sake of attempting to clear their name, is to expect too much. If you were locked away at 17 or 18 and were deprived of so many years, wouldn’t you want to attempt to live again? Have a little fun?

          Pointing to pictures of Jason at Disney World, or Damien at a concert, and saying, “Well there you go, shows how much THEY care about ‘solving’ this crime!” is the tactic of a scoundrel. Yeah, Brando, that means YOU.

          1. Speaking of OJ, ol’ Terry Hobbs is the Columbian Cartel of this case, fo sho.

          2. They can party all they want. Who cares?! What I care about this FACT they will profit from this case. Guilty or not, I feel they have a MORAL obligation to, shut the hell up! Im not sure I would write a book, make a documentary, produce a movie, or trample around the country giving rehearsed interviews to foolish spectators with played out celebrity backers.

            Damien is the most dishonest, manipulative, lying attention seeker I’ve ever seen. He’s playing the in your face role. Not cool.

            Jason? Dunno man…he doesn’t seem to want much, in the way of Damien Echols. He moved as far away from him as possible. That in it self tells me a lot. I still don’t think he should be making a movie though. Just my opinion.

            Now for Jessie. Poor, tattle telling Jessie. He is being ostracized by the other two. I’m sure it has to do with the confessions. There is no way in hell I would forgive someone for putting me away for 18 years! Guilty or not! Heeeeeelll no! I’m not going to be convince otherwise.

            They can party all they want. Who cares!

          3. I agree with you 100% Joey. They’re just LIVING LIFE! Many people seem to forget that they were only kids when they were sent to prison.

          4. If they are innocent and I said IF, I wouldn’t expect them to put any time in finding the REAL killers. If I were Echols & Baldwin I would be doing exactly what Misskelley is doing and staying away from the camera’s and enjoying myself. I’d want to be forgotten whether I was guilty or innocent!! What are the chances of them or anyone else finding other killers after 18 years? NIL..

  2. Joey, O roguish master of the Socratic method, if I might humbly inquire:

    Who was your favorite suspect before the INCENDIARY revelation that Terry Hobbs DNA was FOUND AT THE CRIME SCENE.

  3. The reason I spend so much time here trolling you guys is because subconsciously I know your right, and it makes me so insecure I take it out on all of you. That is why I respond to everything here with such ignorance and hate. If I really was a true “supporter” I would not be wasting all this time here trying to boost my confidence.

    1. Yes, yes. Brilliant, as usual.

      Who was your favorite suspect before the INCENDIARY revelation that Terry Hobbs DNA was FOUND AT THE CRIME SCENE?

  4. Joey, baby, don’t get crazy.

    Maybe when Terry Hobbs confesses five times we’ll know he’s innocent.

    Then we can resume the search for the “real killers”.

    amirite?

  5. I would just like to take a moment to point out that the previous “Joey” post was not, in fact, made by me. I guess nothing’s sacred on-line, and my enemies will stoop to any low to discredit me, including impersonation. Lame, lame, lame. Hey fucktard, are you so insecure you really need to pose as me to make your point? Be a fucking man, grow some fucking balls, and make your points under your own fucking name. And that goes double if you’re a chick too, especially the Pru/Donna scitzo.

    Now, Mr. Vedder, to answer your question: my favorite suspect before the INCENDIARY revelation that Terry Hobbs DNA was FOUND AT THE CRIME SCENE was John Mark Byers. What, do you think you’re clever or something? Wasn’t that fairly obvious? You see, in the stretch between 1994 and 2000, when the 2nd Paradise Lost movie was released, this thing called the internet was in its infancy. I, myself, didn’t get the internet until 1998, and didn’t really start using it (as I use it now, daily) until around 2002. So, yes, all I had to go on during that time period was Devil’s Knot and Paradise Lost 1 & 2. Later I discovered other places, like Callahan’s, Jivepuppi, and the various forums. Lo and behold, my opinion shifted from Byers to Hobbs. Do you know why? It wasn’t just the DNA. It was because suddenly I knew a WHOLE LOT MORE about Hobbs than I ever had the opportunity to know earlier. Funny how, given new information, one can make a more informed decision.

    Anyway, that’s the long and short of it. Unlike you (perhaps), I don’t feel that the facts of this crime can be determined by intuition. “I knew they were guilty in 1994, and no matter what information has come to light since then, I STAND BY my original belief!!!” Congrat-u-fucking-lations. You’re stubborn. What do you want, a medal? A cookie?

    Love,

    Joey

    P.S. THE REAL FUCKING JOEY. And if someone doesn’t like to hear an opinion that differs from theirs, the best thing to do is keep posting BULLSHIT under MY name. I’ll go away and you’ll have won your right to live in a fucking bubble.

    1. Joey, if you’re hurtin’ so am I.

      At least you can admit to following the conventional wisdom on alternate suspects. Is has been rather comical to watch the supporters scramble to get behind our latest suspect du jour; “Yes yes, now I see it. It was Hobbs all along!”
      The rationalization certainly runs deep. Your syntax is a bit more flowery than the typical wm3 parrot, I’ll give you that.

      I see in another thread you posted the bullet points on Hobbs that are making the rounds. Hobbs and Damien both have troubled pasts, that’s for sure. I’m intrigued that Hobbs violent past, murky alibi, and questionable actions around the time of the murders are enough for you to believe in his guilt, yet the same behaviors from Damien can (apparently) be explained away. Unfortunately for Damien, one of his accomplices has confessed multiple times.

      The rationalization, it runs deep.

      1. Thanks for sharing the pain, EV.

        And I think “suspect du jour” is a little misleading…in all fairness, he’s a “suspect du decade,” the second of two alternatives to the WM3 since 1994.

        Hobbs and Damien do both have trouble pasts, but only one involves allegations of sexual assault, incest, child abuse, spousal abuse, drug abuse, and only one is guilty of blowing someone away. You think Damien seemed callous in his court appearances? Just look at the Hobbs deposition tapes when he’s talking about shooting his brother n’law. These are not the “same behaviors” of Damien. To me, they are far more troubling. What’s also far more troubling is that statistically speaking, it’s far more likely that a boy was murdered by his abusive step-father than it is likely that a random teenage thrill-kill was taking place. When kids are killed, it’s far more likely they know their killers, and know them well. That’s a fact, not opinion. Therefor I submit that leaning toward Hobbs, and away from the WM3, is justified by the probabilities alone. Of course, it’s not the probabilities that convince the supporters, but the evidence. I just point that out because to suggest that Hobbs’s past is looked at with suspicion while Damien’s is outwardly dismissed for no good reason, is simply not true.

        And to respond to your statement that, “Unfortunately for Damien, one of his accomplices has confessed multpile times,” that’s very true, it is very unfortunate. What’s most unfortunate was that it was determined by the court that Jessie’s confession wasn’t admissible in the Damien/Jason trial, and the Jury Foreman knew all about it, lied about his promise to be an impartial juror, and proceeded to taint the remainder of the jury with what he knew…which legally speaking should not have been applicable. If you think the whole “legally applicable” thing is just me trying to dismiss the confessions, it’s not. I dismiss the confessions because — unlike many “WM3 Truthers” — I’ve done a little research on the phenomenon of false confessions, which are far more commonplace than most people care to know. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard, “Well I would never confess to something I didn’t do!” As if that means everyone else in the world would feel that way, regardless of the circumstances. The notion of false confessions is not open to debate. Of course, the facts of this crime are open to debate, thus the debate continues.

        1. I’d like to know the research sources you’ve used for false confessions. If it is Leo and Ofshe’s work, you may want to dig deeper.

          1. Check out the Innocence Project if you want to learn more about False Confessions, and the important role they’ve played, historically, in putting people away. Take it all the way back to Salem, if you’d like. Plenty of witch confessions. Do you believe in witches, Brando? Do you believe in Satanists who offer child sacrifices to the Devil? Funny, because I bet if you asked the good people of West Memphis back in 1993, most would say “Yes.” I’m sure plenty today would concur.

          2. It’s interesting you mention Innocence Project since they absolutely refused to take on this case. Wonder why?

          3. When did the Innocence Project refuse to take the case? Is this documented? I would love to read about it for myself.

        2. Hey Joe – you stand behind the law when the court threw out Jesse’s confession. Do you likewise stand behind the law in which two juries convicted these guys and when the law determined (via the Alford pleas) that that they were guilty of the crimes? Or do you just sort of pick and choose, depending on what is convenient for your argument?

  6. Looks like someone really got to Joey. I wonder if the Joey account is just an account that supporters use to troll with.

    It’s OK Joey, we knew you felt that way before you admitted to it. Someone who continuously puts down others while trying to make their argument is obviously trying to compensate for something.

  7. I am getting sick and tired of supporters carrying on about the hair that *might*, or might not belong to Terry Hobbs.

    Have any of these supporters actually had a look at how damn sticky hair can be?

    I have shoulder length hair and I constantly find my hair everywhere. I can be hanging out my washing and find my own hair on pillowcases or sheets that have been through the wash. I have even found my hair on items that have been through the washer *and* the dryer.

    Anybody who denies hair can do this is living with their head up their arse.

