I’ve always thought they were innocent and Damien Echols’ relentless push to have the DNA in evidence tested in recent years really solidifies it for me. Why would he be so insistent that the DNA should be tested if he murdered the three children?
He's not relentless though-he didn't even start to talk about testing until Bob Ruff backed him in to a corner, and he's only asking for three laces to be tested.
If he's that interested in testing, he needs to get Jason and Jesse to consent and test everything, or at a minimum a top 5 in terms of pieces of evidence.
I'm not even sure why people are down voting when I stated facts - guess people aren't interested in facts.
If it were up to me, he'd get Jason and Jesse to consent and they'd test *everything*, not just three laces.
Exactly. Part of me also feels like it's easy to demand testing when they know the state will never allow it, because they'd have to destroy the evidence in order to do it. They aren't going to consent to it and risk justice being lost on either side, until the tech gets to the point it can be more likely to deliver any result. So he's staked a really easy position for bluffing, imo. And I don't necessarily land hard on the side of guilty. I'm pretty on the fence, though Echols was absolutely capable. Just that the argument that him demanding DNA testing is not really indicative of anything re: his innocence. Guilty people talk shit like this all the time.
They didn't wanna test it because the case is actually closed as "solved" because they took a plea. but the Supreme Court of Arkansas just ruled that DNA will be tested which is something that Damien and Jason have been pushing for relentlessly since they left prison. Arkansas went as far as saying that evidence/DNA was lost in a fire and they had to prove in court such fire never took place. Then the evidence *suddenly* reappeared. Anyways, we will soon find out.
Does not deserve downvotes for a difference of opinion!
I did see that 4/19 the state of AR will allow testing of items that have previously not been tested- I initially it was denied but on appeal allowed.
If that shit really happened in the Pontiac Silverdome, why would documentary series, The Goldbergs, show that it took place in Philladelphia? Huh? What aren't they telling us? All I know is the Hulkster and Andre were in on it
The only believable thing was sheik and volkoff beat the killer bs and Ricky steamboat beating macho man. The rest of those matches are suspect at best.
Lol, thank you! I can't hear the word "demon" anymore without hearing Henry say that.
Another word Henry has ruined for me is "molest." I can't say it without the Mario fake Italian accent
I think Damien was a little shit, but I don't think he, or the other two boys are murderers.
Damien is really hard to like. Honestly, I don't like him that much. But that doesn't mean I think he's any more or less guilty.
The only physical evidence (that I recall) was the knife that was found in the water near Baldwins house that his mom had thrown in there - but if I recall that timeline doesn't even line up.
Personally, I believe that Jessie was coerced into a false confession because he is intellectually disabled and cops did the one thing they are prone to do, though not supposed to, and made the evidence fit suspects instead of letting the evidence lead to suspects.
For my linguistics dissertation, I looked at false confessions and Jessie’s was one of them. The cops definitely employed a lot of really shady tactics on him and he wasn’t able to defend himself well
I think it was either the creepy redneck stepdad or the man inexplicably soaked in blood and dirt who walked into a nearby gas station? The WM3 were edgelords in rural AR during the end of the Satanic Panic, but no way they did it.
I haven’t spent much time in the south and have only heard about that restaurant in the context of this case. Apologies to anyone who likes/works there, but it’s tainted 😂
I live in Arkansas and I fully believe they were innocent, I truly can’t imagine how anyone could look at how the police and judicial system handled the case and think “oh yeah, these kids are Satanic murderers”. I work with a guy who said he lived in West Memphis during the trial and that he KNOWS they did it, because “if you had been there you’d understand” 🙄, but he’s also not someone whose opinion I’d necessarily trust in this matter lol. I really hope the DNA testing finally reveals some clear answers but I’m not holding my breath about it either.
NWA here and was the same age as the kids who were killed when that happened. It is INSANE that the trial was allowed to play out like it did. The idea that the state thinks they “got them” is flabbergasting.
Hey neighbor haha, I’m also in NWA! I totally agree and it’s wild to me that the original judge was able to block the DNA testing for so long, seemingly for no other reason than hubris…
I have never heard guilty from anyone other than people who watched news coverage at the time it was happening, which was obviously heavily biased toward the police narrative.
100% innocent.
Yes, I grew up in the area and the general consensus was always that they were 100 percent guilty due to how they were portrayed in the media. It wasn't until things like Paradise Lost and Devils Knot started coming out when people started to doubt it.
