Posts
Check out Scott's comments about the WM3 case. He has a unique perspective and definitely worth the visit. Read at his website: We Are Movie Geeks
In its final review of the trial of Damien Echols, one of the men known as the West Memphis Three, the Arkansas Supreme Court last week agreed to consider an affidavit filed under seal last year by a Little Rock attorney. Echols was found guilty and sentenced to death for the murders of three eight-year-old children. Lawyers for the Arkansas attorney general's office had argued that the affidavit, which alleges juror misconduct, was irrelevant and should not be considered. Lloyd Warford, an attorney with the Arkansas Public Defenders Commission, filed the affidavit in May 2008 in the circuit court in Jonesboro where Echols and co-defendant Jason Baldwin were tried in March 1994. Baldwin was sentenced to life in prison. Sources familiar with the case say that, in it, Warford states that Kent Arnold, the foreman for the Echols-Baldwin jury, telephoned him repeatedly while the trial was in progress and talked about what was happening. Judge David Burnett, who officiated at the trial, expressly forbade such discussions. Lawyers for Echols argue that Arnold's conversations with Warford compromised the integrity of the jury process and that Echols deserves a new trial. Documents submitted to the Supreme Court by Echols' lawyers describe the content of the men's conversations, without identifying either of them by name. According to those filings, Arnold told Warford that he had prejudged Echols' guilt, based on news reports he'd seen from the trial of Jessie Misskelley Jr., a third defendant in the case whose trial was held a month earlier. A jury found Misskelley guilty, largely due to a confession he made to police that implicated Echols and Baldwin. Those two were tried separately from Misskelley because they did not confess, and information about the Misskelley trial was not supposed to enter their trial. Nevertheless, the affidavit reportedly states, Arnold told Warford that he was growing frustrated by the “weak, circumstantial” case prosecutors were presenting against Echols and Baldwin, and that if they did not present something powerful soon, it would be up to him to secure a conviction. A large chart used by jurors during their deliberations and a smaller one kept by one juror support the claim that jurors for Echols and Baldwin discussed the Misskelley confession. Until filing his affidavit, Warford, a former prosecuting attorney who was once an assistant director of the Arkansas Division of Youth Services, had no role in the case. Arnold knew Warford because he'd represented his brother on a charge of child rape, eventually resolved by a guilty plea to first-degree sexual abuse. Warford did not come forward with the information about his contact with the jury foreman until May 2008, after a co-worker recalled hearing him mention the improper conversations and passed that information to Echols' lawyers. Warford did not return a phone message seeking comment. In 2004, two lawyers representing Echols interviewed Kent Arnold. According to affidavits they filed, Arnold said that Misskelley's confession had been “a primary deciding factor” in the jury's conviction of Echols.
Its been nearly 16 years since Damien Echols was sentenced to die for the murders of three 8-year-old boys in West Memphis. Echols' wife says new evidence proves the wrong men are behind bars. Lorri Davis has been married to the death row inmate for 10 years.
"I am not going to stop until we get them out of prison," says Davis.
Freeing her husband is Davis' mission.
It's a fight she lives and breaths every day.
She explains, "Once you meet him its just like everyone says there's no going back."
Damien Echols is one of only about 40 inmates on Arkansas' death row. It's been nearly 16 years since he and two others were convicted of murdering three 8-year-old boys in West Memphis.
Echols spends at least 23 hours a day in solitary confinement.
Davis says, "It is amazing how someone who has pretty much grown up in a box how intelligent and knowledgeable he is on so many things."
Davis sees him only once a week, but sooner rather than later she says that will change.
"If it were tried today and we knew what we know now on all three cases there is no way they would have been convicted," she says.
Last month, Echols requested to the Arkansas Supreme Court to grant him a new trial. The petition is based on new DNA evidence that defense lawyers say doesn't tie the three men to the crime scene.
Also listed is alleged juror misconduct that is associated with the Jessie Misskelley confession.
"It is strong compelling evidence to prove their innocence. It does. It proves their innocence," Davis says.
It's a confession that the judge ordered not be used in deliberations.
Davis says, "We found one of the jurors and she had her original notes. Sure enough five lines down [there was] Jessie Misskelley confession and it was used to convict."
It will likely be a few months before they hear if a new trial will be given. Until then, Davis' mission will continue, in hopes of one day having a marriage outside prison walls.
She explains, "I would hope that everyone's marriage or relationship would be as amazing as ours is on that level."
The defense says DNA found at the crime scene does not match Echols, Baldwin or Misskelley. That was enough to change the mind of Christopher Byers' father. Byers is one of the victims. Early on, he was convinced the West Memphis Three were responsible for his son's death. Now he believes they are innocent.
