The View fawns over Damien Echols

Holy fuck, now I’ve seen everything. Damien Echols was a guest on The View last week, and the hosts ate up every word.

Jeanine Pirro used to be a district attorney and a judge in New York. Did she bring the same astuteness to her job back then? “Well, Mr. Berkowitz, if you say you were out of town on the dates in question, that’s good enough for me. Case dismissed.”

174 thoughts on “The View fawns over Damien Echols”

  1. The last time Damien was asked a question that challenged his position as the innocent victim he portrays was when he took the stand nearly 20 years ago.

    1. I too, swallowed the propaganda and even wore a T shirt Free the WM3; then I thought, what if they were guilty? I lived in Arkansas, and it isn’t the closed-minded population whacked out on drugs Hollywood Satanist film-makers think it is.

      1. I too, wore a T shirt supporting the WM3, swallowed the prop so beautifully and deftly presented by Home Body Odor (which produces kiddie porn as entertainment). I lived in the state of Arkansas and those fine universities and colleges don’t produce stupid lawyers and investigators. Celebrity trash grabbed the case and set those three FREE.

      2. In the space of one sentence you claim not to be part of a closed-minded population, and then accuse Hollywood filmmakers of being Satanists. You’re like a caricature of yourself.

  2. Most people believe there was a conspiracy to assassinate JFK or the US government planned 9/11 to start a war for oil. But when you present them with evidence and facts that there was no conspiracy they don’t want to believe it. It’s the same with the WM3, just because Damien didn’t leave his Trenchcoat (whatever happened to it) at the crime scene they will believe in innocence because they think every killer leaves solid evidence behind. Well they don’t. Most murders are solved by good police work, luck and most important of all, a confession. Damien will not be asked any tough questions because he has music and Hollywood heavyweights backing him. His star can only shine brightly for a certain amount of time though and then things will get interesting.

    1. Clearly you nothing of this case if you’re convinced supporters only believe the three are innocent because his trench cost wasn’t there. Have you read anything about this case?? I mean besides this ridiculous blah written by some average joe that doesn’t know his facts?

    2. The WM3 might be guilty, I tend to distrust any cause a lot of celebrities get behind and that the media pushes. Want to know why Matt? Because the media lied their asses off regarding 9/11 and the Kennedy assassination. Since you have the same kind of “satanic” freaks running America they tend to rally round and protect their own. How about you cite some evidence proving Oswald’s guilt. Oh, you can’t he didn’t get a trial because he was so conveniently silenced before he could speak by someone who wanted to “spare Jackie the pain of a public trial.” Only morons believe that shit. Oh, I forgot, he did say a few things like “I’m just a patsy,” but of course he was just saying that dupe us gullible conspiracy types right, because that word was in such common usage back then. And it wasn’t the least bit suspicious that an hour after the first “plane hit” at the WTC that we had all the “hijackers” info ready to go to declare OBL the guilty party, a man who is an absolute admitted CIA asset. Oh, and now were using those Al Quaeda forces to attack Syria and before that Libya. Yeah, America never starts wars for resources or any of the old reasons empires went to war, we’re different, we’re only interested in freedom and human rights. I’m guessing you’re a right wing type “law and order” type that loves to read true crime shit. I might agree with you about the WM3, but I hate it that I do because I hate being in the company of idiots.

      1. Hi Chris, interesting reply. What are your thoughts on the WM3? I’d be really interested to know. I’m in England, UK. I followed this case at the time then forgot all about it until I stumbled across West of Memphis a couple of days a go.

        1. I’m also in the Uk and I’m fairly new to this case. I watched the West of Memphis documentary on Netflix about a week ago, and then watched the Parsdise Lost docs. I hate to think that so many years were spent attempting to free the WM3, and that it turns out they’re guilty after all. I still can’t get my ahead around how the three actually become suspects in the first place. This generally alludes me; (one of the step fathers mentioned finding some testicles in a jar in Echols’ bedroom, but I’m not sure about the authenticity in that statement) but perhaps that’s the whole stigma of this case… that they were pretty much just targeted because they looked “weird”. ?What do you think about the Terry Hobbs allegations?

  3. I have sat on a jury and it is almost impossible to get 12 people to agree on anything let alone agree to send someone to death. I have no doubt that if 2 juries found them guilty they are.

    1. Michael makes a very good point. I too have sat on a jury, and it’s so true that it’s almost impossible to get 12 people to agree on anything, let alone agree to send someone to death, hence there can be no doubt that if 2 juries found them guilty, they are.

      All those other cases where people were sentenced to death, and then later exonerated…well…they’re bullshit. Those people were guilty too.

      1. What proof exists that they were “exonerated”. I have yet to see one thing that points to innocence. I would gladly change my mind and say the jury was wrong if this were the case. As it stands the evidence at hand says guilty.

        1. The burden of proof is, or should be with prosecution. Seemingly the only proof was post death bragging by the suspects themselves and a dubious (as recitation of facts) confession of Misskelly when he was repeatedly unable to verify times and details of the murders. Bearing in mind that these kids were clearly troubled people, and the case of Ecolls having adversarial position to human value systems, is it at all surprising that they latched on the fact of a local murder in an endeavour to propagate their own misguided stature in the community? Sick teens bragging about something horrible to make them be viewed as more fearful. To me, just as likele as the fact they actually did it. Perhaps equally troubling coming from the case is the legitimate question. Does anyone in that community tell the truth???? Seemingly not!!!

      2. Yeah, a bunch of ignorant, redneck, small-town, “Satanist”-fearing Bible thumpers are totally reasonable and trustworthy–if they found this black-wearing, Devil-music-loving, mentally unstable, poor white trash teenager guilty of murder, then it must be true!! After all, they are sworn to only find the kids guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and that oath magically stops them from being swayed by prejudice and emotions. Innocent people are never, ever, ever sent to death row. Never.

        Damien is a total douche but that doesn’t mean he killed 3 children. Get real, people.

        1. ugh, you are so easily persuaded by what “smart sounding” people tell you. I don’t blame you, I guess it’s human nature. It’s what’s wrong with the world today though. People take what their parents or whatever news source they most commonly view as gospel. Just use common sense/instinct then start following up on that, and don’t just absorb information that justifies your original belief, step outside of the box everynow and then. With that said, the common sense in this case is that 3 kids were last seen going into these woods at 6:30 on their bikes. They and their bikes were found in said woods less than 24 hours later. A guy confesses after failing a polygraph then confesses 3 more times after that. One of the guys who he incriminated also failed a polygraph. Witnesses saw said suspect near the scene of the crime around the possible time of the murders. Said suspect had a 500 page report outlining his psychosis and “homicidal” tendencies. All 3 suspects had ZERO credible alibis. Fibers found at the scene were linked to 2 of the suspects. Is this enough common sense kind of logic that needs to be considered when taking a side on this case or should I keep going?

          1. I don’t view my parents nor any news source as gospel. I’m smart, I don’t need to blindly follow what “smart sounding” people “tell me”. Your comment is completely different, and much more credible, than the person I was replying to who has no doubt of the 3’s guilt just because a jury found them guilty.

          2. EJ
            I agree with you. It is also scary to watch Damien Echols lie even with the rehearsed questions. These stories have changed so many times over the years. First he said he was mentally ill at the time that is why he was smiling. Now it was to make his family feel ok. The same family that he won’t speak to or visit them even though is mother is very ill right now. You can tell that the questions are rehearsed and so are the answers. Damien isn’t a very good actor but a great liar. It is very terrifying to watch him. It is like looking face to face with a psychopath. The stories quickly change from one to another. He retracts what he originally said. The supporters just hang on his every word like sheep. I don’t even see one supporter questioning him why has he changed his stories so many times. What is the truth? He was picked up because he wore black and listens to heavy metal bands? No he was made a person for suspicion because of his medical history and his run in with the law. Jessie was just brought in because they wanted to know if he knew anything about the murders. They never thought he would confess nor did they think he had anything to do with the murders. Lies lies and more lies . Why would a innocent person have to change his stories so many times. Just tell the truth and nothing more!

          3. Sweet Jesus you’re an idiot. Everything you just posted is utter garbage. Miskelley was TOLD he failed the polygraph, he didn’t actually fail it. His confessions were riddled with inconsistencies when compared with the facts of the crime. Not To mention he was all over the place and repeating what he was being fed by the people asking the questions. By people I include his own lawyer as one the confessions was to him. Go read it and tell me he isn’t completely lost. The witness was the town liar and had a car full of people with her that didn’t see Echols. Only her and a young child said they saw him, solid evidence. But you’re certain he’s guilty cause common sense dictates it.

          1. Oh thank you, it never occurred to me to read before. Definitely never thought to read about facts.

          2. Can you give any good arguments in your defense other than pointless rhetoric about ‘bible-thumpers’ and delusions of some with hunt? How about an alibi? How hard is that?

          3. I say go look at the “Callahan” website, people! It has one of the most extensive data bases on the case.. The 3 admins/creators of the site are completely objective.. 2 believe in the innocence of the wm3, the 3rd thinks they’re guilty.. Despite they’re own personal beliefs, they simply print the facts of the case.. Everything from crime scene pics, statements, autopsy reports and medical findings is on there.. Open ur mind!! After drawing my own conclusions, I do believe the WM3 ARE innocent.. But the beauty of this site is u can decide, with all he facts, for urself!!!

          4. I have read, and I’m a lawyer, and we will never know the TRUTH or all of the FACTS in this case, because the cops never did an adequate job of investigating to get the evidence that would actually solve this case. I could talk about every piece of evidence in this case, but the truth is I don’t have the time, so I’ll just take one aspect. How about this: The fibers they found that were “linked” to the suspects were not even “linked” to clothes that they themselves wore, they were clothes that belonged to other family members. If you know anything about fibers, you know that you gather fibers from other people’s clothing through secondary transfer all day long and those fibers could have come from THOUSANDS of other pieces of clothing. The victims could have picked up those fibers from clothing in their own homes, or at school. They couldn’t prove that the fibers actually came from the clothes that they “linked” them to in the suspects homes. . . they were only microscopically similar, and would have been microscopically similar to THOUSANDS of other pieces of clothing they could have found in anyone else’s house. The problem is they only looked in 2 houses. What about the hair that they found on the sheet draped over one of the boys’ bodies (and was probably transferred there from the bodies)? It belonged to an african american, which none of the 3 suspects were. Why is it that fibers that could be “linked” microscopically to thousands of pieces of clothing were more important to investigate than a hair that could have actually positively identified someone? If it had identified someone that had no reason to be in touch with the victims that day, THAT would have been evidence worth mentioning.