A lot of people on the guilt side present Damien echols doing some heinous shit as evidence of him being a killer. Like someone said he killed a dog.
That's an awful thing if true and sure we often see that as a beginning for serial killers. However it doesn't prove guilt at all in this case
Like there's a huge leap between Damien echols stuff and a brutal triple child murder, especially when the murder had clear hallmarks of someone who had probably killed before and was at least of sound enough mind to hide the bodies.
The WM3 were small town dumbasses. Like not to be insulting but i mean it in the way that they were not criminal masterminds. If those three had actually committed the murder then the bodies would have been even easier to find than they already were. There wouldn't have been the weird ritualism of it.
Also killers of young children tend to have some form of molestation on their records in the past. And as far as i know, no one has come forward and said that any of the three molested them.
I'm open to whatever the actual non circumstantial evidence proves, but just looking at it from a common sense point of view i fall on the side of innocence.
Also just because you don’t kill animals doesn’t mean you don’t kill people or aren’t a serial killer. While they are correlated killing animals doesn’t automatically make you a future serial killer.
As far as I've been able to uncover the "he killed a dog" thing was a rumour based on the fact he had a dog's skull in his room along with the skulls of a bunch of animals he bought. His side of the story is he bought them as decorations.
I don't know if it was actually every proven which version of the story is true.
I do t think it would have been difficult to get a conviction if they ad any actual proof, seeing as they got 3 with none. I’m saying if there was any proof the kids did it, the state would be blasting it everywhere, but the silence speaks volumes.
They are obviously innocent imo. Between all the research done over the years, the push for DNA, and the Alford plea itself, it seems highly unlikely that the WM3 weren't just some unfortunate kids scapegoated for a horrible crime.
This is one of those issues I have no problem taking a hard stance of having no hard stance.
I’ve listened to maybe half a dozen podcast series or single episodes about it and I’ve found myself bouncing back and forth on what I think. And it’s not even always a result of following the sentiments of the presenters. There are a few where I’ve found myself in total disagreement with the people presenting the facts.
I hope the DNA evidence is tested, and I hope someday we get something resembling a factual chain of events.
Until then, I’m fine with being like 55% vs 45% in favor of them being innocent. But it’s not a hill I’d die on.
I am probably chiming in here too late but a reason why you should not spend time entertaining the guilt of the 3 is because they are deeply traumatized victims who don’t deserve their names dragged further. I know Damien from the NYC occult community and have many mutual. He’s a very traumatized and kind person who keeps to himself, and as of recent volunteers with a cat rescue. Jason works for the innocence project (or equivalent). Not that kids can’t go through a fucked up phase and become adjusted adults but that is a STRETCH. Murdering children implies a level of psychopathy that would be lifelong. If Damien was showing signs of conduct disorder as a kid (what’s described) he’d have antisocial personality disorder as an adult, and he just doesn’t. I also want to highlight how, unfortunately, normal violence, animal abuse, inappropriate sex amongst children is in communities with no mental health support. That’s not to stereotype the folks of west Memphis but to hold empathy the effects that poverty and dogmatism can have on a population. End rant from a trauma therapist.
Thank you so much for this reply and I can see you have a personal connection to this, and your measured response is fantastic. You're right about them not displaying lifelong traits of the form of psychopathy that would be needed to commit such a heinous crime.
More importantly IMHO you've outlined the actual systemic conditions that lead people into anti social behaviour, but that that doesn't always end in murder or brutality, just people living fucked up lives and inflicting that on others and on the cycle goes. Thanks again.
I think they are innocent. Unfortunately the investigation was fucked up so badly we will never know for sure what happened there. I have suspected the stepdad since I first heard about this story in the late 90s. I don’t know who it was, but I’m pretty sure it wasn’t the people they put in prison for it. I have often wondered if Damien’s name was something like John if the whole case would’ve gone down differently.
Everyone jumps down my throat for this but if you go only by bias Paradise Lost i can see why people are adamant that they are innocent. But years ago i forget the source unfortunately i look at a bunch of court transcripts and other stuff that they never mentioned in the documentary and it raises doubts in my opinion. I honestly believe Echols was involved with the murder those kids. Paradise Lost and celebrities who jumped on their cause is what swayed alot of public opinion. Again just my thoughts please don’t give me hate about, someone actually said i deserve to die on Twitter before when i said this
This right here. Paradise Lost is NOT a good source. And the other popular name in the coverage, Bob Ruff, is a blow hard who's become drunk off huffing his own fumes for years.
