Defense: New evidence may clear 'West Memphis Three'
'...Defense attorneys for death row inmate Damien Echols say they have uncovered forensic evidence that could spare their client's life and help clear his co-defendants as well...
In court papers filed last week, attorneys for Echols stated that -- even with DNA testing unavailable in 1993 -- they have uncovered no forensic evidence tying the three to the murders of Christopher Byers, Steven Branch and James Michael Moore. But DNA that might belong to two other men was found in hairs found at the crime scene, the documents state...
In their court papers, Echols' defense team pointed out that there is no physical evidence linking the three men convicted to the three boys slain. No hairs, no fibers, and not a shred of DNA.
"We are saying is that there's no credible evidence that links any of these defendants to the crime," said Dennis Riordan, San Francisco-based defense attorney.
Riordan said a team of seven forensic scientists has reviewed the autopsy results, photographs and trial testimony. As part of a 200-plus page filing, the experts concluded there was no evidence of sexual abuse or any type of satanic killing.
They also found that the injuries on the bodies of the boys -- which prosecutors called mutilation -- actually were caused by animals after the boys were killed.
Echols' lawyers maintained that it's not their job to solve the crime, only to show that their client wasn't involved. But the defense team said two hairs found at the crime scene could belong to one of the victim's stepfathers and the man's friend.
"The new DNA evidence is that one hair that was found in the ligature of the shoelaces that bound Michael Moore is consistent with the DNA of Terry Hobbs, who is the father of Stevie Branch," Lax told CNN.
He continued: "Another hair that had been found at the crime scene, which had been unidentified for all these years, has just recently been tested. And the DNA on that hair is consistent with the DNA of David Jacoby. David Jacoby is a good friend or was a good friend of Terry Hobbs, and Terry Hobbs was at his house just that afternoon and evening."
'...In September 2008, Judge David Burnett (Circuit Court) denied Echols' application for a hearing on the new DNA evidence. Hearings for Baldwin and Misskelley are scheduled to continue in August, 2009.
In May, 2008, an affidavit was provided to the defense attorneys by Lloyd Warford, a former prosecutor and head of the Arkansas Department of Human Services. In the affidavit, Warford states that during the trial of Echols and Baldwin, he was contacted by Kent Arnold, the jury foreman, who indicated he had begun the trial with a strong prejudgment as to the guilt of the defendants, that the State "had presented a weak circumstantial case" and that "it would be up to him to obtain a conviction."[cite this quote] Arnold then stated that he intended to ensure the other jurors of a statement made by defendant Misskelley, which was inadmissible in the Echols Baldwin trial. In April, 2009, the Arkansas Supreme Court agreed to hear argument concerning the juror misconduct issue, which legal observers indicate will probably result in the vacating of the Echols Baldwin convictions.[2]
Echols' next stage in the legal process is an appeal to the Arkansas Supreme Court. Unless that court reverses the conviction, he will proceed to federal court on his pending writ of habeas corpus...'
Shit, if Ed can tell a person's soul/guilt after 5 hours, why do we have a justice system? We could just have Ed sit down with suspects for 5 hours and tell us if he thinks they're guilty and not bother with trials ever!
There are a lot of problems with the WM3 case and they may or may not be guilty, but regardless the "Ed thinks he's too nice to be guilty" argument is incredibly stupid.
Because reading my above post would clearly lead one to believe that Ed simply decided on a whim to go and sit down with Damien Echols for 5 hours and then proclaim his innocence, right?
The "Ed thinks he's too nice to be guilty" argument may be incredibly stupid, but then nobody here remotely suggested that. That's just your usual tactic of twisting what people say in order to get your point across - though I've no idea what your point is.
Then I suppose I don't know what your point is either. What has Ed's opinion on the WM3 got to do with anything?
Nope. Manson was innocent, and Bugliosi admitted Manson was innocent in his book.
I suppose you're of the opinion that Manson was a devil worshiper who brainwashed his 'followers' into killing for him?
Anyway, back to topic . Start another thread if you like.
No, I'm of the opinion that he's a charismatic paranoid schizophrenic that conspired with his groupies to commit murder for bizarre pseudo-social/political reasons, but was smart enough to not do any of the killing directly.
No, I'm of the opinion that he's a charismatic paranoid schizophrenic that conspired with his groupies to commit murder for bizarre pseudo-social/political reasons, but was smart enough to not do any of the killing directly.
And you base this opinion on what exactly?
I've read Bugliosi's book. I've also read the book 'Manson in his own words'.
Anyway, this isn't the place for this discussion. Start another thread if you're interested in this subject.,
No, I'm of the opinion that he's a charismatic paranoid schizophrenic that conspired with his groupies to commit murder for bizarre pseudo-social/political reasons, but was smart enough to not do any of the killing directly.
And you base this opinion on what exactly?
I've read Bugliosi's book. I've also read the book 'Manson in his own words'.
