Moonlight wrote:Yep I saw it when it first came out. You know people confess to crimes they did not commit all the time. That one kid you talked about, he was held for many, many hours and urged to confess. He was told it would all be over with if he just confessed so he did. Many parts of the confession were wrong. Some things he said they did, the autopsy did not match up with. That is why they are free. The others, they were just teenagers stupid kids who suddenly had the worlds attention and they were messed up enough to play a part.
The stepfather of one of the boys is now strongly suspected as the person who killed the children. The guy they had shooting the guns pretending things he was shooting was those kids.
Jeep! wrote:Why do I imagine Dead Metal sounding exactly like Arnie?
Intah-wib-buls?
Blurrz wrote:10/10
Leave it to Dead Metal to have the word 'Pronz' in his signature.
SlyTF1 wrote:Well that's disturbing...
Jeep! wrote:Why do I imagine Dead Metal sounding exactly like Arnie?
Intah-wib-buls?
Blurrz wrote:10/10
Leave it to Dead Metal to have the word 'Pronz' in his signature.
Dead Metal wrote:Dude, current evidence points to them being innocent.
So they weren't exactly "normal", so what, that doesn't make them guilty for that crime, so far it seems the only evidence against them is that they where "weird".
Also, interrogations for murder crimes are way more extreme and hardcore than "eating all the cookies".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrogation
Loads of innocent people have admitted to murder and other high profile crimes just to finally have it over with, just to then be proven innocent in court.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_confession
Dead Metal wrote:SlyTF1 wrote:Well that's disturbing...
NO! THIS IS DISTURBED!
SlyTF1 wrote:Dead Metal wrote:SlyTF1 wrote:Well that's disturbing...
NO! THIS IS DISTURBED!
Ah, the song about the murder was made by Disturbed. How ironic.
decepta-scott wrote:SlyTF1 wrote:Dead Metal wrote:SlyTF1 wrote:Well that's disturbing...
NO! THIS IS DISTURBED!
Ah, the song about the murder was made by Disturbed. How ironic.
It is isnt it? I didnt know what he posted as the cpu Im using is a p.o.s but Im guessing it was a pic of the band that sant the song three.
Jeep! wrote:Why do I imagine Dead Metal sounding exactly like Arnie?
Intah-wib-buls?
Blurrz wrote:10/10
Leave it to Dead Metal to have the word 'Pronz' in his signature.
Jeep! wrote:Why do I imagine Dead Metal sounding exactly like Arnie?
Intah-wib-buls?
Blurrz wrote:10/10
Leave it to Dead Metal to have the word 'Pronz' in his signature.
Jeep! wrote:Why do I imagine Dead Metal sounding exactly like Arnie?
Intah-wib-buls?
Blurrz wrote:10/10
Leave it to Dead Metal to have the word 'Pronz' in his signature.
decepta-scott wrote:".........Compassionate reader you simply recycle the same crap over and over. You say things like those murderers were convicted on others "false" confessions when in fact none of those people have said they were lying."
All three of the falsely convicted men said that they were innocent when they accepted the Alford plea. I'm not sure who you meant when you said "those people" but the mother of one of the softball girls has since said that Damien was not being serious when he made the statement at the ball park. Michael Carson, the jailhouse snitch who claimed that Jason "confessed" to him in the juvenile hall, has said in the most recent documentary "West of Mempbis" that he was high on LSD at the time and didn't know what he was saying while employees at the juvenile hall have said that Jason and Michael weren't ever alone together long enough for the conversation to have taken place. Joyce Cureton, the supervisor at the juvenile hall at the time, testified at the Rule 37 hearing that she was told to be unavailable to testify for the defense. Jessie has said that what he said was what the police told him to say. If you are referring to any other "people" than those, please tell me.
"There are plenty of senarios where that hair could have been transfered to the other child via terrys own child. For you to go on about all the elaborate set ups and off the wall ways those murderers are innocent and then say that theres no possible way a child could have a hair from his friends father passed to any part of his body is just silly."