          5. Well in that case I think Terry Hobbs and David Jackoby have ALOT of explaining to do! For those not familiar with the latest forensic findings, a hair that seems to implicate Terry Hobbs was found in the ligature (shoelace) knot that bound Michael Moore’s hand and foot together.. And also a hair found on a tree stump at the crime scene pertains to Hobbs’ friend David Jackoby, whom Hobbs claims as an alibi during the frantic search of the 3 young boys, shortly after they went missing on May 5th 1993.. Check the facts on the “Callahan” website.. It’s one of the most comprehensive/objective sites I’ve seen yet! The 3 admin of the site have differing views on the guilt/innocence of the wm3.. Therefore they simply present the cold, hard forensic findings and allow the reader to draw their own conclusions..

          6. If you knew anything about the type of DNA test done on that piece of hair you would realize that it does not make it an open and shut case. The results were very vague and could only prove that the stepfather could not be ruled out. The other issue is secondary transfer…it was his stepson after all. Here is an easy test for anyone to do…take a sticky roller across any of your childrens clothing…tell me how many hairs might just be yours. That is secondary transfer and does not prove that the stepfather is a murderer. What about the DNA evidence on Damiens necklace? It was a match with his own blood as well as one of the victims…..

        2. Elizabeth, read the facts….facts, not the Hollywood stars shouting out, but the cold hard facts. I don’t give a shit who wears what, the music people listen to, etc., but I know guilt when it’s right there in front of me. Damien said he liked the notoriety he got and liked that kids would now know him and be afraid of him. Listen to that and tell me he’s innocent. Puke. TWO juries found these guys guilty. Do you really think they voted guilty unanimously because of the black clothes and music these guys liked? YOU get real, people! Wake up and smell the coffee, asshole.

          1. Do I need to make a flashing neon sign saying that I was replying to ONE PERSON who said that they are certain of the WM3’s guilt just because a jury said they are guilty?!?! I will refrain from calling names unlike you, but please take a chill pill or something.

          2. I also appreciate how you tell me to READ THE FACTS!!! and then cite the very documentary on which you assume I have based my entire opinion. Good job. And you’re right, juries never get it wrong. And that’s a FACT.

          3. Well what about O J Simpson, do you think he was guilty because 12 jurors didn’t, and I sure to hell did.

            What about O J Simpson, I think 12 juriors got that wrong.

          4. Hey Lynn, I was being sarcastic to my dear name-twin Liz. 😉 Juries definitely can be wrong, have been wrong, and will be wrong again.

            Unfortunately when they get it wrong in a way that lets a guilty person off the hook, it is often because either the prosecution or the defense couldn’t or didn’t build a strong enough case. The law requires the prosecution to prove someone guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and sometimes that sucks.

          5. Elizabeth ,
            What facts are you basing the innocents of the WM3. I hope it isn’t because they didn’t find DNA linking them to the crime. Only very few cases have DNA that links the killers to the crime. Do you have any other facts? I am not being rude I really want to know.
            I was upset when you called Jonesboro, Arkansas a bunch of bible thumping rednecks. They upper middle class with many to most educated people. There was not a bunch of bible thumpers on that jury.

          6. Hi Jenn,
            I’m sorry you were upset by my comment. If I could amend it, I would. So they are not rednecks nor Bible-thumpers–since you know the population, what do you think the chances are that there was at least one person on the jury who wasn’t a devout Christian who would be biased/swayed by the Satanist picture painted of Damien? I do understand it was used to show character and that is often important in a trial, I just think that in that part of the country people would be more likely to feel strongly based on that alone.

            At this point I am more convinced of their guilt than I was 2-3 days ago. And it’s really hard to reconcile with because I believed they were innocent for about 10 years (not based on the documentaries, but based on what I had read on Crime Library and various other places which I can’t remember because it was a long time ago). Jason seemed to have come out a good person, very positive and campaigning against life sentences for juveniles–but if he did brutalize those little boys then I don’t believe he deserves to ever be out of jail, no matter how much of a good person he is now.

            The fact that there was no physical evidence left does sway me more towards innocence, but SOMEONE is guilty and whoever that person is didn’t leave any evidence either. I could write a very long comment vacillating back and forth, there are just so many questions left.

            The fact that they are free also sways me towards innocence. I don’t believe that the state would have let them free just because of the amount of money they (mostly Damien) have behind them from supporters. I know a lot of nons accept that idea without question, but I just can’t. I think I’ve seen somewhere that the money is running out, anyway? I wish I could cite a source from that, I know “I think I’ve seen” is a terrible argument.

            Whether they are guilty or not I still think there was not proof beyond a reasonable doubt and the jury tampering alone should cause a new trial. And an SPEEDY new trial, not with a bunch of postponements and delays. But then if they are guilty, does it matter if they didn’t get a fair trial, as long as they are where they should be now??

            I have to end this comment now, I really could go on and on but I think maybe others don’t want to read this as much as I want to write it. 🙂 Again I apologize for offending you and thank you for not being nasty in reply.

          7. Hi Elizabeth, I like hearing from both sides, as long as people can make a point and remain respectful. I like what you said here, I was like you, wanted to believe in their innocence and I am from an area w/the exact same kind of people, so it was easy for me to say the exact same thing and believe that was the main reason they were found guilty, especially listening to Dale Griffiths, dear Lord!!!!!! But after reading alot more and updating myself on more facts and evidence from both points of view, I can’t help but to believe they really did do it. And if you don’t think all that money and big names behind Damien got him and the others out of jail, just look at politics and see how that works, that’s why they had to say “I’m guilty, but I’m really innocent”. Very different from going to trial and being exonerated (and yes, I understand it could have been a very long time before they had a new trial). I appreciate your input and just wanted to throw my viewpoint out there.

          8. You’re a damn redneck Jenn, you can take the trash out of the trailerpark but you can’t take the trailerpark out of the trash

          9. Actually I have read a little more about the neighborhood and the case in fact I went to site that the author of this site touted and I found out that christopher showed signs of being sexually abused before these murders took place. During this time period there was a lot of sexual abuse that had been taking place in that neighborhood along with incest and other problems so you cannot rule out anything.

    2. I haven’t seen any reference at all about the commercial movie planned for this case, it was supposed to have starred Michael Pitt as Damien, and other notables including Ricky Lake depicting the people in this case. Back in 2002-3, the movie caused a lot of talk on the web, but then nothing….what somebody in Hollywood decided it was too risky, what if the guys were guilty? Does propaganda eat itself?

    3. What?? Are you insane?? So no jury has ever convicted an innocent person? Would you like me to list the hundreds of innocent people that WERE convicted?? And the fact that they were convicted the first time ABSOLUTELY swayed these hillbilly jurors. Sorry, but your comment is one of the dumbest, narrow-minded and ridiculous I’ve ever heard. It’s pea-brains like you to convict innocent people in the first place. ALL the physical evidence pointed elsewhere. NONE of it pointed to the 3 convicted. Duh.

      1. Like! Lol! I have added my own comments above… I have 2 words to say…. Callahan Website… Check it out ppl.. Open ur mind..

        1. Too bad they refuse to read it. They just cannot accept the reality that these 3 humans did anything wrong. They are convicted child killers in the eyes of the law and will always be so. I’m really interested in someone interviewing Jessie as,I don’t think he could stop himself from telling the truth as he confessed many times before. I believes it eats away at him every day of his life. God,a higher power,or whatever you believe in,knows what happened to those poor boys,and ask them,”Why,did you kill my sons”?I’m not a “Bible thumper”,I’m just a human being. Those words are just as discriminating as calling another human being a name,just because what they believe in. We are all humans and we will all answer to what we have done. It’s just a sad world we live in.

  4. Damien Echols is a sociopath, a pathological liar and a triple child murderer. He actually gets a pass for his deception. As for the bellowing cows who host this drivel, words escape a rational person.

    1. He’s is not just a socialpath. He has all the charicatures of a borderline personality disorder. He is truely an uncaring person.

  5. Rotfl at the sunglasses bit! I also love the “I was the one who looked the most sensational” line! This guy is sooooo hung up on himself!

    It’s also funny how he says they never let his alibis testify who were, of course, shredded on the stand! And dig his above-it-all posturing with his hand on his mouth and crossing his arms as if he’s in deep contemplation! He’s just so magickal! I don’t get why these bimbos can’t see him for what he is: a repulsive, degenerate scrap of murdering trailer park trash! But then again, we’re dealing with the intellectual giants of The View so what can you really expect?

    1. Maybe because people like you with a witch hunt, hillbilly mentality that think magical is spelled with a k are the only ones dumb enough to still believe 3 innocent kids killed 3 boys for no reason. You’d have to be a complete moron to believe this was a legit case. Look at the evidence. Based on your opinion, it seems you haven’t looked at a thing. The victims parents aren’t even in your side. You’re pretty self righteous for someone with no writing skills…

      1. You obviously didn’t get the joke!

        “Life After Death” tries to reconcile all these extremes into a single narrative, and to a great extent it accomplishes this magic trick. By the way, Mr. Echols spells that word “magick,” just as one of his favorite writers, the very spooky Aleister Crowley, did.

        You see, he likes to use “magick” just like his old buddy Aleister Crowley! How you, a die-hard Damien groupie, didn’t know this is ridiculous! You haven’t even taken the time to read up on the sickening occult proclivities of your hero! You’re awfully self righteous for such a moron!