Anyway, this isn't the place for this discussion. Start another thread if you're interested in this subject.,
Couple of documentaries and interview footage I've seen featuring Charlie Manson himself. If you think that guy is not mentally disturbed... well, it would explain a lot I guess. But I'm not that interested in the subject, so I guess I'll leave it at that.
Couple of documentaries and interview footage I've seen featuring Charlie Manson himself. If you think that guy is not mentally disturbed... well, it would explain a lot I guess. But I'm not that interested in the subject, so I guess I'll leave it at that.
He enjoys playing the fool and the 'psycho' for his own amusement because he knows that the U.S public lap it up - which may also explain why these wacky videos are such a hit. Anyway...
Then I suppose I don't know what your point is either. What has Ed's opinion on the WM3 got to do with anything?
This is a Pearl Jam fans message board.
I'm not following. This is a political forum, supposedly for reasoned debate. "Ed thinks they're innocent" is not a good reason to believe they are.
Maybe not, but if you have any respect for the man then his involvement in this case and his belief in these boys innocence should at least be reason enough to make you look at the details of the case - and maybe contribute to this thread topic in some way. Or maybe, like the Manson case, you're really just not that interested?
I'm not following. This is a political forum, supposedly for reasoned debate. "Ed thinks they're innocent" is not a good reason to believe they are.
Maybe not, but if you have any respect for the man then his involvement in this case and his belief in these boys innocence should at least be reason enough to make you look at the details of the case - and maybe contribute to this thread topic in some way. Or maybe, like the Manson case, you're really just not that interested?
I'm always interested in miscarriages of justice. But not because Ed Vedder says so. All I'm saying is that your response to speedy about Ed thinking he's innocent was a lame fanboy kind of response. There is plenty of evidence that justice wasn't done in this case. Ed's involvement is not.
As to Manson, I'm not interested. There was no miscarriage of justice there. And I don't much feel like debating it with someone who is so far gone that he thinks the guy that carved a swastika into his forehead is a rational victim of some vast conspiracy to convict him for... no apparent reason. Don't tell me he's playing it up for cameras. I have a schizophrenic uncle and when he wasn't taking medication, he spoke in the exact same manner as Manson. You don't fake that.
Eddie must be a really bad judge of character. He spent 5 hours with him a week ago and regards him as a fine individual, and is convinced of his innocence. Maybe he should have consulted you first.
eddie is also switched on enough to realise, that he is brilliant and talented musician and not the messiah. not all of his fans are disciples and go along with whatever eddie believes in. speedy should be allowed to speak freely and have his opinions heard without the 'eddie vedder fan boy card' pulled on him.
O.k, I'll pretend to play your game...Eddie Vedder - aka 'The Messiah' - decided on a whim to jump on the Memphis 3 case in order to appear to be cool, or something - and so last week he just happened to be in the area and so decided to pop in and spend 5 hours with Damien Echols. After this meeting Ed is now convinced of Damien Echol's innocence. Therefore, what we can all assume is that Ed Vedder is an asshole who never carries out any detailed prior research into issues such as those involving the murder of 3 youths. He simply jumps unthinkingly into these cases/causes in order to appear to be right-on, and to gain the favour of lefties and wackjobs.
Thanks to Soulsinging and TriumphantAngel for putting me in my place, and showing me the light.
Byrnzie c'mon now, you know me better than that. i never said any of the above things about eddie, nor do i believe them, so please stop putting words in my mouth.
if that is not sick and disgusting i don't know what is.
How many kids threaten to kill their parents at some point? If every kid that ever threatened to kill his/her parents were incarcerated we could close down all the schools and playgrounds today.
Anyway, concerning Echols, I'm not sure that suffering from depression qualifies someone to be described as sick and disgusting, but then what do I know?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Memphis_3 '...He was diagnosed as depressed and suicidal, and was prescribed the antidepressant imipramine. Subsequent testing demonstrated poor math skills, but also showed that Echols ranked above average in reading and verbal skills.
Echols spent several months in a mental institution in Arkansas, and afterwards received "full disability" status from the Social Security Administration.[4] During Echols' trial, Dr. George W. Woods testified (for the defense) that Echols suffered from:
"... serious mental illness characterized by grandiose and persecutory delusions, auditory and visual hallucinations, disordered thought processes, substantial lack of insight, and chronic, incapacitating mood swings."...'
As to Manson, I'm not interested. There was no miscarriage of justice there.
You're not interested, and yet at the same time you're convinced there was no miscarriage of justice. Perhaps watching a wacky video is enough to make someone an expert.
And I don't much feel like debating it with someone who is so far gone that he thinks the guy that carved a swastika into his forehead is a rational victim of some vast conspiracy to convict him for... no apparent reason.
That's it Soulsinging, keep slinging those cheap shots into the mix - I'm too far gone now am I? At what point did I say that Manson was the victim of some vast conspiracy? Please remind me where I said that, or are you continuing to put words in my mouth? I said he was the victim of media sensationalism and the unscrupulous efforts of a devious lawyer by the name of Bugliosi.
But then you've watched a wacky video of Manson hamming it up and so you know all about it.