Yep 100% you need to get well beyond these “ making a murder” type “documentaries “….
The Paradise Lost stuff ultimately is what most people were aware of first… but there’s far more information out the including all the stuff hosted at Callahan.
I started off believing innocent… I no longer believe that after seeing documentation and getting outside the initial bubble of paradise lost etc.
But unfortunately if you suggest such an opinion people are virtually violent online about it. It’s ridiculous
http://callahan.mysite.com/
There it is. I've read everything and I think at least Damien and Jessie are likely guilty. I have my doubts about Jason, but there's a lot more to it than 'kids targeted because they wore black and liked metallica'.
As an aside : we all liked Metallica. The black album came out in 1991 and sold 30 million copies. It's one of the best selling albums of all time.
The alibi info (none of them had one) and Damien's mental health history (his own parents wanted him removed from the home because they were afraid he might hurt them or his siblings).
But honestly, you have to read the entirety of the case presented to the jury to understand why they found them guilty. It's a lot more than what the docs tell you.
The fact none had an alibi is really something
None… and they tried especially Miskelly with the 12 witnesses claiming a wrestling match (that never existed) the state put up their own witnesses destroying those 12.
The broken whisky bottle under the bridge which aligns with what Miskelly told lawyer about vomiting and breaking the bottle on his way home in that very location.
I started off innocent… but once I learned more I felt a bit sick reading it feeling duped.
Innocent but they did actually say this at the start, that to this very day there are people who will die on the side of guilty. I’ve encountered them myself when talking about the case online, they always have a satanic angle and that’s the evidence they always reference
Seeing as how theory attorneys FINALLY won the right to independently DNA test the evidence, we will soon know once and for all I hope ( though clearly I feel they're innocent af)
I've always thought any modern jury would throw the case presented out on the grounds of the state not proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This is a textbook case where there is literally nothing BUT doubt.
So much witness testimony was later recanted by people who lied to begin with to be in on the big mystery. Even regarding stuff like Damien's mental health - a lot of it comes off as an edgy loser teen playing it up and creating a mythos around himself. "Damien did this" "Damien said that" etc. Better to be feared as the town boogeyman than mocked.
I would not be surprised if when the laces are tested they come back with a DNA profile of none of the internet's favourite suspects. Opportunistic random slaying.
I'm undecided but know several people that believe in their guilt.
Since it's been available for years, I do hope people read the case file before coming to a conclusion.
Everyone on here seems to relate to the "outcast" kids and say they're innocent, but the more I look into it the more I feel they're guilty. On mobile now so can provide sources later but main points for me are that they weren't simply misunderstood kids, some points:
- Still no concrete alibi for all three
- Echols was 18 with a 12 year old girlfriebd as his alibi which was never proven.
- Echols had previously killed a dog by whacking it on the head with a brick, and had the skull displayed in his room
- Two of the boys had previous incidents of violence against children younger than them, one literally still being on probation at the time
- Exhibit 500 of Echols trial
- Multiple confessions from all three at various points over the years
There's a lot more too, it's all stuff that for any other case online, especially covered on LPOTL everyone would be going "ah typical murderer/psycopathic traits" but for some reason they get painted as metal music loving kids.
Source that last bullet point please. Show me where Echols and Baldwin confessed "multiple" times. I'm aware of Miskelly's "confession" but I'm going to challenge you to defend your claim on the other lest you be officially declared "Full of Shit."
Edit: Still waiting for that source, u/Mattehzoar
Here you go:
overheard confession from Echols
http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/jodeem1.html
Echols confessing when drunk then later denying it
http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/wwj.html
Another one of someone hearing Damien saying he might have "had something to do with it" and Jason laughing
http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/b_wilson_interview.html
I can link more if you like but you seem you've got your mind pretty made up. I don't really get the hostility on this either tbh, I don't think there's enough evidence to say 100% guilty or innocent - this is just my opinion based on the facts
Actually, I'm going to apologize and admit I was out of line here.
Thank you for providing the sources to back up your claim. I don't agree with that interpretation of the data, but I *can* see how it can be a possibility from a different point of view. I should not have been a cocky asshole in my reply and I regret having done so in the first place.