      2. Psychos don’t need a motive. Just the opportunity. I figure the murder started out as bullying that went way too far.. Once one kid was dead or seriously injured, they killed the other two to save their necks. If Damien was innocent, he would have no need to lie about his alibi witnesses, as well as the other lies he’s told over the last 2 years since he walked out of jail.
        He’s making a fortune off his infamous reputation. He was NOT exonerated. He is a convicted child murderer and using his conviction to enrich himself. He should have to send all that money to the parents of the children he murdered.

        1. The more I learn about this case, the more plausible this explanation seems.

          Every once in a while I check in on this case, and it seems the more information that comes out, the more guilty the WM3 seem.

    2. If u check out the transcripts and statements of a lot of the ‘witnesses’ that proclaimed the guilt of Damien, Jason and Jessie during the trial, u will realise that after the WM3 were convicted, the witnesses retracted their earlier statements and confessed they LIED UNDER OATH!! This relates to numerous persons who testified! Michael Carson, Vicki Hutcheson and Aaron Hutcheson to name a few.. Don’t believe me… Go look it up on the Callahan Website… And no, it is not biased toward pro WM3, it remains neutral and objective.. After reading just about EVERY piece of anything I cud find pertaining to the case, I believe in their innocence..

    3. Every interview I’ve watched, he maintains the same stance. He expresses almost to the word in each the same emotions, the same account of what he went through regarding everything. Jason does the same. I actually can’t believe I’m on this site right now trying to convince a bunch of knuckle-heads of something that’s right in front of their faces and clear as day.
      I felt this way when I watched the documentaries. Every time any of the parents of all six were on screen it was like…ok. The only people making sense were the accused and the professionals (except the investigation). I mean, banjos and sodomy kept passing through my brain. This is a rough area of the country. Very poverty stricken. Living in squalor. Lack of education. Easily manipulated minds. I feel like the real criminals are the parents of all six. They’re all bible thumping, yet clearly intoxicated on whatever substance EVERY time they’re on screen (except for maybe the Moores). It’s totally a cycle. In almost a complete ironic twist, I believe that the WM3, are almost better off now. They’re living a better a life although they went through hell to get there. Unfortunately, and quite sadly, the three little ones will not even have a chance. And probably wouldn’t have had much of chance anyway, even if they had not been murdered considering the cycle of poverty and abuse they were living in.

  6. He’s just so magickal! — haha
    Love the picture you mentioned where he has his hand on his mouth. Wonder if it just covers the psychopath smirk or if he’s physically attempting to keep himself from saying something else stupid. Lots of stupid remarks on Twitter. Love his insight/”sympathy” re: Sandy Hook.
    His twitter blather is revolting.

    1. Scott and Tom,

      Echols isn’t inadvertently holding his hand to his face and putting a finger on his lips—he is making a very significant hand sign known to other occultists as the sign of silence. I wrote an article about its use a few year ago. You can find a version of it here:
      I detail his connections to the occult in my new book Abomination: Devil Worship and Deception in the West Memphis Three Murders if you would like to investigate the matter in greater detail.



      1. Oh please. Keep your ridiculous conspiracy theories to yourself. I have made that exact gesture thousands of times and I know nothing of the occult. You sound certifiably insane.

        1. Well… he does do that hand gesture an inordinate amount of times.

          And in order it to be a conspiracy, doesn’t the motive have to be something in doubt? We all know Damien Echols proudly admits he is very involved in the occult.

        2. It isn’t a conspiracy theory. He is an admitted occult practitioner. He moved to Salem MA and started a Reiki-new age healing center where he sells his special healing methods for 130/hour and other little occult knick knacks. He met his wife when she began writing letters to him in jail…..birds of a feather I would guess, because yeah, a stable person would really want to write a letter to a possible child murderer to show their support? Calling people rednecks doesn’t make your case. Why continue to spew the same old rhetoric without actually looking at the facts? Are you even aware of Echols past psychiatric issues before the crime. He tried to gouge another kids eyes out with his fingernails. He described himself as a sociopath on his own social security forms. This isn’t hard information to find.

  7. “If I were to be released today, I would kinda want to just blend into obscurity. I wouldn’t want to be remembered. You know, I wouldn’t want to walk down the street and have someone say, “Hey, you’re that kid that was on death row they made that documentary about.” – Damien Echols in the ending credits of Paradise Lost 2

  8. Pretty interesting points in there. I didn’t know anything about the case before I stumbled on this website. I agree with everyone that Damien is totally full of himself, but pretty sad that even on a mindless show like the View they can point out that if there is no DNA or forensic proof against someone, they should NOT be sentenced to death. And there was even DNA from SOMEONE ELSE found at the scene? Um, no, I don’t want to live in a country where you can be sentenced to death with the flimsy proof they had against these guys.
    I have no idea if they were guilty or innocent, but I do know that either way, the DA has to prove his case. Doesn’t seem like that happened here.

    1. That’s how I feel too. So far I can’t decide if I believe they’re innocent or if I believe they’re guilty–but either way, the trial was a total joke and the prosecutors absolutely did not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This sort of reminds me of the case of Darlie Routier who was sent to death row in TX on all circumstantial evidence. I can’t decide on her, either.

    2. Paul,
      I understand your feelings but I don’t want to live in a country that lets the guilty out on a plea . Then with no proof of innocence exonerates them . DNA was from secondary transfer and the defense team knows it . Echols lawyer even said it doesn’t mean Terry Hobbs killed the children . He could have thrown it in had they went to court . Best lawyer money can buy you and you still take a plea . Tells me that they had no real evidence they were innocent . Nothing that would hold up in court . Just like this game they are playing in the media . Lets change the facts game . In court it was innocent till proven guilty . Take a plea and admit your guilt . It is guilty till proven innocent . NEVER should it be innocent from public opinion .

      1. They were exonerated because there was NO evidence against them and ALL the evidence pointed AWAY from them! I’m pretty sure all the evidence PROVING they weren’t there is enough to convince any rational person of their innocence. Take a cue from the victims own parents and smarten up.

        1. Wow, I don’t know what the hell you’re smoking but quit Bogarting! In Britney’s alternate, fantasy land universe a guilty plea = exonerated! She’s so rational!

          1. It is also called an Alford plea. Which means he claims that there would be enough evidence to convict him in a possible other trial. Even though he proclaims he maintains his innocence. Now that is the most stupid “law” that was ever allowed in courtroom history. That still makes him a CONVICTED CHILD KILLER for the rest of his life.

          2. So you’re saying, Scott, that if you were on death row (hell) and you were innocent and then offered a way out, even if it meant accepting a plea of this nature, you wouldn’t take it? What a martyr! So noble!

        2. Britney, the 3 WERE NEVER EXONERATED!!!!!!! Your so quick to jump everyone’s shit and you haven’t done your research. Not ALL of “the victims parents” think the 3 are innocent.

  9. Reasonable doubt isn’t what you happen to think is reasonable, it’s what a juror thinks is reasonable.

    Judge Jeanine had ample opportunity to get her facts right. She just didn’t care.

    1. I was about to argue that reasonable doubt is what any reasonable person would find reasonable, but it appears (after admittedly brief reading on the good old bastion of research Wikipedia) that the legal definition of a “reasonable person” is based upon the “community’s judgment” so you’re right, in this case, with this particular community, fuck it all, there definitely was no reasonable doubt to that specific jury. I think that sucks. 🙁 But I’m glad I learned that today, thanks!

      P.S. I didn’t watch the video because I’m sick of Damien, from your comment it sounds like maybe she talked about reasonable doubt? but that’s not where I had gotten my impression of what it meant.

  10. The West Memphis Three were INNOCENT. It’s obvious.

    Jason Baldwin not wanting to take the Alford Plea deal and wanting to wait for a new trial proves it. No guilty person would run the risk when they could get out of prison and walk free forever.

    Several of the foremost experts in the world all agree that the marks on the bodies were all caused by animal predation. There were no stab wounds, no signs of rape, nothing. The boys died from blunt trauma to the head and then were drowned. No “satanist” or crazy occult person would simply bash each kid in the head and then hog tie them only to hide them underwater. They’d probably slash the hell out of them and leave their bodies in PLAIN SIGHT to show off their handy work.

    Some of the top criminal and homicide psychologists have stated that these murders were done by someone trying to HIDE what happened and in most cases of homicide where that occurs it is because the murders were committed by a family member with a relationship to the victims.

    Anyone with half a brain can tell that Misskelly’s “confession” was coerced. He said he was in the woods that day to witness the crime at NOON. Yes, NOON. No one in their right mind would confuse noon with 7PM. They pressured him until he changed his story to fit the details they were feeding him.

    As for the jury convicting Damien and Jason, they used Misskelly’s confession in their deliberations; which the proof of this came out later and is in and of itself reason for a new trial.

    Damien Echols is no doubt a WEIRDO but he didn’t kill those 3 kids.

    1. “The West Memphis Three were INNOCENT. It’s obvious”

      So INNOCENT they plead GUILTY to the murders! That much is obvious.

      “Jason Baldwin not wanting to take the Alford Plea deal and wanting to wait for a new trial proves it. No guilty person would run the risk when they could get out of prison and walk free forever.”

      And yet, he caved! Real stand-up guy he is!

      Oh, I forgot! He did it all to save his good old pal Damien! What a warm, loving friendship those two have! I swear, they must be Bronies! Friendship is magick!

      “Some of the top criminal and homicide psychologists have stated that these murders were done by someone trying to HIDE what happened and in most cases of homicide where that occurs it is because the murders were committed by a family member with a relationship to the victims.”

      You’re right! I just bet it was that wacky, inbred Byers fella! What? No? Oh well, maybe it was someone with no relation to the victims like that crazy black dude that went into Bojangles bleeding like a stuck pig! What? No? Oh well, let’s go BACK to this infallible family member theory endorsed by all manner of top criminal psychologists….. who probably work for the defense! It must have been Terry Hobbs because there’s one single hair of his in a shoelace or something. Yeah, he’s our man!

      “Anyone with half a brain can tell that Misskelly’s “confession” was coerced.”

      Ehh, you might wanna make that confession-s, plural! Yep, old clock head racked up a bunch! Why, he even confessed to his own attorney. I suppose that one was “coerced” as well! Poor kid, everybody’s out to get him!