The Attorney General and prosecutors will not comment on the case because of a gag order.
Former Nypd HOMICIDE Detective Seeks New Evidence in West Memphis Three Case
Launches Confidential New Evidence Tip Line --(501) 256-1775
Former NYPD homicide detective Jay Salpeter, who uncovered crucial new evidence leading to the exoneration of Martin Tankleff, has joined the effort to free the West Memphis 3. Private investigator Salpeter will ask the public’s help in his investigation seeking the truth in the murders of the young boys. Lorri Davis and others leading the effort to free Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley, will join him at a news conference on Tuesday, April 14 at 10:30 a.m. at Trios, Pavilion Room, 8201 Cantrell, Little Rock.
“There are people who may have information about what really happened the night three 8-year-old boys were tragically murdered in West Memphis in 1993. I am convinced there are those who can help provide new evidence in this case and now want to do the right thing. Please call the confidential tip line and tell me what you know that can prevent the execution of Damien Echols and free these innocent men,” said Salpeter.
Salpeter is interested in meeting with the man found injured in Bojangles’ Restaurant on the night of murders. “He may have seen something that night that could prove crucial.”
Echols, Baldwin and Misskelley were convicted in 1994 for a crime they did not commit, and have served 16 years in prison. No physical evidence, eyewitness testimony or motive tied the three local teens to the murders, only a coerced, false confession that was immediately disavowed. Damien Echols was sentenced to death; Jessie Misskelley and Jason Baldwin were sentenced to life imprisonment. New DNA and forensic evidence proves that these men were wrongfully convicted.
Who: Investigator Jay Salpeter
What: Launch confidential tip line and provide latest news on legal efforts to gain new trial
When: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 – 10:30 a.m.
Where: Trios, Pavilion Room 8201 Cantrell, Little Rock, AR
[Error filled account of Jessie's hearing in Jonesboro. Read it for the big picture...]
Attorney Deems Client was Incompetent
Jill Monier
JONESBORO, Ark. - 16 years after being convicted for killing 3 West Memphis boys, Jessie Miskelley's court appearances continue. Friday, his new attorney tried to convince a Jonesboro judge to grant Miskelley a new trial based on the fact he had inadequate representation during his 1994 trial.
Miskelley, Jason Baldwin and Damien Echols were convicted of killing Christopher Byers, Stevie Branch and Michael Moore. Their bodies were found nude, in a West Memphis drainage ditch.
Police say Miskelley originally confessed to the murders, But his lawyer at the time says Miskelley had the mind of a child and only confessed because he thought it meant he could go home.
One victim's father, Matt Byers, was at the Jonesboro hearing.
He's told FOX13 before he's not convinced the men behind bars are the killers.
"I basically hated them with every fiber in my body. I just knew they were guilty until about seven months ago when I got started thinking for myself. For years I always believed what the state of Arkansas told me."
Miskelley's former attorney says in 1994, he was focused on his client accepting a plea deal and missed signs that he was incapable of understanding what was going on.
He told a judge, Miskelley was unable to understand the role of an attorney. He said his former client only understood yes, no or multiple choice questions and constantly changed his story.
The assistant state Attorney General claims Miskelley did get adequate legal help and only changed his story to appear less involved in the boy's death.
The hearing continues in August. Miskelley is serving a life sentence plus 40-years.
Jason Baldwin is also asking for a new trial. The judge already turned down an appeal by Damien Echols, who is on death row.
JONESBORO, Ark. (AP) - Hundreds of hours spent to defend a man convicted of the 1993 slaying of three West Memphis 8-year-old boys became the focus Thursday of an effort to win him a new trial.
Going line-by-line over a report of hours billed to Jessie Misskelley Jr. after his trial, Assistant State Attorney General Kent Holt sought to show that lawyers for Misskelley provided him adequate legal help during his 1994 trial.
However, Misskelley's chief lawyer at the time testified that he initially missed signs that his client's weak mental faculties caused him to confess to killings he said came from a satanic ritual.
Misskelley, now 33, is serving a life-plus-40-years sentence for taking part in the killings of Stevie Branch, Christopher Byers and Michael Moore. Police found the boys' bound bodies in a watery ditch a day after they went missing from their quiet neighborhood. One of the boys was sexually mutilated.
Misskelley later told detectives that he watched Jason Baldwin and Damien Echols sexually assault and beat two of the boys. Misskelley told detectives that he ran down another boy trying to escape.