Don't tell me he's playing it up for cameras. I have a schizophrenic uncle and when he wasn't taking medication, he spoke in the exact same manner as Manson. You don't fake that.
I'll tell you anything I like. And the behaviour of your uncle proves nothing. You're a lawyer not a psychologist.
If you think Manson is schizophrenic then where's the scientific evaluation that he's schizophrenic?
Candice Delong Is a retired FBI agent who spent 20 years profiling serial killers in various cities, including San Francisco, California, and Chicago, Illinois. She interviewed Manson and concluded that he wasn't mentally ill.
How many kids threaten to kill their parents at some point? If every kid that ever threatened to kill his/her parents were incarcerated we could close down all the schools and playgrounds today.
Anyway, concerning Echols, I'm not sure that suffering from depression qualifies someone to be described as sick and disgusting, but then what do I know?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Memphis_3 '...He was diagnosed as depressed and suicidal, and was prescribed the antidepressant imipramine. Subsequent testing demonstrated poor math skills, but also showed that Echols ranked above average in reading and verbal skills.
Echols spent several months in a mental institution in Arkansas, and afterwards received "full disability" status from the Social Security Administration.[4] During Echols' trial, Dr. George W. Woods testified (for the defense) that Echols suffered from:
"... serious mental illness characterized by grandiose and persecutory delusions, auditory and visual hallucinations, disordered thought processes, substantial lack of insight, and chronic, incapacitating mood swings."...'
so a clinically depressed, suicidal, medicated individual's death threats
should simply be disregarded as meaningless?
O.k, so the consensus on the M.T at the moment is that:
1. Damien Echols is a sick piece of human garbage, because a. Someone says so, and b. because he threatened to kill his parents as a child whilst suffering from depression/mental illness.
2. Echols, along with his co-defendants, has been wrongfully convicted because a. there were numerous errors in the original conviction including coercion of witnesses, and there is absolutely no forensic evidence linking either Echols or his co-defendants to the murder scene, and b. because the evidence actually points to two other individuals known to the victims.
That's it Soulsinging, keep slinging those cheap shots into the mix - I'm too far gone now am I? At what point did I say that Manson was the victim of some vast conspiracy? Please remind me where I said that, or are you continuing to put words in my mouth?
You said he was innocent. That indicates some sort of conspiracy to make him a patsy/victim.
You will discover what a sick, disgusting, piece of human garbage that guy is.
irrelevant speedy. you have a guy sitting on death row, convicted of a crime he may not be guilty of. there's so much conflicting information surrounding the case, i just don't know. Have you read up on Misskelleys confession? That's the only 'evidence' they have, and it's full of inconsistencies that do not match crime scenes and victims injuries.
something is not right..
exactly.
it truly does NOT matter what his 'history'...what matters is facts and evidence. no matter what he may've done in his past, threats or not....the ONLY issue is - is he a murderer? there are many, many "sick, disgusting pieces of human garbage" out in the world, but that alone does not a murderer make.
What of Charles Manson??? That guy NEVER murdered anyone....right???
But that piece of shit is rotting in prison...right????
That's right, Manson didn't kill anyone. So why is he in jail? Something to do with a sensationalistic media and an upcoming, ambitious, crooked lawyer called Vincent Bugliosi.
That's it Soulsinging, keep slinging those cheap shots into the mix - I'm too far gone now am I? At what point did I say that Manson was the victim of some vast conspiracy? Please remind me where I said that, or are you continuing to put words in my mouth?
You said he was innocent. That indicates some sort of conspiracy to make him a patsy/victim.
Take a look at the details of his trial. It was a media show-trial. A complete farce and mis-carriage of justice by any standards. Even Wiki will tell you as much. You really shouldn't just rely on the National Enquirer or some wacky video to make up your mind for you.
That's it Soulsinging, keep slinging those cheap shots into the mix - I'm too far gone now am I? At what point did I say that Manson was the victim of some vast conspiracy? Please remind me where I said that, or are you continuing to put words in my mouth?
You said he was innocent. That indicates some sort of conspiracy to make him a patsy/victim.
Take a look at the details of his trial. It was a media show-trial. A complete farce and mis-carriage of justice by any standards. Even Wiki will tell you as much. You really shouldn't just rely on the National Enquirer or some wacky video to make up your mind for you.
Miscarriage of justice how? I read the Wiki entry and saw nothing indicating he was innocent. Yes, it was a media spectacle. Most big trials are (see OJ, Michael Jackson, the Menendez bros, etc). So what? The fact that it was a spectacle doesn't make it a miscarriage of justice. Are you saying he never had any role whatsoever in the Family and planning/encouraging the killings? He never personally stabbed anybody, but that doesn't make him not guilty.
Miscarriage of justice how? I read the Wiki entry and saw nothing indicating he was innocent. Yes, it was a media spectacle. Most big trials are (see OJ, Michael Jackson, the Menendez bros, etc). So what? The fact that it was a spectacle doesn't make it a miscarriage of justice. Are you saying he never had any role whatsoever in the Family and planning/encouraging the killings? He never personally stabbed anybody, but that doesn't make him not guilty.
