It seems to me there is evidence enough to at least give them a new trial.
Hi!!
Yup, I've been reading the WM3 blog lately.... you would think so, but damn the corrupted system and the people involved in the beginning and STILL today.... I am still hopeful that they will finally grant them a new trial.
Better yet, I want them to throw the whole thing out because they didn't do it right in the first place.
And that is thanks to the people who are not giving up on them and still giving their time and energy in keeping up the fight!
JA: Why do I get the Ticketmaster question?
EV: It's your band.
~Q Magazine
"Kisses for the glow...kisses for the lease." - BDRII
WM3 judge says decision in case coming in 2010
Dec 28, 2009 at 9:26 AM
By George Jared
JONESBORO — Judge David Burnett will not decide before the end of the year
if two men convicted of the 1993 slayings of three West Memphis 8-year-olds
will get new trials.
A decision in the Rule 37 hearings for Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley
Jr. was expected by the end of the year, but Burnett said he’s given
attorneys until Jan. 15 to submit briefs. Burnett said he will rule shortly
after the briefs are submitted.
A controversial and ridiculed figure in the so-called “West Memphis Three”
saga, Burnett said he’s grown weary over the interest of the national and
international media in the case. He’s also remaining mum about his ultimate
decision.
“I can tell you one thing, I’m tired of this case,” the judge said.
The bodies of Christopher Byers, Michael Moore and Steven Branch were found
in a West Memphis ditch on May 6, 1993, one day after they were reported
missing.
A month later Misskelley, Baldwin and Damien Echols were arrested and
charged with capital murder. Prosecutors said the then-teens had occult
beliefs that led them to subdue the boys near the ditch.
Misskelley confessed to police, and he confessed several more times after
being convicted in 1994. Since then he has recanted those statements —
Misskelley, who has an I.Q. of 72, said that police coerced him. Each of the
confessions offered slightly different, sometimes competing versions of what
happened to the victims, according to court documents.
During Misskelley’s trial and the subsequent Baldwin-Echols trial, Burnett
allowed documentary filmmakers to record the proceedings. In 1996 the
documentary “Paradise Lost” was released by HBO, bringing international
attention to the case.
Burnett said he erred in allowing the filmmakers into the courtroom — “the
producers of the film were very one-sided, and it was a mistake,” the judge
said.
The filmmakers argued that many of the things Misskelley described in his
confessions — the time of the murders, the victims being choked and how they
were bound — proved to be false. Misskelley also stated that two of the boys
were sodomized, but the state medical examiner was unable to find any
evidence of it. A slew of defense forensic pathologists affirmed that when
they testified at the recent hearings.
Misskelley’s confession was the key evidence in a case where little forensic
evidence was found.
The judge has been vilified for the convictions and for not granting Echols
a new trial after his Rule 37 hearing in 1999.
Judge’s response
Burnett pointed out that despite the intense criticism of how the case was
handled, the Arkansas Supreme Court has affirmed every decision he’s made in
the trials.
“I’m not ashamed of any ruling I made in the 27 years I sat on the bench,”
he said.
The judge also said that the defense’s evidence in the 1999 hearings
ultimately proved false. The defense argued that human bite marks were on
the faces of the victims that didn’t match teeth impressions of the
convicted, but authorities said no bite marks have ever been verified.
Burnett also said two juries found the West Memphis Three guilty in court —
not him.
“There’s been a lot of spin in this case, for sure,” he said.
Since the guilty verdict, Echols sought another trial based on 2007 DNA
testing results that indicated none of the West Memphis Three’s DNA was
found at the scene. Burnett denied that motion, saying the absence of
evidence does not prove innocence.
Being the judge in such a high-profile case has hurt his reputation, Burnett
admitted. Earlier this year he said he was considering a run for the state
Senate, but his involvement in the case might prove to be a liability. He
still plans to seek political office, he said.
Although he retired as a Circuit Court judge at the end of last year,
Burnett was appointed as a special judge to finish off the work he started
16 years ago.
If Burnett denies the motion for new trials, that ruling will almost
certainly be appealed to higher courts. No matter what he decides, Burnett
said he knows the sensationalism will continue.
“This case will never end, no matter what,” the judge said. “It’ll go on
forever.”
great article. Really makes me sad that the poor parents still have to go through this agony. Imagining what could have been for their children now. Maybe even being grandparents. Im sure this case is a constant salt shake into their wounds. It's also sad that there hasn't been an immediate retrial , especially it being such a public case. The justice system is a bunch of bells and whistles and bullshit. The survivors of the victims are the one's hurting. They should have peace now one way or another and not be in doubt. Lets prove these men innocent or guilty, fairly. We've all waited long enough.
great article. Really makes me sad that the poor parents still have to go through this agony. Imagining what could have been for their children now. Maybe even being grandparents. Im sure this case is a constant salt shake into their wounds. It's also sad that there hasn't been an immediate retrial , especially it being such a public case. The justice system is a bunch of bells and whistles and bullshit. The survivors of the victims are the one's hurting. They should have peace now one way or another and not be in doubt. Lets prove these men innocent or guilty, fairly. We've all waited long enough.