But former Misskelley lawyer Dan Stidham, now a Greene County district judge, said Thursday that his client only confessed to police because he thought it would mean he could go home. Misskelley, then a 17-year-old with what Stidham called a "Gomer Pyle and Mr. T haircut," was a high school dropout who huffed gasoline and often told lawyers that "I ain't all here," Stidham said.
Misskelley thought his lawyers were police officers and only parroted an ever-changing confession to them, Stidham said. When lawyers tried to "get him back on script" for a possible plea deal, Misskelley still changed his story and only answered questions with simple responses, Stidham said.
"He really didn't seem to understand who we were or what we were doing," Stidham said. "It was hard to get him to open up."
Holt, however, suggested that Misskelley only changed his story to make it appear like he was less culpable in the boys' deaths. He went page by page through a statement showing the billable hours Stidham's law practice accumulated while preparing for trial.
"You didn't just fall off the turnip truck and represent Jessie Misskelley," Holt told Stidham.
During the hearing Thursday in Craighead County Circuit Court, Holt asked Stidham to read through notes he took during a 1993 interview with Misskelley. A woman in the courtroom gasped as Stidham read through details Misskelley provided of the alleged boys' sexual assault.
Misskelley "saw boys kicking around in the water," Stidham read. "Client was afraid to go back and help so he left."
Misskelley also claimed that Echols wanted to "try to (raise) dogs, cats and birds from the dead" and "stuck his tongue through the skull of a bird," Stidham read.
Misskelley, dressed in a striped shirt, dark blue jeans and shiny black dress shoes, sat silently during the testimony and showed no response. He remained cuffed at the ankles and wrists during much of the hearing, turning only to talk with family members seated in the front row of the courtroom.
A prison tattoo of faded blue ink could be seen on top of Misskelley's shaved head - a clock with Roman numerals and no hands, signifying serving time.
In the time since the killings, documentaries about the case sparked interest in the men sympathizers call the "West Memphis Three." Supporters of the men raised about $1 million to hire new lawyers and conduct DNA testing.
Special Judge David Burnett, who oversaw Misskelley's original trial, said the hearing would resume Friday. Baldwin, who also is asking for a new trial, did not attend Thursday's hearing as his out-of-state lawyers had schedule conflicts.
Burnett has already rejected an appeal by Echols, who is on Arkansas' death row. While Baldwin and Misskelley's appeals continue, Thursday's hearing appeared not to sway Burnett. The recently retired judge rolled his eyes and stared at the ceiling during some of Stidham's testimony.
[Note: This is a from a press release we received so we take no credit for awkward phrasing and inflammatory remarks]
New Evidence Confidential Tip Line - 501-256-1775
New DNA and Forensic Evidence and Juror Misconduct Cited in Plea to Overturn Wrongful Conviction
Prominent Arkansas Attorney Files Sworn Affidavit Stating Jury Foreman Urged Other Jurors to Convict Based Upon False Confession
(Little Rock AR, March 26, 2009) – DNA testing and other powerful forensic evidence - combined with a sworn affidavit that the original jury foreman engaged in blatant misconduct that contributed to the jury’s decision - proves that Damien Echols was wrongfully convicted of three notorious 1993 murders in West Memphis, Arkansas, according to legal papers filed today in the Arkansas Supreme Court asking to overrule a lower court decision and grant Damien Echols a new trial.
Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley were convicted in 1994 for crimes they did not commit, and have served 15 years in prison. There was no credible physical evidence, eyewitness testimony or motive tying the three local teens to the murders. Damien Echols was sentenced to death and Jason Baldwin to life imprisonment at their joint trial. Misskelley was tried separately and sentenced to life in prison.
Case History
Three eight-year-old boys were found dead in a drainage ditch in Robin Hood Hills, a local wooded area near their homes in West Memphis, on May 6, 1993. Less than a month later, 17-year-old Jessie Misskelley “confessed” to the crime and claimed that Echols and Jason Baldwin sexually abused and beat the victims. Misskelley, a mentally handicapped boy with an IQ of 72, believed he would get a reward for confessing; many of the details of his confession (including the time of day the crimes were committed and the claim of sexual abuse) did not match the facts of the crime. Misskelley was tried and convicted of first-degree murder in February 1994. Baldwin and Echols were tried together after Misskelley’s trial, and were convicted of three counts of first-degree murder. The following day, Echols was sentenced to die, and he has been on death row ever since.
At the time of Damien Echols’s trial, there was no scientific evidence to support the prosecution’s case and a poisonous atmosphere during trial contributed to his wrongful conviction. The prosecution alleged that Echols and two other teenagers committed the crimes as part of a satanic ritual and provided testimony from a faux “expert” whose words created a Salem witch trial atmosphere.