      1. Yeah, and I’m sorry Whitelilly, I hope you weren’t referring to my previous post on Hobbs…because I don’t think I mentioned the hair. There’s a lot more to Hobbs than the hair.

      2. You mean not a hair RECOVERED.
        Not a hair recovered by the keystone cops down there in WM.

        Huh.

  8. I don’t have a link, but didn’t Scott Ellington admit at a debate with his congressional primary opponent the defense had not provided him with anything to justify reopening the case? I believe this is correct.

    I also found this link on the 48 Hours Facebook page to a number of facts around the case. I didn’t see the Ellington statement in here but may have missed it:

    http://midsouthjustice.org/smf/index.php?topic=43.0

  9. By the way, I have issues with the “Hobbs did it” theory, so don’t get me wrong, but I must say, I think if ANY hair came back as “This hair is consistent with Damien Echols and only 1.5% of the population,” that would have been well and good enough for a lot of people who say that might not even be TH’s hair. Of course, a family member’s hair is a far different thing from any one of the WM3’s hair, but I doubt many would jump on that 1.5% as something significant if it were turned around.

    1. Just to be clear: The “Hobbs did it” theory is a theory. Everyone who believes in it wants only for further inquiry and more dirt digging. The fact is this: from the MOMENT those three boys were found in ’93, one step-father was investigated by the police (JMB) and one step-father was not even for one moment CONSIDERED. Not even CONSIDERED. Not even officially INTERVIEWED. That is baaaaaad police work, I don’t care if it was patently OBVIOUS the WM3 committed the crime. When Gary Gitchell was pressed on this point in the Dixie Chick deposition, he states that rather than comment on Terry Hobbs and the initial investigation, he would NOT comment at all, because he didn’t want to say something that could end up getting the WM3 a new trial. In other words, Gary Gitchell knows something about Hobbs that the rest of us don’t…and unless there is a real demand to re-open this case, that’s likely how it will stay. Wouldn’t you rather know anything and everything about what happened that day? Why are you content to dismiss every single questionable thing about Hobbs, being that there are a few ambiguities in this case? I don’t care if you are 1001% POSITIVE the WM3 are guilty, can you not admit there are certain ambiguities regarding the facts and regarding EXACTLY what went down that night and why?

    2. Keese, you mean Joey baby hasn’t convinced you of Hobbs guilt? ALLEGATIONS OF INCEST, mind you.

      So who’s your favorite suspect?

      Remember, ace profiler John Douglas (these guys are never wrong) says it was a lone adult killer who knew the boys.

      1. Keese is a rogue entity, and I don’t prosthelytize. In fact, I myself am not convinced of Hobbs’ guilt. I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: this case needs less people who are “convinced” they know what happened, and more people admitting we know very little.

        1. “A rogue entity,” love it!

          “…this case needs less people who are ‘convinced’ they know what happened, and more people admitting we know very little.”

          That is the best point I have seen made regarding this case.

          For what it’s worth, I get your point about Hobbs. Absolutely.

  10. I am a total non and believe the hair likely is Hobbs’. The reason it is of so little to no evidentiary value is that Hobbs was an immediate household member of one of the children. The same would have applied if Echols had lived in the same household as the victims or had been around them.

    I guess if I intend to post here again I better get ready to have the links ready, but just as Ellington said he had not received anything new from the defense that would justify reopening the case, the defense last year said a DNA match of a parent/step-parent hair was worthlesss without something plus. That is a paraphrase, and maybe a bad one, but I’ll look for the exact quote.

  11. EddieEtc.,

    I don’t have a “favorite suspect.”

    “Recovered” is a worthy point, for sure. Have you looked at the crime lab and DNA status reports yourself? There is more there than what is most often mentioned. Investigators absolutely need to be ruled out as sources for unidentified DNA, but even if you consider them a likely source, you still have hair and DNA that belongs to the victims and hair possibly from home that survived emersion and investigators, but nothing recovered matches any one of the three? Then, the unidentified male DNA on the shoestring hole and the shoelace the shoe contained (the only one of the boys’ shoestrings not used) — did that come from an investigator handling the shoe in such a way, or did that come from the person who was sweating and attempting to remove that lace? The matching shoe had DNA on it from a different male source. The foreign allele from one penal swab likely came from the folds of skin rather than the tip, and if that’s the case, we aren’t talking about an accidental bump that happened to leave some DNA or an un-gloved ME’s finger. Where did THAT come from then? What about the DNA (partial) under the fingernails of Michael Moore, who had defensive wounds? (Just a few examples)

    I’m not sure I get the sarcasm about Douglas. He isn’t infallible, of course, but he is certainly no Dale Griffis. Do you know who John Douglas is?

      1. Yes I know who ACE profiler John Douglas is. A pioneer in the field, certainly. Hollywood movies have been based on his work (if that doesn’t prove how good he is, I don’t know what does). Crack FBI profiler John Douglas has stated that the killer is a lone adult who knew the boys. Now you peeps are telling me that Hobbs might not be guilty. Of course we all know that the previous suspect du jour, John Mark Beyers, is not guilty also.

        I KNOW that Keese and Joey have spent a lot of time researching this case, you guys know it backwards and forwards, inside and out.

        So who is this AS YET UNNAMED third suspect? This is going to be new bombshell in the development of the case, I can feel it already. You guys are getting farther in your “search for the real killers” than the defense team.

        1. EddieEtc,

          I’m only teasing you a bit about Douglas. The thing to keep in mind about the DNA status report on the shoes is that it was submitted to the court exactly one month before the WM3 were released (it is available on Callahan), well after Douglas offered a profile. I don’t know if he would revise it now, and I don’t know if that makes him completely wrong. Who knows how this really fits together? Is there an unknown suspect or an unknown second? He could still be right on other points. And again, none of this was checked against investigators, though the location of some of this DNA makes it unlikely theirs, I would think.

          I’m sure you are being sarcastic, but I do want to say I don’t know how far I have gotten. The defense has access to a lot people with far more education and experience than I have, but it does concern me that just as the state has too much invested in the WM3, the defense “machine” has too much invested in Terry Hobbs. I hope not.

  12. Let’s say that public pressure, celebrity influence and costly legal challenges prevailed, and the Alford pleas are overturned in Supreme Court, etc., Police arrest Hobbs and put him on trial.

    What exactly would the case against Hobbs be? I’m not joking, I’m just trying to picture it in a legal sense.

    They have the hair — which might be his, and can be explained away.

    The other evidence such as lack of alibi, prior bad acts, third-party statements are too similar to the stuff that convicted the WM3, so I imagine they wouldn’t be considered.

    What is the motive?

    Did he really have time to keep going back and moving bodies all through the night?

    How big is Robin Hood Hills? Seems like there were lots of people there after 8:00PM.

    1. How big is Robin Hood Hills? Seems like there were lots of people there after 8:00PM.

      My best estimate: the wooded area was around 4-5 acres. The wooded area where the bodies were found, north of the Ten Mile Bayou Diversion and the pipe bridge, was around 1.5-2 acres.

      http://callahan.8k.com/cgi-bin/i/images/pics/WestMemphisAriel_cropped.jpg

      That’s a big problem with the dump site theory. When did someone enter the woods with the bodies? Where did they park? How did they avoid being seen? Why would they take the risk of dumping them there with so many people around searching?

      1. Thanks for the detailed map.

        I see most of the addresses of families and witnesses listed on the map. What we don’t see are the location of the two WM3 trailer parks. Jessie and Jason lived north-west of the location, and Damien’s trailer park is south-east. (Both are off map)

        Where was the Hobbs residence in relation to the other families? Is that off the map as well?

        Robin Hood Hills is located mid-point between the two trailer parks. It seems odd that some key people involved in this case are very vague about whether they even knew that Robin Hood Hills existed, like: “I think I might of heard of it…” or “I never went by there”, etc. How could you live in that area and NOT know about that patch of woods?

        Also, I often hear people describing the murder scene as if it’s “some town miles and miles away.” These kids had no problem walking miles everyday. If they wanted to hang out, they would have had to of cut through or walk near RHH. The whole “it happened in ANOTHER town” theory is a stretch, no?

  13. good points everyone. btw, dont forget, damien and jessie both failed polygraphs. also, baldwins’s accuser, michael carson, passed his polygraph confirming lowlife jb confessed to him. wm3 are guilty as sin. thanks.

    1. Cool, once again impersonated. For the record, no one needs to discredit me, I think I do a pretty good job of doing that all by myself. When you impersonate me all you do is further prove that you’re so insecure in your own point-of-view that you can’t deal with being challenged. Congratu-fucking-lations. I would appreciate it if another “non” or two spoke up and defended me on this point, but I won’t expect it.

      1. Joey,
        I can’t help but giggle a little about you being impersonated. It it makes you feel any better I’m sure people can recognize you from those who want to play you. The gift of sarcasm is not bestowed upon all, and your post drip with sarcasm and such dry humor. Most of the regulars who visit here are distinctive to me. Keese’s post are informative and OJ’s are usually peppered with points that make you question everything. Donna/Pru, well, we know what her post consist of. I’d say don’t worry about it. Punctuation and spelling seperate people too.