Couldn't have said it better myself. These families must be going through pure hell....on both sides.
Just posted to the discussion list by the legendary co-founder of the support fund, Mister Burk Sauls!
Amazing how blatantly biased he is. Despite saying he's keeping “mum” about his decision and that it was a mistake to allow the media into the mix, he makes no attempt to keep his intentions from this Jonesboro Sun reporter.
What is it? Keeping 'mum' or talking to the media yet again about how biased he is about the case?
And, he says:
“There’s been a lot of spin in this case, for sure,”
Does he remember the spin that the prosecution and the local media put on this case back when it actually happened and went to trial in his courtroom?
Devil worshippers, Satanic ritual human sacrifice, eyewitnesses who claimed to have been to ”devil meetings.“
Local media reporting on the epidemic of “Satanic Cults” in the area.
The Lake Knife being shown to jurors as the ”murder weapon,“ when the prosecution and the police had nothing at all to connect it to the victims, the suspects or the injuries themselves?
Jessie Misskelley's clearly coerced statements being excluded from the court except for the prosecution - who was allowed to have it mentioned without it being a mistrial, and without having to deal with any counter-arguments about it from the defense?
The “judge” allowing untrained and unqualified funeral directors to make misguided assessments of the injuries.
NOT allowing the juries to hear the defense's expert witnesses, but allowing them to sit through the unbelievable testimony of noted nutcase Dale Griffis.
NOT paying attention to the allegedly sequestered jury and allowing the jury foreman to discuss the case with an attorney.
Allowing the jury to watch a biased and hysterical episode of the Geraldo Show about the case in which the devil worshipping motive is detailed and family members of the victims express their feelings about the suspects.
The list of SPIN goes on and on with this case.
WM3 supporters have spent over a decade trying to ELIMINATE the spin.
The Jonesboro Sun writer got the part about Burnett being ridiculed correct. But I think 'ridiculed' isn't a strong enough word. Burnett has shown a very clear bias and allowed 'spin' from the prosecution and the WMPD since the first day of the proceedings. And he continues to create his own 'spin' by doing these endless media interviews in which he expresses his very obvious bias against Jason, Jessie and Damien.
I've been in the courtroom and I've seen him and his court stenographer roll their eyes and heave heavy “you've got to be kidding me” sighs when the defense attorneys presented their case. I've seen him opening what appeared to be his personal mail during defense testimony - and the defense attorney halted the proceedings to wait for him until he was finished reading his bills or whatever it was. I've seen him allow prosecution witnesses to claim that the dates on clearly fabricated paperwork were “typographical errors” without even asking them about it.
If he wants to make accusations of 'spin' he needs to take a look at his own tactics.
And condemning the cameras in the courtroom by claiming that they somehow fabricated images and words magically making it ”one-sided“ is absurd. I'd like to see him name one thing he'd like the filmmakers to have included in those films that would have made it look less like a kangaroo court in a town hysterical with Satanic Panic and blind, superstitious rage.
He condemns the media eye on this case while giving an interview to the media. How very Judge Burnett of him.
I think what he means is that he wishes the filmmakers had LEFT OUT some of the things they included in their films. Things like WMPD officers losing evidence and admitting to trying to scare a mentally challenged kid into making what they later spun into a confession for instance. And all that embarrassing stuff about how the entire motive was presented as a Ritual Human Sacrifice by an evil coven of Satanists in the woods behind the truck stop. You don't hear them talking about THAT very much these days. Now they try to claim that there was actual evidence, but when asked about it, they still can't produce even a vague hint of evidence against the WM3.
OF COURSE he's not going to grant the motion for new trials. He made up his mind about this case in 1993 when his hunting buddies in the West Memphis Police and the DAs office said they'd caught the devil-worshipping baby killers - and that he could now quickly shut up the locals who were complaining that the police weren't doing anything to catch the killer, and he's been doing his best to keep his hands on the controls ever since because he KNOWS that if a REAL judge looked at the evidence and the ridiculous ”police work“ and the blatant abuse of the justice system, they'd grant new trials in about one second.
Why else would he come out of retirement to preside over every hearing? And why else would he go against what he claims he feels about the media and continue to speak to the media about this case?
I used to think that he was just doing his job and trying his best to put the guilty people in prison without having much experience or knowledge about criminal justice or criminal psychology (or the existence of devil worshipping cults) but now I'm pretty convinced that he knows exactly what he's doing.
I don't believe he's being honest - and I have so ruled.
- Burk Sauls
10:42 AM Pacific
Sunday, December 27, 2009 CE
Los Angeles, CA
*****************************************************
AND here's an interesting tidbit on the judge according to this commenter FEB:
Burnett has anounced he's running for Senate and is soliciting campaign contributions while sitting on the bench in this case and others.
