Yeah. Are these 3 indeed innocent, or is this just a case of celebrity involvement swaying the masses?
Someone fill me in.
I guess we'll have to wait until tomorrow to see if these are true confessions of guilt, or if they are just saying what they're being told to say.
I personally believe they're innocent. I watched Paradise Lost and DNA evidence has ruled them out several times. Plus I trust Eddie's judgement. Doesn't mean they're not guilty. Just means I don't think they are. But what do I know?
Another habit says it's in love with you
Another habit says its long overdue
Another habit like an unwanted friend
I'm so happy with my righteous self
UPDATE:
All three will admit guilt to the crime and two will be released with time served
Steve Branch, the father of one of the victims tells us Damien Echols will be one of the men released
According to KTLA.com
Seems contradictory to what they have said all these years. after all this time, I would think "I" would keep hanging on for a retrial , one in which I could get a more fair and just trial.
Would assume they would be on parole, staying under state control.
whats for sure though is we'll find out tomorrow after the hearing, whats what!!
You know what I was thinking too? By "admitting guilt" they can't sue the state for wrongful conviction. They won't get one red cent from this. Ever.
If it were me, I'd take my ass back to jail and take my chances in trial. Especially with the DNA evidence. They'd be found not guilty by a jury today; easily.
Then sue the fucking state.
Another habit says it's in love with you
Another habit says its long overdue
Another habit like an unwanted friend
I'm so happy with my righteous self
You know what I was thinking too? By "admitting guilt" they can't sue the state for wrongful conviction. They won't get one red cent from this. Ever.
If it were me, I'd take my ass back to jail and take my chances in trial. Especially with the DNA evidence. They'd be found not guilty by a jury today; easily.
You know what I was thinking too? By "admitting guilt" they can't sue the state for wrongful conviction. They won't get one red cent from this. Ever.
If it were me, I'd take my ass back to jail and take my chances in trial. Especially with the DNA evidence. They'd be found not guilty by a jury today; easily.
Then sue the fucking state.
I'd do the same.
(I agree)
More details will probably start surfacing soon enough. So I don't want to speak too much about the terms of release.
But what I do know, if you did not do the crime, do not admit to it, regardless of how much time you already spent locked up or abused or whatever else. Then again, being innocent and locked away for so long, and all you have to do is say "I did it", then you get to be free?? Yeah I understand why a person would opt for that option. But stick with the truth. It's all that matters.
A tentative deal would include a legal maneuver allowing the men to maintain their innocence claim while admitting that prosecutors likely have enough evidence to win a conviction, the person familiar with the case said. That person spoke on the condition of anonymity because of a gag order barring parties in the case from speaking publicly about it.
Take me piece by piece..... Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
"A tentative deal would include a legal maneuver allowing the men to maintain their innocence claim while admitting that prosecutors likely have enough evidence to win a conviction, the person familiar with the case said."
"In what’s called an Alford plea, they would agree that prosecutors have a solid amount of evidence against them — likely enough to win a conviction.
Normally, when defendants plead guilty in criminal cases, they admit that they’ve done the crime in question. But in an Alford plea, defendants are allowed to insist they’re innocent"
So are we strangers now? Like rock and roll and the radio?
this is so fucked up situation..say i kill the boys for get out..how fucked up system is that..
and how the fuckin judge will look to the eyes of the parents of the victims and say,
the guys just said thery kill your boys ,they are free to go.
from the other hand,you are innocent,they put u i jail for a merder u didnt do,and after 17 years they tell u,admit you are a killer,to set you free....and u cant suit us...those 17 years the system was fuckin with u..
how fuckin wrong is that,in any side u are..how fuckin wrong..
"...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
Never followed this case, but I can't believe they took an Alford plea deal!! I can't believe their attorney accepted an Alford plea in a triple murder case, but, then again, I don't know the history of the case.