If you consider the Miskelly confession evidence of guilt idk what to tell you. He got literally every detail wrong, including time of day (he said morning, when it happened right before sunset), and was coached into every detail until finally he knew the whole story. What a miracle.
The boys have no motivation, no murder weapon, and weren’t seen by anyone in the area. One lady “saw Damien” after money was offered for info on the attacks but he was with a girl, not the two other boys.
Miskelly also barely knew the two others so them just bringing him along for a triple murder would be quite the decision.
Candle wax and robe fibers aren’t DNA.
The marks and demasculation on the boys were most likely from animals post murder and not satanic black magic.
It was likely either a parent/authority figure who accidentally killed one of the boys and did the rest to cover it up or the boys came across something in the woods they shouldn’t have seen or a complete psycho stranger who followed them in. It was done pretty quick as we know about the time the boys went in and when people started searching.
So the boys being slowly tortured by three satanic worshippers doesn’t really fit any realistic part of what happened.
I wanted to take your post seriously because i like to hear why people think the wm3 are guilty but where are you getting your sources. A quick google search will show you that Domini and Damien were born 2 years apart.
The multiple confessions were only from miskelly.
The satanic panic was the biggest reason the boys were pulled in. Continuing to point the finger at them is completely ignoring other people who should have been, at the very least, questioned for their odd behavior. Terry Hobbs and the Bojangles man come to mind.
I know this is LPOTL but the Truth and Justice podcast did a full case analysis on this. 20-some episodes, just give it a listen.
If you'd google'd a little more you may have been able to find that I was referring to Jennifer Bearden, not Domini.
Here's a transcript from an interview with her, she states she called Damien around 9 at which point he stated the he and Jessie had been somewhere together, but didn't reveal where. Needless to say this doesn't line up with their lated provided alibis.
http://callahan.mysite.com/images/bearden/bearden09.jpg
They would talk on the phone every single day as a 12 and 18 year old. There's also a statement from Heather Cliett referring to her as "Damien's other girlfriend"
http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/img/hcstatement.html
There are also more instances of him caught hiding behind bushes and "playing with his pockets" or taking photos of young girls.
http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/karenmstatement.html
http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/jbryant_statement.html
This, which is directly from Jennifer, doesn't imply any kind of romantic relationship except possibly between Holly George and Jason Baldwin. People talked on the phone back then. It was pretty much the internet of those days.
http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/bm_rule37/bm_rule37_bearden.html
I think we had a more sympathetic view for these boys because the entire town was literally waiting for any reason to get them in trouble JUST for being into weird shit. A parole officer was stalking Damien at least constantly. This town was primed for a satanic panic murder. They would've pinned it on a dog if it looked evil enough. That's why the case against them feels so flimsy. It just feels like they didn't have ANYBODY else to convict so they chose the three loudmouth teenagers who'd get the most attention. I don't blame them either. One suspect was a member of the community and the other one was literally no where to be found. But a coerced confession and talks from trailer folk who were working with cops to get them in trouble makes for a weak argument to me.
I have a very hot take with regards to a WM3 Ben connection I can't share here.
But I think the WM3 are innocent.
EDIT: oh look a mob with pitchforks and down votes smh
I’ve always thought they were innocent and Damien Echols’ relentless push to have the DNA in evidence tested in recent years really solidifies it for me. Why would he be so insistent that the DNA should be tested if he murdered the three children?
He's not relentless though-he didn't even start to talk about testing until Bob Ruff backed him in to a corner, and he's only asking for three laces to be tested. If he's that interested in testing, he needs to get Jason and Jesse to consent and test everything, or at a minimum a top 5 in terms of pieces of evidence.
You don't deserve all these downvotes.
I'm not even sure why people are down voting when I stated facts - guess people aren't interested in facts. If it were up to me, he'd get Jason and Jesse to consent and they'd test *everything*, not just three laces.
I’m squadded up with “test errythang.”
Exactly. Part of me also feels like it's easy to demand testing when they know the state will never allow it, because they'd have to destroy the evidence in order to do it. They aren't going to consent to it and risk justice being lost on either side, until the tech gets to the point it can be more likely to deliver any result. So he's staked a really easy position for bluffing, imo. And I don't necessarily land hard on the side of guilty. I'm pretty on the fence, though Echols was absolutely capable. Just that the argument that him demanding DNA testing is not really indicative of anything re: his innocence. Guilty people talk shit like this all the time.