JA: Why do I get the Ticketmaster question?
EV: It's your band.
~Q Magazine
"Kisses for the glow...kisses for the lease." - BDRII
Since there seems to be an interest on the WM3 with the latest developments... I'm going to post the latest on the WM3 blog with an article written by columnist John Brummett:
It says so in the state constitution. A sitting judge who seeks a
non-judicial political office vacates the judgeship automatically when he
files for the other office.
Surely you see the wisdom.
Let’s say a circuit judge was running for governor. You wouldn’t want him
weighing matters of justice in the context of personal campaign
considerations. At the very least, you’d have a glaring appearance of a
conflict.
Let’s say you were a defendant in his court. You might wonder if it would be
a good idea to contribute to his gubernatorial campaign.
The only reason retired Circuit Judge David Burnett of Osceola may sit as a
specially assigned judge for post-conviction issues arising in the famous
case of the so-called West Memphis Three is that the filing period for the
state Senate won’t open until March 1. So Burnett has merely declared his
intention to run next year for a term-limited vacancy arising in the state
Senate. He keeps right on judging.
There’s a rule of judicial conduct that requires a judge to avoid even any
appearance of impropriety. But Burnett has disregarded that and the Arkansas
Supreme Court has dismissed perfunctorily a request from a lawyer for one of
the West Memphis Three to remand the issue for Burnett to reconsider his
decision to stay on the case.
Burnett retired this year after a long career that found him, in 1994,
presiding over the original trials in which Damien Echols was convicted of
capital murder and given the death penalty while Jason Baldwin and Jessie
Misskelley were sentenced to life in prison.
They were found guilty in the mutilation and slayings of three young boys in
West Memphis in 1993. The strongest evidence was that Misskelley, with an IQ
of 72, had made contradictory confessions to police. The community was
horrified and the three defendants, then in their late teens, were weird and
seemed to have an interest in the occult.
After retiring in January, Burnett agreed to appointment as a special judge
solely for post-conviction issues that are still percolating from these
highly publicized West Memphis cases. The reasoning was that the files were
so thick that a new judge would have faced a mountainous learning curve.
Burnett should have had the good grace to decline this appointment if he
knew he was running for the state Senate. And he certainly should not have
whined to the Jonesboro Sun in tones perhaps suggesting prejudice.
But there it was Sunday — Burnett telling a Sun reporter that, yes, he was
intending to run for the Senate; that he was sick and tired of this West
Memphis case; and that he regretted letting documentary filmmakers into the
courtroom in 1994 because their “Paradise Lost” turned out to be biased for
the defendants.
An appellant might feel better if the judge did not tell the newspaper he
was sick of the case.
Burnett admitted his misjudgment in a phone conversation Monday. “I
shouldn’t have said that, and I’m sorry,” he said.
Surely you see the problem with a declared state Senate candidate serving as
a judge. Is Burnett getting quoted as a judge or as a man trying to defend
himself in the context of his candidacy for the state Senate?
If Burnett rules against these defendants in their latest pleading, will
they have reason to be satisfied that they got full and fair consideration?
I shouldn’t think so.
Already there is an article in the University of Arkansas Law Review saying
Burnett erred in denying Echols a new trial on new evidence that there was
no DNA evidence putting him at the scene. Burnett said the absence of
evidence was not innocence.
It might not have served a state Senate candidacy well to side with a Death
Row inmate.
Burnett told me Monday the political vulnerabilities work both ways. I told
him he was thus in a fix of his own making. He said he guessed so.
JONESBORO — Two men convicted in the 1993 slayings of 8-year-olds
Christopher Byers, Steven Branch and Michael Moore should know by next
week if they will get new trials.
Attorneys for convicted murderers Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley
Jr. were supposed to have all briefs filed with the court by Jan. 15,
Circuit Court Judge David Burnett said. The filings are part of the
defendants’ post-conviction Rule 37 petition. It’s the last chance, at
the circuit court level, for the men to seek a new trial.
A decision granting or denying new trials could come as early as
Monday or Tuesday, Burnett told a Sun reporter this week.
The state has submitted its briefs, Prosecuting Attorney Mike Walden
said Friday morning. “The state has always maintained they’re guilty,”
he said.
Attempts to reach defense attorneys for comments were unsuccessful.
According to police, Baldwin, Misskelley and cohort Damien Echols
lured the boys to a rain-filled ditch in the Robin Hood Hills area of
West Memphis on May 5, 1993. The boys were beaten, tortured, possibly
sodomized and drowned as part of an occult ritual, prosecutors claim.
Searchers found the boys’ bodies the next day.
The men were convicted of capital murder in 1994. Dubbed the “West
Memphis Three” by the media and supporters, the men have fought the
convictions for years in state and federal courts. An outpouring of
support erupted after the release of the documentary “Paradise Lost”
in 1996.