They don't get sue the State, and any profits from movie, talk shows, book deals can be counter sued for by the victims families. Eddie and friends can walk all day, under an Alford plea - they plead guilty to the crime, they acknowledge that the State has provided enough evidence to date to maintain the original conviction, they acknowledged that the State could produce additional evidence to support their continued conviction.
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
Never followed this case, but I can't believe they took an Alford plea deal!! I can't believe their attorney accepted an Alford plea in a triple murder case, but, then again, I don't know the history of the case.
They don't get sue the State, and any profits from movie, talk shows, book deals can be counter sued for by the victims families. Eddie and friends can walk all day, under an Alford plea - they plead guilty to the crime, they acknowledge that the State has provided enough evidence to date to maintain the original conviction, they acknowledged that the State could produce additional evidence to support their continued conviction.
In an Alford plea, you’re admitting you are innocent – not because you didn’t commit the crime – you’re claiming to be innocent because you don’t remember doing the crime. Like in DUI cases.
In an Alford plea, you acknowledge that the evidence proves that you were at the scene of the crime, but you just don’t remember details, therefore, your conviction was just. Thus, the State is not liable for civil actions.
In an Alford plea, you acknowledge that the State has enough evidence to continue your conviction as original sentenced. Again, the State is not liable for civil actions.
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
Yeah. Are these 3 indeed innocent, or is this just a case of celebrity involvement swaying the masses?
Someone fill me in.
I guess we'll have to wait until tomorrow to see if these are true confessions of guilt, or if they are just saying what they're being told to say.
I personally believe they're innocent. I watched Paradise Lost and DNA evidence has ruled them out several times. Plus I trust Eddie's judgement. Doesn't mean they're not guilty. Just means I don't think they are. But what do I know?
you trust Eddies Judgment ? just out of curiosity would you all have believed these 3 guilty if Eddie said so ?
as far as I can tell there wassn't enough evidense to find them guilty ...other than a confession from a mentally challenged young man...was he lieing when he gave it ? this whole case stinks, it sounds like mis-handled evidense and a case of "we need to bust someone for this" and the possibality of guilt that's been hidden by all that crap and a celeb or two to really mix up the pot and for some of you thet're innocent because Eddie said so ?..if he told you to vote Republican this place would be a heck of lot different ...Bush and Reagen would be your hero's. moral of the story...think for yourselfs.
you trust Eddies Judgment ? just out of curiosity would you all have believed these 3 guilty if Eddie said so ?
as far as I can tell there wassn't enough evidense to find them guilty ...other than a confession from a mentally challenged young man...was he lieing when he gave it ? this whole case stinks, it sounds like mis-handled evidense and a case of "we need to bust someone for this" and the possibality of guilt that's been hidden by all that crap and a celeb or two to really mix up the pot and for some of you thet're innocent because Eddie said so ?..if he told you to vote Republican this place would be a heck of lot different ...Bush and Reagen would be your hero's. moral of the story...think for yourselfs.
Godfather.
The fact that I trust Eddie's judgement was the third and least of my reasons for my belief in the WM3's innocence. Funny how you picked the smallest little detail out of my post and focused on it. Are you bored? Lonely? Hmmm, you remind me of another forum member whose name I won't mention...
Think for "yourselfs??" Learn to spell!
Another habit says it's in love with you
Another habit says its long overdue
Another habit like an unwanted friend
I'm so happy with my righteous self
you trust Eddies Judgment ? just out of curiosity would you all have believed these 3 guilty if Eddie said so ?
as far as I can tell there wassn't enough evidense to find them guilty ...other than a confession from a mentally challenged young man...was he lieing when he gave it ? this whole case stinks, it sounds like mis-handled evidense and a case of "we need to bust someone for this" and the possibality of guilt that's been hidden by all that crap and a celeb or two to really mix up the pot and for some of you thet're innocent because Eddie said so ?..if he told you to vote Republican this place would be a heck of lot different ...Bush and Reagen would be your hero's. moral of the story...think for yourselfs.