  14. I feel so much sympathy for the parents of All the boys. I can understand people trying to find someone concretely connected to this crime, but TH seems like a weak suspect to me. He maybe should have been investigated deeper at the time but to blame this on him 20 years after because he isn’t a saint (or maybe even a horrible person) makes him no more a murderer than the ones who really believe wm3 were convicted for music and clothes. People tear these parents apart.
    Here’s a question. Does anyone see the irony in Misskelley’s confession with his hand on the Bible while being accused of Satanic rituals. IF, big IF, he was participating in stuff like that the Bible wouldn’t really be any different than placing his hand on a Dickenson novel. That confession, though, good grief, that was…hmmm.

    1. I agree they are guilty. It just amazes me how ignorant & gullable our Public is to believe everything they watched from West of Memphis, nothing but Propaganda a serious abomination to the memory of these 3 victims.

      They are Guilty. I’m sick of ignorant people asking, well if they are guilty why did they get out of Prison; Peter Jackson’s Money. Money Talks. Money was probably offered to half these people on West of Memphis; & you know dam well alot of these people are lying there asses off; who the hell remembers details of a specific evening almost 20 years ago; not many. West of Memphis made me sick; it was Messy; all over the place; a bunch of Finger Pointing; these SOB’s are making profit off of these Victims; it’s Sickning, Disheartning; & a serious ambombination to the Memory of these 3 innocent souls that were Lost. What’s even more Sad; here recently they were having a Fundraiser, to raise money to make repairs to a Memorial in their names at a Local Park there. That is so sad they had to Raise money for this. If you ask me all these fkn celebrities & Peter Jackson should pay for all this considering all the money they have made in the 3 Victims Names.

  15. I was reading the section “Damien Echols brags at the softball park – late May 1993” and read all of the related documents. There is nothing there. Really, I mean it. Nothing. This was not a confession – it was merely Echols (a teen-ager at the time) yelling back at a lynch mob of adult spectators calling him a murderer and wanting to know who he was going to kill next. It is not surprising to me that he would respond sarcastically with “yah I did it and I already got the next two picked out.” This is not evidence. And if he did do it, I doubt he would show up at a public softball game.

    1. Brian,

      I don’t think sarcasm goes over too well in court transcripts. The whole town thought Damien was a suspect, not just the police. Rather than defend himself, he just said screw it: “yeah I did it… whatever.” In fact, he might have played up the attention. Bad move.

      He also made the mistake of drunkenly telling people “he did it” – and then asked the people to disregard what he said. But at the point it’s too late. They told two friends, and so on…

      Damien knew that he had to lie on the stand regarding the softball park. Yeah, it was lame and a pretty weak statement, but he couldn’t cop to it at the time. He admits he lied now.

      He also had to make a decision to lie on the stand about whether or not he knew about Alistair Crowley and Anton LaVey. He downplayed it, but it backfired. Alibis crumbled. The jury didn’t believe him.

      Now NONE of this proves murder or guilt, but when you add the tattoos (EVIL and pentagram) plus poorly-hidden interest in occult through Crowley and Lavey, lack of alibi, witness statements, etc, — the softball girls statements have a whole different context to a jury. Plus the douche attitude and flock of seagulls haircut didn’t help.

      1. Hi, I’m not writing in reply but you seem a pretty straight forward person. I have read a fair amount of information regarding this case and I was hoping you could enlighten me as to the evidence (that I don’t believe was submitted in court for whatever reason) that is Jason’s muddy boots with new laces in them? I can’t recall the site on which I read about them as I have gone through so many at this point. It’s frustrating I can not say that they are innocent or guilty I don’t like Damien much and he lies about the silliest of things but that doesn’t mean much in terms of guilt or innocence he just craves the lime light. What pisses me off the most is that the case is no longer centred on Christopher, Stevie or Michael.

    2. Exactly! How many of us have NOT been screaming nasty stuff at others in high school? I was constantly accused of being an arrogant, non-caring person in high school because I was different. Numerous of times I shouted back “Sure, I am this nasty elitist and hate all of you and the rest of the world!’. Doesn’t mean I did. That’s what teenagers DO! It’s like when Damine said he now would turn in to the boogey-man of children growing up in the area: he didn’t say that with mockery or fascination or pride, he said it with SADNESS! Jesus, how STUPID people are! Also, in the trial when he said he imagined the killer having not minded what he did he meant that as if he would have minded he wouldn’t have DONE IT! He is right! He diesn’t justify killing here, he merely claims that this sort of a killer most likely doesn’t regret his actions! And THESE intelligent and rational statements are used AGAINST him!? Unbelievable.

  16. I read the section”Jessie Misskelley’s 6/3/93 confession: myths and facts.” If a fair-minded person reads the entire transcript of the interview, it is clear that the interrogators are feeding him details of the crime. Misskelley knew of critical details only because the police mentioned those details first in the questions, then those details appeared in his answers. That is why Misskelley appeared to know about the crimes. Misskelley states “the police said I could not go home until I got the story right…” After he got the story right, he went to jail along with the other two he (the police) implicated. This kid was so dumb that he probably believed his own story after the police made him rehearse it many times. .

    1. I disagree Brian. I feel fair-minded, have read ALL the confessions and think this is the main reason I can’t jump on the supporters bandwagon. If he gave them a false confession, he wasn’t dumb enough to believe it first of all, and I can’t get past the confessions that followed the ones to the police. As for going to jail with the two he implicated, that’s not the only reason the other two went to jail. JM wasn’t a suspect when he was picked up that morning. He was there b/c he was friends with Echols and Baldwin and they wanted to see if he had any info. He gave them more than they expected and enough to get warrants for the other two. I am being argumenative on this because I can’t bring myself to say whether they did or didn’t (as if what any of us believe matters) but this confession(s) is not a cry for supporters. Also because I am so tired of all the ‘retarded’ comments people post about Misskelley and the people involved in this case. They were not retarded because they couldn’t read or pass a math course. They could do what they needed to do to survive in that region in that time. Even Jessie. Roofing is not an easy trade physically or mentally. All jobs are not about college education. (This post reads like I’m an 8th grade drop-out and I promise I’ve been to the finest schools we have here in the great state of MS ya’ll!I) 😉

    2. While his confession doesn’t leagally pass muster, it certainly has the ring of truth to it when read by a lay observer. I do not live in Arkansas and have no dog in this fight, but Jesse Misskelly’s accounts sound very much like he was there at the crime scene.

  17. Brian August 17, 2012 at 2:46 pm
    “I was reading the section “Damien Echols brags at the softball park – late May 1993? and read all of the related documents. There is nothing there. Really, I mean it. Nothing. This was not a confession – it was merely Echols (a teen-ager at the time) yelling back at a lynch mob of adult spectators calling him a murderer and wanting to know who he was going to kill next. It is not surprising to me that he would respond sarcastically with “yah I did it and I already got the next two picked out.” This is not evidence. And if he did do it, I doubt he would show up at a public softball game.”

    Where do you live so I can make sure I never go there. I’ve lived several places in my life and I can not think of one place where Echol’s comment would remotely be considered rational, teenager or otherwise.

    Please explain to me where and how it is rational for anyone to suggest they killed someone, much less kids, and were going to kill two more kids. Teenager or not. Arguing those comments were rational is ridiculousness.

    1. this is something that sarcastic kids do all the time. this type of attitude in the face of persecution is commonplace among the people subjected to ridicule.

      1. alley,
        I live my life in sarcasm but have never acted like this. (Was guilty by association a lot as a teen) It so happens that I was a teen in the same region at the same time as these guys. Sorry to say that here in the south we know that they don’t care how old you are to send you to prison. YOU do not confess to things you did or didn’t do- expecially if you are already a target of law enforcement. I was mostly always innocent (ignorant) of what was going on around me but I would have never admitted to doing something I didn’t just to be sarcastic. Who does this all the time, seriously?

    2. Exactly! How many of us have NOT been screaming nasty stuff at others in high school? I was constantly accused of being an arrogant, non-caring person in high school because I was different. Numerous of times I shouted back “Sure, I am this nasty elitist and hate all of you and the rest of the world!’. Doesn’t mean I did. That’s what teenagers DO! It’s like when Damine said he now would turn in to the boogey-man of children growing up in the area: he didn’t say that with mockery or fascination or pride, he said it with SADNESS! Jesus, how STUPID people are! Also, in the trial when he said he imagined the killer having not minded what he did he meant that as if he would have minded he wouldn’t have DONE IT! He is right! He diesn’t justify killing here, he merely claims that this sort of a killer most likely doesn’t regret his actions! And THESE intelligent and rational statements are used AGAINST him!? Unbelievable.

  18. There was nothing satanic about the killings. The Boys were beatin, hogtied and dumped in a creek. Their clothes were anchored with sticks to wash away evidence. The one boys body has claw marks all over it and his privates were chewed on by a animal/s. The people who try to use the satanic thing as a means of guilt are fools.

