12 posts tagged “filing”
by Cathy Frye
Defense attorneys for the three men convicted of killing three West Memphis boys in 1993 have asked a judge to examine a sealed affidavit that alleges improper conversations during the trial between the jury foreman and a nonjuror.
The request appears in documents filed Friday by the convicted men’s attorneys, who also entered three new exhibits of their own under seal.
One of the new exhibits is an affidavit from former Little Rock television reporter Lyndall Stout. According to the attached, explanatory court documents, Stout’s affidavit contains an assertion that the jury foreman admitted to her in the spring of 2005 that he and his fellow jurors discussed a confession that had been deemed inadmissible at Damien Echols and Jason Baldwin’s joint trial.
The documents, filed in Craighead County Circuit Court, say Stout’s affidavit corroborates the defense’s claim that there was jury misconduct during the trial. The reporter’s statement was entered under seal because it contains the name of the jury foreman. Jurors are identified in public documents by numbers.
But the name of the jury foreman is no secret. Juror No. 4, aka Kent Arnold, spoke to the Democrat-Gazette in 2000 and again on Tuesday.
Journalists and talk-show hosts from all over the nation have been calling him for years, Arnold said, but he usually doesn’t agree to interviews.
Arnold was the jury foreman during the joint trial for Damien Echols, then 18, and Jason Baldwin, then 16. Jessie Misskelley, then 17, was tried separately, since he gave a confession to police. Because Misskelley refused to testify against Echols and Baldwin, his confession couldn’t be admitted into evidence at the pair’s trial.
The defense has long contended that the Echols-Baldwin jurors disregarded this fact and still considered the confession during deliberations.
Echols was sentenced to death; Baldwin to life. Misskelley also received a life sentence. An international effort to obtain new trials for them has been under way for years, and appeals hearings are scheduled for this fall.
ASKING FOR A LOOK Friday’s defense filing asks Craighead County Circuit Judge David Burnett to look over an affidavit from a man who says Arnold discussed the case with him during the trial. The court documents assert that the alleged conversations bolster the defense’s claim that the Echols-Baldwin jurors “improperly discussed and relied on the Misskelley statement, as well as the claims that Juror Number Four had erroneously discussed the trial with a nonjuror before its completion and had prejudged the defendants’ guilt or innocence.” The man’s affidavit was entered under seal by his attorney, who isn’t involved with either the case or the current defense team.
No one, including defense attorneys, has yet seen a copy of that affidavit.
Earlier this year, defense attorneys heard that Arnold had been discussing the case with a nonjuror during the trial, the filing states. Attorneys pursued this information and located the man.
But when the defense team contacted the man, he told them he was “concerned about whether the information he possessed was subject to a claim of privilege by Juror Number Four.” Friday’s filing doesn’t identify the man, nor does it explain why privilege could be a factor. It asks a judge to release the affidavit to Arnold so that he may consider whether he wants to enter a claim of privilege. It also requests that defense attorneys and the prosecutor be given copies of the affidavit.
AN AGENDA ? Arnold, a home builder, assumes that the affidavit came from an attorney, given the question of privilege, but said he doesn’t know who it could be. He said he has relied on legal representation from several lawyers over the years in his business dealings. He can’t remember whether he called anyone during the trial, saying, “You’re digging way back into something from 15 years ago. I’m sure if there was something that came up that I did not understand, I would have asked somebody.” It’s possible he called an attorney and asked questions about procedures during the trial, he said, but he can’t remember anything that would have been considered improper.
“Asking what voir dire means — is that inappropriate ?
“ It wouldn’t surprise me to hear I asked questions about stuff. And it wouldn’t be unlike me to discuss post-trial what went on during the trial.” Arnold wondered if the man has an agenda in coming forward now, all these years later.
“Does he remember it accurately ? And what does he have to gain from it ?” Arnold also questioned the credibility of Stout’s affidavit. He contended that Stout was deceptive about who she was and what she was doing when she interviewed him. He also questioned why a reporter would sign an affidavit for the defense team. It would appear, he said, that she was working for them rather than putting together an objective news story.
Arnold said he brought up the confession only after Stout backed him into a corner, asking him to justify the jury’s verdict.
“Maybe you’re not aware of the Misskelley confession,” he recalls saying to the reporter.
He referred to it as proof that the jury, in the end, had made the right decision — not as something jurors took into consideration at the time of trial, he said.
“She misquoted me.” Stout is on maternity leave from her television job in Pennsylvania, according to the station’s Web site. She didn’t return a call for comment. Attorneys cannot discuss the case, having been threatened by Burnett with contempt of court if they talk to reporters.
