Victim's parents lobby Oscars to exclude West Memphis 3 doc
EquallyWorthless
Posts: 3,993
Title says it all... discuss...
Victim's parents lobby Oscars to exclude West Memphis 3 documentary
http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/12/01/v ... cumentary/
Victim's parents lobby Oscars to exclude West Memphis 3 documentary
http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/12/01/v ... cumentary/
{if (work != 0) {
work = work + 1;
sleep = sleep - work * 10;}
else if (work >= 0) {
reality.equals(false);
work = work +1;
}system("pause");
return 0;}
work = work + 1;
sleep = sleep - work * 10;}
else if (work >= 0) {
reality.equals(false);
work = work +1;
}system("pause");
return 0;}
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
so no justice has been served for them.
Now if the real killer or killers could be brought to justice and
a documentary done perhaps they would then feel different.
This is the outcome I hope for and perhaps waiting until this takes place
could be a compromise.
I understand how they feel, this is a living nightmare for them,
one now without a conclusion. A lifetime of pain they are living.
The real killers need to be punished ... I hope many are working on that.
This grim reminder must be extremely brutal for the parents of the victims. I simply couldn't imagine. Just couldn't.
This is why I posted this. There def are people, this boys parents, who firmly believe they had the right people.
work = work + 1;
sleep = sleep - work * 10;}
else if (work >= 0) {
reality.equals(false);
work = work +1;
}system("pause");
return 0;}
The parents are holding on to the fact that they were falsely convicted, nothing else.
The WM3 absolutely were innocent.
None of the evidence was real.
Nothing to discuss.
:-)
I understand the parents' side though...they thought they had closure, at least that in such a painful situation, and now it turns out the killer is still free and roaming around somewhere.
I'll play Devil's advocate once. You seem so sure of this. I am assuming you were very close to the case to make such a bold assertion. Many people who were closely tied to the case think differently. Some of the evidence at a minimum raise a level of doubt. Much of the media portrayed the local law as a bunch of slack-jawed yokels, but some hold them in great esteem and value their careers and work.
1996 - Toronto
1998 - Montreal, Toronto
2000 - Montreal, Toronto
2003 - Toronto, Montreal
2004 - Boston I, Boston II
2005 - Kitchener, London, Hamilton, Montreal, Ottawa
2011 - Toronto I, Toronto II, Ottawa
2013 - London, Seattle
2016 - Ottawa, Toronto I, Toronto II
You are right. No one can even come close to imagining what it is like to be in the parent's shoes.
That said, They may be hanging on to the sense of closure they got when the Death Penalty came into play and were looking towards the day when Echols was executed. That was yanked form them and another trauma confronted them.
“Because of public pressure that exploded due to gross misrepresentations of fact in the two previous documentaries, Michael’s killers were unjustly able to enter into a plea agreement, were released from prison and now pose additional threats to society,” the letter reads. “We implore the Academy not to reward our child’s killers and the directors who have profited from one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated under the guise of a documentary film.”
Public pressure does not change the justice system we have in place. We do not have all of the facts, but, overturning a conviction is an extremely difficult task to complete. The Plea Agreement was drafted so the Prosecution could maintain the conviction. To say otherwise would open the door for every conviction done by this prosecutor and/or these police investigators for the past 18 years. The justice system worked as designed... none of the DNA evidence matched any of the three men. The prosecution is allowed to save face and prevent the district attorney's office from getting swamped by appeals from every convict tried by the specific D.A. and police.
The anger is misdirected. It should be directed towards the prosecution who bowed to pressure to close this case. That is what allowed the person or persons who actually commited these heinous crimes to roam free.
Let's all hope that the DNA points to the real guilty parties.
Hail, Hail!!!
Do you equate their pain with the pain of parents living with the reality that their children were murdered in grotesque fashion? Certainly anguishing and hard... but not quite the same wouldn't you agree? This post seems somewhat like a dismissal of the previous post which expressed the need to empathize with the murder victims' parents.
agreed.
1996 - Toronto
1998 - Montreal, Toronto
2000 - Montreal, Toronto
2003 - Toronto, Montreal
2004 - Boston I, Boston II
2005 - Kitchener, London, Hamilton, Montreal, Ottawa
2011 - Toronto I, Toronto II, Ottawa
2013 - London, Seattle
2016 - Ottawa, Toronto I, Toronto II
Please present the evidence to me.
The prosecution claimed the three boys were killed in the creek by the WM3... this is not humanely possible due to the fact that not a single one of them had a mosquito bite on them. These three were dropped off in the creek.
It is difficult to go against 9 of the US best forensic minds who studied the case and found that the WM3 are in fact just the easy explanation.
But, if you/someone has evidence to counter, I would like to see it.
:-)
Peter Jackson Announces Completion of West Memphis Three Doc
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=84836
WingNut Films has announced the completion of the documentary West of Memphis, which covers the story of the West Memphis Three. Here is the full press release:
WingNut Films proudly announced today the completion of WEST OF MEMPHIS – a documentary film chronicling the untold story behind one of the most infamous miscarriages of justice in American history; the story of an extraordinary and desperate fight to stop the State of Arkansas from killing an innocent man.