      “Damien Echols is no doubt a WEIRDO”

      Hey, we agree on something! Although I’d call him a weird, immoral, lying, deceitful, worthless, murdering waste of sperm and eggs!

      “but he didn’t kill those 3 kids”

      Well, if he had never been convicted of the murders and then years later plead guilty to them you might have a point!

      Why don’t you just admit that he’s a child killer? HE already has!

      1. Plead guilty. LOLZ. If that’s your main piece of ‘evidence’ then you really are grasping at straws.

        Yes, they took a special plea deal to get back to their lives after the crooked Arkansas bozos screwed them for nearly 20 years. YES, the same bozos that the Arkansas State Supreme Court ruled were WRONG.


        1. “Plead guilty. LOLZ. If that’s your main piece of ‘evidence’ then you really are grasping at straws.”

          No need to grasp at straws LOLZ! There’s a mountain of evidence collected right here pointing to the guilt of these three douchenozzles! Like most supporters, you haven’t done anything but watch slanted documentaries and engage in hero worship! Not surprising really!

          “Yes, they took a special plea deal to get back to their lives after the crooked Arkansas bozos screwed them for nearly 20 years. YES, the same bozos that the Arkansas State Supreme Court ruled were WRONG.”

          And there it is! It didn’t take long for the “poor widdle teenagers who were done wrong by the evil, corrupt authorities of Arkansas” angle to emerge! And BTW, that “special plea” you speak of was engineered solely by Echols’ defense team. Blame them for how it makes your heroes look! No matter how you choose to paint it, they are GUILTY of murder! Oh, I forgot, they’re guilty but….. they’re innocent! What a concept!


          Well, how very mature of you! And yet, you can’t deny anything on this site which paints these three murderers as anything other than what they are! For somebody that holds truth in such high regard you sure do ignore it when it suits you! Suck THAT bambino!

        2. The Truth Will Set You Free,
          You really think that the case was messed up ? You think having A wittiness that seen Echols and Jason near the scene would mistake Echols for someone else? Echols with his lies about the girls he was on the phone with and his great alibis. Have you read what the girls said? One places Echols at Jason’s house around 4:30. She called Jason’s house. Damien then tells the girl to call him at his house at 8:00 PM at his house and she does. Damien is not there and comes back home past 9:00. Tells her he was with Jason’s mom and she took them out. Jason’s mom was at work. Not one of the girls says Damien is at home. That is why they were never called for alibis.
          It is easy to lie to people that don’t read the case. It is easy to say I had an alibi when you’re not in court and there is no one to dispute anything. When he mentions this great alibi why doesn’t he read what they had to say? Damien Echols has not once taken the case apart but created his own case. Most of what he puts out there is lies and there are no questions about it. He was a suspect because of the way he dressed lie ! He just had teenage problems lie! Jerry Driver was after him lie! He never had run ins with the law big lie. Not just when he ran away but the time he was arrested because he was at Dianna’s house threating to kill her and her family. Jerry Driver never picked up Damien Echols up for walking the streets. Jerry Driver always had to bring Damien Echols in because someone called the police on him. Damien Echols is not trying to clear up the case but clear his name with public opinion with lies. Not once did the defense team pick something from the case and dispute it . They hide the facts from the case.
          If they are so sure they have a case why don’t they bring to light what they are claiming. Such as all of their alibis with proof. Let’s pull the file out that shows you have a clear alibi. Not new ones so they can entice them with money and fame. The files are there in Callahan. Echols says that it was just teenage stuff he was going through show exhibit 500 to the public.

      2. Your rebuttal to Jason’s reason for accepting the plea is pretty weak. Okay, so, Jason “caved” to the plea–why did he not accept it at first?

        And an Alford Plea is not a black-and-white “I did it, I’m guilty!” plea, and die-hard nons would do much better to stop saying the 3 PLEADED GUILTY!1!!! You have plenty else to back up your case without resorting to hyperbole.

        1. My take on this whole dramatic touch of Jason not accepting but then finally accepting to “save his friend’s life” is that it was all orchestrated by the defense team. It was merely a ruse to tug at the heartstrings of gullible supporters AND make Baldwin look like some sort of hero. PURE BS from the defense team and nothing more I’m afraid.

          Sorry but I can’t help but resort to hysterics when discussing the Alford Plea! It’s like they’re guilty, they’re not guilty, they didn’t do it but the evidence may prove otherwise so let’s not go to trial! As someone who believes in the guilt of these three, I wish Ellington had just rejected the plea but it effectively lets all parties off the hook so I’m sure he was happy to simply have his hands washed of the whole affair.

          Anyway, I won’t stop saying they plead guilty because……. they plead guilty! A fact is a fact!

          1. I suppose that’s an okay theory about Jason’s reasoning. I mostly believe him but I am neither convinced of their guilt nor their innocence. Honestly you have me thinking about that, the defense certainly could have realized that it might look bad if all three of them jumped on the deal.

            This is where I kind of eat crow and admit that I didn’t realize the Alford plea is an actual guilty plea. To me, “maintaining innocence while acknowledging the prosecution has enough evidence to convict” sounded like the person was saying they are actually innocent but realizes that a case might actually be able to be made against him. But I decided to be a good girl and read up on it, and it is indeed pleading guilty without *admitting* to the guilt. I still think it’s misleading to say they pled guilty, but hey, it’s technically true. And I might be a little biased because I am having a hard time realizing they may not be unequivocally innocent, after having believed they were for the past 10 years.

          2. You might ask yourself: why does Echols keep lying?

            Here’s a whopper from the Larry King interview:

            ” I think at the time I probably suffered from what most teenagers suffer from, you know, just teenage angst, maybe depression, maybe sometimes even severe depression.”

          3. That is what turned me against him. I listened to his book and was like why in the hell is he trying to gloss over his mental history?!?? Then I saw that on Larry King and I couldn’t believe he could say that with a straight face. That doesn’t convince me of their guilt, though.

          4. I’ve often asked myself:

            If Peter Jackson funded an unlimited investigation into finding evidence of guilt, what more would be unconvered? Think of what they’ve come up with after spending millions on their search for exculpatory evidencs: a red herring (I believe they know this) suspect and a nice billboard in West Memphis.

          5. You “listened” to his book? Anyway, he actually covers his experiences with mental health in great detail. Something tells me you didn’t actually “listen” nor did you read his book.

          6. Elizabeth –

            Another thing to consider: Everybody keeps saying that they plead guilty, and that is true. No one brings forth the fact that the state wouldn’t have given them an option of an Alford Plea and a way out of jail if there wasn’t also a lot of evidence that their legal rights were badly abused during the process. Our legal rights are in place for a reason, and as a conservative I often hate the amount of protection suspects are given. However, when I look back at what some of my friends were like when they were in their late teens, I can definitely see why these protections are in place. When you are young, reckless, are faced with the authority of the law, and have very little family support you are likely to say and do things that are untrue and/or can be misconstrued. Even after looking at the evidence on this site, I am sure that the cops, prosecutors and judge all did things that would have lost them their jobs in other jurisdictions. I have yet to see anything to convince me of ANYONE’s guilt in this case.

          7. Absolutely agree with everything you said. Some people think that the state agreed because of the amount of cash behind the 3 thanks to supporter donations, but I just can’t buy that.

          8. The state knows how hard it is to obtain a conviction in high profile cases these days. An alford plea allows them to have a guilty verdict, and not have to deal with the Damien worshippers anymore.
            The defense attorneys also were also thinking of cost effectiveness. They had been handling this case for almost 2 decades proBono and it was time to get away from it.
            I’m anxious to see which of the WM3 winds up back in jail first. I also have a feeling that one day, either Jason or Jessie will publicly confess and Damiens house of bullshit fame will crumble around him. Jessie changed his story because of his father. Once Jessie Sr has passed away, and Jessie is on his own, I have a feeling he will come clean.
            The best thing Damien could do at this point is write another bullshit book and swallow a bullet at one of his signing parties.

      3. Scott, thanks for being the voice of reason. I, too, heard Damien admit he liked being known as the child killer, and now suddenly he’s this oh-so-happily married man, wrongly accused? Ugh! H

      4. Actually they were forced into the plea, genius. If they didn’t take it their only other option was to rot in jail. What would you choose? Duh. It’s funny how crazy you conspiracy theorists sound and how few of the facts you actually know, in comparison to the supporters who sound intelligent, well-read and much more sane than you. They are free because intelligence won out this time and your idiotic hillbilly “lynch em” mentality lost. It always will.

        1. Oh man, here we go again! They were NOT “forced” to take this damn plea! I hate to do this since it’s gonna make Brit look like a twit but I gots to!

          “It’s a picture worth a thousand words, Damien Echols embracing his wife free of shackles and handcuffs for the first time since leaving death row. It was taken by Little Rock attorney Patrick Benca who joined Echols’ defense team earlier this year and played a major role in his release.

          Having gone to law school with Attorney General Dustin McDaniel, Benca had lunch with his friend earlier this month. That discussion he says lead to McDaniels setting up a meeting with members of the defense team and prosecutor Scott Ellington. Benca pitched the idea of an Alford plea.”

          I have to post this everytime one of you lemmings gets it wrong. Patrick Benca, of the DEFENSE TEAM, pitched the Alford plea to Ellington! This just shows how “few of the facts” YOU actually know! Kinda makes you wonder what else you’ve gotten wrong doesn’t it? But I guess as long as you feel “intelligent, well-read and much more sane” than those who have actually done some research into this case, it’s all good! Enjoy your make believe land of intelligent superiority!

        2. The defense came up with the idea to approach the state w/the Alford plea Brittany. They were NOT forced to take it.

  11. Here is how the meeting with Jason went regarding the Alford Plea,

    Attorney – It’s set, all you have to do is accept the Alford Plea and you are a free man.
    Jason – But what about the new evidence that will overturn the original verdict.
    Attorney – mmmmmmmmm we don’t have any!!!!!!!!!!
    Jason – But if I take the Alford Plea then it looks like I am guilty.
    Attorney – Wanna be a hero?
    Jason – ok
    Attorney – We will say you didn’t want to take it but you had to in order to save Damien’s life.
    Jason – That works.