Supporters point to the lack of DNA and forensic evidence linking the
convicted to crimes. Hairs found at the scene were tested in 2007 and
do not match any of the West Memphis Three, according to court
documents.
The West Memphis Three sought new trials based on the DNA results, but
Walden said the lack of DNA doesn’t prove the men, who were teens when
the crimes happened, are innocent.
Branch’s mother, Pam Hobbs, now believes the convicted men are
innocent of her son’s murder.
“I hope the judge doesn’t rule against them based on circumstantial
evidence,” Hobbs said. “I don’t believe these guys (the defendants)
could have killed these kids and not left any evidence. That’s
impossible.”
A key component of the arrests and conviction, a series of convoluted
confessions of Misskelley, have also come under fire. In his original
confession Misskelley told police the boys were attacked around noon,
that one was choked to death and ropes had been used to bind them.
The boys were in school at noon, none of them had injuries to their
throats, and it was the victims’ shoelaces, not ropes, that were used
as ligatures, police said. Misskelley also claimed two of the boys
were sodomized, which defense forensic experts have disputed.
State Medical Examiner Dr. Frank Peretti testified in October there
were no bruises or semen found in the boys, and it was unlikely they
were sodomized. He would not rule out, however, some form of sexual
assault.
Since his conviction Misskelley has recanted his confession. Echols
and Baldwin have always maintained their innocence. It’s unknown when
prosecutors would refile charges if Burnett grants a new trial.
If the judge denies the motion for retrial, it’s likely to head to
state Appeals Court for another round of litigation. Echols was
sentenced to death in the case. Misskelley and Baldwin both received
life sentences.
JONESBORO — Two men convicted in the 1993 slayings of 8-year-olds
Christopher Byers, Steven Branch and Michael Moore should know by next
week if they will get new trials.
Attorneys for convicted murderers Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley
Jr. were supposed to have all briefs filed with the court by Jan. 15,
Circuit Court Judge David Burnett said. The filings are part of the
defendants’ post-conviction Rule 37 petition. It’s the last chance, at
the circuit court level, for the men to seek a new trial.
A decision granting or denying new trials could come as early as
Monday or Tuesday, Burnett told a Sun reporter this week.
The state has submitted its briefs, Prosecuting Attorney Mike Walden
said Friday morning. “The state has always maintained they’re guilty,”
he said.
Attempts to reach defense attorneys for comments were unsuccessful.
According to police, Baldwin, Misskelley and cohort Damien Echols
lured the boys to a rain-filled ditch in the Robin Hood Hills area of
West Memphis on May 5, 1993. The boys were beaten, tortured, possibly
sodomized and drowned as part of an occult ritual, prosecutors claim.
Searchers found the boys’ bodies the next day.
The men were convicted of capital murder in 1994. Dubbed the “West
Memphis Three” by the media and supporters, the men have fought the
convictions for years in state and federal courts. An outpouring of
support erupted after the release of the documentary “Paradise Lost”
in 1996.
Supporters point to the lack of DNA and forensic evidence linking the
convicted to crimes. Hairs found at the scene were tested in 2007 and
do not match any of the West Memphis Three, according to court
documents.
The West Memphis Three sought new trials based on the DNA results, but
Walden said the lack of DNA doesn’t prove the men, who were teens when
the crimes happened, are innocent.
Branch’s mother, Pam Hobbs, now believes the convicted men are
innocent of her son’s murder.
“I hope the judge doesn’t rule against them based on circumstantial
evidence,” Hobbs said. “I don’t believe these guys (the defendants)
could have killed these kids and not left any evidence. That’s
impossible.”
A key component of the arrests and conviction, a series of convoluted
confessions of Misskelley, have also come under fire. In his original
confession Misskelley told police the boys were attacked around noon,
that one was choked to death and ropes had been used to bind them.
The boys were in school at noon, none of them had injuries to their
throats, and it was the victims’ shoelaces, not ropes, that were used
as ligatures, police said. Misskelley also claimed two of the boys
were sodomized, which defense forensic experts have disputed.
State Medical Examiner Dr. Frank Peretti testified in October there
were no bruises or semen found in the boys, and it was unlikely they
were sodomized. He would not rule out, however, some form of sexual
assault.
Since his conviction Misskelley has recanted his confession. Echols
and Baldwin have always maintained their innocence. It’s unknown when
prosecutors would refile charges if Burnett grants a new trial.
If the judge denies the motion for retrial, it’s likely to head to
state Appeals Court for another round of litigation. Echols was
sentenced to death in the case. Misskelley and Baldwin both received
life sentences.
JONESBORO — A judge in Craighead County has refused to grant a new trial for Jason Baldwin — one of the three men convicted in the 1993 killings of three young West Memphis boys.