The film has been produced by first-time filmmakers Damien Echols and Lorri Davis, in collaboration with the Academy Award-winning team of Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh. Jackson and Walsh became involved in 2005, when they helped to re-invigorate the then stagnant case by funding a new investigation. The film has been written and directed by Academy Award-nominated filmmaker, Amy Berg (Deliver Us From Evil).
Starting with a searing examination of the police investigation into the 1993 murders of three eight-year-old boys – Christopher Byers, Steven Branch and Michael Moore in the small town of West Memphis, Arkansas, the film goes on to reveal hitherto unknown evidence surrounding the arrest and conviction of the other three victims of this shocking crime – Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley Jr.; all three of whom were teenagers at the time of their arrests and all three of whom spent 18 years and 17 days in prison for crimes they did not commit.
How the documentary came in to being is in itself a key part of the story of Damien Echols' fight to save his own life; it reveals how close he and his wife Lorri Davis, along with his legal team, friends and supporters, came to losing that battle.
As Echols has stated: "September 2008 was one of my lowest points. Judge David Burnett had refused to hear any new evidence – this included new DNA testing… as if proof of our innocence was somehow irrelevant. I thought we had come to the end of the line, that there was nowhere else to go. It was at this point that Fran and Peter suggested that maybe there was another way of fighting back… that if the evidence was not going to be allowed to be heard in a court of law, it would be heard in another forum. That was when they said to me and Lorri, ‘We should make a film'."
WEST OF MEMPHIS reveals the exhaustive research that uncovered startling new findings pointing to the innocence of Echols, Baldwin and Misskelley Jr. and includes new forensic evidence that points to other suspects that the West Memphis police chose to overlook. It was this new evidence as highlighted in the documentary that ultimately prompted the Arkansas Supreme Court to overturn previous denials of appeals and allowed for a new evidentiary hearing to proceed.
Faced with the very real prospect of a new trial being granted and in order to avoid potentially large compensation claims for wrongful imprisonment, the State of Arkansas struck a deal with the West Memphis Three, as Echols, Baldwin and Misskelley Jr. had come to be known, whereby the men agreed to enter an Alford plea; an unusual and rarely used legal maneuver through which the defendant is able to assert their innocence whilst accepting it is in their best interest to allow a guilty plea to be entered against them, in exchange for their freedom. The film follows these events and examines how the State Prosecutor's declaration that the case is now closed, leaves three innocent men convicted of a crime they did not commit and a triple child murderer still at large.
Director Berg says, "This film represents the trial these men didn't have. With the support of Damien and Lorri, along with unprecedented access to those closest to the case, we were able to make a film that shows the inner workings of the defense – the investigation, research, and appeals process, in a way that has never been shown before. This film began as a study about innocence; but I feel it goes beyond that now – it asks the question, what value do we, as a society, place on the truth?"
Says Jackson, "Seven years ago, Fran and I began this journey with Damien and Lorri, having no idea where it would lead. We now realise, that journey is not over, that even though these men have been released from prison – they are not free. Our hope is that continuing evidence testing and further investigation will lead to the unmasking of the killer of these children and that one day Damien, Jason and Jessie will be exonerated."
In addition to never before seen footage about the case and the trial, WEST OF MEMPHIS includes interviews with Echols, Davis, Baldwin, Misskelley Jr. and Jackson as well as interviews with friends and families of the victims, defense lawyers, state prosecutors, local law enforcement, judges, forensic experts, journalists, surprise witnesses and prominent supporters including Eddie Vedder, Henry Rollins and Natalie Maines.
Original music for the film has been written by acclaimed songwriters and composers Nick Cave and Warren Ellis.
The film has been Executive Produced by Ken Kamins who will be leading discussions with potential distributors.
and Devil's Knot is being made into the movie, directed by Atom Egoyan
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0804463/
The evidence that I find hard to just simply overlook and completely ignore from a distance include the confession, the statements made by Nichols regarding facts about the case that he normally should not have known, and the circumstantial evidence related to microfibers as well as Nichols 'less than stable' personal history prior to the event. I know what the classic dismissals for each of these are so save the comment- these items by themselves at least warrant a mild level of suspicion.
With the aforementioned said, I am not an expert. Far from it. What I can say is that it would at least appear that many people have managed to create 'possibilities' for alternative scenarios which may or may not be likely- casting doubt (including my own) of the boys' involvement. For example, whether right or wrong, the bloody knife of the stepfather has managed to raise the eyebrows of some. Yet, the nature of the crime seems to point at multiple parties involved in committing it.
There is a story there. I don't know what it is. I really can only formulate my opinion based on what I have read. If the boys were indeed not responsible, they needed to be freed. This is what has occurred so I can truly accept it as the right thing to have happened; however, I think it is fair to say that the media and messages we receive tend to sway public opinion. Initially, the public was convinced the three were the culprits and now, with various efforts, a flip-flop of public sentiment has manifested itself.