    1. Damian siad that he would take an Alford plea because,he was scared that the guards or someone could pay $50.00 to have him killed in prison. If that were true,they would have had him killed in the 18+ years he was already there.

    1. lol I didn’t even watch it and I bet I can summarize. Solitary for 10 years, eyes ruined by lack of sun, there are other innocent people on death row/have been executed, had to learn how to walk/use a fork/wipe his butt all over again, cops had it out for him because he was different, sick of talking about the case all the time.

  12. Well. I’m from Europa and I think they are guilty.
    Don’t You have in USA some good psychics, some who could say what really happened that day?Sometimes that is the only way to get the truth out, although ….
    For myself I would do it.

  13. eddievedder…:
    Do you think it would be possible to find any evidence that ties someone directly to the crime either way (either in- or exculpatory?)? I believe Terry Hobbs’ hair is a little bit suspicious, because it’s the only DNA found there (along with his friend’s), but in no way do I think it is strong evidence towards his guilt. One of the things that bothers me is that there is no direct physical evidence that ties the 3 to the crime. But on the other hand there is the whiskey bottle under the overpass.

    I just woke up and am way too foggy to think about this right now. I just would like to know if you think it’s likely that there is any kind of evidence to be found for either side. I tend to think that due to the age of the crime and the less-than-stellar investigation that it’s probably impossible. Of course there may be scenarios that haven’t occurred to me.

    1. Well, you might be right about actual physical evidence. Unless wmpd or the fbi has something in lockup that everyone’s missed…is there biological material that wasn’t tested? (perhaps David knows the answer to that question).

      That being said,
      and first of all, even if we assume that the hair was a possible match with TH, there are still 2 million other Americans who are also a possible match.

      In my view, if I was funding an unlimited investigation, the first order of business would be an independent analysis of the new defense “evidence”, similar to a discovery process in a trial situation. Remember we all seem to be taking their word on DNA and fiber evidence. I’d like to hear opinions of some independent experts.
      Likewise, you can be sure I would interview and re-interview and re-re-interview these folks who claim to have heard someone talking about Hobbs apparent admission of guilt. Something tells me their credibility would be called into question under heavy scrutiny.
      Also, of course, I’d interview and re-interview all witnesses from the first trial, to find out who actually has recanted and who has not. I’d interview and re-interview those who were considered for testimony but not called. I’d re-examine the wm3’s failed alibis and establish a time frame of where each was and when they were unaccounted for. I’d interview and re-interview those who’ve made claims of hearing confessions (Carson, Lucas, Watson et al).
      I’d talk to the families of the wm3, see who’s heard what, who knows what, who believes what. I’d leave no stone unturned in an attempt to find out what happened to Echol’s trenchcoat.
      I’d expose the PR operation funded by Jackson and company. I’d tell the world how much they have spent in order to find little but a textbook red herring suspect. How they have let the constant errors about “DNA exoneration” in the press be portrayed as fact.
      I’d spend a good deal of time researching the making of the PL docs, exposing how one-sided they are, I’d detail the behind the scenes shenanigans.
      I’d document and expose the voluminous lies that come from Echol’s mouth, the obvious coached answers to various questions that imply complete innocence.
      And finally, I’d have to get a sit down with Jesse Misskelley. I believe that, under the right circumstances, it could be done.
      Maybe I’d put all the info I found or corroborated or refuted in a documentary.
      Something like that.

      1. eddie – I’m beginning to really enjoy your posts.

        So this “new” DNA evidence came directly from the defense, and they have only released what they wanted the public to hear?

        If I understood Todd Moore’s piece, and I quote
        “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.”

        I completely agree with him about the DNA evidence. Even if we take the defense’s word as 100% truthful, which is a stretch after the WM3 guilty plea, the lack of DNA evidence from a crime committed 20 years ago is not surprising. And weren’t the bodies submerged/partially submerged?

        1. I think this post by eddie is probably the best I’ve seen on this site. It kind of broke my brain because it has SUCH good points and ideas and it’s so frustrating that no one is doing what he laid out in his post. Then I feel inept because I’m basically sitting at home wringing my hands wondering what can we do, instead of taking some–any–kind of action to get anything started. The Free movement had to start somewhere, why can’t a movement start to really get to the bottom of this unspeakably tragic case once and for all? I get images in my head of the 3 boys in the afterlife (Heaven, limbo, what have you) knowing who did this and not being able to tell us. It’s a lot to think about and I’ve been having to work a lot so don’t have time to reply with anything other than, “Awesome post derp derp.”

          1. Also,where is the DNA evidence proving their innocence?It has and never will be produced because there is none. I don’t hear of the “Famous people” who spent 10 million dollars doing anything to help find the “Real” killers,because the case is closed and NO ONE is looking for the killers,that got released because of money. Sound simular?…OJ looking for the “real” killers of his ex and Ron’s while playing golf?

        2. There was no “guilty plea”. Read up on e facts. An Alford Plea is not a guilty plea, and they were forced into it. I can’t believe there are people dim enough to say they must be guilty if they chose an Alford plea over dying in prison for a crime they didn’t commit. Duh! Hillbilly much??

          1. But it technically IS a guilty plea. I thought the same thing, but then I like, researched it. Try looking it up sometime.

          2. In the “Eyes” of the law. They are CONVICTED CHILD KILLERS,and will always be for the rest of their lives. All they had to do was wait a few more months and have a possible chance of proving their innocents but,they chose the cowards way out and ran like the child killers they are.

          3. Here you go Britney………An Alford plea (also called a Kennedy plea in the state of West Virginia,[1] an Alford guilty plea,[2][3][4] an “I’m guilty but I didn’t do it” plea [5] and the Alford doctrine[6][7][8]) in United States law is a guilty plea in criminal court,[9][10][11] where the defendant does not admit the act and asserts innocence.[12][13][14] Under the Alford plea, the defendant admits that sufficient evidence exists with which the prosecution could likely convince a judge or jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.[6][15][16][1

    2. Do you think it would be possible to find any evidence that ties someone directly to the crime either way (either in- or exculpatory?)?

      The only possibility I can think of would be the semen stain found on one victim’s pants. No crime lab has ever been able to get DNA from that stain.

      Discussed here at the original Misskelley trial:

      And discussed here in Echols 2002 motion for DNA testing, when Barry Scheck was still working for Echols (scroll to part 4 beginning on page 24 ):

      The hair matching Terry Hobbs doesn’t mean much. If investigators meticulously checked the clothing of the Sandy Hook victims, they would almost certainly find parents’ DNA. That wouldn’t prove the parents were the real killers; the DNA sources could have been on victims’ clothing before the crime.

      A semen stain on an 8-year-old murder victim’s clothing, especially when there are signs of sexual assault, is far more likely to be related to the crime.

      For example, compare the 1993 San Diego child murders, which happened five weeks before the West Memphis murders. At the time there was some speculation that the two crimes could be linked. That case went unsolved for eight years. Eventually they were able to get DNA from semen found in one victim’s mouth.

      1. I find it an interesting coincidence that those 2 guys whose names I can’t remember left for Oceanside (or was it Carlsbad) days after the murder. Oceanside or Carlsbad are about half an hour/an hour away from San Diego. I’m not trying to imply anything at all, just find it interesting.

        I knew about the stain, it wrenches my gut that they can’t get DNA from it. I find TH’s DNA just a little suspicious (I mean that literally, not sarcastically) because it’s the only DNA they could find a match for, and it wasn’t on his own son. I know Michael was probably at Stevie’s house all the time, but Stevie didn’t have any hairs so that takes away from the “of course” factor for me. Plus the possibility that it was INSIDE the knot (note I said POSSIBILITY–it doesn’t seem to be clear whether it was inside or just on it). I think that if they had found this hair and been able to test DNA back then, it would have been enough for them to check him out as a possible suspect, which they really should have done ANYWAY. I know nons think the police did a good job with the investigation, but I don’t and it is beyond frustrating. I also know that nons will see all of this in the vein of “the investigation sucked because the 3 are innocent and Hobbs did it” so let me put a disclaimer that I am on the fence and leaning a little towards guilt, so please spare me the “READ THE FACTS” argument.

        Also WM3truth thanks for your post.

        1. The two guys who went to California were Christopher Morgan and Brian Holland. Last I checked, Wikipedia still considers Morgan a prime suspect.

          As for the shoelaces, there’s no reason to believe that each boy was tied up with the laces from his own shoes. Two of the boys were tied with different color shoelaces. Unless both happened to be wearing one white and one black shoelace that day, that means the killers mixed up the shoelaces between removing them and tying the victims.

          1. Good point, thanks for pointing that out. I haven’t been able to read every single thing on Callahan’s yet so I appreciate that you provide links (and wonder how the heck you remember everything so well) and don’t get hysterical when people don’t have every single detail of the story yet and/or aren’t convinced of WM3’s guilt. I would like to wait until I’ve pored over every single document before engaging in any discussion, but I’m really interested in reasonable people’s points of view on different issues in the case.

      2. I could understand if the hair that ‘allegedly’ belonged to Terry Hobbs was found in the knots of Stevie, as he was his step father…but it was actually found in the ligature that bound Michael Moore, wasn’t it? Not so easy to explain?? Any theory’s on this?

        1. Copied from my recent response to the same question:

          As for the shoelaces, there’s no reason to believe that each boy was tied up with the laces from his own shoes. Two of the boys were tied with different color shoelaces. Unless both happened to be wearing one white and one black shoelace that day, that means the killers mixed up the shoelaces between removing them and tying the victims.

    3. evidence, one shoe lace came from adult shoe and Jason has new shoe laces in his shoes
      necklace of damien had his blood and poss match for jason and stevie’s victim
      how many people have blood on their necklace?