Circuit Court Judge David Burnett issued an order Wednesday rejecting Baldwin’s claims that he wasn’t adequately represented at trial. Baldwin was convicted along with Damien Echols and Jessie Misskelley in the deaths of 8-year-olds Christopher Byers, Steven Branch and Michael Moore.
The judge also rejected Baldwin’s claims that animals — likely turtles — caused multiple injuries to the boys’ bodies. Burnett noted that the medical examiner who performed the autopsies was a turtle expert who said the injuries were caused by a knife.
Baldwin was sentenced to life in prison for the killings.
Thank you for coming to the Web site of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. We're working to keep you informed with the latest breaking news.
JA: Why do I get the Ticketmaster question?
EV: It's your band.
~Q Magazine
"Kisses for the glow...kisses for the lease." - BDRII
Don't miss this one: 48 Hours Mystery will air a two-hour special dedicated to the WM3
case on Saturday, Feb. 27, 10PM ET/PT. We don't have complete details but it
will feature an extensive interview with Damien Echols, JM Byers, ATA/supporters
and a legal update on the case. Tell everyone you know to watch it LIVE!
JA: Why do I get the Ticketmaster question?
EV: It's your band.
~Q Magazine
"Kisses for the glow...kisses for the lease." - BDRII
Society should not allow judges to run for political postions. Judges have more power than anyone in our culuture and there is no way i can be convinced that their biases and prejudices do not influence due process, even when it's a jury trial....
Comments
It seems to me there is evidence enough to at least give them a new trial.
Hi!!
Yup, I've been reading the WM3 blog lately.... you would think so, but damn the corrupted system and the people involved in the beginning and STILL today.... I am still hopeful that they will finally grant them a new trial.
Better yet, I want them to throw the whole thing out because they didn't do it right in the first place.
And that is thanks to the people who are not giving up on them and still giving their time and energy in keeping up the fight!
EV: It's your band.
~Q Magazine
"Kisses for the glow...kisses for the lease." - BDRII
WM3 judge says decision in case coming in 2010
Dec 28, 2009 at 9:26 AM
By George Jared
JONESBORO — Judge David Burnett will not decide before the end of the year
if two men convicted of the 1993 slayings of three West Memphis 8-year-olds
will get new trials.
A decision in the Rule 37 hearings for Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley
Jr. was expected by the end of the year, but Burnett said he’s given
attorneys until Jan. 15 to submit briefs. Burnett said he will rule shortly
after the briefs are submitted.
A controversial and ridiculed figure in the so-called “West Memphis Three”
saga, Burnett said he’s grown weary over the interest of the national and
international media in the case. He’s also remaining mum about his ultimate
decision.
“I can tell you one thing, I’m tired of this case,” the judge said.
The bodies of Christopher Byers, Michael Moore and Steven Branch were found
in a West Memphis ditch on May 6, 1993, one day after they were reported
missing.
A month later Misskelley, Baldwin and Damien Echols were arrested and
charged with capital murder. Prosecutors said the then-teens had occult
beliefs that led them to subdue the boys near the ditch.
Misskelley confessed to police, and he confessed several more times after
being convicted in 1994. Since then he has recanted those statements —
Misskelley, who has an I.Q. of 72, said that police coerced him. Each of the
confessions offered slightly different, sometimes competing versions of what
happened to the victims, according to court documents.
During Misskelley’s trial and the subsequent Baldwin-Echols trial, Burnett
allowed documentary filmmakers to record the proceedings. In 1996 the
documentary “Paradise Lost” was released by HBO, bringing international
attention to the case.
Burnett said he erred in allowing the filmmakers into the courtroom — “the
producers of the film were very one-sided, and it was a mistake,” the judge
said.
The filmmakers argued that many of the things Misskelley described in his
confessions — the time of the murders, the victims being choked and how they
were bound — proved to be false. Misskelley also stated that two of the boys
were sodomized, but the state medical examiner was unable to find any
evidence of it. A slew of defense forensic pathologists affirmed that when
they testified at the recent hearings.
Misskelley’s confession was the key evidence in a case where little forensic
evidence was found.
The judge has been vilified for the convictions and for not granting Echols
a new trial after his Rule 37 hearing in 1999.
Judge’s response
Burnett pointed out that despite the intense criticism of how the case was
handled, the Arkansas Supreme Court has affirmed every decision he’s made in
the trials.
“I’m not ashamed of any ruling I made in the 27 years I sat on the bench,”
he said.
The judge also said that the defense’s evidence in the 1999 hearings
ultimately proved false. The defense argued that human bite marks were on
the faces of the victims that didn’t match teeth impressions of the
convicted, but authorities said no bite marks have ever been verified.
Burnett also said two juries found the West Memphis Three guilty in court —
not him.
“There’s been a lot of spin in this case, for sure,” he said.