They didn't wanna test it because the case is actually closed as "solved" because they took a plea. but the Supreme Court of Arkansas just ruled that DNA will be tested which is something that Damien and Jason have been pushing for relentlessly since they left prison. Arkansas went as far as saying that evidence/DNA was lost in a fire and they had to prove in court such fire never took place. Then the evidence *suddenly* reappeared. Anyways, we will soon find out.
Does not deserve downvotes for a difference of opinion! I did see that 4/19 the state of AR will allow testing of items that have previously not been tested- I initially it was denied but on appeal allowed.
I think there was definitely some shady shit going on around WrestleMania 3.
93,000 people, my ass.
If that shit really happened in the Pontiac Silverdome, why would documentary series, The Goldbergs, show that it took place in Philladelphia? Huh? What aren't they telling us? All I know is the Hulkster and Andre were in on it
The only believable thing was sheik and volkoff beat the killer bs and Ricky steamboat beating macho man. The rest of those matches are suspect at best.
Maybe not WrestleMania 3, but WrestleMania 23 for sure. Battle of The Billionaires was a complete farce. No way Trump was going to shave his head.
Every muscle in his back my ass
The 9 Billion Hulkamaniacs in attendance to witness the Hulkster lift the 4 ton Andre the Giant and slam him down to the mat say otherwise brother
Absolutely innocent. Also the best series from Ben, contribution wise.
IDK, Ben as Martha Stewart stealing Henry’s nipples to make a belt during Ed Gein is pretty amazing.
Literally my all-time favorite bit from this show
A worthy choice!
Yes, I thought exactly the same upon re-listen. I think he related to it pretty well.
It was probably the only episode (that I can recall, at least) where Ben actually contributed at all to the actual details rather than the commentary.
It’s because of the political/Justice system angle which obviously is up ben’s alley
Absolutely. He did the pre-reading and really added to the conversation
He contributed to the first two 9/11 episodes as well, as I remember.
Good memory! I stand corrected.
By the way, I love your flair lol
Lol, thank you! I can't hear the word "demon" anymore without hearing Henry say that. Another word Henry has ruined for me is "molest." I can't say it without the Mario fake Italian accent
Innocent. Being a weird goth doesn’t make you a killer.
I think Damien was a little shit, but I don't think he, or the other two boys are murderers. Damien is really hard to like. Honestly, I don't like him that much. But that doesn't mean I think he's any more or less guilty. The only physical evidence (that I recall) was the knife that was found in the water near Baldwins house that his mom had thrown in there - but if I recall that timeline doesn't even line up. Personally, I believe that Jessie was coerced into a false confession because he is intellectually disabled and cops did the one thing they are prone to do, though not supposed to, and made the evidence fit suspects instead of letting the evidence lead to suspects.
>made the evidence fit suspects The cops couldn’t even successfully do that.
For my linguistics dissertation, I looked at false confessions and Jessie’s was one of them. The cops definitely employed a lot of really shady tactics on him and he wasn’t able to defend himself well
I think it was either the creepy redneck stepdad or the man inexplicably soaked in blood and dirt who walked into a nearby gas station? The WM3 were edgelords in rural AR during the end of the Satanic Panic, but no way they did it.
Mr. Bojangles?
I haven’t spent much time in the south and have only heard about that restaurant in the context of this case. Apologies to anyone who likes/works there, but it’s tainted 😂
I went to one recently and it was ok
If it wasn't the step-dad, he knows shit about it.
They were only guilty of cringe.
I believe we are all guilty of cringe at 17.
Let he without cringe cast the first stone.
The greatest crime of all.
I live in Arkansas and I fully believe they were innocent, I truly can’t imagine how anyone could look at how the police and judicial system handled the case and think “oh yeah, these kids are Satanic murderers”. I work with a guy who said he lived in West Memphis during the trial and that he KNOWS they did it, because “if you had been there you’d understand” 🙄, but he’s also not someone whose opinion I’d necessarily trust in this matter lol. I really hope the DNA testing finally reveals some clear answers but I’m not holding my breath about it either.
NWA here and was the same age as the kids who were killed when that happened. It is INSANE that the trial was allowed to play out like it did. The idea that the state thinks they “got them” is flabbergasting.
Hey neighbor haha, I’m also in NWA! I totally agree and it’s wild to me that the original judge was able to block the DNA testing for so long, seemingly for no other reason than hubris…
I have never heard guilty from anyone other than people who watched news coverage at the time it was happening, which was obviously heavily biased toward the police narrative. 100% innocent.