  14. Elizabeth,
    Satanist”-fearing Bible thumpers are totally reasonable and trustworthy–if they found this black-wearing, Devil-music-loving, mentally unstable, poor white trash teenager guilty of murder, then it must be true!! After all, they are sworn to only find the kids guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
    You would have thought that was true if they were tried in West Memphis but they were not. Jonesboro, Arkansas is a far cry from West Memphis and is not a bible thumping town. What stood before the court was not three 3 boys wearing Metallica tee shirts and Echols was not wearing black. The Echols Jason and Jessie were 2 cleaned up. What stood before the court was Echols that couldn’t keep his stories straight. There was an alibi used that fell through on the stand. They were seen near the crime scene where the 3 children were killed. He bragged to small girls that he did the crime. Please don’t say the girls recanted their story because he admitted to saying it on 48 hours and said he said it as a joke.
    Echols says he was on the phone with three girls which was his great alibi. The reason it wasn’t used in court because two of the girls put Echols at Jason’s house gone between 4:45 till 9:00.PM. One of the girls called Echols at 8:30 just like he asked her to do, at his home and he wasn’t there. When she was able to reach Echols at his home it was 9:30 PM. She was told by Echols that he went out with Jason’s mother. Jason’s mother was at work at that time. Jason said he went to Walmart to play games and that is right pass the crime scene. Then he tried to say he was home all night.
    Echols now even tries to say that some of medical records are from when he was in prison. His medical records are doctored up for his appeal. All of the medical records are admitted as evidence and can’t be altered. The date of the medical record is clear to see and also the request forms and release forms . The infinus Jerry Driver was supposed to be picking on Echols but every time Echols was picked up it was from someone calling the police on him. Jerry Driver had no reason to lie about Echols before the murders and he had nothing to do with his medical records .All the medical records just back up what Jerry Driver reported . Echols tries to play off his medical records as just teenage stuff. They are far from just teenage actions. I can go on and on but you have to look through the records yourself. Look through the whole case .
    On 48 hours he was asked if he wanted to be exonerated through public opinion and he said yes he does. All of this new evidence is doing is casting doubt. Which is great to have when you are in court but proving they are innocent even Echols lawyer made the statement that none of this evidence shows that Mr. Hobbs did the crime .This is the evidence that they were going to use in court. Now I know why they didn’t choose to go to court . Why don’t we just throw up the whole justice system for the WM3 and everyone get a trial in public opinion.

    1. I don’t think the entire trial was based on wearing black and listening to Metallica. I was replying to someone who said they are certain of the 3’s guilt simply because a jury said so. The jury may not have seen Echols in his full glory, but the prosecution definitely painted a more than clear picture. I was goth/weird/Satanic as a teen (I hate admitting this here for fear of being disregarded as just someone who identifies with Echols) and have personally experienced the way people judge you when you present yourself that way, and this was in San Diego which I am willing to bet has a far more open-minded and accepting atmosphere than anywhere in Arkansas.

    2. Read up on the real evidence before you post novels of drivel. You seem to forget the supporters base their opinion on the fact there is no evidence against the wm3 and ALL points to other people! Duh!! I feel like I’m in the twilight zone on this ridiculous blog. I’m out.

      1. Thank God. You are an idiot and your ignorance is painful.

        Ps…there is much evidence against the 3. Much more than a secondary transferred hair. But you have ignored others pointing to that evidence, so I’ll refrain from repeating it.

  15. Do any of you know of an other forum with a lot of other people convinced of the guilt of the wm3?

    I stopped following the case for almost 2 years now but I remember one forum that changed my mind from the paradise lost propaganda. There was a man on that forum (one that discusses multiple cases like this) that is an airline pilot and lives near West Memphis who made very elaborate posts. I know he also visited the WM police station several times and had spoken with people involved.

  16. Thank you, thank you, thank you! Memphis 3 are guilty as sin. It’s a joke the way these Hollywood heavies got into the whole thing without knowing crap. It makes me sick that this guy is now a folk hero. I will never forget how he said, in earlier documentary, how he liked being seen now as the boogey man type of guy. It gave him pleasure. I can only hope that they get theirs when judgment day comes.

    1. Without knowing crap?? Uh, that would be you, my dear. You clearly have not read up on the forensic evidence. If you had, I would HOPE you at least had the brain cells necessary to see they were innocent, seeing as NOTHING ties them to the crime and all the evidence they DO have implicates other people. Stop reading conspiracy bullcrap and actually educate yourself in the real case, genius.

      1. Brit, a hair was found at the crime scene and later tested for DNA. Mitochondrial DNA was extracted which indicated that Terry Hobbs is a possible match, along with millions of other people in the US, and thousands of other people in Memphis metro. Assuming that the hair belonged to Hobbs (which I’m sure you have) a perfectly logical and reasonable explanation for it being there has been provided. I think I can also assume that you aren’t interested in such logic.

        The fact that no DNA from the real killers was recovered is not unusual, as DNA evidence is used in a small fraction of murder cases.

        Also, does it not give you the slightest…just the slightest…pause that all of the so called “new” forensic evidence is bought and paid for by wealthy supporters of the defense, with no discovery process?

      2. The Mt DNA doesn’t exclude the 3 from the crime scene or victims bodies Britney!!! OMG why am I wasting precious mins arguing w/you?!?!?!?! You need to do your research.

  17. Do you really think that that the three boys would not have left some DNA , you know that the police would have searched thier house shoes and clothes for some sort of evidence, and if they had found any it would of come out but they didn’t.
    Also the boys were not killed were they we’re found, so that ment that the Memphis 3 would of had to kill them somewhere else, they had no car, so they would of had to carry all three bodies to we’re they we’re found, also there was not a drop of blood found at the site.

    Also the police did not go into the houses of the children to look for any DNA or blood
    Pam Hobbs family believed that terry Hobbs killed the boys right from the start, and now so does Pam, also some of their neighbors said that they saw terry Hobbs with the three boys at around 5.30 the night of the murders, also the only DNA that was found on the boys was from Terry Hobbs and his friend.

    12 juriors can and have been wrong a lot of times just look at OJ simpson

  18. “Do you really think that that the three boys would not have left some DNA .”

    Well actually, they did on Damien Echols necklace (although not conclusive).
    Most murders are not solved by DNA. Furthermore DNA was in it’s infancy in 1993, and the DNA evidence was compromised by being submerged under water.

    There is also more that I don’t understand about the testing requested and completed by the defense. The defense only tested what they wanted tested (left out the branches indicated by Jesse as being part of the attack), and furthermore the defense only publicly released what they wanted to have released.

    “Also the boys were not killed were they we’re found”

    The evidence for this is weak. Two unanimous juries and luminol testing disagree with you. They were not murdered in a white room with white carpets. They were murdered on the side of a ditch, which did not take a genius to use the water from the ditch to clean up. Also branches and fists (blunt force wounds) were used in the attack, and two of the children were drowned. There would be significantly more blood from one 200 lb man than from three 8 year olds.

    “Pam Hobbs family believed that terry Hobbs killed the boys right from the start, and now so does Pam, also some of their neighbors said that they saw terry Hobbs with the three boys at around 5.30 the night of the murders, also the only DNA that was found on the boys was from Terry Hobbs and his friend.”

    Pam Hobbs family had a major falling out with Terry years after the murder. The WM3 team has millions of dollars. Getting paid to slander someone you hate is going to be attractive to some people.

    Terry Hobbs whereabouts that night are actually pretty well documented with Pam, the police and others. To think in between all these sightings, Terry was at one point murdering three children, and then at another point burying the bodies (with search parties similarly looking through the woods) without showing any signs is bizarre to say the least.

    But the greatest sign of Terry’s innocence comes from the WM3 scheme team themselves. Terry was not a blip on the radar of the WM3 team until the shoelace DNA. The disgustingly graphic and disgraceful propaganda pieces (PL and PL2) focused every gun at a different redneck oaf (and bat sh&t crazy fool) step-dad, Mark Byers. Even though Mark had an airtight alibi.

    And now they change their guns to an entirely different direction and stepdadin PL3? Does it not dawn on you, YOU are being lied to? That you are being fed pure propaganda to fit the lowlife directors various agendas? You have to suspend any sense of logic and skepticism to not realize you are.

    Terry may be a redneck oaf, but nowhere in his psychological profile will you find someone capable of murdering three little boys. Similarly nowhere in David Jacoby, and we are supposed to combine them together?

    There has been plenty of psychopaths that kill children. But killing three 8 year olds at the same time takes a special kind of psychopath. Please review Damien’s Echols psychological profile for the exact kind of psychotic sociopath capable of committing these murders. Has there ever been phenomenon such as this where a young child AND his two unrelated young friends were all killed by a step dad, parent, etc? I have searched…and no. It just doesn’t happen. But “thrill kills” by young sociopathic teenagers do happen, in fact they happen a lot. And NO, not thrill kills by young teenagers that are weird or different, or listen to Metallica, or consider themselves Wiccans. But YES to teenagers and young adults who are clinically proven to be sociopaths, who have tortured, mutilated, bleached and kept the skulls of cats and dogs. Who have started fires, parents were terrified of them, threatened to eat your Dad, and have a disturbingly violent history at school.

    1. Except all the violence in Terry’s past including shooting his brother in law, molesting a lady and beating up his wives.

  19. Bluntly, i’d like to say that I think unless you’ve poured over every single document pertaining to this case, you’re in no position to say these people are either guilty or innocent.

    Opinions of suggested guilt or innocence can be brought about by thorough investigation into what’s out there, but there will always be a shred of doubt somewhere on both sides.

    I’d like to find out more about damien’s involvement with animal cruelty and more information than there is currently on his relationship with his family and records of his upbringing prior to the murders.

    Some mass murderers and serial killers have notorious patterns of cruelty towards animals in their youth, not unlike what was evident in what we know about damien’s childhood. That for me at least is a sign that he was (maybe still is?) capable of brutality towards living creatures including humans. However, as far as I understand it beyond mere heresay there are no police reports or factual physical evidence to suggest this was the case. If i’m wrong about that please someone do link me to whatever you’ve found.

    1. As far as the animal cruelty goes, I think it’s worth mentioning (altough I’m sure most of you already know this) that Terry Hobbs worked at a slaughterhouse. That is a lot of death, pain, and violence to take part in and be around on a daily basis.
      That certainly takes a certain type of person….

  20. Charles, I am not 100% convinced the WM3 are guilty, but from the evidence I have researched easily beyond a reasonable doubt (which should be about 90-95%).