WHAT HE RECALLS When asked Tuesday if the jury discussed Misskelley’s confession during deliberations, Arnold said: “During the trial, I think mention was made by somebody, a witness, in relation to Misskelley, and I think the judge said, ‘Oh, by the way, you can’t use that in... deliberations.’ “ Whether or not it was brought up, I don’t think I could be accurate in telling you one way or another,” he added, noting that it took place 15 years ago.
Arnold said the jury agreed to “throw all our ideas out on paper” in the form of a large list of pros and cons. “To the best of my recollection, we threw out ideas and that may have been one of them.” But jurors determined that they couldn’t consider the confession in their deliberations, Arnold said. It might have been then that someone scratched out items from the list, he added.
“That sounds like something that would have happened.” The defense has referred to the scratch-outs as evidence of juror misconduct.
In an April filing for Echols, his attorneys argued, “In Juror Four’s opinion, the jury could not ignore the Misskelley confession despite the court’s instructions to do so.” They base this belief on affidavits of two defense attorneys who interviewed Arnold in October 2004. Those documents also remain under seal because they contain the names of other jurors. Arnold said it bothers him that jurors don’t get to hear everything about a case during a trial.
“What’s interesting to me is that post-trial, when you get to go back and review the facts, is how much information they will not let come to a jury. Why not let the decision-makers have all that information ?” Asked if either the passage of time or new DNA test results have altered his opinion on the outcome of the Echols-Baldwin trial, he replied “I think the trial in its entirety was fair. Whenever you go looking back 10 or 20 years later, you ask, ‘Would you make that decision then based on what you know now ?’ “ The other jurors — I don’t know what they would say. I would say justice was served.”
Joint Status and Case Management Memorandum submitted by lawyers for all three and Brent Davis (to Judge Burnett) last week -- click here
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
RICHARD SHEPPARD ARNOLD UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE
500 W. CAPITOL, ROOM D444
LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-3325
(501) 604-5140
Facsimile (501) 604-5149
November 21, 2001
LETTER ORDER
Ms. Deborah Ruth Sallings
Cauley Bowman Carney & Williams, LLP
Post Office Box 25438
Little Rock, AR 72221-5438
Re: Damien Echols v. Norris, 5:04-CV-00391WRW
Dear Ms. Sallings,
I have reviewed and considered your second amended petition for writ of habeas corpus and the memorandum in support.
On November 7, 2007, I granted your motion to file the second amended habeas petition. However, after reviewing your petition and memorandum, it appears that you have not yet exhausted your state remedies (Doc. No. 20 at 5, 9).
Isn't it well settled that the state courts should have an opportunity to address a petitioner's claims of constitutional error before those claims are presented to the federal court? 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254; Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (2005); Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 731-33 (1991).
I plan to hold your second amended petition in abeyance pending exhaustion of state court remedies. You must file your amended petition with the Court no later than sixty (60) days after the state court's disposition. In addition, I request that you file monthly status reports to inform the Court of the status of state court proceedings. You must begin filing the monthly status reports on January 2, 2008. The Clerk of the Court is directed to hold the second amended petition in abeyance (Doc. Nos. 20, 21).
Finally, this Order renders the Attorney General's motion for determination of time to respond and alternative motion for extension of time (Doc. No. 28) moot at this time.
Cordially,
/s/Wm. R. Wilson, Jr.
Wm. R. Wilson
Original to the Clerk of the Court
cc: Mr. Dennis P. Riordan
Ms. Theresa A. Gibbons
Mr. Donald M. Horgan
Ms. Lauren Elizabeth Heil, Office of the Attorney General
Mr. Brent P. Gasper
Dan Stidham and, surprisingly to some, John Mark Byers, talk sense, acknowedging the impact of new evidence presented in Damien Echols' federal writ. Brent Davis on the other hand continues to live in the past with his confidence in the botched investigation of the Robin Hood Hills Murders, denying new technology and its revelations.
KAIT-8
Jonesboro, AR - Will Carter Reports
West Memphis Three: A closer look at the trials and new evidence.
"There's still no evidence linking these kids to that crime. The evidence points elsewhere," said Dan Stidham, Jesse Misskelley's long-time attorney.
The news he speaks of has been swirling worldwide since Monday when attorneys of the West Memphis Three filed a federal appeal stating that DNA evidence proves the innocence of the three boys convicted of murder in 1994.
"I don't see how anyone, how any competent person, could look at the evidence and come away without thinking there is something horribly, horribly wrong," said Stidham.
New evidence presented this week links gashes and scratches found on the three eight year old victims bodies to animal predation - meaning the boys fell victim to predatory animals after they were already dead.
"That brings a very, very important dimension to the case because it completely destroys the prosecution's theory, which of course is that this is a satanic-ritualistic homicide," said Stidham.
And the guilt of the West Memphis Three is fading fast in the public eye and now that of victims families.
"I believed with all my heart you killed my son, and I'm sorry for that."