I didn't say that it was a miscarriage of justice simply because of the media spectacle. You said that. I said it was a media spectacle and a miscarriage of justice. Of course he had a role in the family. He was a part of that group. But he didn't go out and kill anyone and he didn't even know about the first murders at Polanski's home until the following day. Did Manson encourage the killings? Not that I'm aware of. Nothing in anything I've read on this case suggests he encouraged the killings. He may have taken a passive attitude to the killings, but that's not the same as encouraging and planning them.
Why was Nixon not sent to death row for his planning/encouraging of the bombing of Cambodia and Laos?
Just some random facts plucked from Wiki. I don't have the Bugliosi book with me here in which he states, amongst other things, that he knew Manson was innocent but that he was determined to see him prosecuted regardless:
During the trial a Los Angeles Times front page carried the headline "Manson Guilty, Nixon Declares".
Manson was denied the court's permission to question a prosecution witness whom the defense attorneys had declined to cross-examine.
On November 16, the prosecution rested its case. Three days later, after arguing standard dismissal motions, the defense stunned the court by resting as well, without calling a single witness.
In chambers, the women's lawyers told the judge their clients wanted to testify that they had planned and committed the crimes and that Manson had not been involved.[120] By resting their case, the defense lawyers had tried to stop this
The next day, Manson testified; but...the jury was removed from the courtroom.[122]
As the body of the trial concluded and with the closing arguments impending, attorney Ronald Hughes disappeared during a weekend trip.[124] When Maxwell Keith was appointed to represent Van Houten in Hughes' absence, a delay of more than two weeks was required to permit Keith to familiarize himself with the voluminous trial transcripts
I suppose you'll now claim that all of the above are normal and acceptable codes of practice?
eddie is also switched on enough to realise, that he is brilliant and talented musician and not the messiah. not all of his fans are disciples and go along with whatever eddie believes in. speedy should be allowed to speak freely and have his opinions heard without the 'eddie vedder fan boy card' pulled on him.
One thing I have never really been able to figure out is the fascination that the "hollywood people" and certain "rockstars" have with "The West Memphis 3".
Damien Echols threatened to kill and eat his parents."Slash my parents throat and eat them alive"
Threatened to kill his girlfriends father. "Damien freely admitted he had plans to shoot his girlfriends father"
Damien Echols was put on probation for charges of breaking and entering and sexual misconduct.
There are plenty of other facts about Damien Echols that would make anyone cringe....right?
What I dont understand is, there are probably hundreds, hell, thousands of innocent people(and I am not saying Damien Echols is innocent) that are rotting in our prison system. Right? But why the fascination with Damien Echols? I just dont get it. He just doesnt seem like the type of human being that would get people all bent out of shape, because his is sitting in prison. I mean if most people have read the facts about Damien Echols, Im thinking a large majority wouldnt give a fuck that he is sitting in prison. Right?
Take me piece by piece..... Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
eddie is also switched on enough to realise, that he is brilliant and talented musician and not the messiah. not all of his fans are disciples and go along with whatever eddie believes in. speedy should be allowed to speak freely and have his opinions heard without the 'eddie vedder fan boy card' pulled on him.
One thing I have never really been able to figure out is the fascination that the "hollywood people" and certain "rockstars" have with "The West Memphis 3".
Damien Echols threatened to kill and eat his parents."Slash my parents throat and eat them alive"
Threatened to kill his girlfriends father. "Damien freely admitted he had plans to shoot his girlfriends father"
Damien Echols was put on probation for charges of breaking and entering and sexual misconduct.
There are plenty of other facts about Damien Echols that would make anyone cringe....right?
What I dont understand is, there are probably hundreds, hell, thousands of innocent people that are rotting in our prison system. Right? But why the fascination with Damien Echols? I just dont get it. He just doesnt seem like the type of human being that would get people all bent out of shape, because his is sitting in prison. I mean if most people have read the facts about Damien Echols, Im thinking a large majority wouldnt give a fuck that he is sitting in prison. Right?
Since when does making threats warrant a life behind bars?
Also, he had sex with his girlfriend, and was charged with second degree sexual misconduct. She was 15 and he was 17. Does this qualify him for a life behind bars?
Anyway, we should be talking about his conviction for the murder of 3 youths, not about the fact that he had sex with his girlfriend, or that he threatened his parents.
I also notice that a lot of people here are giving a lot of credence to Jivepuppy.com. Jivepuppy.com? Is this a serious webpage?
One thing I have never really been able to figure out is the fascination that the "hollywood people" and certain "rockstars" have with "The West Memphis 3"...What I dont understand is, there are probably hundreds, hell, thousands of innocent people that are rotting in our prison system. Right? But why the fascination with Damien Echols?
On this point I have to agree. I don't understand it either. I was hoping someone could shed some light on this case for me here. Like I said, I recently heard Vedder talking about this case and so wondered what the deal was. Personally, I can understand people getting passionate about the Leonard Peltier case, but I don't know too much about this one.