    Moores father wants to take the easy way out and sleep sound at night knowing his sons killer/s have recieved justice. Im not blaming him as this was a horrible crime and the thought that the killer is running free would be too much.

    The people who think the boys(now men) are guilty are simpletons. The internet is full of them and this blog master is one also. They want the simple and easy way out of everything. A piss poor, borderline retarded boy confessed and fingered two other boys so it must be true. Its the easy way out.

    1. If what you posted above were the only ‘evidence’ and confessions used during the investigation, arrest and trial then I don’t think this case would be a debate now, DR. Jones. Unfortunately, for us who straddle the fence and those who are 100% certian of guilt, there is much more to this than satanism and 1 coerced confession. Misskelley insist he is telling the truth, Lucus told the police about the shoes and a confession to him; We have countless confessions floated by the three convicted of this. Could they all be false. I suppose they could, but it creates doubt of innocence in me.
      You believe animal preditation caused the marks on the “one boy”. I don’t believe that and I do not believe a damn turtle ate away at them either. No one, not the defense nor the Medical Examiner or coroner or anyone else who SAW the bodies thought that animals had done this. It wasn’t until some years later that this theory was proposed and without the bodies on hand it is only a theory.
      As for your posting about Micheal Moore’s father taking the “easy way out” -Heh?
      Do you think believing that three children barely older than your own could committ such a terrible crime is the easy way out? NO GO Dr. JONES. If it were the easy way out Mark Byers would not have been going stark crazy in PL 1 when this was his belief. There is no easy way out when it is your child. How senseless of you to make such a statement, Mr. Jones.
      While the internet may be full of many simpletons, this case is not an example of such whether you believe one way or the other. You, Dr. Jones, have come across here today as a simpleton who has recently discovered and watched PL1, 2, 3 and are looking for a good cause. Learn the facts, there are many respected supporters on this site, then argue your case if you wish. Finish school first though. Thank you,
      Miss. Simpleton

    2. There was nothing satanic about the killings.

      Agreed, the occult angle was a minor element in the crimes. The fact that Damien Echols was a deranged psychopath who fantasized about torture and killing was the primary motive. This was a Satanic killing in the same way that Leopold & Loeb’s crime was a Nietzschean killing.

      1. Am I mistaken or wasn’t occult/cult activity implied to be the motive? What other motive was put forth? It seemed to be a pretty big part of the prosecution’s case to me.

  19. Misskelly confessed almost a month after the murders when there was a large sum of reward money advertised. He named multiple people as the killers before settling on Echols and the police filled in the details of the confession. Only a small part was recorded by the police department in the original confession, with the police correcting him multiple times as to the true facts of the case. The confession is a joke and would never have stood up today.

    1. As I’ve previously referenced, I’ve been fascinated by the absolute textbook study of rationalization on display by so many of the supporters.

      Mikey, can you help a simpleton out? What’s your explanation for Jessie Misskelly’s confession to Dan Stidham on 2/8/94? Further evidence of his innocence, I’m sure.

      Also, I’m dying to hear your theory on what actually happened on 5/5/93. Surely someone like you who possesses such a towering intellect has a theory?

      It would certainly help your position (You’re all simpletons!) if you had a better explanation.

      1. Because he is borderline mentally retarded young man who was incarcerated in jail during the second and third confessions. He was under the impression that if he confessed against the others he would receive a lighter and eventually get out of jail. If your simple mind would read the transcripts closely you would see that his descriptions and details change and that his confession’s don’t make any sense. His story is shaky and pieced together. I’ve read all the transcripts and its shows a highly susceptible person who is trying to make the police happy so he can be released.

        If the 3 boys were out there in the woods on the side of the highway drinking like he says there would have been some kind of physical evidence. That creekbed wasn’t exactly a popular hangout spot. The only physical evidence that is there links to Hobbs, or another person who is one of the 3 of 200 in the general population who has that type of hair.

          1. Its is pretty obvious that the creekbed is where the boys bodies were dumped and not the site of their deaths.

        1. I see, I see.

          Why did Jessie confess to two deputies on his way to ADC?

          So you think Hobbs is the perp?

  20. And here is why:

    “Because he is borderline mentally retarded young man who was incarcerated in jail during the second and third confessions.”

    How do you explain the four month period he maintained his guilt to his lawyer?

    How did he know the bikes were left in the area, which by the was specific and unprompted information. This among the other specific unprompted information he gave.

    He was under the impression that if he confessed against the others he would receive a lighter and eventually get out of jail.

    Really? Can you provide a cite from Misskelly that indicates this? If you can link a transcript of Misskelly stating as such, I’ll read it.


    If your simple mind would read the transcripts closely you would see that his descriptions and details change and that his confession’s don’t make any sense.

    So a person who not unlike other murders changes and manipulates the confession in order to lessen their own involvement which includes deception and inaccuracies.

    I wish supporters would provide ANY credible argument to suggest that Misskelly would give a forth right confession, if he were to confess. This logical fallacy that he would give a more accurate or honest confession if he were guilty is bullshit and quite frankly a simpletons view of how things work.

    His story is shaky and pieced together. I’ve read all the transcripts and its shows a highly susceptible person who is trying to make the police happy so he can be released.

    Yet, when his lawyers, both of whom, told him to shut the fuck up, he was not susceptible that day and sung like a bird. You have not read the transcripts. Wanna know how I know? You’ve come on here with the same spin that’s repeated on supporter forums with no clear obejctive understanding of the facts. It’s clear to anyone who knows about this case and the people who debate it.

    If the 3 boys were out there in the woods on the side of the highway drinking like he says there would have been some kind of physical evidence.

    You mean like the Evan Williams bottle?

    That creekbed wasn’t exactly a popular hangout spot. The only physical evidence that is there links to Hobbs, or another person who is one of the 3 of 200 in the general population who has that type of hair.

    Once again, butchered understanding obviously relayed from a supporter message forum. Try again, but a little harder.

  21. Thank you for keeping me up to date on the case. With the truth and not from someone that is just putting something out there for a cause.

  22. Did the Evan Williams bottle have their DNA on it? Answer me that. If they were out there drinking at the time of the murders all three boys DNA would be on that bottle. That liquor bottle could have came from anybody at anytime. The crime scene was by the side of the highway. Your evidence for guilt is weak just like the states was. Why do you think they let them out of on an Alford plea. Its because the state knew they would lose in a new trial.

    1. The Evan Williams bottle was never tested for fingerprints or DNA. As far as I know, it was never taken into evidence at all. I’ve never seen a photograph or crime lab document about it.

      Misskelley said he was drinking the whiskey, while Baldwin & Echols drank beer, so there’d be no reason to expect anyone else’s DNA there anyway.

  23. mikey jones,
    Attach a link about them all drinking out of that bottle. I can’t find that. When I see that link I’ll be with you 100%. YOU seem like the only expert on this case. Were you part of the orginal trial? Shitfire, man, you’re so knowledgeable.

  24. Did the Evan Williams bottle have their DNA on it? Answer me that. If they were out there drinking at the time of the murders all three boys DNA would be on that bottle. That liquor bottle could have came from anybody at anytime. The crime scene was by the side of the highway. Your evidence for guilt is weak just like the states was. Why do you think they let them out of on an Alford plea. Its because the state knew they would lose in a new trial.

    Goal post shift? Or is this more likely a supporter caught misrepresenting or distorting facts ?

    If the 3 boys were out there in the woods on the side of the highway drinking like he says there would have been some kind of physical evidence.

    Difference between forensics and physical. Once I presented you with the EW bottle as physical evidence then obviously you change to demanding forensics. Typical supporter bullshit after its pointed out they don’t know shit about this case, change the subject or the goal post.

    Is the Evan Williams Bottle significant by it self? No, just like every other piece of evidence in the circumstantial case. In a vacuume you can dismiss all the evidence independently with out weighing it against the other evidence, However, the totality of all the evidence, testimony and statements it is an uncanny amount of coincidences that would have to take place for these boys not to commit these murders.

    And obviously this is the crux of the supporters arguments in any discussion. They fail to look at the total amount of evidence together and instead focus on discrediting it individually.

    By itself the Evan Williams bottles means very little. By itself the initial Misskelley confession means very little (how people dismiss Misskelly’s statements to his own lawyer, I’ll never know). By them selves the fibers mean very little. By it self the Echols 500 means very little. By itself the Baldwin statements mean very little. By itself Echols statement at the softball field means little. There is much more….but for all these things to point to the WM3 and they not be guilty, you have to have giant leap of faith.

    susie August 22, 2012 at 2:02 pm
    mikey jones,
    Attach a link about them all drinking out of that bottle. I can’t find that. When I see that link I’ll be with you 100%. YOU seem like the only expert on this case. Were you part of the orginal trial? Shitfire, man, you’re so knowledgeable.

    Think this should of been directed at me. Check Misskelleys confession to Stidham, commonly referred to as the “bible confession”.

    Of course Misskelley could of lied about the Evan Williams bottle and once again became the unluckiest confessor ever once Stidham found it.