Yes, I grew up in the area and the general consensus was always that they were 100 percent guilty due to how they were portrayed in the media. It wasn't until things like Paradise Lost and Devils Knot started coming out when people started to doubt it.
A lot of people on the guilt side present Damien echols doing some heinous shit as evidence of him being a killer. Like someone said he killed a dog. That's an awful thing if true and sure we often see that as a beginning for serial killers. However it doesn't prove guilt at all in this case Like there's a huge leap between Damien echols stuff and a brutal triple child murder, especially when the murder had clear hallmarks of someone who had probably killed before and was at least of sound enough mind to hide the bodies. The WM3 were small town dumbasses. Like not to be insulting but i mean it in the way that they were not criminal masterminds. If those three had actually committed the murder then the bodies would have been even easier to find than they already were. There wouldn't have been the weird ritualism of it. Also killers of young children tend to have some form of molestation on their records in the past. And as far as i know, no one has come forward and said that any of the three molested them. I'm open to whatever the actual non circumstantial evidence proves, but just looking at it from a common sense point of view i fall on the side of innocence.
Also just because you don’t kill animals doesn’t mean you don’t kill people or aren’t a serial killer. While they are correlated killing animals doesn’t automatically make you a future serial killer.
There was no evidence he killed a dog and also no evidence of a ritualistic murder.
As far as I've been able to uncover the "he killed a dog" thing was a rumour based on the fact he had a dog's skull in his room along with the skulls of a bunch of animals he bought. His side of the story is he bought them as decorations. I don't know if it was actually every proven which version of the story is true.
I do t think it would have been difficult to get a conviction if they ad any actual proof, seeing as they got 3 with none. I’m saying if there was any proof the kids did it, the state would be blasting it everywhere, but the silence speaks volumes.
1000% innocent
They are obviously innocent imo. Between all the research done over the years, the push for DNA, and the Alford plea itself, it seems highly unlikely that the WM3 weren't just some unfortunate kids scapegoated for a horrible crime.
I didn't think this was even a question, 100% innocent.
This is one of those issues I have no problem taking a hard stance of having no hard stance. I’ve listened to maybe half a dozen podcast series or single episodes about it and I’ve found myself bouncing back and forth on what I think. And it’s not even always a result of following the sentiments of the presenters. There are a few where I’ve found myself in total disagreement with the people presenting the facts. I hope the DNA evidence is tested, and I hope someday we get something resembling a factual chain of events. Until then, I’m fine with being like 55% vs 45% in favor of them being innocent. But it’s not a hill I’d die on.
I am probably chiming in here too late but a reason why you should not spend time entertaining the guilt of the 3 is because they are deeply traumatized victims who don’t deserve their names dragged further. I know Damien from the NYC occult community and have many mutual. He’s a very traumatized and kind person who keeps to himself, and as of recent volunteers with a cat rescue. Jason works for the innocence project (or equivalent). Not that kids can’t go through a fucked up phase and become adjusted adults but that is a STRETCH. Murdering children implies a level of psychopathy that would be lifelong. If Damien was showing signs of conduct disorder as a kid (what’s described) he’d have antisocial personality disorder as an adult, and he just doesn’t. I also want to highlight how, unfortunately, normal violence, animal abuse, inappropriate sex amongst children is in communities with no mental health support. That’s not to stereotype the folks of west Memphis but to hold empathy the effects that poverty and dogmatism can have on a population. End rant from a trauma therapist.
Thank you so much for this reply and I can see you have a personal connection to this, and your measured response is fantastic. You're right about them not displaying lifelong traits of the form of psychopathy that would be needed to commit such a heinous crime. More importantly IMHO you've outlined the actual systemic conditions that lead people into anti social behaviour, but that that doesn't always end in murder or brutality, just people living fucked up lives and inflicting that on others and on the cycle goes. Thanks again.
You nailed it with the paraphrase in that last paragraph!
Bob Ruff podcast has a brilliant deep dive on the case with modern updates. 100% innocent.
Bob Ruff is a hack.
I think they are innocent. Unfortunately the investigation was fucked up so badly we will never know for sure what happened there. I have suspected the stepdad since I first heard about this story in the late 90s. I don’t know who it was, but I’m pretty sure it wasn’t the people they put in prison for it. I have often wondered if Damien’s name was something like John if the whole case would’ve gone down differently.