    WM3Truth psychological profile of Echols is very informative.

    It says a lot that Echols was convicted by a jury even without Damien’s extremely disturbing mental history or Jesse’s multiple confessions (over a span of nine months).

    1. In my opinion the prosecution did paint a picture of a disturbing psychology/mindset (although definitely not as disturbing as what’s in the 500, sure). And the foreman did tell the other jurors about Jessie’s original confession, and before the trial he asked his lawyer what he had to do in order to get Damien and Jason convicted.

    2. No, it doesn’t “say a lot” that they were convicted. The police went into a press conference saying they were positive these kids were guilty, so the 12 hillbillies they picked out to be jurors said “of course they are! The cops said so!”. It says nothing. Educate yourself on the hundreds (possibly thousands) of wrongful convictions in the united states. While reading up on those, you will see that many of those cases had evidence way more incriminating than the nothing the prosecution had against the wm3.

      1. Brit, you’re arguing based on a logical fallicy. It’s known as “affirming the consequent.”

        Damien Echols was convicted. Many people are wrongly convicted, therefore, Damien Echols was wrongly convicted.

        In other words, that was a weak post.


    Summary of Damien Echols’ Mental Health History

    5/7/92. E. Arkansas Mental Health Center: Client admits to having been suspended seven times this past semester for initiating fights at school and starting fires. States in one fight he almost gouged out the victim’s eyes.

    Clinical report based on psychological tests: The behavior of this youngster is characterized by impulsive hostility…the desire to gain power and demean others springs from animosity and a wish to vindicate past grievances. This teenager believes that past degradations may be undone by provoking fear and intimidation in others. Cool and distant, this youth demonstrates little or no compassion for others.

    5/19/92. Damien arrested for breaking into a trailer with his 15 year old girlfriend, Deanna Holcomb. Suicide pact if they couldn’t be together. Damien threatening to kill police officers and Deanna’s father when picked up. Convicted of second-degree burglary and sexual misconduct.

    5/19/92 to 6/1/92. Craighead County Juvenile Detention Center.
    Damien voiced suicide plan to folks at the center. Staff reported that Damien and Deanna planned to have a baby and sacrifice it. Damien knocked a peer to the ground, sucked the blood from the boy’s wounded arm and rubbed the blood on his face. No remorse. Deanna is hospitalized at Mid-South Hospital in Memphis.

    Joyce Cureton, Juvenile Director, reported that “it is our opinion that Damien needs mental health treatment.”

    6/1/92 to 6/25/92. Charter Hospital of Little Rock. Immediate hospitalization due to suicidal intent.

    Admits to a history of violence and attempting to scratch out the eyes of a classmate. There were major concerns that Damien was exhibiting disturbed thinking. He has a history of extreme physical aggression toward others. It was felt that he needed to be temporarily removed from his environment to provide protection for him and protection for others.

    Damien states, “I burn myself with lighters. I have huffed gas and paint, used speed, marijuana, glue, and alcohol.”

    Progress Notes:

    Damien stated that he got a hold of a police officer’s gun, and that if Deanna’s father had acted aggressively, “I would have blown him away and the next time I will eliminate that person.”

    Denies having a conscience or feelings of regret.

    Stares into space and shows no emotional response to any kind of stimuli.

    Verbalized concern that there are surveillance cameras behind his mirror and under the desk in his room. Quite paranoid; he definitely bears watching.

    Still drawing witchcraft symbols & continues to speak of bizarre and unusual practices.

    Makes an unusual sound with his mouth that sounds like a cat purr.

    States that visit with parents didn’t go well, but would not elaborate.

    Damien’s mother concerned about her son “not learning to deal with anger and rages.” Thinks Damien is responding to outside stimulation. Voiced fear that “son may be crazy.”

    6/25/92. Damien discharged to mother with instructions for continuing care. Family moving to Oregon.

    8/13/92 Home Visit Evaluation by Calvin Downey, Oregon Juvenile Counselor:

    Damien indicates he did spend approximately 30 days in a psychiatric hospital via court order, because he was suicidal. He feel his prior depression has improved greatly. Denies use of non-prescribed, controlled substances or alcohol.

    Mrs. Echols indicates there are no family conflicts with Damien, that he gets along well with the family, that she does not believe he has a behavioral problem & that she does not need any services from this state.

    9/1/92. Officer Ortez is called to the Echols’ apartment in Oregon. Damien transported to St. Vincent’s Hospital.

    Emergency Room Report: The patient denies suicidal or homicidal idealization. However, in talking with family members, they state that he made it quite clear that he had thoughts of harming other people, i.e. was going to cut mother’s throat, and also made verbal threats to his father here at St. Vincent’s.

    Parents state that he has sniffed propane, glue, gasoline and almost any other drug that is possible. Parental concerns regarding satanism, devil worship.

    Admission diagnosis: Suicidal/homicidal idealization.

    9/4/92. Discharged from St. Vincent’s. Because of Damien’s threats, both parents do not feel that they wish to have him return to their home. They are frightened of him and what he can do, not only to them but to the other children who reside in the home (2 others). Damien is to return to Arkansas by bus.

    9/14/92 to 9/28/92. Readmitted to Charter Hospital from Juvenile Detention Center. He admitted to sucking the blood out of a peer’s neck while in the Center. The other peers were afraid of him. Threats to kill both parents (slash throats, eat alive).

    Presenting problem: Homicidal and psychosis. Alteration in thought processes evidenced by delusional thinking and inappropriate social behavior.

    Progress notes: Belief in devil worship, has agreed to threatening to “kill” others. Bizarre behaviors. Stated he had attempted suicide before and “wasn’t worried about trying again, because I know I can come back.”

    Says he’s going to eat father and that he needs to be locked up or he will hurt someone.

    Peers complaining of Damien making growling sounds at them.

    Continues talk of satanism. Possible deprogramming needed. Could be a danger to others.

    Continues laughing strangely and getting peers to feed into his satanism. Tries to keep staff from seeing him do anything other than what’s appropriate according to unit guidelines. Depressed mood, bizarre behavior.

    Said he was “happy to be here because otherwise he’d be in jail and this has to be better.”

    Spoke with Jerry Driver re: Damien’s discharge to stepfather Jack Echols. Said this was “o.k.”.

    Diagnosis: Psychotic Disorder NOS and Dysthymia. Prognosis: Poor.

    1/5/93. Mental Health Center reopens case: Reports self-mutilation, cutting self with knives. Will “trance out” since 5th grade – doesn’t have to deal with what’s going on. Says he thinks a lot about life after death–”I want to go where the monsters go.” He admits being caught with satanic items, but denies cult involvement.

    Is interested in witchcraft for the past 8 years. He has tried to steal energy from someone else and influence others’ minds with witchcraft. Describes self as “pretty much hates the human race.” Relates that he feels people are in two classes–sheep and wolves (wolves eat the sheep).

    1/13/93: Damien reports that he’s very angry with family members and with other people who have “let him down”. He discussed issues of power & control. He states that he could make things happen. Affect and mood was flat.

    1/19/93: Reveals history of abuse as he talked of how he was treated as a child. States, “I just put it all inside.” Describes this as more than just anger – like rage. Sometimes he does “blow up.” Relates that when this happens, the only solution is to “hurt someone.” When questioned on his feelings he states, “I know I’m going to influence the world. People will remember me.”

    1/20/93: Damien is an 18 year old, recently discharged from Charter Hospital. He’s had three psychiatric hospitalizations. Each has been associated with anger, thoughts of killing others, and thoughts of killing himself.

    1/25/93: Speaks of rituals, drinking blood, more involved in demonology. Damien explained that he obtains his power by drinking blood of others. He typically drinks the blood of a sexual partner or of a ruling partner. This is achieved by biting or cutting. He states, “It makes me feel like a god.”

    Damien describes drinking blood as giving him more power and strength. He remembers doing this as far back as age 10. He wants very much to be all powerful. He wants very much to be in total control.

    Damien relates that a spirit is now living with him. The spirit was put inside him last year. He indicates that a month ago, the spirit decided to become part of him and he to become part of the spirit. This is reportedly a spirit of a woman who was killed by her husband. In addition, he also reports conversations with demons and other spirits. This is achieved through rituals.

    He denies that he’s satanic, seeing himself more as being involved in demonology.

    Affect and mood today continued to be bland, although there was more emotion when talking about drinking blood.

    2/5/93: Damien is noted to have cuts on his right arm and hand. Related that he cut himself as a way of permanently marking his skin. Related feeling very angry yesterday when running into previous girlfriend. “I controlled it – I can do anything.”

    5/5/93: At times he is impulsive and does things that may be harmful to him. He has impulses to do strange and harmful things.

    5/5/93: Christopher Byers, Steve Branch, and Michael Moore are murdered.

  22. I read callahans for days because I was on the fence with this case and it confused me for so long – I am convinced the WM3 are guilty as charged, tried, convicted, and plead. The ridiculous attempts to blame Terry Hobbs make me SICK … I think blaming an innocent parent / victim is beyond the pale for Damien and his ‘supporters’. I also just read through his Twitter account and can see he’s still trapped in an early 90’s teenage mentality which is a little pathetic – I would have thought jail would have given him a chance to educate himself beyond the basics. I think his so called intelligence is vastly exaggerated … if he committed this crime all the meditation in the world will not stop him for acting out again in the future so I believe time will tell. There is something truly sickening about Damien Echols … Oh and Salem? Really? Could you be any more of a cookie cutter goth?

    1. Well, genius, people blame the “innocent parent” because there is incriminating physical evidence against him and NONE against that “sickening” Damien Echols. I think your opinion of yourself is vastly exaggerated…

      1. Brit, I always find it fascinating (and darkly comical) to hear die-hards like yourself rationalize Misskelley’s SEVEN (at least) documented confessions. So entertain us, let’s hear your rationalization for his multitudinous confessions.

      2. “NONE against that “sickening” Damien Echols.”

        Wow, all caps. Well then it must be true….

        Actually, there is a lot.

