- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
4
Posted on 6/19/17 at 9:29 am to slapahoe
quote:
was terry hobbs DNA at the scene? I ask because I haven't really looked deep into this case
Yes. They recovered hair in the bindings used to hogtie the boys and matched it to his DNA. Talk about a smoking gun.
LOL at the mouthbreather downvoting this.
This post was edited on 6/19/17 at 9:37 am
Posted on 6/19/17 at 9:29 am to Zach Lee To Amp Hill
quote:
there is a lot of "evidence" that makes them look guilty as well.
Right, I wouldn't base my opinion on just the documentary, which is skewed. Do some more research then form an opinion.
Posted on 6/19/17 at 9:30 am to REG861
quote:
jesus, for the last time, they were cleared by DNA evidence. That's 100%, foolproof science (which I know some of you don't trust). You don't have a Satanic Blood Orgy and not leave behind a microscopic amount of genetic evidence.
A lack of DNA evidence doesn't prove innocence. It suggests it. The burden of proof is on the prosecution, however, and again, I don't think they came close to meeting it. But it's nonsense to say that solely because they didn't find any DNA evidence, they must be innocent. Particularly back when the trial occurred and DNA evidence wasn't as strong.
This post was edited on 6/19/17 at 10:26 am
Posted on 6/19/17 at 9:33 am to crap4brain
quote:
Right, I wouldn't base my opinion on just the documentary, which is skewed. Do some more research then form an opinion.
Right, I'm basing it off of DNA science. Or the fact that the government's star witnesses all recanted afterwards and apologized and said they were offered leniency in their own sentences to lie. Or the fact that Misskelley's "confession" was off on the time of day the boys were killed, the manner in which they were killed, and falsely stated that they were raped (they were not sexually assualted). Wouldn't a murderer know those basic facts about his crime? Or the fact that the abusive stepfather's hair was found in the bindings that tied them up. Is there anything else I can help you with?
Posted on 6/19/17 at 9:38 am to OMapologist
(no message)
This post was edited on 6/29/17 at 1:51 pm
Posted on 6/19/17 at 9:42 am to Zach Lee To Amp Hill
God, I can still picture the creek bed crime scene to this day. 
Sickening that some "human being" could do such a thing to three young boys.
Sickening that some "human being" could do such a thing to three young boys.
This post was edited on 6/19/17 at 9:48 am
Posted on 6/19/17 at 9:45 am to Zach Lee To Amp Hill
quote:
there is a lot of "evidence" that makes them look guilty as well.
Yep....if this would have been in Memphis, TN and not West Memphis, AR these boys would have fried a long time ago I think.
Total incompetence at all levels of the justice system in West Memphis.
Posted on 6/19/17 at 9:49 am to LSU316
The whole town of W Memphis needs to be leveled.
Posted on 6/19/17 at 9:53 am to Rebel
Yea I drove through there one time when I had some work up around Jonseboro and Paragould. It was rough....and this was 10+ years ago.
Posted on 6/19/17 at 10:02 am to REG861
why did damien lie so much about his alibi?
Posted on 6/19/17 at 10:11 am to LSUTigersVCURams
quote:
The West Memphis Three case was a Rorschach test to determine where you stood on the culture war in the 90s and 2000s......There are no winners in these kinds of grotesque kabuki shows in late republic America.
AAAAnnndddd SCENE.
Posted on 6/19/17 at 10:13 am to Zach Lee To Amp Hill
quote:Damn.
February 8, 1994: He put his hand on a Bible and swore to his attorney (Dan Stidham) that he, Damien, and Jason committed the murders. Further, he told Stidham that he was drunk on Evan Williams whiskey during the murders and the broken bottle could be found where he threw it on the ground under a bridge in West Memphis on his way home from the crime scene. Stidham told prosecutors he would believe his client's confession if he could find that bottle. So Stidham, WMPD Inspector Gary Gitchell, and the prosecutors drove to West Memphis to look for it. They found a broken Evan Williams bottle in the exact area that Stidham indicated Jessie said it would be. According to Prosecutor John Fogleman, Stidham directed the group to search the I-40 underpass nearest to Wal-Mart (near the current sight of Kroger), and the men found the broken bottle in that location. Further corroborating this story is the fact that Jessie mentioned in this 2/8/94 confession that Vicki Hutcheson was the one who bought him Evan Williams whiskey on the day of the murders. When the attorneys called Hutcheson she confirmed that she did, indeed, buy Jessie a bottle of Evan Williams on the day of the murders.
This definitively puts him at the scene.
shite, maybe they did do it.
Posted on 6/19/17 at 10:24 am to Roaad
I think that proves he drank whiskey that day.
This post was edited on 6/19/17 at 10:37 am
Posted on 6/19/17 at 10:34 am to OMapologist
It doesn't appear we will ever know what happened which is a travesty.. do I believe the Memphis 3 should've been convicted..no. I am also not 100% sure they didn't do it.. the documentaries paint a story of doubt and innocence but much more evidence exists and the documentaries have some outright falsehoods..
Posted on 6/19/17 at 10:45 am to OMapologist
I think Mr. Bojangles was involved for sure.
Shoddy police work for sure. You mean to tell me a guy covered in grass, mud, and blood on the night of the murders runs into a Bojangles bathroom, and locks himself in, and runs away before the police get there, and he is not even investigated as a potential subject?
Shoddy police work for sure. You mean to tell me a guy covered in grass, mud, and blood on the night of the murders runs into a Bojangles bathroom, and locks himself in, and runs away before the police get there, and he is not even investigated as a potential subject?
Posted on 6/19/17 at 10:50 am to LSUTigersVCURams
quote:
a Rorschach test to determine where you stood on the culture war in the 90s
This is hard to believe for some, but growing up a metal head in the late 80s...well, it was fricked up. Damien said "modern day Salem" and he wasn't kidding, especially down here.
I was a devil worshipping POS for wearing a Slayer shirt to a football game. And condemned to Hell for being in a band that played Metallica, Iron Maiden, Anthrax. shite, it was 1989 and I was 17 with no clue how bad my family was talked about.
This was in BR, too.
Posted on 6/19/17 at 11:18 am to tigerfootball10
quote:
I think that proves he drank whiskey that day.
. . .at the scene of the crime. He states this as part of a confession he made 2.5 hours after being questioned. When you see little details like this corroborated by evidence, it makes the rest of the confession look genuine.
Posted on 6/19/17 at 11:27 am to Roaad
The prosecutors literally fed Misskelley those facts. The transcripts are publicly availableand in the documentaries. He got all the facts in the confession wrong the first time and you can read as the prosecutors tell him what to say so to fix that.
Example: misskelley said they killed the boys in te morning. The boys were at school that day and couldn't have been killed until the afternoon. Wouldn't a killer know this? The detectives prod him along saying 'dont you mean later on around five?' The whiskey bottle is another example. You can read all of this in t transcript. They change his story to fit the narrative over the course of the day long interrogation. All it means is a force fed confession .
Example: misskelley said they killed the boys in te morning. The boys were at school that day and couldn't have been killed until the afternoon. Wouldn't a killer know this? The detectives prod him along saying 'dont you mean later on around five?' The whiskey bottle is another example. You can read all of this in t transcript. They change his story to fit the narrative over the course of the day long interrogation. All it means is a force fed confession .
This post was edited on 6/19/17 at 11:29 am
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News