Since when does making threats warrant a life behind bars?
Also, he had sex with his girlfriend, and was charged with second degree sexual misconduct. She was 15, and by my calculations he was 18. Does this qualify him for a life behind bars?
Anyway, we should be talking about his conviction for the murder of 3 youths, not about the fact that he had sex with his girlfriend, or that he threatened his parents.
I also notice that a lot of people here are giving a lot of credence to Jivepuppy.com. Jivepuppy.com? Is this a serious webpage?
Lets say Damien Echols was released from prison tomorrow....
Do you feel Damien Echols should just be released from prison and put back in to society? Or do you think maybe Damien Echols should be held in some type of Facility were he can get treatment for his obvious mental issues?
Knowing the history of Damien Echols, before he was convicted of murder...
If Damien Echols were to be released from prison tomorrow .....what do you feel should happen to Damien Echols??
Take me piece by piece..... Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
Lets say Damien Echols was released from prison tomorrow....
Do you feel Damien Echols should just be released from prison and put back in to society? Or do you think maybe Damien Echols should be held in some type of Facility were he can get treatment for his obvious mental issues?
Knowing the history of Damien Echols, before he was convicted of murder...
If Damien Echols were to be released from prison tomorrow .....what do you feel should happen to Damien Echols??
I have no idea what his current mental state is so I'm not qualified to answer. Nothing that he did prior to his arrest for murder warrants him being put behind bars. I don't think that a 17 year old having consensual sex with his 15 year old girlfriend warrants jail time. But then maybe that's why he was charged with a second degree offense at the time.
But again, none of this has anything to do with the murder case.
And as far as the threats he made...such things should be dealt with - and it looks like they were dealt with - by a mental health institution, not by sticking him behind bars.
Ive read plenty of your posts over the years. I dont always agree with what you have to say.....but what i do admire is the fact that you say exactly what is on your mind and you dont seem to give a fuck what other people think of what you say......and i admire that.....Im sure a ton of people here dont care for my beliefs on certain subjects......but they also know that I am going to state my opinion regardless.....
anyway.....
I have a question for you.....You seem to me to be the type of person who has plenty of "personality" and has probably met and associated with hundreds of individuals over the years......am I right???
If you were to meet someone/anyone.... at work/school/ blah blah blah.......and you found out that person had the exact same criminal/mental history as Damien Echols.....
Wouldnt you just think to yourself..."I really dont want anything to do with this guy" "And i really dont need to associate myself with this guy"
Because that is exactly how I FEEL after I read the mental records and police records of Damien Echols....
He is someone that i just dont need to give a fuck about......
Take me piece by piece..... Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
Ive read plenty of your posts over the years. I dont always agree with what you have to say.....but what i do admire is the fact that you say exactly what is on your mind and you dont seem to give a fuck what other people think of what you say......and i admire that.....Im sure a ton of people here dont care for my beliefs on certain subjects......but they also know that I am going to state my opinion regardless.....
Thanks.
Though I also know I shouldn't keep coming across so aggressive here on the M.T.
I'm working on it - It's a work in progress. :oops:
I have a question for you.....You seem to me to be the type of person who has plenty of "personality" and has probably met and associated with hundreds of individuals over the years......am I right???
If you were to meet someone/anyone.... at work/school/ blah blah blah.......and you found out that person had the exact same criminal/mental history as Damien Echols.....
Wouldnt you just think to yourself..."I really dont want anything to do with this guy" "And i really dont need to associate myself with this guy"
Because that is exactly how I FEEL after I read the mental records and police records of Damien Echols....
He is someone that i just dont need to give a fuck about......
I'll answer your question as honestly as I can.
One thing that I've learned over the years is never make assumptions about people based on the opinions of others. The fact is, I've never met Damien Echols. I have no idea what sort of person he is. If, after meeting him, I found out about his criminal/mental record prior to the murder case my initial reaction would probably be the same as anyone else's, i.e, "fuck!" But, at the same time, how institutions label, classify, and judge people doesn't mean too much to me either. Maybe I'd meet him and we'd hit it off. Or maybe I'd meet him and think 'What a dick!"
So...It's impossible to say. I suppose I like to think that there's some good in everyone - even Jlew :P
I think It's also worth remembering that all of this shit happened almost 20 years ago. He was 17 at the time. The sun wasn't exactly shining out of my ass at age 17 either.
One final thought before I put my dumbass to bed....
I have met plenty of people on this board...their families...their children...their loved ones....blah blah blah....
If those same people found out that SPEEDY MCCREADY as a teenager, threatened to kill and eat his parents...threatened to kill and eat his girlfriends parents.....had a criminal record for sexual misconduct....and was then CONVICTED OF MURDER.....
I have a feeling NOT ONE of those people i have met on this board.....would be banning together with others to "FREE SPEEDY"....
as a matter of fact Im pretty sure all those people would try to get as far the fuck away from me as possible....
and im DAMNED SURE they wouldnt be sending any money for my defense......
