WM3 New evidence!!!
Read

Church Point, LA

#61 Sep 9, 2008
mother goose wrote:
<quoted text> Well, I don't know. Were you being sarcastic?
No not at all..you?
Read

Church Point, LA

#62 Sep 9, 2008
supporter wrote:
Jessie's IQ was 72 not 87. No sticks were jabbed through the bodies. The sticks were used to hold the victims cloths in the mud underwater. The animal bites were done postmortem (after they died) and the emasculation of Chris Byers is even said to have been done by animals. This comes from FBI investigators, not some small town drug inspector. Their credentials far outweigh those from West Memphis who worked this case.
Why so confident of their innocence, you ask.
Out of all the evidence; DNA, bite marks, hair, prints, everything, none of it matches the accused. Again this comes from professionals. This is not words from the supporters.
All options were not explored. There was blood evidence that could have been linked to the crime and it was lost. Mark Byers has a vast criminal record. Terroristic threatening(death threats), drug charges, theft, fraud, physical abuse, among others. Yet he was all too quickly exempt as a suspect. Melissa Byers was an alleged heroin addict, she was also addicted to many prescription medications such as dilaudid and xanax. In addition she was involved in many of the crimes that Mark was involved in. She was never looked at as a suspect.
Mark Byers was a drug informant (a snitch). Drug dealers don't like snitches and will retaliate against them and their families. This was never even brought up.
Terry Hobbs also had a criminal record.
Chris Morgan, another person that had confessed and recanted just like Jessie, was dismissed from having to testify in court because his lawyer said he would plead the fifth amendment. This would have given the jury reasonable doubt (as if they already didn't have it) and the prosecutors didn't want that.
Every time the defense brought in a witness or an expert to testify, the prosecution objected. Burnett would dismiss the jury, then he would hear the testimony and decide if he wanted the jury to hear it or not. Then he would only allow parts of the testimony to be heard by the jury when they returned.
Jessie's confession was not to be used in Damien and Jason's trial. The jurors weren't even allowed to acknowledge it. Yet during their deliberation a list of pro's and con's was made for each defendant. Under the list of con's "Jessie's confession" was listed and then scratched out. Impartial jury??? Not a chance.
Well said!
supporter

Ozark, AL

#63 Sep 9, 2008
Shelly wrote:
SO supporter how do you know so much about it were you friends with them, how do you know they didnt do and and have lived around cons and crooks and murderers and became very good at lying, they may have not done it all but i guarantee they were there and they are were they should be.
There's this thing I do...It's called...Research! To be honest I don't know 100% that they did it or not. No one does, no one can possibly know that. If you spend any amount of time in a single place you're gonna leave DNA or some kind of evidence there. If you beat someone to death you're going to leave evidence, even if you're a professional killer, not to mention a teenager. But the DNA of the three in prison has been tested and compared and found not to match any..ANY...DNA found at the crime scene.
You say you guarantee that they were there. What gives you the impression that what you "think" is better than what professional FBI investigators have found? What you "think" VS. Science.
supporter

Ozark, AL

#64 Sep 9, 2008
barely sain says wrote:
<quoted text>Yes we can all agree everything book that is written and every movie written is 100% facts.
Just like we can all agree that judges and prosecutors are always 100% honest and upstanding citizens. They're never corrupt and never make mistakes. They would never accuse someone who might be innocent. Juries are alway impartial, and would never find a guilty verdict for someone who was actually innocent.
Are there any available homes in this "perfect world" you seem to live in? I'd like to move there.
Read

Church Point, LA

#65 Sep 9, 2008
supporter wrote:
<quoted text>
There's this thing I do...It's called...Research! To be honest I don't know 100% that they did it or not. No one does, no one can possibly know that. If you spend any amount of time in a single place you're gonna leave DNA or some kind of evidence there. If you beat someone to death you're going to leave evidence, even if you're a professional killer, not to mention a teenager. But the DNA of the three in prison has been tested and compared and found not to match any..ANY...DNA found at the crime scene.
You say you guarantee that they were there. What gives you the impression that what you "think" is better than what professional FBI investigators have found? What you "think" VS. Science.
I would of never believed they were charged the way that they were, until I read.