Since the guilty verdict, Echols sought another trial based on 2007 DNA
testing results that indicated none of the West Memphis Three’s DNA was
found at the scene. Burnett denied that motion, saying the absence of
evidence does not prove innocence.
Being the judge in such a high-profile case has hurt his reputation, Burnett
admitted. Earlier this year he said he was considering a run for the state
Senate, but his involvement in the case might prove to be a liability. He
still plans to seek political office, he said.
Although he retired as a Circuit Court judge at the end of last year,
Burnett was appointed as a special judge to finish off the work he started
16 years ago.
If Burnett denies the motion for new trials, that ruling will almost
certainly be appealed to higher courts. No matter what he decides, Burnett
said he knows the sensationalism will continue.
“This case will never end, no matter what,” the judge said. “It’ll go on
forever.”
http://www.jonesborosun.com/story.php?ID=41229
EV: It's your band.
~Q Magazine
"Kisses for the glow...kisses for the lease." - BDRII
Yeesh
*smirks* Yeah, funny coming from a judge...
EV: It's your band.
~Q Magazine
"Kisses for the glow...kisses for the lease." - BDRII
Couldn't have said it better myself. These families must be going through pure hell....on both sides.
********************************************************************************************************************
WM3 wrote:
Just posted to the discussion list by the legendary co-founder of the support fund, Mister Burk Sauls!
Amazing how blatantly biased he is. Despite saying he's keeping “mum” about his decision and that it was a mistake to allow the media into the mix, he makes no attempt to keep his intentions from this Jonesboro Sun reporter.
What is it? Keeping 'mum' or talking to the media yet again about how biased he is about the case?
And, he says:
“There’s been a lot of spin in this case, for sure,”
Does he remember the spin that the prosecution and the local media put on this case back when it actually happened and went to trial in his courtroom?
Devil worshippers, Satanic ritual human sacrifice, eyewitnesses who claimed to have been to ”devil meetings.“
Local media reporting on the epidemic of “Satanic Cults” in the area.
The Lake Knife being shown to jurors as the ”murder weapon,“ when the prosecution and the police had nothing at all to connect it to the victims, the suspects or the injuries themselves?
Jessie Misskelley's clearly coerced statements being excluded from the court except for the prosecution - who was allowed to have it mentioned without it being a mistrial, and without having to deal with any counter-arguments about it from the defense?
The “judge” allowing untrained and unqualified funeral directors to make misguided assessments of the injuries.
NOT allowing the juries to hear the defense's expert witnesses, but allowing them to sit through the unbelievable testimony of noted nutcase Dale Griffis.
NOT paying attention to the allegedly sequestered jury and allowing the jury foreman to discuss the case with an attorney.
Allowing the jury to watch a biased and hysterical episode of the Geraldo Show about the case in which the devil worshipping motive is detailed and family members of the victims express their feelings about the suspects.
The list of SPIN goes on and on with this case.
WM3 supporters have spent over a decade trying to ELIMINATE the spin.
The Jonesboro Sun writer got the part about Burnett being ridiculed correct. But I think 'ridiculed' isn't a strong enough word. Burnett has shown a very clear bias and allowed 'spin' from the prosecution and the WMPD since the first day of the proceedings. And he continues to create his own 'spin' by doing these endless media interviews in which he expresses his very obvious bias against Jason, Jessie and Damien.
I've been in the courtroom and I've seen him and his court stenographer roll their eyes and heave heavy “you've got to be kidding me” sighs when the defense attorneys presented their case. I've seen him opening what appeared to be his personal mail during defense testimony - and the defense attorney halted the proceedings to wait for him until he was finished reading his bills or whatever it was. I've seen him allow prosecution witnesses to claim that the dates on clearly fabricated paperwork were “typographical errors” without even asking them about it.
If he wants to make accusations of 'spin' he needs to take a look at his own tactics.
And condemning the cameras in the courtroom by claiming that they somehow fabricated images and words magically making it ”one-sided“ is absurd. I'd like to see him name one thing he'd like the filmmakers to have included in those films that would have made it look less like a kangaroo court in a town hysterical with Satanic Panic and blind, superstitious rage.
He condemns the media eye on this case while giving an interview to the media. How very Judge Burnett of him.
I think what he means is that he wishes the filmmakers had LEFT OUT some of the things they included in their films. Things like WMPD officers losing evidence and admitting to trying to scare a mentally challenged kid into making what they later spun into a confession for instance. And all that embarrassing stuff about how the entire motive was presented as a Ritual Human Sacrifice by an evil coven of Satanists in the woods behind the truck stop. You don't hear them talking about THAT very much these days. Now they try to claim that there was actual evidence, but when asked about it, they still can't produce even a vague hint of evidence against the WM3.