Take me piece by piece..... Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
Comments
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/US/law/11/0 ... index.html
November 8, 2007
Defense: New evidence may clear 'West Memphis Three'
'...Defense attorneys for death row inmate Damien Echols say they have uncovered forensic evidence that could spare their client's life and help clear his co-defendants as well...
In court papers filed last week, attorneys for Echols stated that -- even with DNA testing unavailable in 1993 -- they have uncovered no forensic evidence tying the three to the murders of Christopher Byers, Steven Branch and James Michael Moore. But DNA that might belong to two other men was found in hairs found at the crime scene, the documents state...
In their court papers, Echols' defense team pointed out that there is no physical evidence linking the three men convicted to the three boys slain. No hairs, no fibers, and not a shred of DNA.
"We are saying is that there's no credible evidence that links any of these defendants to the crime," said Dennis Riordan, San Francisco-based defense attorney.
Riordan said a team of seven forensic scientists has reviewed the autopsy results, photographs and trial testimony. As part of a 200-plus page filing, the experts concluded there was no evidence of sexual abuse or any type of satanic killing.
They also found that the injuries on the bodies of the boys -- which prosecutors called mutilation -- actually were caused by animals after the boys were killed.
Echols' lawyers maintained that it's not their job to solve the crime, only to show that their client wasn't involved. But the defense team said two hairs found at the crime scene could belong to one of the victim's stepfathers and the man's friend.
"The new DNA evidence is that one hair that was found in the ligature of the shoelaces that bound Michael Moore is consistent with the DNA of Terry Hobbs, who is the father of Stevie Branch," Lax told CNN.
He continued: "Another hair that had been found at the crime scene, which had been unidentified for all these years, has just recently been tested. And the DNA on that hair is consistent with the DNA of David Jacoby. David Jacoby is a good friend or was a good friend of Terry Hobbs, and Terry Hobbs was at his house just that afternoon and evening."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Memphis_3
'...In September 2008, Judge David Burnett (Circuit Court) denied Echols' application for a hearing on the new DNA evidence. Hearings for Baldwin and Misskelley are scheduled to continue in August, 2009.
In May, 2008, an affidavit was provided to the defense attorneys by Lloyd Warford, a former prosecutor and head of the Arkansas Department of Human Services. In the affidavit, Warford states that during the trial of Echols and Baldwin, he was contacted by Kent Arnold, the jury foreman, who indicated he had begun the trial with a strong prejudgment as to the guilt of the defendants, that the State "had presented a weak circumstantial case" and that "it would be up to him to obtain a conviction."[cite this quote] Arnold then stated that he intended to ensure the other jurors of a statement made by defendant Misskelley, which was inadmissible in the Echols Baldwin trial. In April, 2009, the Arkansas Supreme Court agreed to hear argument concerning the juror misconduct issue, which legal observers indicate will probably result in the vacating of the Echols Baldwin convictions.[2]
Echols' next stage in the legal process is an appeal to the Arkansas Supreme Court. Unless that court reverses the conviction, he will proceed to federal court on his pending writ of habeas corpus...'
Then I suppose I don't know what your point is either. What has Ed's opinion on the WM3 got to do with anything?
No, I'm of the opinion that he's a charismatic paranoid schizophrenic that conspired with his groupies to commit murder for bizarre pseudo-social/political reasons, but was smart enough to not do any of the killing directly.
This is a Pearl Jam fans message board.
And you base this opinion on what exactly?
I've read Bugliosi's book. I've also read the book 'Manson in his own words'.
Anyway, this isn't the place for this discussion. Start another thread if you're interested in this subject.,
I'm not following. This is a political forum, supposedly for reasoned debate. "Ed thinks they're innocent" is not a good reason to believe they are.
Couple of documentaries and interview footage I've seen featuring Charlie Manson himself. If you think that guy is not mentally disturbed... well, it would explain a lot I guess. But I'm not that interested in the subject, so I guess I'll leave it at that.
He enjoys playing the fool and the 'psycho' for his own amusement because he knows that the U.S public lap it up - which may also explain why these wacky videos are such a hit. Anyway...
Maybe not, but if you have any respect for the man then his involvement in this case and his belief in these boys innocence should at least be reason enough to make you look at the details of the case - and maybe contribute to this thread topic in some way. Or maybe, like the Manson case, you're really just not that interested?
I'm always interested in miscarriages of justice. But not because Ed Vedder says so. All I'm saying is that your response to speedy about Ed thinking he's innocent was a lame fanboy kind of response. There is plenty of evidence that justice wasn't done in this case. Ed's involvement is not.
As to Manson, I'm not interested. There was no miscarriage of justice there. And I don't much feel like debating it with someone who is so far gone that he thinks the guy that carved a swastika into his forehead is a rational victim of some vast conspiracy to convict him for... no apparent reason. Don't tell me he's playing it up for cameras. I have a schizophrenic uncle and when he wasn't taking medication, he spoke in the exact same manner as Manson. You don't fake that.
it is public record that as a teenager he threatened to kill and eat his girlfriend's parents.
http://www.jivepuppi.com/damien_echols_4.html
if that is not sick and disgusting i don't know what is.