Godfather.
The fact that I trust Eddie's judgement was the third and least of my reasons for my belief in the WM3's innocence. Funny how you picked the smallest little detail out of my post and focused on it. Are you bored? Lonely? Hmmm, you remind me of another forum member whose name I won't mention...
Think for "yourselfs??" Learn to spell!
nice come back(learn to spell)- as poorley as I may have worded my point the fact remains the same..too many people rely on the word of a celeb to help make up their minds or sway their judgment, in my opinion it's wrong if these three are guilty or not to let a celebs popularty sway the judgment of the people.
I don't "trust eddies judgment", but he did open my eyes to the case. After reading the case on my own, I came to the same conclusion as Eddie did, that these kids are NOT guilty.
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
I don't "trust eddies judgment", but he did open my eyes to the case. After reading the case on my own, I came to the same conclusion as Eddie did, that these kids are NOT guilty.
I don't know, the only thing that worrys me is the admission of guilt from the mentaly challenged kid...it takes a good lawyer to tap into that and make it work.
I don't "trust eddies judgment", but he did open my eyes to the case. After reading the case on my own, I came to the same conclusion as Eddie did, that these kids are NOT guilty.
I don't know, the only thing that worrys me is the admission of guilt from the mentaly challenged kid...it takes a good lawyer to tap into that and make it work.
Godfather.
From what I read, the kid didn't understand his rights and was "broken down" by the police so to speak.
I don't know why the stepfather isn't being investigated, after all his DNA was actually found at the crime scene...
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
I don't "trust eddies judgment", but he did open my eyes to the case. After reading the case on my own, I came to the same conclusion as Eddie did, that these kids are NOT guilty.
You didn't read the case on your own...
If you had you would not have come to the same conclusion that eddie did.
Please do yourself a favor and actually read the case file. There is evidence...
was the mentally challenged kid in prison also or was he put in a mental ward ?
Godfather.
Godfather, do your self a favor and actually read the case file, you can find it online.
The boy was not mentally challanged, he actually had a normal IQ, I will try and find all the file I had on the case (it was a few years ago) THey brought up examples in court of his original IQ restults.
He was far from mentally challenged...
I got sucked in to Eddies view to and also watched the Paradise lost movie, then I actually read the case, and there are plenty of evidence. Let alone MULTIPLE confessions of the boys... THey have audio and manuscripe of the earliest confession where he was dissuaded by the defense lawyers to not confess, yet he did, It was not some "broke down" by police...
I don't "trust eddies judgment", but he did open my eyes to the case. After reading the case on my own, I came to the same conclusion as Eddie did, that these kids are NOT guilty.
I don't know, the only thing that worrys me is the admission of guilt from the mentaly challenged kid...it takes a good lawyer to tap into that and make it work.
Godfather.
From what I read, the kid didn't understand his rights and was "broken down" by the police so to speak.
I don't know why the stepfather isn't being investigated, after all his DNA was actually found at the crime scene...
From what you read???... Admit it, you didn't read anything, I know because the kids confessed more than 3 times and pointed out specific thing that were found on the crime scene (certain alcohol bottle) that had yet to be found... Are you going to ignore all the fibers (of clothing) that was found on the kids bodies that matched what the clothing that the kids were wearing that day?
was the mentally challenged kid in prison also or was he put in a mental ward ?
Godfather.
Godfather, do your self a favor and actually read the case file, you can find it online.
The boy was not mentally challanged, he actually had a normal IQ, I will try and find all the file I had on the case (it was a few years ago) THey brought up examples in court of his original IQ restults.
He was far from mentally challenged...
I got sucked in to Eddies view to and also watched the Paradise lost movie, then I actually read the case, and there are plenty of evidence. Let alone MULTIPLE confessions of the boys... THey have audio and manuscripe of the earliest confession where he was dissuaded by the defense lawyers to not confess, yet he did, It was not some "broke down" by police...