OF COURSE he's not going to grant the motion for new trials. He made up his mind about this case in 1993 when his hunting buddies in the West Memphis Police and the DAs office said they'd caught the devil-worshipping baby killers - and that he could now quickly shut up the locals who were complaining that the police weren't doing anything to catch the killer, and he's been doing his best to keep his hands on the controls ever since because he KNOWS that if a REAL judge looked at the evidence and the ridiculous ”police work“ and the blatant abuse of the justice system, they'd grant new trials in about one second.
Why else would he come out of retirement to preside over every hearing? And why else would he go against what he claims he feels about the media and continue to speak to the media about this case?
I used to think that he was just doing his job and trying his best to put the guilty people in prison without having much experience or knowledge about criminal justice or criminal psychology (or the existence of devil worshipping cults) but now I'm pretty convinced that he knows exactly what he's doing.
I don't believe he's being honest - and I have so ruled.
- Burk Sauls
10:42 AM Pacific
Sunday, December 27, 2009 CE
Los Angeles, CA
*****************************************************
AND here's an interesting tidbit on the judge according to this commenter FEB:
Burnett has anounced he's running for Senate and is soliciting campaign contributions while sitting on the bench in this case and others.
EV: It's your band.
~Q Magazine
"Kisses for the glow...kisses for the lease." - BDRII
http://wm3.vox.com/library/post/judging ... nders.html
Judging Burnett's Blunders
Posted on 29 December 2009
By John Brummett
It says so in the state constitution. A sitting judge who seeks a
non-judicial political office vacates the judgeship automatically when he
files for the other office.
Surely you see the wisdom.
Let’s say a circuit judge was running for governor. You wouldn’t want him
weighing matters of justice in the context of personal campaign
considerations. At the very least, you’d have a glaring appearance of a
conflict.
Let’s say you were a defendant in his court. You might wonder if it would be
a good idea to contribute to his gubernatorial campaign.
The only reason retired Circuit Judge David Burnett of Osceola may sit as a
specially assigned judge for post-conviction issues arising in the famous
case of the so-called West Memphis Three is that the filing period for the
state Senate won’t open until March 1. So Burnett has merely declared his
intention to run next year for a term-limited vacancy arising in the state
Senate. He keeps right on judging.
There’s a rule of judicial conduct that requires a judge to avoid even any
appearance of impropriety. But Burnett has disregarded that and the Arkansas
Supreme Court has dismissed perfunctorily a request from a lawyer for one of
the West Memphis Three to remand the issue for Burnett to reconsider his
decision to stay on the case.
Burnett retired this year after a long career that found him, in 1994,
presiding over the original trials in which Damien Echols was convicted of
capital murder and given the death penalty while Jason Baldwin and Jessie
Misskelley were sentenced to life in prison.
They were found guilty in the mutilation and slayings of three young boys in
West Memphis in 1993. The strongest evidence was that Misskelley, with an IQ
of 72, had made contradictory confessions to police. The community was
horrified and the three defendants, then in their late teens, were weird and
seemed to have an interest in the occult.
After retiring in January, Burnett agreed to appointment as a special judge
solely for post-conviction issues that are still percolating from these
highly publicized West Memphis cases. The reasoning was that the files were
so thick that a new judge would have faced a mountainous learning curve.
Burnett should have had the good grace to decline this appointment if he
knew he was running for the state Senate. And he certainly should not have
whined to the Jonesboro Sun in tones perhaps suggesting prejudice.
But there it was Sunday — Burnett telling a Sun reporter that, yes, he was
intending to run for the Senate; that he was sick and tired of this West
Memphis case; and that he regretted letting documentary filmmakers into the
courtroom in 1994 because their “Paradise Lost” turned out to be biased for
the defendants.
An appellant might feel better if the judge did not tell the newspaper he
was sick of the case.
Burnett admitted his misjudgment in a phone conversation Monday. “I
shouldn’t have said that, and I’m sorry,” he said.
Surely you see the problem with a declared state Senate candidate serving as
a judge. Is Burnett getting quoted as a judge or as a man trying to defend
himself in the context of his candidacy for the state Senate?
If Burnett rules against these defendants in their latest pleading, will
they have reason to be satisfied that they got full and fair consideration?
I shouldn’t think so.
Already there is an article in the University of Arkansas Law Review saying
Burnett erred in denying Echols a new trial on new evidence that there was
no DNA evidence putting him at the scene. Burnett said the absence of
evidence was not innocence.
It might not have served a state Senate candidacy well to side with a Death
Row inmate.
Burnett told me Monday the political vulnerabilities work both ways. I told
him he was thus in a fix of his own making. He said he guessed so.
http://arkansasnews.com/2009/12/29/judg ... -blunders/
EV: It's your band.
~Q Magazine
"Kisses for the glow...kisses for the lease." - BDRII
Petition Ruling Expected
Jan 16, 2010 at 6:14 PM
By George Jared
JONESBORO — Two men convicted in the 1993 slayings of 8-year-olds
Christopher Byers, Steven Branch and Michael Moore should know by next
week if they will get new trials.