    1. Ahha, Confession, you missed the key to words to the question. “them all drinking out of the bottle.” wm3truth caught me immediately. I asked Mikey Jones for the link because he said they were drinking it. Only Jessie was drinking EW, according to his confession, Damien and Jason had a bag with beer. I know you may already have known this, as did I, I just wanted to play with Dr. Jones a bit.

  25. my last posted was butchered…..

    cliff’s

    Mikey wants physical evidence indicating presence. Presented with the EW bottle based upon Misskelley statements, he shifts goal post asking for forensics disregarding the physical evidence provided. LOLsupporter.

  26. Update on Fox 13 Memphis; Reporter says “bromance is over”… says Baldwin and Echols had falling out over how Echols was portrayed in the movie the Devils Knot. Echols is apparently on twitter talking about it. Reporter says “no word on what Jessie Misskelley thinks of this.” What do you guys think Jessie Misskelley thinks of this?

    1. So the three aren’t very friendly nowadays huh….Shocking.

      Echols is one of the biggest sociopaths I’ve ever read about. I don’t think I would want anything to do with him either.

  27. Okay, so the biggest confusion that I am facing is the time of death. If the coroner says time of death was between 1 am and 7 am, which would have been on the 6th, then how is any of this relevant? I can’t seem to find why this time of death is being disregarded anywhere. Maybe I am missing something and someone with much more knowledge of the case can help?

    Also, was there ever any evidence that the way Jessie described Jason was cutting the penis with the knife could have been plausible? The way Jessie said Jason was swinging his arm just seems as though there would have been further damage done. Was there ever any explanation as to how it could have happened? I know in a lot of cases they are able to determine if the person doing the cutting had experience before, such as like a surgeon, butcher, hunter? Also, with the way Jessie describes the cutting and all the blood, how was blood not found on surrounding plants and trees? How did they not find the testicles that he had supposedly thrown into the woods?

    Are there any documents stating which injuries occurred pre and post mortem? Or were they all post mortem?

    My problem with the Miskelly confessions is there isn’t a lot of scientific specific evidence to what he is claiming. A lot of the things he said were given to him by the police, and if he said it wrong were corrected by them. Things like one of the boys running away and his body being found further away….if the boys were thrown into the water, then really how does that matter? I feel as though most of the information given by Miskelly in his confession is circumstantial and not scientific evidence. It’s all so iffy. It’s almost as if what Miskelly is saying is what the police “thought” “could have” happened to the boys.

    However, all of the confessions are alarming, and all the times he broke down crying. While I do think Jessie was vulnerable, I also don’t understand why he would confess with his lawyer sitting right there telling him not to, unless he didn’t understand what and who his lawyer was.

    At first, I was on the supporter bandwagon, but now I am teetering. I don’t know what to think, other than the police failed miserably in their investigation.

  28. Lindsay,

    First thing to remember is, no confession will ever be completely accurate due to limitations of the human mind.

    I do not think you will find one person who’s read about this case who thinks the murders occurred exactly how Misskelley said they did.

    For me the key is the basics, who, what, where, when, why…

    The “what” in this situation you ask about is…Misskelley saw Baldwin using a knife in the groin area. Would it be nice for Misskelley to be able to recall how exactly every single detail occurred, its mpractical to expect as such. He got the basic’s of what happened with enough specificity to indicate first hand knowledge, such as the attack on the groin area.

    Your questions about the Misskelley confessions.

    There is one big elephant in the room when talking about scientific evidence and Misskelley’s confession. What is that you may ask? Three dead bodies, of which Misskelley stated him, Baldwin and Echols were responsible for.

    The other thing to remember is and this is a systemic issue for most supporters. They fall under the logical fallacy that, if Misskelley were to confess, they believe he would be 100% truthful and 100% accurate when in most cases confessions are anything but.

    In my opinion you have to disregard so many circumstances and take a giant leap of faith to think they are not guilty

    The Fibers

    The Confessions

    The eye witness

    The EW bottle

    The Echols 500

    The “jail house snitch”

    The failed alibi’s

    None of these are strong on their own but together they tell of a very strong tale of murder. If you think of odds, the odd’s of all these circumstances occurring and the WM3 being innocent would be astronomically low. I’m not a believer in “perfect storm” in most cases…..and much less so in this one.

    For me the confessions are it. If you study the confessions you can find specific unprompted information Misskelley gives that would indicate first hand knowledge. It is a little difficult and most supporter explain it away as “public knowledge” but if you accept that, you can not accept Misskelley having a brain/memory of an 8 year old and discount the confession based on his mental state..

    I’m obviously pointing out another logical fallacy amount supporters. which is: He is too dumb to know what to say when the cops are supposedly feeding him information in the moment, but he is smart enough to remember several details from other sources from an event that happened a month before.

    Supporters honestly want you to believe that….and I’ve rambled enough.

    1. The fibers – just proven to not be consistent at all.

      The witness – recanted

      The confession – affirmed by many experts that it was coerced.

      The jailhouse snitch – recanted

      Your list is slowly dwindling with forensic proof. Hurry, jump sides while you still can!

    2. Used to be a supporter but now I’m on the fence. The one thing that gets me is, nobody puts any emphasis on the false testimony phenomenon. If you refer to the central park jogger case you will see five examples of false confessions made by young men who later through DNA testing were proven innocent and released from prison. If five individuals can each confess to a crime they did not commit, then it’s very plausible that a misskelley with a well below average IQ could also make multiple false confessions under pressure from the police. Just saying.

      1. I am a big believer that false confessions occur often. That is why I am almost willing to throw out Jesse’s confession, and still feel the evidence overwhelmingly points to their guilt.

        Is it true Jesse maintained his guilt despite the advice of his counsel for four months? I am not sure I’ve ever heard of false confessions lasting that long. The excuse he kept his story going for a “lighter sentence” is weak.

  29. Wouldn’t you all agree that the defense attorneys for the WM3 know this case better than any of us? That being said, even they knew they didn’t have enough new and compelling evidence to win a new trial. If they did, they would have went ahead with the evidentiary hearing that was to take place last December. Instead they asked the state for the plea deal. Shouldn’t that tell us something?

  30. In regards to the hair:
    As stated above, the boys played at eachothers houses often. Todd’s hair nor Dana’s hair nor Marks hair nor Melissa’s hair nor Pam’s hair nor Stevie’s hair nor Chris hair nor Damien’s hair nor Jason’s hair nor Jessie’s hair was found in that ligature. The boys were at school that day around numerous other people, played outside after scchool and that lace was ripped through eyelets of a shoe before binding Michael. That hair was consistent with Terry Hobbs. And he, by his own admittance, was in the woods that night. Secondary transfer my ass. The other hair, consistent with David jacoby, may have been secondary transfer, from Terry Hobbs because he was, afterall, playing guitars with David the afternoon of the murders.

    Mr. Ellington:
    Scott admitted at the conference at the Clinton school that if he were to have taken this case to trial, he would have lost. Hence the reason he gulped down his maggot sandwich.
    Scott also admitted in an article, published not too long ago, that HE offered the Alford plea.
    Damien Jason and Jessie, as part of the plea, HAD to sign waivers promising not to Sue the state of Arkansas for wrongful imprisonment. This was written by Scott himself. Why would he have them sign such a thing if he knew they were so guilty?
    People, there is a plethera of information out there, use it. Don’t base your opinions in what you read on message boards.

    1. Hunnie, hunnie, hunnie,

      It’s always good for a laugh, from a fangirl like yourself;

      a)Let’s hear your rationalization for Misskelley’s multiple confessions,

      and

      b)share with the group the identity of your favorite suspect before the INCENDIARY revelation that a hair CONSISTENT WITH TERRY HOBBS was found at the crime scene!!!

      1. Jessie confessed, because he was told numerous times, that if he did so, he could go home. Jessie believed even after his conviction, that if he told them what they wanted to hear, they would let him go.

        The irony, 19 years later, he signed a piece of paper saying he did it, and they let him go…

        As far as who I thought did it….I had no clue, but I knew that D,J & J didnt.

        There is more evidence against Terry Hobbs than there ever was against the wm3.

        1. Jessie confessed, because he was told numerous times, that if he did so, he could go home.

          I’ve heard that excuse many times for Misskelley’s 6/3/93 confession to police. There’s no evidence whatsoever that that happened, but it’s a good excuse.

          How about his 6/11/93 confession to his defense lawyers? Or his 8/19/93 confession to his defense lawyer? Or his many post-conviction confessions? What’s your excuse for those?

        2. More evidence where? In a hair in a childs’ shoe string. Lost time? Dana Moore testified during trial that he was out there searching with them when she reported Micheal missing. There is very sketchy evidence against this man. It’s ok to believe that the wm3 are innocent, but to insist that you have the perp that proves they are innocent is to far reaching.

          1. Is Dana Moore’s testimony that “he was out there searching” documented somewhere? She never mentions Terry Hobb’s name in any of the transcripts that I’ve read. Actually her testimony seems to contradict his. If you know of other trial testimony I’d love to read it.

          2. Yes, Heather, I was wrong. I went back through the Calahan’s site with trial testamony from the mothers and it was Melissa Byers, (during MissKelleys’ trial) that made the statement and not Dana Moore. Sorry about the misinformation on my part.