I'd love to see the case file if you have it, because if I'm wrong, I'd like to be corrected.
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
was the mentally challenged kid in prison also or was he put in a mental ward ?
Godfather.
Godfather, do your self a favor and actually read the case file, you can find it online.
The boy was not mentally challanged, he actually had a normal IQ, I will try and find all the file I had on the case (it was a few years ago) THey brought up examples in court of his original IQ restults.
He was far from mentally challenged...
I got sucked in to Eddies view to and also watched the Paradise lost movie, then I actually read the case, and there are plenty of evidence. Let alone MULTIPLE confessions of the boys... THey have audio and manuscripe of the earliest confession where he was dissuaded by the defense lawyers to not confess, yet he did, It was not some "broke down" by police...
cool if you find it can you post it here so I can read it,you're right I haven't read the case file but would likle to. then what you are telling me makes my point clear that celeb's using their fame to voice an opinion dirty's a case.
nice come back(learn to spell)- as poorley as I may have worded my point the fact remains the same..too many people rely on the word of a celeb to help make up their minds or sway their judgment, in my opinion it's wrong if these three are guilty or not to let a celebs popularty sway the judgment of the people.
Seriously, I've never seen anyone write "yourselfs" before in my life. That wasn't just a little spelling error or a typo - you spelled it that way on purpose. I wasn't trying to make a comeback - I was just making fun of you.
And like I said, I thought these guys were innocent based on the DNA evidence and from what I read and saw for myself. Eddie's judgement, which I do trust, only helped seal my conviction. Afterall, he knows the specifics of the case better than most people and has worked with the defense very closely on this for many, many years. He's an intelligent guy, so why shouldn't I trust his judgement? That was a rhetorical question by the way; no need to answer.
Another habit says it's in love with you
Another habit says its long overdue
Another habit like an unwanted friend
I'm so happy with my righteous self
nice come back(learn to spell)- as poorley as I may have worded my point the fact remains the same..too many people rely on the word of a celeb to help make up their minds or sway their judgment, in my opinion it's wrong if these three are guilty or not to let a celebs popularty sway the judgment of the people.
Seriously, I've never seen anyone write "yourselfs" before in my life. That wasn't just a little spelling error or a typo - you spelled it that way on purpose. I wasn't trying to make a comeback - I was just making fun of you.
And like I said, I thought these guys were innocent based on the DNA evidence and from what I read and saw for myself. Eddie's judgement, which I do trust, only helped seal my conviction. Afterall, he knows the specifics of the case better than most people and has worked with the defense very closely on this for many, many years. He's an intelligent guy, so why shouldn't I trust his judgement? That was a rhetorical question by the way; no need to answer.
you were making fun of me ????well I never...well mabe once or twice but nobody saw and you can't prove anything , you thought ? you mean you don't know ?...but but Eddie said so ! now take your playboy and go to your room.
ohhh I'm sorry you said reeetooorrriiicccaaall question please diiiiissssrrreeeegggguuuuaaaarrrrrdddd the above statement
Here's my take on it. I know a little about the case, but not tons.
I believe a lot of the momentum around freeing them was due to the perception that the original trial and evidence were a farce. Forced confession, circumstantial evidence, etc.
From what I read about the latest deal and the Alford plea, the WM3 and their lawyers decided to plead that way because they maintained their innocence, but acknowledged there was enough evidence to convict them again.
So if the first trial was such a farce, why is there still enough evidence to convict them?
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Here's my take on it. I know a little about the case, but not tons.
I believe a lot of the momentum around freeing them was due to the perception that the original trial and evidence were a farce. Forced confession, circumstantial evidence, etc.
From what I read about the latest deal and the Alford plea, the WM3 and their lawyers decided to plead that way because they maintained their innocence, but acknowledged there was enough evidence to convict them again.