Attorneys for convicted murderers Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley
Jr. were supposed to have all briefs filed with the court by Jan. 15,
Circuit Court Judge David Burnett said. The filings are part of the
defendants’ post-conviction Rule 37 petition. It’s the last chance, at
the circuit court level, for the men to seek a new trial.
A decision granting or denying new trials could come as early as
Monday or Tuesday, Burnett told a Sun reporter this week.
The state has submitted its briefs, Prosecuting Attorney Mike Walden
said Friday morning. “The state has always maintained they’re guilty,”
he said.
Attempts to reach defense attorneys for comments were unsuccessful.
According to police, Baldwin, Misskelley and cohort Damien Echols
lured the boys to a rain-filled ditch in the Robin Hood Hills area of
West Memphis on May 5, 1993. The boys were beaten, tortured, possibly
sodomized and drowned as part of an occult ritual, prosecutors claim.
Searchers found the boys’ bodies the next day.
The men were convicted of capital murder in 1994. Dubbed the “West
Memphis Three” by the media and supporters, the men have fought the
convictions for years in state and federal courts. An outpouring of
support erupted after the release of the documentary “Paradise Lost”
in 1996.
Supporters point to the lack of DNA and forensic evidence linking the
convicted to crimes. Hairs found at the scene were tested in 2007 and
do not match any of the West Memphis Three, according to court
documents.
The West Memphis Three sought new trials based on the DNA results, but
Walden said the lack of DNA doesn’t prove the men, who were teens when
the crimes happened, are innocent.
Branch’s mother, Pam Hobbs, now believes the convicted men are
innocent of her son’s murder.
“I hope the judge doesn’t rule against them based on circumstantial
evidence,” Hobbs said. “I don’t believe these guys (the defendants)
could have killed these kids and not left any evidence. That’s
impossible.”
A key component of the arrests and conviction, a series of convoluted
confessions of Misskelley, have also come under fire. In his original
confession Misskelley told police the boys were attacked around noon,
that one was choked to death and ropes had been used to bind them.
The boys were in school at noon, none of them had injuries to their
throats, and it was the victims’ shoelaces, not ropes, that were used
as ligatures, police said. Misskelley also claimed two of the boys
were sodomized, which defense forensic experts have disputed.
State Medical Examiner Dr. Frank Peretti testified in October there
were no bruises or semen found in the boys, and it was unlikely they
were sodomized. He would not rule out, however, some form of sexual
assault.
Since his conviction Misskelley has recanted his confession. Echols
and Baldwin have always maintained their innocence. It’s unknown when
prosecutors would refile charges if Burnett grants a new trial.
If the judge denies the motion for retrial, it’s likely to head to
state Appeals Court for another round of litigation. Echols was
sentenced to death in the case. Misskelley and Baldwin both received
life sentences.
http://www.jonesborosun.com/story.php?ID=41481
EV: It's your band.
~Q Magazine
"Kisses for the glow...kisses for the lease." - BDRII
http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2010 ... /?breaking
Judge: No new trial in West Memphis case
By The Associated Press
JONESBORO — A judge in Craighead County has refused to grant a new trial for Jason Baldwin — one of the three men convicted in the 1993 killings of three young West Memphis boys.
Circuit Court Judge David Burnett issued an order Wednesday rejecting Baldwin’s claims that he wasn’t adequately represented at trial. Baldwin was convicted along with Damien Echols and Jessie Misskelley in the deaths of 8-year-olds Christopher Byers, Steven Branch and Michael Moore.
The judge also rejected Baldwin’s claims that animals — likely turtles — caused multiple injuries to the boys’ bodies. Burnett noted that the medical examiner who performed the autopsies was a turtle expert who said the injuries were caused by a knife.
Baldwin was sentenced to life in prison for the killings.
Thank you for coming to the Web site of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. We're working to keep you informed with the latest breaking news.
EV: It's your band.
~Q Magazine
"Kisses for the glow...kisses for the lease." - BDRII
48 Hours Mystery on WM3 Case
Feb 7, 2010 at 1:20 AM
Don't miss this one: 48 Hours Mystery will air a two-hour special dedicated to the WM3
case on Saturday, Feb. 27, 10PM ET/PT. We don't have complete details but it
will feature an extensive interview with Damien Echols, JM Byers, ATA/supporters
and a legal update on the case. Tell everyone you know to watch it LIVE!
EV: It's your band.
~Q Magazine
"Kisses for the glow...kisses for the lease." - BDRII
@wm3org
Johnny Depp, puts in an appearance in this upcoming 48 Hours about WM3: http://wm3.vox.com/library/post/48-hour ... -case.html
YAY!!!! My boyfriend, JOHNNY DEPP, is gonna be showing some support for our WM3!!!!
EV: It's your band.
~Q Magazine
"Kisses for the glow...kisses for the lease." - BDRII
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kw2jgp2HZtE