I cant believe that they actually went to prison with really no evidence.

You are right, I cant see how 3 teenage (boys) could of pulled this off without living a trace of DNA at the scene or on the victims. People that argue this on here have not taken the time to look up any facts at all on this case (other than News or the verdict). I began to look into from all angles when I started and what I ended up with floored me.

I am not saying that those 3 are innocent, I am saying that the prosecutors never proved they were guilty as far as evidence.

Since: Jun 08

Corning, AR

#66 Sep 9, 2008
supporter wrote:
Jessie's IQ was 72 not 87. No sticks were jabbed through the bodies. The sticks were used to hold the victims cloths in the mud underwater. The animal bites were done postmortem (after they died) and the emasculation of Chris Byers is even said to have been done by animals. This comes from FBI investigators, not some small town drug inspector. Their credentials far outweigh those from West Memphis who worked this case.
Why so confident of their innocence, you ask.
Out of all the evidence; DNA, bite marks, hair, prints, everything, none of it matches the accused. Again this comes from professionals. This is not words from the supporters.
All options were not explored. There was blood evidence that could have been linked to the crime and it was lost. Mark Byers has a vast criminal record. Terroristic threatening(death threats), drug charges, theft, fraud, physical abuse, among others. Yet he was all too quickly exempt as a suspect. Melissa Byers was an alleged heroin addict, she was also addicted to many prescription medications such as dilaudid and xanax. In addition she was involved in many of the crimes that Mark was involved in. She was never looked at as a suspect.
Mark Byers was a drug informant (a snitch). Drug dealers don't like snitches and will retaliate against them and their families. This was never even brought up........
I completely agree!!!!! I said a lot of the same things on here and I was told that since I was only 5 when all this happened I wouldn't know. I was 9 when it happened and I have watched the trials on tv. If the 3 suspects really did kill those 3 little boys then why did they mysteriously "lose" the evidence. One of the police officers quit after this case was over because he was "certain he had the right guys" but they still didn't have enough evidence to prove they really did do it. Mark Byers knife had blood on it which when it came back they said it had both Mark and Christopher's DNA on it and they had the same DNA. A stepfather and stepson canNOT have the same DNA. Not unless they were related somewhere down the line. Even then it wouldn't be the same DNA. There would be some similarities but they wouldn't be the same. Like I stated before, as far as I know the boys were never given a polygraph test and if they were then why didn't they use the results during the trials? Their alibies were never mentioned in the trials. If they did know their alibies then they obviously didn't check into them. I seriously don't think they did it. I think they've been serving a sentence for some other loser who is free to kill again. I do have a kid but I'm not going to be worried if these boys are set free from something they didn't do. There are too many pedophiles in Corning to worry about someone in West Memphis. If they are set free, they more than likely won't stick around here. So yes, I feel confident in saying the I hope these 3 guys are set free when theya re proven innocent. Sorry for any misspellings.
sunshine on a cloudy day