That statement was made Thursday night by John Mark Byers in an interview with World News Tonight.
"I was a little bit stunned because I never thought that I would hear him say those words. He's been so adamant about his statements over the course of the last 14 years," said Stidham.
And that statement by the father of a victim is just one more reason the convictions of the West Memphis Three could eventually be overturned.
"I think that's very important, because if they can recognize that surely an appellate court can recognize that, and surely the Attorney General and the prosecuting attorney can recognize that. We can fix this. It's not too late to do the right thing," said Stidham.
So, with that said, we now take a closer look at the trials that lead to the convictions of the West Memphis Three back in 1994.
"These kids were throw away kids. They came from very poor families. They didn't have a chance," said Stidham.
The lack of money for Jesse Misskelly, Jason Baldwin, and Damien Echols could have been the very thing that convicted them of murder 14 years ago.
"The reason they were convicted is because of the satanic panic that occurred and existed here back in 1993. These were very horrible crimes. It was a national kind of crime that everyone was watching," said Stidham.
And with worldwide attention on the case, the pressure was on for police, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and most importantly the jurors.
"The result was verdicts based on fear and panic and not on anything reliable or scientific," said Stidham.
Now some 14 years later, DNA evidence could eventually overturn convictions of the West Memphis Three, but that is something that would prove mistakes were made and the killer or killers are still on the loose.
And in 1993 it was the desperation of finding the killers that led straight to the West Memphis Three.
"Those three kids stuck out like a sore thumb in West Memphis in 1993. They were the perfect patsies. All the stars and all of the moons lined up, and what happened happened," said Stidham.
But not without a lot of help from the confession of Jesse Misskelley.
His long time attorney says this was a big mistake.
"Misskelley's confession was not admissible, yet they all said they knew about it and they considered it in their deliberation. That is a gross violation of all concepts of our ideals of justice and due process. I've always been stunned that Mr. Echols and Mr. Baldwin were convicted," said Stidham.
But what's done is done, and until the three are exhonorated - there is no price tag that can describe freedom from a wrongful conviction.
"Someone is on death row. If he is executed we cannot go back and undo that. Nobody can write a check to someone big enough to give them 14 and a half years of their life back. I don't think it matters. I think what matters is that we get it right. We still have a chance for justice," said Stidham.
We talked with prosecutor Brent Davis who wouldn't comment other than to say that he still believes the West Memphis Three are guilty of the crimes they were convicted on in 1994.
Stay with Region 8 News as we continue to follow these new developments in the 14 year old case.
Not surprisingly, Arkansas continues to compund this injustice with endless delays and stonewalling. Ironically they claim objectivity while standing 'behind the conviction of Mr. Echols.' Is it any wonder federal relief is needed? Read statement below:
Tue, 30 Oct 2007
Arkansas Attorney General's Office statement on recent federal court filing of Damien Echols
Yesterday, Damien Echols, through his attorneys, filed a motion
seeking to amend, for the second time, his habeas corpus petition in
federal court. With the motion, he provided a copy of the amended
petition, brief and exhibits that he will file if allowed by the
court, all of which exceed 500 pages. The Attorney General's
office is seeing many of these allegations and supporting exhibits for the
very first time and, it will take some time to sort through them,
consult with appropriate experts, evaluate their validity and
respond. After the State responds, it is possible that discovery
will be conducted and a hearing held so that the federal district
judge can determine whether these allegations merit relief. As
litigation goes, this process will likely take months and possibly
years. Indeed, counsel for Echols has taken years to develop these
claims so it will take the State a fair amount of time to properly
respond.
Finally, while the State will look at the new allegations and
evidence objectively, it stands behind the conviction of Mr. Echols and that
of his codefendants and does not anticipate a reversal of the jury'
verdicts.
Gabe Holmstrom
Spokesman
Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaneil
501-682-0517
WMCTV-5
Reported by Janice Broach
Nov 1, 2007 02:20 PM
There is no evidence linking the West Memphis 3 to the murders of three eight-year-old boys in 1993. That was the message delivered Thursday by a panel of experts at a press conference in Little Rock.
Among those in attendance at Thursday's announcement was Damien Echols' wife, dressed in blue. She, along with members of the press and other interested parties, gathered in a classroom at the University of Arkansas Law School to listen to a panel of legal heavy hitters, including a defense attorney, an FBI profiler, and a forensics expert. The panel spent more than an hour laying out its findings in the West Memphis 3 case.
"Then, as now, there is not a single piece of evidence to tie Damien Echols to these crimes," said defense attorney Dennis Riordan.
John Douglas, the former FBI profiler who broke the Ted Bundy case, said the killer of the three eight-year-old boys was too sophisticated to be a teenager. The West Memphis 3- Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin, and Jessie Misskelly- were all teenagers when they were arrested for the murders more than 14 years ago.