How many kids threaten to kill their parents at some point? If every kid that ever threatened to kill his/her parents were incarcerated we could close down all the schools and playgrounds today.
Anyway, concerning Echols, I'm not sure that suffering from depression qualifies someone to be described as sick and disgusting, but then what do I know?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Memphis_3
'...He was diagnosed as depressed and suicidal, and was prescribed the antidepressant imipramine. Subsequent testing demonstrated poor math skills, but also showed that Echols ranked above average in reading and verbal skills.
Echols spent several months in a mental institution in Arkansas, and afterwards received "full disability" status from the Social Security Administration.[4] During Echols' trial, Dr. George W. Woods testified (for the defense) that Echols suffered from:
"... serious mental illness characterized by grandiose and persecutory delusions, auditory and visual hallucinations, disordered thought processes, substantial lack of insight, and chronic, incapacitating mood swings."...'
You're not interested, and yet at the same time you're convinced there was no miscarriage of justice. Perhaps watching a wacky video is enough to make someone an expert.
That's it Soulsinging, keep slinging those cheap shots into the mix - I'm too far gone now am I? At what point did I say that Manson was the victim of some vast conspiracy? Please remind me where I said that, or are you continuing to put words in my mouth? I said he was the victim of media sensationalism and the unscrupulous efforts of a devious lawyer by the name of Bugliosi.
But then you've watched a wacky video of Manson hamming it up and so you know all about it.
I'll tell you anything I like. And the behaviour of your uncle proves nothing. You're a lawyer not a psychologist.
If you think Manson is schizophrenic then where's the scientific evaluation that he's schizophrenic?
Candice Delong Is a retired FBI agent who spent 20 years profiling serial killers in various cities, including San Francisco, California, and Chicago, Illinois. She interviewed Manson and concluded that he wasn't mentally ill.
so a clinically depressed, suicidal, medicated individual's death threats
should simply be disregarded as meaningless?
i would certainly hope not.
Is that what I said? No.
They shouldn't be disregarded as meaningless, but neither should such an individual be labeled as a sick and disgusting piece of human garbage.
1. Damien Echols is a sick piece of human garbage, because a. Someone says so, and b. because he threatened to kill his parents as a child whilst suffering from depression/mental illness.
2. Echols, along with his co-defendants, has been wrongfully convicted because a. there were numerous errors in the original conviction including coercion of witnesses, and there is absolutely no forensic evidence linking either Echols or his co-defendants to the murder scene, and b. because the evidence actually points to two other individuals known to the victims.
You said he was innocent. That indicates some sort of conspiracy to make him a patsy/victim.
exactly.
it truly does NOT matter what his 'history'...what matters is facts and evidence. no matter what he may've done in his past, threats or not....the ONLY issue is - is he a murderer? there are many, many "sick, disgusting pieces of human garbage" out in the world, but that alone does not a murderer make.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
LOL unreal.
Take a look at the details of his trial. It was a media show-trial. A complete farce and mis-carriage of justice by any standards. Even Wiki will tell you as much. You really shouldn't just rely on the National Enquirer or some wacky video to make up your mind for you.
Miscarriage of justice how? I read the Wiki entry and saw nothing indicating he was innocent. Yes, it was a media spectacle. Most big trials are (see OJ, Michael Jackson, the Menendez bros, etc). So what? The fact that it was a spectacle doesn't make it a miscarriage of justice. Are you saying he never had any role whatsoever in the Family and planning/encouraging the killings? He never personally stabbed anybody, but that doesn't make him not guilty.
I didn't say that it was a miscarriage of justice simply because of the media spectacle. You said that. I said it was a media spectacle and a miscarriage of justice. Of course he had a role in the family. He was a part of that group. But he didn't go out and kill anyone and he didn't even know about the first murders at Polanski's home until the following day. Did Manson encourage the killings? Not that I'm aware of. Nothing in anything I've read on this case suggests he encouraged the killings. He may have taken a passive attitude to the killings, but that's not the same as encouraging and planning them.
Why was Nixon not sent to death row for his planning/encouraging of the bombing of Cambodia and Laos?
Just some random facts plucked from Wiki. I don't have the Bugliosi book with me here in which he states, amongst other things, that he knew Manson was innocent but that he was determined to see him prosecuted regardless:
During the trial a Los Angeles Times front page carried the headline "Manson Guilty, Nixon Declares".
Manson was denied the court's permission to question a prosecution witness whom the defense attorneys had declined to cross-examine.
On November 16, the prosecution rested its case. Three days later, after arguing standard dismissal motions, the defense stunned the court by resting as well, without calling a single witness.