Jacksonville, AR

#67 Sep 9, 2008
supporter wrote:
Jessie's IQ was 72 not 87. No sticks were jabbed through the bodies. The sticks were used to hold the victims cloths in the mud underwater. The animal bites were done postmortem (after they died) and the emasculation of Chris Byers is even said to have been done by animals. This comes from FBI investigators, not some small town drug inspector. Their credentials far outweigh those from West Memphis who worked this case.
Why so confident of their innocence, you ask.
Out of all the evidence; DNA, bite marks, hair, prints, everything, none of it matches the accused. Again this comes from professionals. This is not words from the supporters.
All options were not explored. There was blood evidence that could have been linked to the crime and it was lost. Mark Byers has a vast criminal record. Terroristic threatening(death threats), drug charges, theft, fraud, physical abuse, among others. Yet he was all too quickly exempt as a suspect. Melissa Byers was an alleged heroin addict, she was also addicted to many prescription medications such as dilaudid and xanax. In addition she was involved in many of the crimes that Mark was involved in. She was never looked at as a suspect.
Mark Byers was a drug informant (a snitch). Drug dealers don't like snitches and will retaliate against them and their families. This was never even brought up.
Terry Hobbs also had a criminal record.
Chris Morgan, another person that had confessed and recanted just like Jessie, was dismissed from having to testify in court because his lawyer said he would plead the fifth amendment. This would have given the jury reasonable doubt (as if they already didn't have it) and the prosecutors didn't want that.
Every time the defense brought in a witness or an expert to testify, the prosecution objected. Burnett would dismiss the jury, then he would hear the testimony and decide if he wanted the jury to hear it or not. Then he would only allow parts of the testimony to be heard by the jury when they returned.
Jessie's confession was not to be used in Damien and Jason's trial. The jurors weren't even allowed to acknowledge it. Yet during their deliberation a list of pro's and con's was made for each defendant. Under the list of con's "Jessie's confession" was listed and then scratched out. Impartial jury??? Not a chance.
oh were you on the jury
sunshine on a cloudy day

Jacksonville, AR

#68 Sep 9, 2008
supporter wrote:
<quoted text>
Just like we can all agree that judges and prosecutors are always 100% honest and upstanding citizens. They're never corrupt and never make mistakes. They would never accuse someone who might be innocent. Juries are alway impartial, and would never find a guilty verdict for someone who was actually innocent.
Are there any available homes in this "perfect world" you seem to live in? I'd like to move there.
I'm so glad you agree!!!Yes there are homes available. The name of the street is easy street.
supporter

Ozark, AL

#69 Sep 9, 2008
sunshine on a cloudy day wrote:
<quoted text>oh were you on the jury
See first line of post #63.
sunshine on a cloudy day

Jacksonville, AR

#70 Sep 9, 2008
HannahLR wrote:
<quoted text>
I completely agree!!!!! I said a lot of the same things on here and I was told that since I was only 5 when all this happened I wouldn't know. I was 9 when it happened and I have watched the trials on tv. If the 3 suspects really did kill those 3 little boys then why did they mysteriously "lose" the evidence. One of the police officers quit after this case was over because he was "certain he had the right guys" but they still didn't have enough evidence to prove they really did do it. Mark Byers knife had blood on it which when it came back they said it had both Mark and Christopher's DNA on it and they had the same DNA. A stepfather and stepson canNOT have the same DNA. Not unless they were related somewhere down the line. Even then it wouldn't be the same DNA. There would be some similarities but they wouldn't be the same. Like I stated before, as far as I know the boys were never given a polygraph test and if they were then why didn't they use the results during the trials? Their alibies were never mentioned in the trials. If they did know their alibies then they obviously didn't check into them. I seriously don't think they did it. I think they've been serving a sentence for some other loser who is free to kill again. I do have a kid but I'm not going to be worried if these boys are set free from something they didn't do. There are too many pedophiles in Corning to worry about someone in West Memphis. If they are set free, they more than likely won't stick around here. So yes, I feel confident in saying the I hope these 3 guys are set free when theya re proven innocent. Sorry for any misspellings.
Oh i'm sorry I had your age wrong. There is no more difference in a 5 and 9 year old than there is in a car hop and a rocket scientist!
supporter

Ozark, AL

#71 Sep 9, 2008
sunshine on a cloudy day wrote:
<quoted text>Oh i'm sorry I had your age wrong. There is no more difference in a 5 and 9 year old than there is in a car hop and a rocket scientist!
Huh???
wondering