I disagree. There aren't "plenty of senarios" (sic) to explain the presence of Hobbs' hair in the ligature of Michael Moore. There are only two scenarios that would explain that - either Hobbs left the hair himself or it was secondary transfer. Since Hobbs claims that he didn't see any of the boys on May 5th, secondary transfer is less likely, IMO, than Hobbs leaving the hair himself because we know that Hobbs is a proven liar. The Jacoby hair presents an even more unusual situation. The boys were not with Jacoby at any point during May 5th. Jacoby claims that he was never near the discovery ditch, and he also claims that Hobbs was at his house "playing guitars" early that evening. So, again there are two possibilities. If Jacoby is lying, he could have left the hair when he went to the discovery ditch. Or, Hobbs could have picked up the hair when he was with Jacoby and left it at the discovery ditch himself. That's it. The important thing here that you seem to be missing is how these two hairs got to the discovery ditch if the teenagers were the murderers, and, even more important, why were none of the teenagers' hairs at the scene? Was the water magic in that it only washed away the teens' hairs while leaving the hairs of two innocent men? I find that highly unlikely.
"You say your hubby got that satanic book in the sixties yeah? That would put you right at the murderers age at the time they killed those babies yes? Thought so. You Didnt read a satanic bible that your ol man brought in the house? I cant prove other wise but I submit that you didnt have a problem with it either and thusly have an open mind to it at very least. I believe that you did indulge that lifestyle while at the murderers age possibly took guff for it and that is why you blindly defend those murderers."
First, I didn't read the Satanic Bible because my husband and I weren't married (or even living together) at the time he had the book. Second, yes, at the time he got the book, we would have been about the age of the teens. Guess what? WE NEVER KILLED ANYONE! The fact that a person owns a certain book does not make him/her a murderer. THAT WAS MY POINT! Teenagers (and young adults) often have unusual tastes and buy and read unusual things. It's part of the maturing process.
"Please stop acting like it is perfectly normal for teens to go about admitting to murderers. To quote the mighty megatron Shock value my boran compressor."
I didn't say it was "perfectly normal" for teens to "go about admitting to murderers (sic)." My experience with teenagers has shown me that they often make outrageous threats against family and/or peers, and they VERY RARELY carry out such threats. And, Damien never threatened the victims. However, false confessions, especially by teenagers or mentally challenged persons (and Jessie was both) are far from rare. I don't care whether you personally would admit to a murder that you didn't commit. I don't think I would, either. However, that doesn't mean that false confessions never occur.
"Howard stern in known for his shock value. He is perhaps one of the most shocking people in the u.s.He is hated for the shocking things he has said for decades now and NEVER ONCE has he had to say he murdered three babies."
So what? Again, that doesn't mean that false confessions never occur. Please research the Norfolk Four as one example.
"You cant tell me you dont see how silly this all sounds. Good god woman."
Obviously, I don't think that my scenario sounds "silly" or I wouldn't put it forth. I'm not in the habit of saying "silly" things on Internet boards. Are you?
"That murderer echols was clearly NOT playing when he said that he loved to be thought of as a bogy man and to have children fear for their lives when thinking of him. He wasnt saying that for shock. Im sorry that YOU cannot see that, although Id bet that you actually can see it despite what you say."
Damien was being sarcastic when he made the "boogeyman" statement. It's just another example of a teen saying something for shock value. Again, that sort of thing happens all the time. I'm sorry that you can't see it.
"Listen up. Dont presume to act as if you know how it feels to loose someone in a brutal manor. Terry has shown no weird behavior. He also never said that people were showing too much sympathy. What he said was that people wouldnt leave him alone and that his wife was having an awful time getting over their sons death. How do you expect anyone to take you seriously when you intentionally misquote people to further your own agenda?"
I didn't quote Terry. Nor did you. He said that Pam couldn't "just get over" Stevie's death and he couldn't take it anymore. I advise you to watch the Pasdar deposition. As to me having never lost someone in a brutal manner, you're wrong. I have.
"When my youngest sister was raped and murdered I too dealt with it by trying to forget it completely. It is infact a common safety mechanism. I was lucky enough to not have lived in a small town where everyone weather they knew you or not would come up and talk your ear off about it. Same thing being said over and over and over and over again by everyone around you. Then to go home and have your wife on the floor drowning in tears and meloncholy. Id say he acted about as normal as expected given the circumstances.....How dare you even comment on that. You know shite lady."