Echols was 18 years old and penniless at the time of his trial, and a court-appointed attorney representing him failed to challenge a pattern of inaccurate and inflammatory statements made by prosecutors and others during the trial, failed to engage forensic experts who could have refuted the testimony that was used to convict Echols, and entered into a contract with documentary filmmakers prior to the trial which improperly influenced legal decisions in the defense.
Crime Scene DNA Does Not Match Echols, Baldwin or Misskelley
Dozens of pieces of evidence found at the crime scene conclusively show that no DNA from the murders matches Echols or the other two men. DNA testing, however, links Terry Hobbs, stepfather of one of the murdered children, to the crime scene, and other evidence has emerged implicating him in the crimes. [Editor's note: Hobbs has denied such charges in the past.]
A hair found in the knot used to bind the victims matches Terry Hobbs. Tests also show foreign DNA – from someone other than Echols, Baldwin and Misskelley – on two of the victims. DNA matches a hair at the murder scene to another man who was with Hobbs on the day of the crimes. This places Hobbs at the scene of the crime, since it refutes any theory that the Hobbs hair was there before the crime. DNA testing linking Hobbs to the crime scene was not available at the time of the trial.
In addition, scientific evidence from the nation’s leading forensics experts demonstrates that most of the wounds on the victims were caused by animals at the crime scene, after their deaths – not by knives used by the perpetrators, as the prosecution claimed and was the centerpiece of the prosecution’s case. Moreover, evidence presented that a knife recovered from a lake near one defendant’s home caused the wounds was completely discredited by the pathologists. As well, the testimony of a jailhouse informant and a faux “expert” who testified that the knife wounds were part of a satanic ritual was deemed incredulous by these forensic scientists.
Jury Foreman Engaged in Shocking and Illegal Activity During Trial
Echols’s brief also informs the Supreme Court that a prominent Arkansas attorney who is a former prosecutor and state official filed a sworn affidavit with the trial court detailing the contents of improper conversations that the jury foreman held with the attorney while the original trial was in progress, clearly violating the law and the rights of Damien Echols and Jason Baldwin to a fair and impartial trial. In those conversations, the jury foreman indicates that he had prejudged Echols’s guilt and was trying to convince other jurors to convict based upon news reports of the false confession of Jessie Misskelley, which was barred from admission at the Echols-Baldwin trial.
During one conversation, the jury foreman told the attorney that the prosecution had presented a weak case, and that the prosecution had better present something powerful the next day (the end of the prosecution’s case) or it would be up to him to secure a conviction.
The Arkansas Attorney General has opposed placing the affidavit, originally filed in May 2008 in the Circuit Court that tried the three defendants, in the record before the Arkansas Supreme Court.
Lower Court Decision Denying New Trial Based Upon DNA Law is Flawed and Narrows Legislation’s Intent
In 2001, the Arkansas Legislature passed a law granting post-conviction access to DNA testing. The law passed partly as a result of widespread doubts about the convictions of Echols, Misskelley and Baldwin. The lower court’s decision denying Damien Echols a new trial based upon its narrow interpretation of Arkansas’ new scientific evidence statute (DNA law) was flawed and limits the possibility of any wrongfully convicted defendant of obtaining justice using DNA results. In denying Echols a new trial, the state essentially declares that unless the new DNA establishes absolute exoneration it is not relevant. The judge’s decision would not grant relief, “no matter how scientifically conclusive that a petitioner is not the source of relevant DNA, if not legally conclusive in favor of innocence.”
In fact, according to the Arkansas law (Ark.Code 16-112-201,et seq.) “A person is entitled to a new trial insofar as he can demonstrate that the DNA test results, when considered with all other evidence in the case, regardless of whether the evidence was introduced at trial, establish by compelling evidence that a new trial would result in an acquittal.”
Dennis Riordan and Don Horgan, Echols’s lead counsel, assert in their brief before the Supreme Court that “the evidentiary showing made by petitioner completely undermines the state’s evidence and convincingly points in the direction of alternative suspects. Every reasonable juror hearing Echols’s new evidence would doubt his guilt; indeed, any such juror could be confident of his innocence. Petitioner has more than satisfied the standard for relief set forth in Arkansas’ new scientific evidence statutes.”
New Evidence Confidential Tip Line - 501-256-1775
My Groups
-
Human Rights Updated: Yesterday
Neighborhood
Explore friends, family, friends & family, or entire neighborhood.
