West Memphis Three awareness day
 

6/3/07 is West Memphis Three Awareness Day, on the 14th anniversary of their arrest.
Shortly after three eight-year-old boys were found mutilated and murdered in West Memphis, Arkansas, local newspapers stated the killers had been caught. The police assured the public that the three teenagers in custody were definitely responsible for these horrible crimes. Evidence?

The same police officers coerced an error-filled “confession” from Jessie Misskelley Jr., who is mentally handicapped. They subjected him to 12 hours of questioning without counsel or parental consent, audio-taping only two fragments totaling 46 minutes. Jessie recanted it that evening, but it was too late— Misskelley, Jason Baldwin and Damien Echols were all arrested on June 3, 1993, and convicted of murder in early 1994.

Although there was no physical evidence, murder weapon, motive, or connection to the victims, the prosecution pathetically resorted to presenting black hair and clothing, heavy metal t-shirts, and Stephen King novels as proof that the boys were sacrificed in a satanic cult ritual. Unfathomably, Echols was sentenced to death, Baldwin received life without parole, and Misskelley got life plus 40.

For over 13 years, The West Memphis Three have been imprisoned for crimes they didn’t commit. Echols waits in solitary confinement for the lethal injection our tax dollars will pay for. They were all condemned by their poverty, incompetent defense, satanic panic and a rush to judgment.

But there’s still hope for them, and you can help.
http://www.wm3.org/

Hm. Figured there'd be at least one reply.

i watched Paradise Lost.
the documentary on it.

seems like they did it to me.

based on the "confession" that was factually incorrect on many accounts, the other possible suspects that nobody bothered to look into, or the lack of concrete evidence?

well i actually only finished the first half...theres prolly a shitload of stuf in there that i missed.

i doubt this will help though. worth a try i guess.

Did you get to the part where the people who said they heard Damien talk about the murders are cross-examined?

no i believe i missed that. it was probably key, wasnt it?

They conveniently couldn't hear anything BUT him say "I killed them and will kill again" or whatever they said he said, and IIRC it was at a crowded event.

I just finished watching this recently.
I too found it amazing how those witnesses overheard all that in a noisy, crowded room.
It does paint a very grim picture for the accused but flaws can be found in most of the investigation.

I kind of believe in letting things take their course in a case like this. Sure they could be innocent but if by some chance they're guilty then it would be a shame to set them free wouldn't it? It's lose/lose unless we know what really happened.

Yeah, I suppose they COULD be guilty, but Byers COULD be guilty. Based on the evidence available, that should not have been a conviction. Innocent until proven guilty.

What ever happened to original arresting officers in charge..??

I forget, I think one of them retired after the case.

I don't know that much about this case, which is why I didn't reply before, but the problem is, when the law thinks they have the right person or persons, it is really hard to get them to look in another direction. Once there is a conviction, it is damn near impossible.
The justice system is flawed, of course, and always will be, because of human error. If you have plenty of money, its much easier to find an attorney that can get you off on technicalities or make pretty important evidence look inconsequential. And if you have none, its easy to get a lawyer that doesn't care, or have the resources to fight the case properly. Its dangerous for someone to be convicted on no evidence or very thin "evidence". There is a reason why there is a burden of proof, and why if there is REASONABLE doubt, there just shouldn't be conviction.
People shouldn't be railroaded because they may or may not be guilty. There just has to be proof they commited the crime.
I am not sure if that is what happened here though, like I said, I just don't know that much about the case.

This so true.
Here in N.Z we had 2 such high profile cases..same thing..
1] Arthur Allan Thomas..
the detectives in charge actually planted the bullet casings in his garden.
He served 20 of his 35 yr prison sentence before being pardoned.

I Have Seen The Documentary And Am I Reading The Book On The Same Subject. I Personally Think That They Are Innocent And Had Nothing To Do With The Murders Of The Three Boys.

That's pretty much what happened. No murder weapon, no physical evidence, no motive, forced confession, et cetera. One of the prosecutors even said that without that confession, the case against them would be 50/50 at best.

Which is exactly why I can't get behind either side. I'd like to see the movie but I could never trust it to give me the whole truth. I hope justice is carried out and in the end the people involved get what they really deserve.

If you haven't seen the second documentary, it's really hard to form a concrete opinion. After watching Paradise Lost 2: Revelations, I wanted to rip the head off of that jack ass that was one of the dead boy's step father. He surely did it, and anyone who watched it would believe that too. It's disheartening to think in this day and time that such injustices still occur. That could be one of us rotting in that jail cell.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0239894/

Any movie, not matter how steeped in fact, can be (and in most cases is) biased toward one side or the other. I don't know how possible it would be to make a movie like that and be unbiased because then, why would you have the desire to create such a film in the first place?

The simple fact that there are so many questions without answers, lead them to make the movies. It would probably have been pretty dull if it was cut and dry.

Well, there's other sources of information.

This is true..
sometimes these movies/documentries only portray the belief of the
narrator or writer..so to speak

How many of them do you know are completely fair to both parties?

I have heard of the case but havent seen the documentary.

My guess is that the police rounded up the usual suspects in an effort to look like they are doing something.

I'm curious about that as well; I would want to get information from sources that just told the facts of the case, with no bias toward either side. And would it even be possible to find that? Seems like they is always a bias one way or another.

If I'm not mistaken, trial transcripts and case files are available.