So if the first trial was such a farce, why is there still enough evidence to convict them?
That's what I don't understand either.
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
Here's my take on it. I know a little about the case, but not tons.
I believe a lot of the momentum around freeing them was due to the perception that the original trial and evidence were a farce. Forced confession, circumstantial evidence, etc.
From what I read about the latest deal and the Alford plea, the WM3 and their lawyers decided to plead that way because they maintained their innocence, but acknowledged there was enough evidence to convict them again.
So if the first trial was such a farce, why is there still enough evidence to convict them?
I'm waiting for the link that Blockhead was talking about I'm at work now but will look for it this weekend when I get home ..DNA confessions etc. com'on it sounds pretty sticky to me but before I give a straight up opinion I'll wait till I can read the case file or some reliable info on the case.
Comments
I guess we'll have to wait until tomorrow to see if these are true confessions of guilt, or if they are just saying what they're being told to say.
I personally believe they're innocent. I watched Paradise Lost and DNA evidence has ruled them out several times. Plus I trust Eddie's judgement. Doesn't mean they're not guilty. Just means I don't think they are. But what do I know?
Another habit says its long overdue
Another habit like an unwanted friend
I'm so happy with my righteous self
man that's fucked up
"what a long, strange trip it's been"
I know. I don't think the writer is an Eddie Vedder fan or believes the WM3 are innocent.
Another habit says its long overdue
Another habit like an unwanted friend
I'm so happy with my righteous self
You know what I was thinking too? By "admitting guilt" they can't sue the state for wrongful conviction. They won't get one red cent from this. Ever.
If it were me, I'd take my ass back to jail and take my chances in trial. Especially with the DNA evidence. They'd be found not guilty by a jury today; easily.
Then sue the fucking state.
Another habit says its long overdue
Another habit like an unwanted friend
I'm so happy with my righteous self
I'd do the same.
(I agree)
More details will probably start surfacing soon enough. So I don't want to speak too much about the terms of release.
But what I do know, if you did not do the crime, do not admit to it, regardless of how much time you already spent locked up or abused or whatever else. Then again, being innocent and locked away for so long, and all you have to do is say "I did it", then you get to be free?? Yeah I understand why a person would opt for that option. But stick with the truth. It's all that matters.
sad all the way around, what a world.
Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
This article - if you can call it that - is a bit of a f#(^%ing joke.
If I was marking it as a school assignment I'd give it an F.
Anyway...
http://wm3org.typepad.com/blog/2011/08/ ... hs.html#tp
"A tentative deal would include a legal maneuver allowing the men to maintain their innocence claim while admitting that prosecutors likely have enough evidence to win a conviction, the person familiar with the case said."
"In what’s called an Alford plea, they would agree that prosecutors have a solid amount of evidence against them — likely enough to win a conviction.
Normally, when defendants plead guilty in criminal cases, they admit that they’ve done the crime in question. But in an Alford plea, defendants are allowed to insist they’re innocent"
and how the fuckin judge will look to the eyes of the parents of the victims and say,
the guys just said thery kill your boys ,they are free to go.
from the other hand,you are innocent,they put u i jail for a merder u didnt do,and after 17 years they tell u,admit you are a killer,to set you free....and u cant suit us...those 17 years the system was fuckin with u..
how fuckin wrong is that,in any side u are..how fuckin wrong..
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
They don't get sue the State, and any profits from movie, talk shows, book deals can be counter sued for by the victims families. Eddie and friends can walk all day, under an Alford plea - they plead guilty to the crime, they acknowledge that the State has provided enough evidence to date to maintain the original conviction, they acknowledged that the State could produce additional evidence to support their continued conviction.
In an Alford plea, you’re admitting you are innocent – not because you didn’t commit the crime – you’re claiming to be innocent because you don’t remember doing the crime. Like in DUI cases.