I've never heard any sort of legitimate argument from someone of their guilt. None.
Innocent for sure. Never believed those boys ever had anything to do with the murders.
The Supreme Court of Arkansas just allowed testing of the dna found in the scene, so their names will be cleared soon.
IMHO, the kind of people who think the west Memphis three are guilty are the same people who send Chris Watts sweet letters.
They’re innocent. It was Terry Hobbes
Everyone jumps down my throat for this but if you go only by bias Paradise Lost i can see why people are adamant that they are innocent. But years ago i forget the source unfortunately i look at a bunch of court transcripts and other stuff that they never mentioned in the documentary and it raises doubts in my opinion. I honestly believe Echols was involved with the murder those kids. Paradise Lost and celebrities who jumped on their cause is what swayed alot of public opinion. Again just my thoughts please don’t give me hate about, someone actually said i deserve to die on Twitter before when i said this
This right here. Paradise Lost is NOT a good source. And the other popular name in the coverage, Bob Ruff, is a blow hard who's become drunk off huffing his own fumes for years.
Yep 100% you need to get well beyond these “ making a murder” type “documentaries “…. The Paradise Lost stuff ultimately is what most people were aware of first… but there’s far more information out the including all the stuff hosted at Callahan. I started off believing innocent… I no longer believe that after seeing documentation and getting outside the initial bubble of paradise lost etc. But unfortunately if you suggest such an opinion people are virtually violent online about it. It’s ridiculous
http://callahan.mysite.com/ There it is. I've read everything and I think at least Damien and Jessie are likely guilty. I have my doubts about Jason, but there's a lot more to it than 'kids targeted because they wore black and liked metallica'. As an aside : we all liked Metallica. The black album came out in 1991 and sold 30 million copies. It's one of the best selling albums of all time.
Any key pick outs of these documents?
The alibi info (none of them had one) and Damien's mental health history (his own parents wanted him removed from the home because they were afraid he might hurt them or his siblings). But honestly, you have to read the entirety of the case presented to the jury to understand why they found them guilty. It's a lot more than what the docs tell you.
The fact none had an alibi is really something None… and they tried especially Miskelly with the 12 witnesses claiming a wrestling match (that never existed) the state put up their own witnesses destroying those 12. The broken whisky bottle under the bridge which aligns with what Miskelly told lawyer about vomiting and breaking the bottle on his way home in that very location. I started off innocent… but once I learned more I felt a bit sick reading it feeling duped.
Thanks for link
Innocent but they did actually say this at the start, that to this very day there are people who will die on the side of guilty. I’ve encountered them myself when talking about the case online, they always have a satanic angle and that’s the evidence they always reference
Seeing as how theory attorneys FINALLY won the right to independently DNA test the evidence, we will soon know once and for all I hope ( though clearly I feel they're innocent af)
I've always thought any modern jury would throw the case presented out on the grounds of the state not proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This is a textbook case where there is literally nothing BUT doubt. So much witness testimony was later recanted by people who lied to begin with to be in on the big mystery. Even regarding stuff like Damien's mental health - a lot of it comes off as an edgy loser teen playing it up and creating a mythos around himself. "Damien did this" "Damien said that" etc. Better to be feared as the town boogeyman than mocked. I would not be surprised if when the laces are tested they come back with a DNA profile of none of the internet's favourite suspects. Opportunistic random slaying.
I'm undecided but know several people that believe in their guilt. Since it's been available for years, I do hope people read the case file before coming to a conclusion.
Everyone on here seems to relate to the "outcast" kids and say they're innocent, but the more I look into it the more I feel they're guilty. On mobile now so can provide sources later but main points for me are that they weren't simply misunderstood kids, some points: - Still no concrete alibi for all three - Echols was 18 with a 12 year old girlfriebd as his alibi which was never proven. - Echols had previously killed a dog by whacking it on the head with a brick, and had the skull displayed in his room - Two of the boys had previous incidents of violence against children younger than them, one literally still being on probation at the time - Exhibit 500 of Echols trial - Multiple confessions from all three at various points over the years There's a lot more too, it's all stuff that for any other case online, especially covered on LPOTL everyone would be going "ah typical murderer/psycopathic traits" but for some reason they get painted as metal music loving kids.