  31. Another logical fallacy by supporters is the continue and repeated claims of the “hair”. Once thing is enough for them in the face of several other circumstantial pieces of evidence to the contrary.

    1. Pssssssst…..now there is evidence to prove that the fibers that the state said was “consistent” with the ones found at Damien and Jason’s house are not, in fact, consistent. Ouch…another theory of yours out of the water.

      Just wait until Mr. Fogleman announces he’s now PRO-wm3. Ohhhhh, sweet, sweet victory.

  32. I still don’t understand time of death. I know a lot of times the time people have gone missing is used to help determine time of death, but the coroner said time of death was between 1 am and 7 am. I don’t understand this part. If that is time of death, then Miskelly’s confession doesn’t mean anything. This would then point more towards the step-father. Am I missing something, though? I can’t believe all those professionals would miss time of death discrepancies, so I am sure I am missing something.

    And in Bladwins and Echols trial, the confessions were not used. All those other reasons could be explained enough to cause reasonable doubt. Echols is certainly not a likable character, which could be a major factor in the convictions, but there are too many what ifs to prove guilt.

    I was sure there was no way Casey Anthony could get away with the murder of her child, but there was too much reasonable doubt and no cause of death, I guess.

    I just feel like there was not enough investigation by the police at the time. I think they are the ones that caused this injustice. They should have recognized they were in over their heads and asked for help.

    1. Hi Lindsay,

      TOD can be altered by the bodies being submerged in water for any amount of time. Also, TOD is not an exact science, many many different factors can change this. Especially in an out door setting where these bodies were disposed.

  33. lindasy,

    If you think the confession(s) has to be 100% or even 90% accurate then you’ll never accept most confessions given by criminals.

  34. That’s not it. The time of death thing is confusing me. Even if the WM3 had left the boys to die, the time of deaths wouldn’t match. It only takes a few minutes to bleed out or even drown.

    1. Based on Misskelley’s confessions and the last sightings of the victims entering the woods, time of death would be around 6:45-7:30 pm on May 5.

      Dr. Peretti stated at trial that his time of death estimate was around 1:00-5:00 am on May 6. But please read the cross-examination (about 2/3 of the way through the document, beginning with “Davis: Now Dr. Peretti, at one point when …”). The evidence for that 5/6 1:00-5:00 am estimate was shaky.

      http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/ebtrial/frankp.html

      Also, the Echols defense team contacted a forensic pathologist (Dr. Sperry) before trial. Sperry wrote back that Peretti had failed to account for the cooling effect of the ditch water on the corpses and that his (Sperry’s) best time of death estimate was more like 8:30 pm on May 5. Discussed at Echols Rule 37 hearing in 1998 here (beginning at page 513):

      http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/rule37/june10.html

      And again here (beginning at page 1238):

      http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/rule37/october28.html

      My take: Peretti’s 5/6 1:00-5:00 am estimate at trial was wrong. He had insufficient information to make that estimate, and he didn’t properly account for the ditch water temperature. Time of death was around 5/5 6:45-7:30 pm.

    2. Supporters ridicule the coroner’s office for their determination that Byer’s genital wounds were cause by his attacker. Animal predation is the popular theory, I believe.

      Many of these same supporter hold the time of death as sacrosanct, though. It’s rather essential to their theory.

      So I guess the bumbling coroner’s office botched the examination, except for the TOD, which is correct, no doubt.

      The cold water complicates the rigor and lividity timeline, unfortunately.

  35. It is obvious that the only reason why these three are free is because of the backing from celebrity forces and their money that pushed for this. It is sickening that they would use their “power” on something like this when we have real bonafide issues in our country that could use their financial backing. These three sick individuals did it – no doubt. Misskelly’s awkward, frightened confession proves it – there are so many different interpretations of this confession, but if you break it down, there was too much Misskelly knew for it to be other than the truth.
    My heart goes out the the victims’ families. May they find the strength and peace to go on in their lives given this injustice to their sons. May they find comfort in knowing that we all will eventually meet our maker, including those that helped free these men. Do these celebrities have little boys? I think the true test would be to have the West Memphis Three babysit their boys alone. Would they allow it? My guess is not.

  36. Mikey Jones commented:

    The people who think the boys(now men) are guilty are simpletons. The internet is full of them and this blog master is one also. They want the simple and easy way out of everything. A piss poor, borderline retarded boy confessed and fingered two other boys so it must be true. Its the easy way out.

    ——————–
    After seeing Paradise Lost I was convinced of the three boy’s innocence. The documentaries, although gripping, felt a little one sided.
    I then read some case files. Looked at some facts. Left out of Paradise Lost.
    Now, I’ve gone from ‘Free the innocent kids’ to …’fuck…I think they actually did this’.
    Jesse borderline retarded? Brain of a six year old? I have taught kids from the ages of 4-11. Many years teaching kids 6-7yrs of age. Miskelley does not react or express himself anything like a six year old. He seems a little slow, but that’s it.

    Only a simpleton would accept one side of a story.

    1. Maybe you should research, what slow really is. He has the brain capacity of a six year old. It doesnt mean hes into playing with crayons like a six year old. Or watches cartoons. It means that his thought process and the way his brain works is equivelent to a six year old. Watching and hearing him, purely shows that.
      The simpletons did accept one side of the story. That the boys were guilty. Evidence showed otherwise. Against the boys, how could they brutley kill these kids but not have one bit of dna left at the scene. YET the dna they find is DNA from Terry hobbs and some dna from his friends house. the same friend that terry said he was with at the time of murder YET the freind came out and said he was lying. terry Hobbs was also seen with the boys minutes before yet lied and said he wasnt. he had reason as he was mad at his wife for kssing a mexican and told her he would get even. Terrys own nephew told friends that it was the familys dark secret. Do you really think they would let the three men go with alford pleas if they really had proof they were guilty. Back in 1993, things were different. If it was done now, terry hobbs would be in jail as DNA is the real proof. Rot in hell Terry Hobbs.

  37. I’ve read and listened to both sides of this debate, and can say that in my opinion the investigation was sloppy and faulty and by default the trial was a sham. A mockery of the legal system and exploited the power a select few have. With that said, I believe regardless of their guilt or innocence they deserve to be free. Fair and decent trial for all, no? But the 3 men are as innocent as the day is long. Again, my opinion.

    Continuing on, due to the developments of DNA I believe that Mr.Hobbs should account with 200% certainty his whereabouts and how he and his friends DNA is somewhere it shouldn’t be. All relevant evidence and pertinent behaviour of Mr.Hobbs should have had him on the top of the suspect list, and for all you people who claim Echol’s as a sociopath– what do you think of Mr.Hobbs? He shot his ex wife’s brother, admits to domestic abuse on several occasions, and his own daughter has went on record claiming he sexually assaulted her. He’s a real saint isn’t he?

  38. This tragic miscarriage of justice seems so similar to the O.J. Simpson case..There was more than enough evidence to convict these 3 sick individuals, but due to some issues with the investigation and jury misconduct with the jury foreman 3 child killers are wallowing in movie deals while the 3 little boys have been forgotten by everyone except their families and friends. The “Big Money” that was thrown around bgy the likes of hollywood and musical idols along with peter jackson are the reasons why they are free. The state of Arkansas was clearly intimidated by a suddenly well established defensive fund that was put forth to free them regardless of the outcome. There is a thing called the wrath of God, and when the Devil is in the details like it is in this case, There will come a day of Judgement when no lawyer or expert on animals will deem enough to secure their certain fate. {ask O.J. simpson}

    1. The wrath of God (Thor? Allah? A Native American God…there are so many) amd the Devil??? Religious nutcases are the worst. C’mon use your brain – it’s not real!

  39. Whilst I have no interest in debating the facts of this case, I do feel the need to point out that having spoken to both Mr. Moore, and Mr. Hobbs at great length, I find the notion of either of them having actually written those articles more than a little absurd.

    In fact, it’s absolutely ridiculous.

    1. Don’t you believe they have lawyers who will help get their point across? Whilst you try to sound important and knowledge think about that.

  40. Considering that they’re up against a massive PR machine with extremely deep pockets, I’m not particularly offended if these articles are ghost-written.

    I suspect your underlying point is that if only they were a bit smarter, they would realize our heroes are innocent.

    Hobbs would realize he’s guilty, I’m sure.

  41. Do you honestly think that they would release these men if the evidence didnt show their innocence. Making them plead the alford plea, is to protect themselves from a major lawsuit. Back then times were diiferent. Especially all the hype about someone who wore dark clothing or liked dark things. We know now that people confess when being interrogated for over 10 hours. Its wrong when you write 4 hours as they wouldnt release all the confession tapes. Why is that. Terry Hobbs was seen on the day of the murder yet he says he wasnt there. His own friend said he wasnt at his house when he said he was. He was mad at his wife for kissing a “mexican”. I truley believe he is the murderer. His own nephew told his friends that it was the familys dark secret. He knows the truth.