I am not trying to argue with you. I hope that the right thing has occurred. I feel terrible for the parents. It shames me to be human (in particular a male one) when I read of cases such as these and am presented with further ones- a young girl is currently missing from my community and, while holding hope, I am outraged.
Suspicious things are not hard facts. Nichols is a mentally challenged kid who was bullied into giving incorrect information about the murders... hence saying it happened during the day when the boys were at school.
You aren't arguing with me, you are just saying there is suspicion in the case (I understand that). I am sure with enough circumstantial evidence I could get a conviction of Ghandi.
The parents (in my opinion) want to believe what they want to believe.
A documentary creates interest in this case. It doesn't glorify any of the three and Echols has said point blank the the wants to continue till he finds the real killer/killers.
Keeping the case alive is a good thing for the parents of the victims.
Perhaps some day they will get the correct answers they seek?
:-)
Nichols was not mentally challenged- Misskelley was. Nichols was a troubled youth with a very questionable past. I seriously think that it would be difficult getting a conviction of Ghandi when damning circumstantial evidence wasn't enough to convict OJ Simpson.
:-)
This was just a cover for his Mission Impossible 'Recover the Heisman' escapade. Did I bring this guy into the conversation... sorry. Man, if he isn't one of the all-time biggest dorks I'm not sure who would be?
Well, they want and need to hold someone responsible and extract a measure of justice for their son - a completely reasonable desire. And now, because so much time has past, the likelihood of that happening is a lot slimmer than it was at the time the crime was committed. So it is natural for them to want to cling to those convicted as the 'real killers'. People want closure, and if they can't have that, they want the illusion of closure.
The WM3 is a perfect example of the police, under intense public pressure to be 'tough on crime', arresting and prosecuting what are quite probably the wrong guys. And as a result, everyone involved (except for the real killers) has suffered....and justice might now never be served.
Sadly, the Troy Davis execution in Georgia is a similar situation, only in that case, a man was executed for a crime he quite possibly did not commit.
Unfortunately, in both cases the real murderers are running around free, having never served even a day in prison....and now, they most likely won't.
This is why the public needs to back off with the moral outrage and let the police do their jobs instead of putting pressure on them for a quick arrest. If The Innocence Project has taught us anything, it is that mistakes are sometimes made - and the likelihood of those mistakes occurring increases exponentially in cases where there is a big rush to arrest someone - ANYONE - in an effort to satisfy the blood lust of the general public..or where the top law enforcement official is an elected office beholden to the public (especially during election years).
A bit off topic... but...
Remember, in 1994, DNA evidence was a new science in the courtroom. There were some people that actually didn't believe that DNA proved anything. In both cases, Simpson and WM3, DNA evidence was not sufficient enough to convince juries that Simpson was guilty... and the WM3 were not.
We've come a long way since then. DNA proves that the samples gathered at the crime scene did not belong to any of the victims... or any of the men charged and convicted:
"The DNA evidence has been developed during a state collateral proceeding statutorily established in 2001 in Arkansas partly because of continuing questions as to the accuracy of the verdicts in this case. It establishes that no genetic material of the defendants was present on the victims’s bodies, as it would have been if the crimes occurred in the manner hypothesized at Echols’ trial. On the other hand, there was genetic material on the penis of Steve Branch that could not have come from any of the defendants or victims. "
ref. http://www.dpdlaw.com/2ndAmendedHabaes.htm
...
DNA will convict this person... law enforcement must first, FIND this person.
...
I feel for the parents... but, killing someone who was not guilty of the crime to gain closure... is not justice.
Hail, Hail!!!
read the book devil's knot.
then you will know why the plea deal was done the way it was and why noone will ever be brought to justice for the murders
A lot of people think Terry Wayne Hobbs, stepfather of Stevie Branch killed the three kids. I think I heard his ex-wife even has suspiscions now. She used to believe the WM3 did it until recently, now shes convinced they didn't. Along with Mark Byers, stepfather of another boy doesn't believe the WM3 are guilty anymore.
The fact they found one of Terry's hairs in the shoelace knots which bound one of the kids and this deposition definitely has me leaning that way as well...
http://www.wm3blackboard.com/forum/index.php?board=52.0
It makes a hell of a lot more sense than three teenage kids (one borderline mentally retarded) in a satanic cult sacrificing three kids without leaving a shred of physical evidence behind.
:wave:
Honestly, if keeping this from getting an oscar nomination helps the parents of the victims have some peace of mind then ban the film from the oscars because who cares about an award anyway. The movies helped save 3 lives from rotting away for no reason.....it's the big winner reguardless come oscar night. I'd look at these films even in a better light than I already do if they film makers said...we don't need an oscar award for our film and out of respect to the 3 dead little boys we withdraw.
What about the parents who think the WM3 are innocent and still want justice to be served? What about their piece of mind? This film could bring more attention to the case and eventually lead to catching the real killer(s).