In chambers, the women's lawyers told the judge their clients wanted to testify that they had planned and committed the crimes and that Manson had not been involved.[120] By resting their case, the defense lawyers had tried to stop this
The next day, Manson testified; but...the jury was removed from the courtroom.[122]
As the body of the trial concluded and with the closing arguments impending, attorney Ronald Hughes disappeared during a weekend trip.[124] When Maxwell Keith was appointed to represent Van Houten in Hughes' absence, a delay of more than two weeks was required to permit Keith to familiarize himself with the voluminous trial transcripts
I suppose you'll now claim that all of the above are normal and acceptable codes of practice?
Damien Echols threatened to kill and eat his parents."Slash my parents throat and eat them alive"
Threatened to kill his girlfriends father. "Damien freely admitted he had plans to shoot his girlfriends father"
Damien Echols was put on probation for charges of breaking and entering and sexual misconduct.
There are plenty of other facts about Damien Echols that would make anyone cringe....right?
What I dont understand is, there are probably hundreds, hell, thousands of innocent people(and I am not saying Damien Echols is innocent) that are rotting in our prison system. Right? But why the fascination with Damien Echols? I just dont get it. He just doesnt seem like the type of human being that would get people all bent out of shape, because his is sitting in prison. I mean if most people have read the facts about Damien Echols, Im thinking a large majority wouldnt give a fuck that he is sitting in prison. Right?
Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
Since when does making threats warrant a life behind bars?
Also, he had sex with his girlfriend, and was charged with second degree sexual misconduct. She was 15 and he was 17. Does this qualify him for a life behind bars?
Anyway, we should be talking about his conviction for the murder of 3 youths, not about the fact that he had sex with his girlfriend, or that he threatened his parents.
I also notice that a lot of people here are giving a lot of credence to Jivepuppy.com. Jivepuppy.com? Is this a serious webpage?
On this point I have to agree. I don't understand it either. I was hoping someone could shed some light on this case for me here. Like I said, I recently heard Vedder talking about this case and so wondered what the deal was. Personally, I can understand people getting passionate about the Leonard Peltier case, but I don't know too much about this one.
Lets say Damien Echols was released from prison tomorrow....
Do you feel Damien Echols should just be released from prison and put back in to society? Or do you think maybe Damien Echols should be held in some type of Facility were he can get treatment for his obvious mental issues?
Knowing the history of Damien Echols, before he was convicted of murder...
If Damien Echols were to be released from prison tomorrow .....what do you feel should happen to Damien Echols??
Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
I have no idea what his current mental state is so I'm not qualified to answer. Nothing that he did prior to his arrest for murder warrants him being put behind bars. I don't think that a 17 year old having consensual sex with his 15 year old girlfriend warrants jail time. But then maybe that's why he was charged with a second degree offense at the time.
But again, none of this has anything to do with the murder case.
And as far as the threats he made...such things should be dealt with - and it looks like they were dealt with - by a mental health institution, not by sticking him behind bars.
Ive read plenty of your posts over the years. I dont always agree with what you have to say.....but what i do admire is the fact that you say exactly what is on your mind and you dont seem to give a fuck what other people think of what you say......and i admire that.....Im sure a ton of people here dont care for my beliefs on certain subjects......but they also know that I am going to state my opinion regardless.....
anyway.....
I have a question for you.....You seem to me to be the type of person who has plenty of "personality" and has probably met and associated with hundreds of individuals over the years......am I right???
If you were to meet someone/anyone.... at work/school/ blah blah blah.......and you found out that person had the exact same criminal/mental history as Damien Echols.....
Wouldnt you just think to yourself..."I really dont want anything to do with this guy" "And i really dont need to associate myself with this guy"
Because that is exactly how I FEEL after I read the mental records and police records of Damien Echols....
He is someone that i just dont need to give a fuck about......
Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
Thanks.
Though I also know I shouldn't keep coming across so aggressive here on the M.T.
I'm working on it - It's a work in progress. :oops:
I'll answer your question as honestly as I can.
One thing that I've learned over the years is never make assumptions about people based on the opinions of others. The fact is, I've never met Damien Echols. I have no idea what sort of person he is. If, after meeting him, I found out about his criminal/mental record prior to the murder case my initial reaction would probably be the same as anyone else's, i.e, "fuck!" But, at the same time, how institutions label, classify, and judge people doesn't mean too much to me either. Maybe I'd meet him and we'd hit it off. Or maybe I'd meet him and think 'What a dick!"
So...It's impossible to say. I suppose I like to think that there's some good in everyone - even Jlew :P
I think It's also worth remembering that all of this shit happened almost 20 years ago. He was 17 at the time. The sun wasn't exactly shining out of my ass at age 17 either.
I have met plenty of people on this board...their families...their children...their loved ones....blah blah blah....
If those same people found out that SPEEDY MCCREADY as a teenager, threatened to kill and eat his parents...threatened to kill and eat his girlfriends parents.....had a criminal record for sexual misconduct....and was then CONVICTED OF MURDER.....
I have a feeling NOT ONE of those people i have met on this board.....would be banning together with others to "FREE SPEEDY"....
as a matter of fact Im pretty sure all those people would try to get as far the fuck away from me as possible....
and im DAMNED SURE they wouldnt be sending any money for my defense......
Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....