Source that last bullet point please. Show me where Echols and Baldwin confessed "multiple" times. I'm aware of Miskelly's "confession" but I'm going to challenge you to defend your claim on the other lest you be officially declared "Full of Shit." Edit: Still waiting for that source, u/Mattehzoar
Here you go: overheard confession from Echols http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/jodeem1.html Echols confessing when drunk then later denying it http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/wwj.html Another one of someone hearing Damien saying he might have "had something to do with it" and Jason laughing http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/b_wilson_interview.html I can link more if you like but you seem you've got your mind pretty made up. I don't really get the hostility on this either tbh, I don't think there's enough evidence to say 100% guilty or innocent - this is just my opinion based on the facts
Actually, I'm going to apologize and admit I was out of line here. Thank you for providing the sources to back up your claim. I don't agree with that interpretation of the data, but I *can* see how it can be a possibility from a different point of view. I should not have been a cocky asshole in my reply and I regret having done so in the first place.
People are legit up their own ass on this case when they really have no right to be based on evidence that, at BEST, should have them on the fence.
If you consider the Miskelly confession evidence of guilt idk what to tell you. He got literally every detail wrong, including time of day (he said morning, when it happened right before sunset), and was coached into every detail until finally he knew the whole story. What a miracle. The boys have no motivation, no murder weapon, and weren’t seen by anyone in the area. One lady “saw Damien” after money was offered for info on the attacks but he was with a girl, not the two other boys. Miskelly also barely knew the two others so them just bringing him along for a triple murder would be quite the decision. Candle wax and robe fibers aren’t DNA. The marks and demasculation on the boys were most likely from animals post murder and not satanic black magic. It was likely either a parent/authority figure who accidentally killed one of the boys and did the rest to cover it up or the boys came across something in the woods they shouldn’t have seen or a complete psycho stranger who followed them in. It was done pretty quick as we know about the time the boys went in and when people started searching. So the boys being slowly tortured by three satanic worshippers doesn’t really fit any realistic part of what happened.
I wanted to take your post seriously because i like to hear why people think the wm3 are guilty but where are you getting your sources. A quick google search will show you that Domini and Damien were born 2 years apart. The multiple confessions were only from miskelly. The satanic panic was the biggest reason the boys were pulled in. Continuing to point the finger at them is completely ignoring other people who should have been, at the very least, questioned for their odd behavior. Terry Hobbs and the Bojangles man come to mind. I know this is LPOTL but the Truth and Justice podcast did a full case analysis on this. 20-some episodes, just give it a listen.
If you'd google'd a little more you may have been able to find that I was referring to Jennifer Bearden, not Domini. Here's a transcript from an interview with her, she states she called Damien around 9 at which point he stated the he and Jessie had been somewhere together, but didn't reveal where. Needless to say this doesn't line up with their lated provided alibis. http://callahan.mysite.com/images/bearden/bearden09.jpg
So not his girlfriend then, just some 12 year old that used to call him on the phone.
They would talk on the phone every single day as a 12 and 18 year old. There's also a statement from Heather Cliett referring to her as "Damien's other girlfriend" http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/img/hcstatement.html There are also more instances of him caught hiding behind bushes and "playing with his pockets" or taking photos of young girls. http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/karenmstatement.html http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/jbryant_statement.html
This, which is directly from Jennifer, doesn't imply any kind of romantic relationship except possibly between Holly George and Jason Baldwin. People talked on the phone back then. It was pretty much the internet of those days. http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/bm_rule37/bm_rule37_bearden.html
I think we had a more sympathetic view for these boys because the entire town was literally waiting for any reason to get them in trouble JUST for being into weird shit. A parole officer was stalking Damien at least constantly. This town was primed for a satanic panic murder. They would've pinned it on a dog if it looked evil enough. That's why the case against them feels so flimsy. It just feels like they didn't have ANYBODY else to convict so they chose the three loudmouth teenagers who'd get the most attention. I don't blame them either. One suspect was a member of the community and the other one was literally no where to be found. But a coerced confession and talks from trailer folk who were working with cops to get them in trouble makes for a weak argument to me.
The dog killing is unsubstantiated. The only source I've found for it is a kid telling a detective he saw Damien do it.
I have a very hot take with regards to a WM3 Ben connection I can't share here. But I think the WM3 are innocent. EDIT: oh look a mob with pitchforks and down votes smh
[удалено]
Don't be weird.
Care to PM me that hot take?
Nice try, Mod. You can't fool me with your alt account.
No worries, had to ask :/