  42. Ok Amanda Leigh, I’ll bite on this one…

    “Making them plead the alford plea, is to protect themselves from a major lawsuit”- No. No status for sueing the state over the results of a jury verdict. (Thanks again to Fred for that tidbit of information)

    “…all the type about someone who wore dark clothing or liked dark things.”- No. I was a teenager in 1993 and the weird ones were the ones that DIDN’T wear black and listen to Metallica.

    “Its wrong when you write 4 hours as they wouldn’t release all the confession tapes.”- No. All the confession tapes are on Callahan. Jessie wasn’t interrogated for 10, 12, 14, or however many hours the pro-WM3 movement is claiming right now. Sorry.

    “Terry Hobbs was seen on the day of the murders yet he says he wasn’t there.”- No. Terry Hobbs has never denied being seen on the day of the murders. His claim was he didn’t see the boys that afternoon.

    “His own nephew told his friends that it was the famlys dark secret.”- And… no. There’s a claim his nephew told them that his father told him that Terry told him (did you get all that?).

    Really lady, read something besides WM3.org. Because you sound like a parrot.

  43. terry hobbs these guys did not do this, and you know this. Justice is not served for the beautiful little boys, however it will.

  44. i only recently discovered this case when i attended an event at my law school which involved a screening of west of memphis and panels consisting of a few of the appeal attorneys and then damien and lorri. it was clearly an event based on WM3 innocence, so being new to it, i went home and did as much reading as i could. i doubt the full truth will ever really be known considering the age of the evidence, all that has happened, and the complete mishandling of the original investigation and trials. whatever you think about their innocence or guilt, there is no disputing that several incidents happened that should have resulted, at least, in a mistrial. our legal system is set up so that various procedures and rules must be followed and when they are not, the presumption of innocence and axiom that it’s better that 10 guilty men go free than 1 innocent be convicted, plus the consequences that *normally* follow when those procedures and rules are violated mean that there can be no meaningful conviction. that is what happened here. it’s a fundamental aspect of how our legal system works and a risk that we accept in an imperfect legal system, as any legal system is. if you accept that a jury of your peers voting guilty means conviction, period, even though we know it doesnt always work that way and juries get it wrong, then by the same token, you must accept that the same set of rules means that botched/illegal investigations and trials mean no conviction. aside from a continued pursuit for *truth*, the bottom line, which is irrefutable, is that sufficient procedures and rules were violated in this investigation and trial to mean that these men should not have been convicted, as a matter of law. even if they were guilty. and i have not seen sufficient evidence to prove *beyond a reasonable doubt* (that is a high standard) that *any* of these folks, the wm3, byers, or hobbs did this. and that is b/c the killer(s) managed to not leave enough evidence (it happens) and how badly the original case was handled. the miscarriage of justice here is mainly in the original handling, not the freeing of these men who were *legally* (w/o even getting into the rest of it) wrongfully convicted and the main victims of that mishandling are the 3 murdered boys. from a purely legal/technical standpoint, there was not sufficient evidence even to charge them, let alone convict, and there were sufficient illegal maneuvers to support mistrial. they are free and cannot be charged again for the same crime. except for those who continue to pursue the truth, which i dont believe we currently know, it’s time to let it go, their freedom was legally gained, move on so all parties involved can have some closure.

  45. also, and again, im speaking from a purely technical legal standpoint, not even getting into opinions of actual guilt or innocence, there is no way the state would have agreed to the release if they weren’t aware of the multiple serious legal defects in the case.

  46. The Ockult, Satan worship – get a grip and enter the 21st century like the rest of us. Being afraid of Satan is equally legit as fearing Hello Kitty. NEITHER EXIST IN REAL LIFE!!!

  47. As if Terry Hobbs has written this piece himself! Ridiculous. The man could barely speak for crying out loud! What a pig.

  48. only thing i have to say is the state of arkansas doesnt care about damien, jason, jesse, or those boys that were murdered. The judge is a moran. This fool said you don’t and to have an education or a real phD to be an expert. They police are redneck, uneducated idiots. And the parents of those poor boys have no idea the state of
    Arkansas could care less who really killed those boys, they were lazy, sloppy, and just flat out didn’t want to try to figure it out. I weep for every citizen in that state. that moran of a judge is in the senate now. God help us all.

    1. Hey dbone, it’s kind of ironic that someone who calls everyone a “moran” (sic), doesn’t know how to spell “moron”.

      Wouldn’t you say?

  49. I stumbled on this case about a year ago (dateline I think, but maybe 48 hours). I have seen numerous cases in which dateline, 48 hours etc provide an objective account of a case which convinces me the convicted are innocent. I am also a big believer that coerced confessions happen all the time. I have a lot of sympathy for the convicted of these so called confessions. However, I have not heard any examples of multiple confessions spanning months against the advice of your attorney? In a way, that is making a mockery of the major problem of real false confessions (ex: NY jogger)

    Back to dateline, I remember thinking the presenters were going out of their way to try and suggest the WM3 were innocent, but still did an objective enough piece where I left it undecided despite their attempt to sway me.

    Last night, I stumbled back on this case with HBO on demand Paradise Lost. A powerful documentary takes the best evidence that can be used against their POV and summarily deconstruct and discredits it. PL doesn’t do that. It targets the weak evidence. It targets the areas where it can find easy sympathy and support. Paradise Lost is a textbook example of propaganda. I seemed to have a different reaction than the vast majority of people that watched Paradise Lost, as it convinced me more of the weakness of the WM3 positions.

    I was also disgusted by the crime scene photos in Paradise Lost. They should at least have been cut out/edited to a large degree. A jury absolutely needed to see them, but not someone that stumbles across this documentary on HBO. My heart breaks for the families of these children used as a propaganda piece.

    While I am still a beginner in researching this case, Todd Moore’s excellent editorial above has moved the dial solidly in the “Non” cause. I will be looking at the other side in a desperate attempt to understand their side, but they have a lot of ground to make up. So far, the majority I have read from them has been red herrings and weakly supported arguments.

  50. Some questions

    I couldn’t care less that Echols was a weird teenager, different, dressed in black, listened to Metallica. For the most part meaningless. However, do the supporters deny his history and psychiatric evaluations of a clear cut sociopath (A history of torturing and killing animals,fire-setting,violence against peers (conduct disorder) and a history of a psychotic delusional system that supports the perpetrators narcissism). When I look at crime, first and foremost, I look at character, and a drunken sociopath Echols was clearly capable of something like this.

    For the Non-Supporters, the best case for their innocence seems to be claiming the evidence against them is weak ( I disagree), but also providing another suspect. Byers or now Hobbs.

    The best evidence I’ve seen so far in at least raising an inkling of doubt was brought up by Joey. And I quote him.
    “Hobbs and Damien do both have trouble pasts, but only one involves allegations of sexual assault, incest, child abuse, spousal abuse, drug abuse, and only one is guilty of blowing someone away. You think Damien seemed callous in his court appearances? Just look at the Hobbs deposition tapes when he’s talking about shooting his brother n’law. These are not the “same behaviors” of Damien. To me, they are far more troubling. What’s also far more troubling is that statistically speaking, it’s far more likely that a boy was murdered by his abusive step-father than it is likely that a random teenage thrill-kill was taking place.”

    As noted in my introductory post, I like deconstructing and discrediting the BEST points of my adversaries. I have no interest in going after weak ones. So can a Non- discredit this?

    Basically, if the above is true, it is a decent enough point that Hobbs has to be a suspect too. If you want to throw in the bloody Bo Jangles guy as a co-conspirator, the thought that some black guy would assist is pretty bizarre, but is it out of the realm of possibilities? I suppose not.

  51. Hi Bill,

    I was scanning through some of these older posts and came across your post. Since I’d say I’m much more of a non-supporter I thought I’d tackle your question:

    “For the Non-Supporters, the best case for their innocence seems to be claiming the evidence against them is weak ( I disagree), but also providing another suspect. Byers or now Hobbs.

    The best evidence I’ve seen so far in at least raising an inkling of doubt was brought up by Joey. And I quote him.
    “Hobbs and Damien do both have trouble pasts, but only one involves allegations of sexual assault, incest, child abuse, spousal abuse, drug abuse, and only one is guilty of blowing someone away. You think Damien seemed callous in his court appearances? Just look at the Hobbs deposition tapes when he’s talking about shooting his brother n’law. These are not the “same behaviors” of Damien. To me, they are far more troubling. What’s also far more troubling is that statistically speaking, it’s far more likely that a boy was murdered by his abusive step-father than it is likely that a random teenage thrill-kill was taking place.”

    As noted in my introductory post, I like deconstructing and discrediting the BEST points of my adversaries. I have no interest in going after weak ones. So can a Non- discredit this?”

    So… here goes:

    Allegations of sexual assault, child abuse, spousal abuse- If you can show me some evidence other than the word of a jilted ex wife and her family given YEARS after the fact I’d be willing to listen. But if that’s all there is, you’ll forgive me if I don’t put that much stock in them.

    Drug abuse- You got me there. I seem to remember Terry admitting somewhere he did drugs.

    Blowing someone away- Big difference between shooting someone (not killing them, so “blowing them away” isn’t exactly accurate) in anger and cold blooded murder. And this was a crime against another adult, not a child.