When my 13-year-old cousin was killed, I did live in a small town. Everyone talked about it and asked me questions, and I was a child myself at the time - I was ten. My cousin's parents had trouble dealing with everything, but my uncle didn't leave my aunt two weeks later because she was still dealing with the grief. He stood by her and tried to help her cope. The whole family did. As an adult, when I was attacked and almost raped in the laundry room, my husband helped me deal with that situation; he didn't leave me two weeks later because I still needed to talk it out. And, when I was AGAIN sexually assaulted a few years later outside our apartment, my husband was there for me and didn't expect me to "just get over it" in two weeks. Don't presume to know my experiences, either. Yes, trying to forget is, for many, a common defense mechanism. However, it doesn't work for everyone, and for those who can't (or don't) use it, the others around them must allow them to grieve in their own way. Trying to force them to "get over" the situation will only make the grieving process longer and more painful for all concerned.
"You are aware that those murderers took an alford plea correct? That means that they agree that the state DOSE INFACT HAVE THE EVIDENCE TO CONVICT THEM.....but they still maintain they are innocent. Why do that and be forever labeled a baby killer? Why not take it to trial and be completely exhonerated if theres soooo much evidence to show their innocence? Why be on probation for decades if it would be an easy win?"
The Alford Plea said that the State had enough evidence that they COULD (not would) be convicted if they went to trial. Obviously, since they were already convicted, they knew that another kangaroo court could well convict them on the same bogus evidence. I don't think that another jury would have convicted them primarily because the whole Satanic panic thing is passe now. Scott Ellington didn't believe that another jury would find them guilty either, at least according to his interview published in a December, 2011, Gentlemens' Quarterly article. However, since these men had served over eighteen years in prison for murders that they didn't commit, I totally understand why they wouldn't want to trust the same justice (or should I say injustice) system that had already unjustly convicted them to get it right this time? And, they are not on probation. They have a ten year suspended sentence. They have no travel restrictions and they do not have to periodically report to a parole or probation officer. Please get your facts straight.
"OOOOH I know. Because those bumpkins in memphis want all "weird teens" put behiend bars and ultimately exicuted so they didnt want to gamble right? GET REAL!!"
The "bumpkins in Memphis," which is in Tennessee, don't have anything to do with a crime in West Memphis, Arkansas. Small town justice can often go astray. This case is one example of such. The McMartin preschool trials is another. The Salem witch trials are yet another. There are a plethora of examples of such a situation, if you just investigate. Would you gamble with your life?
"You have angered me now lady. I get mad when a clearly bias person defends baby killers because they see themself in them. Human nature dictates that anyone with a shred of a soul would show their emotions when talking to someone defending killers."
I'm sorry that you are angered. However, you, too, have a bias in this situation, as the previous poster mentioned. I don't think that I am "defending killers." I think that I am seeking justice for falsely convicted men.
"Once again Id thank you to cease saying that I am not educated on this case as I am. Thus far Im pretty sure the only thing youve corrected me on were the ages of the children killed and the shoelace. Hardly worth mentioning. My opinion should be taken every bit as serious as yours."
I never said that you didn't have the right to your opinion. You have said that you haven't read all of the case documents available at Callahan's. IMO, someone who has read those documents (as I have) is more educated on the case than someone who has not. That's all I said. I'm not saying that you haven't read anything. I'm saying that you haven't read everything, or at least, by your own admission, you haven't read the case documents readily available to anyone who wants to educate him/herself on the case.
"Thank you."
So what? Again, that doesn't mean that false confessions never occur. Please research the Norfolk Four as one example.[/QUOTE]
Admitting to the murder of three babies, bragging about it afterwards,knowing intimate details of the crime scene(reguardless of weather he confused laces with rope and got times wrong) are a FAR CRY from making typical teenage threats and boasts.
Threatning to get a tatto, running away, saying you are a black belt at karate and that you beat up five guys are the kinds of outraegous things teens make. NOT what those murderers said.
They say things to make themselves look cool or tough. To get people to think well of them. Bragging about killing three babies and saying they were going to do it again, Saying you love to be thought of as a boggy man by children AFTER you have been sentenced to death and the game is over do not qualify as a teens attempt at gaining popularity or shocking someone. GET REAL.
Wigglez wrote:Just remember. The sword is an extension of your arm. Use it as if you're going to karate chop someone with your really long sharp ass hand.
Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Hero Alpha, Majestic-12 [Bot], Nemesis Primal, Rodimus Prime, Sabrblade, Yahoo [Bot]