In an Alford plea, you acknowledge that the evidence proves that you were at the scene of the crime, but you just don’t remember details, therefore, your conviction was just. Thus, the State is not liable for civil actions.
In an Alford plea, you acknowledge that the State has enough evidence to continue your conviction as original sentenced. Again, the State is not liable for civil actions.
Oh totally. You can tell by the opening paragraph that the writer isn't very articulate. And the picture they chose of Eddie was very misleading...
But yeah, like you said, anyway.....
Another habit says its long overdue
Another habit like an unwanted friend
I'm so happy with my righteous self
as far as I can tell there wassn't enough evidense to find them guilty ...other than a confession from a mentally challenged young man...was he lieing when he gave it ? this whole case stinks, it sounds like mis-handled evidense and a case of "we need to bust someone for this" and the possibality of guilt that's been hidden by all that crap and a celeb or two to really mix up the pot and for some of you thet're innocent because Eddie said so ?..if he told you to vote Republican this place would be a heck of lot different
Godfather.
The fact that I trust Eddie's judgement was the third and least of my reasons for my belief in the WM3's innocence. Funny how you picked the smallest little detail out of my post and focused on it. Are you bored? Lonely? Hmmm, you remind me of another forum member whose name I won't mention...
Think for "yourselfs??" Learn to spell!
Another habit says its long overdue
Another habit like an unwanted friend
I'm so happy with my righteous self
Godfather.
I don't know, the only thing that worrys me is the admission of guilt from the mentaly challenged kid...it takes a good lawyer to tap into that and make it work.
Godfather.
Godfather.
I don't know why the stepfather isn't being investigated, after all his DNA was actually found at the crime scene...
If you had you would not have come to the same conclusion that eddie did.
Please do yourself a favor and actually read the case file. There is evidence...
The boy was not mentally challanged, he actually had a normal IQ, I will try and find all the file I had on the case (it was a few years ago) THey brought up examples in court of his original IQ restults.
He was far from mentally challenged...
I got sucked in to Eddies view to and also watched the Paradise lost movie, then I actually read the case, and there are plenty of evidence. Let alone MULTIPLE confessions of the boys... THey have audio and manuscripe of the earliest confession where he was dissuaded by the defense lawyers to not confess, yet he did, It was not some "broke down" by police...
cool if you find it can you post it here so I can read it,you're right I haven't read the case file but would likle to. then what you are telling me makes my point clear that celeb's using their fame to voice an opinion dirty's a case.
thanks,
Godfather.
Seriously, I've never seen anyone write "yourselfs" before in my life. That wasn't just a little spelling error or a typo - you spelled it that way on purpose. I wasn't trying to make a comeback - I was just making fun of you.
And like I said, I thought these guys were innocent based on the DNA evidence and from what I read and saw for myself. Eddie's judgement, which I do trust, only helped seal my conviction. Afterall, he knows the specifics of the case better than most people and has worked with the defense very closely on this for many, many years. He's an intelligent guy, so why shouldn't I trust his judgement? That was a rhetorical question by the way; no need to answer.
Another habit says its long overdue
Another habit like an unwanted friend
I'm so happy with my righteous self
ohhh I'm sorry you said reeetooorrriiicccaaall question please diiiiissssrrreeeegggguuuuaaaarrrrrdddd the above statement
Godfather.
I believe a lot of the momentum around freeing them was due to the perception that the original trial and evidence were a farce. Forced confession, circumstantial evidence, etc.
From what I read about the latest deal and the Alford plea, the WM3 and their lawyers decided to plead that way because they maintained their innocence, but acknowledged there was enough evidence to convict them again.
So if the first trial was such a farce, why is there still enough evidence to convict them?
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
I'm waiting for the link that Blockhead was talking about I'm at work now but will look for it this weekend when I get home ..DNA confessions etc. com'on it sounds pretty sticky to me but before I give a straight up opinion I'll wait till I can read the case file or some reliable info on the case.
Godfather.