        And I understand the arguments against Hobbs. The first few posts are a good summary of them in this old thread.$d

        Frankly Hobbs gets nailed. In a vacuum, it’s pretty close to 50/50 who did it, and neither the WM3 or Hobbs could be convicted beyond a reasonable doubt.

        But the counter arguments against Hobbs being the perpetrator are when the case against him falls apart. I have not heard any reasonable counter arguments on the case against the WM3. Surprisingly enough, calling the jury stupid “hillbillies” is not convincing.

        The evidence against the WM3 has been presented in court. WM3 supporters have tried then, and continue to fail to counter the evidence. Instead they make personal insults, summarily ignore the evidence, and last but not least, present a red herring step-Dad suspect (pick a step-Dad here) This “new” evidence against Hobbs has never been presented in court, and considering the WM3 chose guilty instead of presenting their “new” evidence in court…it should make reasonable people very skeptical it was as solid as they claim.

        Mark Byers (Did you watch PL2? No credibility is an understatement.)
        Pam Hobbs (Drug addict who wants to get back together with Terry Hobbs (check Hobbs website with recent pics). Why would any sane person want to get back together with someone if she even had an inklng of suspicion he killed her son. She changes her mind every other month, but she take WM3 supporter money though. It’s actually pretty sad. )
        Millions of dollars + shady Private Investigator = new witnesses 17 years later.
        1) How much money did they get.
        2) Let them be cross examined.
        3) To some extent, I can understand Jamie Ballard and her sister not understanding the importance of going forward with information on the boys during the search while they were lost and the subsequent murder investigation.
        But No, not their mother. She also said she saw them playing in a dangerous area, but didn’t come forward when they were lost?
        They would be destroyed during cross examine.

        Well at least you have easily transferable DNA on mixed shoelaces, and a shaky timeline by Terry Hobbs between 6:30 and 8pm.
        The evidence against the WM3 dwarf Terry Hobbs.

  23. Lorri makes me sick!! Talk about a golddigger!! I would love to ask her how come your bastard husband FAILED a polygraph in 1993 and refused to take a polygraph in the early 2000’s. Echols always lies, its crazy how he fooled a lot people in believing he’s innocent. He’ll pay in the next life!!

  24. 20 Years ago tonight on May 5th, 1993 in West Memphis, Arkansas as the sun set and the moon rose, Christopher Byers (8), Michael Moore (8) and Steve Branch (8) were beaten, tortured and subsequently killed by Damien Wayne Echols, Charles Jason Baldwin and Jesse Lloyd Misskelley, Jr. The three spent 18 years in jail and now walk freely under the auspices of an Alford Plea. All three remain on probation until 2021.

  25. I grew up in West Memphis. Though Gitchell was never one of my favorites, I knew the man for over a decade by 1971 and he was always above reproach. As a kid, he always wanted to do the right thing. Fogleman was even more of a stickler. I’ll never forget an incident in undergraduate school when he left a party because a group of KAs were hurling racists insults at black students.

    Since 1996, I have never ever doubted for one moment that Echols et al weren’t guilty. To believe any differently would demand the suspension of critical thinking. Echols did it and he knows he did it. This ruse of blaming step parents is completely inept.

  26. To all:

    Today is the first day of a Kickstarter campaign intended to raise money for post-production costs related to my documentary about the West Memphis Three. You can obtain more information here:

    The film is currently in post-production. As 150 minutes of material has already been compiled, all that is needed are some additional funds to complete the project. Please help if you are able.
    If I can surpass the amount I’m looking for, I’d like to add an additional disc to the DVD case with visual information on the following provisional topics:

    Mara Leveritt and the Devil’s Knot: Grinding A Dull Axe;
    The Defense Rests: Obfuscation and Omissions in all Defense arguments;
    Fools on Parade: Hollywood and journalistic dupes, etc.

    I also just completed a small article about a data point many researchers have missed—the pentagram tattoo on the chest of Damien Echols. See here:

    Thank you!!

  27. Until YOU have been accused of a crime and sent to jail then to trial. You have no idea how messed up “Justice Theater” in our country is. Your fate is being decided by 12 people too stupid to get out of jury duty. Lawyers don’t give a damn what the outcome is because they get paid in full up front. I have been through the judicial system in the military, America’s and a trial in Europe and I can tell you the American legal system is the laughing stock of the world. It ranks right down there with China and the Middle Eastern countries. Ever wonder why we, America, incarcerates more people that the rest of the planet? Get on a cop’s bad side and you too may experience what I have.

  28. Bottum line, look at Vice show…do you know about body language? Arms crossed by Damien…(defensive move…keeps out others getting inside of him)…dark glasses…protects him when lying…why does he not hold wife’s hand?…he is not really there… why move to Salem and follow such an awful career path…????why why why..
    ( I think from what I see and feel….he is guilty…and one or all will fall into crime again
    i.e. book in the Belly of the Beast …
    P.S. my wife was a juror in a trial…man convicted 2nd time for a separate murder after
    first imprisonment!

    1. “Bottum line, look at Vice show…do you know about body language? Arms crossed by Damien…(defensive move…keeps out others getting inside of him)…dark glasses…protects him when lying…why does he not hold wife’s hand”

      WOW frank you’ve solved the case!!! Nothing you say even makes sense. And it’s utter bullshit saying why moving to Salem. And as for your wife WTF had that gotta do with anything????? Frank get a grip

  29. These boys did not kill the three eight year old boys. There is no way they could. There is no way three teenage boys could do that sick person did to those boys, and leave no evidence. There was DNA of Stevie Branch’s stepfather, Terry Hobbs, on the children. Why would you still think that Echols, Baldwin, and Misskelly did these things to these young boys? They were just children themselves when all this happened. Have you done your research? If they would have killed these boys then all three of them (Echols, Baldwin, and Misskelly) would still be in jail. But they aren’t. They have been out for many years because of the DNA found on the body. No one has came right out and said that Terry Hobbs is the one who killed the three boys, but he is. I will believe he did it until the day I die.

    1. Ashley forgive me, but you are an imbecile. There was no DNA found belonging to Hobbs; only DNA that may or not been his or MILLIONS of other people. Even if a hair belonging to Hobbs was found, it is most likely secondary transfer. They are out of jail for one reason and one reason only: money. Big money the kind that Hollywood generates. Being the nice guy that I am, I am only going to charge you $25 to take my patented gullibility test that I normally charge $35. You should do quiet well on the exam.

  30. I would assume those of you who believe these guys are guilty are at least two of these:
    A) Republican (or conservative)
    C)Practices some form of Christanity

    I’ve read almost everything there is to read about this case. Biases are hard to put aside. I get it. But most of you sound, although you claim to not be, very biased and judgmental. It shows in your name calling and your overly zealous attempts at quieting others who possess an opinion other than yours. That was point in listing the descriptions above. It’s easy to jump to conclusions. Maybe you aren’t any of these things. But they were the first things that came into my head. See how that works?

    1. Well Nicole I am not A nor C & I spend a lot of time with people in the Rock n Roll business. I attend the NAMM Conference every year which is pretty much 100,000 people dressed in black, covered in tattoos, long hair & leather. I initially thought their incarceration was a travesty of justice after watching the first two PL movies. After the abrupt changes & a few other things that didn’t sit right with me I decided to read every documented piece of evidence related to this case. I’m sorry but Damien’s Psychiatric problems must be taken into account as well. There’s so much stuff that gets suppressed in trials due to legal precedence but even with all of the suppression they were found guilty & in my opinion rightly so.

    2. Wrong. I actually own Crowley books, write fictional horror that makes this story look like Disney, have an obsession with dark twisted stuff and celebrate Halloween 24/7. Also thought these guys were innocent for over 10 years, then I had the courage to go beyond Paradise Lost and read the entire case. They definitely did it, but whatever you say.

  31. Other than him having mental issues and quite possibly even being a psychopath, what says he killed these kids? Alibi or not, where is the evidence that links him?? He’s acting odd because he was in prison, in solitary, for more than half his life by the time he got out. From what I’ve read about him he has had major issues but I’m not really prepared to say he’s a killer.

  32. the more I have seen, watched and read I am convinced they are all innocent. I do however not trust Damien as far as I could throw him. Jesse no longer speaks to him. He makes hundreds of thousands a year and gives nothing to Jesse jr. Jesse is on 500 dollars a month and wont leave the house. Damien is best friends with Johnny depp and all the celebrities while poor jessie has not been supported by one of them. Jason is a lovely guy and I was privileged to meet him because he did not CHARGE money for me to see him. Damien charges between 85-250 dollars for book signings or a class on his wonderful bullshit magic and he DOES read and favorite Alistair Crowley. He may not have killed those boys but he is Narcissistic. He was on death row for 18yrs yes but Holocaust survivors or Japanese POWs had it FAR worse and do not go around charging fools money for sessions and healing or a photo with him. What makes him such an expert in Reiki and magick as he calls it anyway?

  33. I grew up in West Memphis. I played at Robin Hood Hills and knew many of the primary players in this case. I completed my undergrad work in chemistry at ASU-Jonesboro where the trial was held. I know as much about this case as any lay person could. I could regurgitate stats and data and quote callahan8k with the best of them and and to boot. That being said, I believe whole heartedly that Echols et al killed the kids and what’s more, he knows he did it. Of course, I also believe that Lee Harvey Oswald killed President John F Kennedy and DPD Officer J D Tipett as all 58 major evidential proofs confirmed. Knowing what I know, to think Echols is innocent is to abandon many levels of critical thinking. Was it proved in court? Now that’s another matter. What have I learned? ….That I should charge supporters $25 to take my patented gullibility test and make some serious money.

  34. They were released on a technicality. They will forever be known as the guilty in the wrongful deaths of Chris Byers, Stevie Branch and Mike Moore. Anything else rests on the responsibility of the WM3.

  35. my two cents. Saw all but the last doc. Like the others say go to While like others I was swayed to see this as a witch hunt when i read the Miskelley confessions I was struck at the correlation to specific details. The unusual stick, the semen on the clothing, the cub scout separated from the others, the washed down bank…. these crime scene details could ONLY have been known to one who was there. Those were my personal irrefutables. Then, of course there is a ton of other evidence…..that points to their guilt.

Leave a Reply

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