Paragould, AR

#72 Oct 6, 2008
please wrote:
To Supporter: You sure do think u know alot about this case. Are u Damian's wife or something or just one of them people who like to obsess over men in prison and marry them.
Apparently you were not on the jury and your comments mean nothing. Next time sit in on the jury. And just because you have a low IQ does not mean u can go out and do to 3 little boys what these so called "men" now did. Oh yeah, they've been there a while and probably have read every law book to try to get out of this like Dahmer, and Manson.
You think they're so innocent move to California with the rest of the idiots.
Apparently you haven't researched this case. Here is a link I think everyone should read.

http://www.wm3.org/live/evidence/wmpdevidence...
supporter

Ozark, AL

#73 Oct 7, 2008
How many people knew about the "rule 37" hearings last week...think you should look that up.
Duh

United States

#74 Oct 7, 2008
if I remember correct, their bodies w re in running water. would this not be similar to washing the bodies? would think Most, if not all, dna would be washed away.
Duh

Hobbs, NM

#75 Oct 7, 2008
http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_...

This is the link to TruTV.com it has alot of the details, trial notes, etc. I know it sounds morbid, but it is interesting reading.

A lot of things don't sound right in how the investigation was handled.

The witnesses...I can understand part of why they were not allowed to testify on some items. Lie detector tests are not admissible in court, so they are not allowed to discuss rather or not one was taken or if they did or didn't pass.

But we have to believe that the Justice System isn't flawed. They were found guilty by a jury.
guitar girl

Paragould, AR

#76 Oct 7, 2008
Duh wrote:
http://www.trutv.com/library/c rime/notorious_murders/famous/ memphis/index_1.html
This is the link to TruTV.com it has alot of the details, trial notes, etc. I know it sounds morbid, but it is interesting reading.
A lot of things don't sound right in how the investigation was handled.
The witnesses...I can understand part of why they were not allowed to testify on some items. Lie detector tests are not admissible in court, so they are not allowed to discuss rather or not one was taken or if they did or didn't pass.
But we have to believe that the Justice System isn't flawed. They were found guilty by a jury.
We have to believe the justice system isn't flawed? What a sophomoric statement. Since 1976 111 people found guilty of murder by a jury have been released from death row because of new evidence proving their innocence. Just because 12 people assume guilt doesn't mean you are.
Duh

Hobbs, NM

#77 Oct 8, 2008
But that doesn't necessarily mean our system is flawed.

Some, I know - not all, are proven because technology has come so far and they were able to analyze the evidence better. DNA evidence alone has come so far since it was first introduced.

It's not a perfect system, but it is all that we got. Do away with it completely and you are going to have chaos.
Duh

Hobbs, NM

#78 Oct 8, 2008
I did a google search looking for the stats that you are quoting. Where did you find them?

I did locate a study that the Justice Department authorized concerning new evidence and previous ruled cases. It was very interesting to read.

I really liked one of the summary paragraphs. It's not that the system failed us. Technology and the system (at the time of the court hearings) did exactly what they were suppose to do. They worked. We are just advancing so much.

Here is the link...

http://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/dnaevid.txt

and here is the quote....

The only clear conclusion that can be drawn is that this new technology can be used within the existing legal framework to undo past injustices.
In other words, both the science and the legal system worked in these cases!
supporter

Defiance, MO

#79 Oct 13, 2008
supporter wrote:
How many people knew about the "rule 37" hearings last week...think you should look that up.
Obviously not!!!!
supporter

Defiance, MO

#80 Oct 13, 2008
Or rather obviously no one.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Corning Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Poll Did you vote today? (Jun '10) 8 min BarneyII 40,039
Jr./Sr. High 7 hr bn 21
food Wed what??? 5
woman of Corning I wanna fool around Tue shouldnt 8
AJ is out Oct 16 MemphoWars 5
Corning's Harvey Weinsteins must be exposed Oct 16 SmokeOutHarveyYall 2
Corning Women: Do You Deal with a Harvey Weinst... Oct 16 HelpHotHoneys 1

Corning Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Corning Mortgages