    “Just look at the Hobbs deposition tapes when he’s talking about shooting his brother n’law. These are not the “same behaviors” of Damien. To me, they are far more troubling.”- These are so different in context I don’t even see how they can be compared. Damien was on trial for murder. Terry was giving a desposition related to his lawsuit with Natalie Mayes. Damien was a smart ass to his attorney, the prosecutors, even the victim’s families. Hobbs was just nasty to the attorney of the person he was suing. It’s comparing apples to oranges.

    “What’s also far more troubling is that statistically speaking, it’s far more likely that a boy was murdered by his abusive step-father than it is likely that a random teenage thrill-kill was taking place.”- And lastly, I’d agree with you… except for one thing. Show me a case where a parent or step-parent killed their child AND two other unrelated children. You can’t. If it had just been Stevie killed, I’d be the first screaming QUESTION HOBBS! But that didn’t happen.

    I admire how you phased these questions and enjoyed the challenge. Hope this helped!

      1. Finding a case where a stepfather killed a step child and 2 unrelated children is a red herring. Finding cases where a psychopath, rapist or a pediphile kills is a better question. Most sexual predators are often married (or in relationships) and still rape, whether the victims are children or women. It is about power and anger. And the murder crime scene depicts rage and someone smart enough (enough years behind them) to know to cover the evidence. The amount of violence, planning and covering up is leagues above inexperienced teenagers ability.

        1. Planning? You’re saying that Hobbs planned the killing? Did he make sure that all three boys were together? Was that part of the plan?
          Jeezuz H.

          By the way, your talking points are a little off. All good supporters know that Robin Hood was a dump site.

        2. “Finding a case where a stepfather killed a step child and 2 unrelated children is a red herring.”

          No, it’s a legitimate point. Because you can’t find one which makes the theory it happened here even less likely.

          “Finding cases where a psychopath, rapist or a pediphile(sic) kills is a better question.”

          You mean like someone who tried to gouge a classmates eyes out, stomped a dog to death, claimed drinking blood made him feel like a god, and had 500 pages of psych history?

          “Most sexual predators are often married (or in relationships) and still rape, whether the victims are children or women.”

          Care to site a source? I’m aware of predators that were both in a relationship and were loners.

          “It is about power and anger.”

          Agreed. And who was angerier than Echols?

          “And the murder crime scene depicts rage and someone smart enough (enough years behind them) to know to cover the evidence.”

          How freakin bright to you have to be to stuff the bodies in a creek and use the water to wash off the bank? My six year old can clean his room. Does that mean he has enough years behind him to cover up a murder?

          “The amount of violence, planning and covering up is leagues above inexperienced teenagers ability.”

          Violence- Echols definitely has enough.
          Planning- What planning? 3 psychopaths were sitting around, 3 kids walked by, they killed them. Then they dumped them in the creek, slung some water up on the bank, and left.

          This wasn’t some well thought plan. The 3 had motive and opportunity. Unfortunately they took it. As a result 3 children losts their lives.

  52. I was on the side of the WM3 for ages having – naively – assumed what the documentaries showed me was the full facts surrounding the case. After watching West of Memphis I eventually looked at this and another website (westmemphisthreefacts.com) and can now confirm myself a complete convert to non-supporter.

    All the evidence has been argued and discussed more than enough so I’m not going to focus on that side of things. All I’ll say is that the comments from supporters of the WM3 on this thread have been such childish, ill-considered, straw-man arrogance (hunnebooboo, to name one) – as opposed to the balanced, well-thought out evaluations of non-supporters, that it adds weight to my belief that I’ve made a fully-justified decision.

    1. Easy to discount all the professionals that poked massive holes in the conviction of the three kids? Without doubt we can say that the motive and the murder weapon was rubbished. It was also shown that Jury Tampering took place. It was evident to the state that they could not win a prosecution in light of all this. Which is why the three kids walk free. The state saves slight face with the Alford plea.

      Its about finding who actually did the murders and who had motive (as Satanism is not a serious motive and would not fly in any court room today). its not certain Hobbs did it (although as mentioned below Douglas was convinced Hobbs was at the very least involved) but on the balance of probabilities he is by far and away the most likely suspect. Hobbs is a very violent man, this is on record, but was also violent to his children. Statistically speaking as a step father this made him far and away the most likely suspect, a case of Occam’s razor. As also mentioned it was Douglas who made my mind up – mainly in his conviction in the three witnesses who gave statements saying they saw Hobbs with all three kids around 6pm on the night of the murders.

      I’m not on a witch hunt against Hobbs but I suggest you contact Douglas if you can, he is extremely persuasive in his theories. And this is a man who has caught and been with a great deal of murderers.

  53. I think the most damning fact is that John E. Douglas, an extremely talented FBI pro filer and author considers Terry Hobbs to be the Perp. I had occasion to interview Douglas by email for a paper I wrote in Winchester (Hampshire UK). He told me he was 99% sure that Hobbs was involved in the murders for a host of reasons. His profile was said to involve red flags ‘everywhere’. This is what fundamentally convinced me of Hobbs involvement.

    The arrogance of amateur sleuths deciding they know the three kids are guilty is astounding. I’ll take my lead from a celebrated professional thanks.

    And to be clear Hobbs never and has never been able to come up with a verifiable alibi. Three neighbors also state categorically that they saw Hobbs with the kids that evening, Douglas even told me one woman had written down the time she had seen Hobbs in the days after the murders. It was just that no one ever spoke to her and for some reason Hobbs was never considered as a suspect by police. The interview they gave him in 2007 was only to cover their asses.

    Douglas felt that the Alford plea let Law enforcement brush the murders under the carpet as they had nothing to complete a successful prosecution against Hobbs. They meanwhile knew the kids would be exonerated, I was told. And his view was that law know Hobbs is the likely killer purely for the amount of red flags uncovered. But they know that nearly 20 years after and with such thin DNA that prosecutors would never take the case. Douglas wrote the exact words to me ‘Terry Hobbs has got away with murder’. He said it was most evident he was capable of murder in the shooting of his brother in law.

    I can post my copy of the interview with him here if you wish.

  54. The West Memphis case proves why the world looks to the south as dumb bumpkins incapable of reason nor justice. My suggestion to any parent that is contemplating moving to that area…DON’T. The police looks for the first low IQ poor person they can nab; high fiving each other for the promotions they will get for suckering the retard into naming more suspects. I’ll bet the prison industrial complex investors were lining their pockets for years, let alone the donations given to grease the evidence to support conviction and not truth. Gary Gitchel and the prosecuting attorney and the crooked judge all need to be in prison. The south has the terrible reputation of imprisoning innocent people because there are corrupt civil servants swimming in a pool of uneducated poor people with no human services to help. All the while the government representatives are bleeding their states dry unfettered. Accountability. Ferguson is proof of the dumb bully cop with no evidence and a deep history of over use of authority……It will only get worse until we get money out of politics

  55. No way did Hobbs write that letter. Sounds like a lawyer wrote it for him. He has the intelligence and literary acumen of a gnat. How can the prosecution and police excuse themselves from interviewing a man who had a history–ON FILE–of sexual assault, or any of that man’s neighbors, or any of that man’s family????? It boggles the mind. What a pack of inbred, clueless donkeys. Fogelman is the worst. He actually pursued the Satanic angle in 1994!!! Not 1544! What a boob.
    Todd Moore has to keep believing his son was killed by the 3 because if he admits they are innocent, he has to admit that he has done much to motivate a lot of people to keep the 3 imprisoned. But continuing to stick it to them doesn’t make them guilty. And working against them all those years, Moore helped rob Damien of his own son, as well.

  56. Joey is a WM3 supporter troll..

    “Hobbs and Damien do both have trouble pasts, but only one involves allegations of sexual assault, incest, child abuse, spousal abuse, drug abuse, and only one is guilty of blowing someone away.” and he goes on to say that it’s Hobbs. Hobbs is none of those things. That does however describe Damien to the T based on his own medical records prior to the murders known as exhibit 500.

    So much trolls… They have been taking everything that points to the WM3 and spinning it around and putting it on someone else.

  57. Love how you religious jagaloons still insist guilt when Mark Byers himself forgave these boys. Many of us intelligent folks have noticed that convicted killer Edward Edwards got himself on camera during filming for the first paradise lost and he’s been linked to the murders as well as other high profile unsolved murders. Secondly Terry Hobbs never showed even a modicum of remorse or depression over the killings. Those two men alone had more motive and opportunity. The repeated lie y’all are spreading about no alibi shows you don’t even know the details of the case your discussing. Gary Gitchell violated his oath and lied on the stand as well. At best the original trial was a joke. This is the danger in giving hillbilly’s computers. Keep refusing to believe truth and keep judging anyone different thats why you live in Tennessee in the first place, its where we keep our worthless Americans who breed within their own gene pool. Remember suicide is an option.

  58. And while we’re on the subject any assertions that the West Memphis, Arkansas police conducted a professional, balanced and thorough investigation is like saying Isis is doing a great job bringing peace to the middle East.

Leave a Reply

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