Riordan said the panel's investigation revealed there is no evidence that ties the West Memphis 3 to the murders of the eight-year-old boys. While showing video from the trio's trial, Riordan said Jessie Misskelley's statement that all three committed the crimes was a sham- a statement filled with inaccuracies that was led and coerced by police.
"This is not a Satanic murder," Riordan said. "There is no ritual. There is no ritualistic crime going on here."
Prosecutors maintained a knife found behind Jason Baldwin's trailer was used to ritually cut up the boys. Forensic expert Dr. Richard Souviron said the wounds found on the victims were claw marks from animals..
"You don't have to be a rocket scientist to know these cuts did not come from a serrated knife or any knife, and see these marks on these two human beings that back handed knife made the marks," Souviron said. "Give me a break. That's the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard."
Earlier this week, the defense team filed more than 700 pages of evidence from their investigation in federal court, in an attempt to get the convictions overturned.
Dear Friends & Supporters:
I have waited a long time to write you this note.
Just hours ago, our attorneys filed a SECOND AMENDED PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS proving that three innocent men were wrongfully convicted of murder in West Memphis, Arkansas, in 1993. Citing DNA testing and evidence from several witnesses and leading experts, the nearly 200-page writ asks the court to order a new trial for my husband, Damien Echols, or release him.
In short, DNA testing has been conducted on dozens of pieces of evidence. The DNA results show no link whatsoever to Damien Echols, Jessie Misskelley or Jason Baldwin ñ and all of the experts agree that, under the prosecution theory of how the crime was committed, their DNA would be present at the crime scene if they were guilty. Instead, the DNA results match Terry Hobbs, the step-father of one of the victims. Our new filing also includes strong evidence from Pam Hobbs (the ex-wife of Terry Hobbs and the mother of one of the victims) implicating her former husband in the murders.
The writ includes scientific analysis from some of the nationís leading forensics experts, stating that wounds on the victimsí bodies were caused by animals at the crime scene -- not by knives used by the perpetrators, as the prosecution claimed. These wounds, and evidence about knives, were the centerpiece of the prosecutionís case.
Beyond writing to share this exciting news, I want to thank you for your support. Each person who spoke out about this case or donated money--each person who refused to let the world forget about three men locked away forever, one on death row, for a crime they so clearly did not commit --made this week's filing possible. Without you, we could not have made it this far, and we cannot thank you enough.
I am not an expert on science or the law. But I know that the writ that we just filed in federal court completely undercuts every argument and piece of ìevidenceî that was used to convict Damien, Jessie and Jason. Our lawyers and other legal experts say that any one piece of evidence in our filing, by itself, would be enough to overturn these convictions ñ and that, combined, all of the evidence makes it clear that this was a grave injustice that the federal court must step in and correct.
That won't happen easily.
In the weeks ahead, the court will review the writ we just filed, and the Arkansas Attorney General will file a response. We will then reply to that filing, and the court will rule. We hope and believe that the court will rule to overturn these convictions, but we still have a lot of work to do to get there. I am also writing to ask for your help ñ which we need now more than ever.
You and I know that Damien, Jessie and Jason would not have been convicted if they werenít teenagers without more than a few dollars to their name, who were perceived to be 'different' than other kids. They did not have the resources to fight a zealous prosecution in a poisonous atmosphere, and so they were convicted. The state still has millions of dollars at its disposal to defend these convictions. Despite all of the evidence we have uncovered and filed in court this week, the state is going to fight us in federal court. No matter what, they will have more money than we do. But with your help, we can follow up on this unprecedented court filing and secure justice.
We only have a few weeks to gear up for the next phase. Our experts, investigators and attorneys need to refute everything the state will throw at us, and we need to keep the court focused on the scientific truth in this case. Please make checks payable to the Damien Echols Defense Fund, PO Box 1216, Little Rock, AR 72203.
You can also donate online, through PayPal. It's easy, free and allows you to use your credit card. We also suggest that International Supporters use this option. Click this LINK to find out more. Please use LDavis11@hotmail.com as the "recipient" address. PLEASE INCLUDE YOUR NAME & ADDRESS TYPED IN YOUR MESSAGE! The button you can click to include your address does not always work.
I cannot overstate how important it is that you donate now. Damien, Jessie and Jason were convicted more than 12 years ago based on nothing but fear, hysteria and innuendo. We now have the evidence we need to overturn these convictions based on cold, hard science ñ but we need your help today.
We are close to overturning these convictions -- if we have the money it will take over the next few months to pursue this appeal. Go HERE to read the writ we just filed in federal court, and you'll see that we are at a critical juncture in this case, and that your help and support has gotten us here. Please help us, and please know that your support has already gotten us farther than many people thought possible.
DONATE HERE
Thanks very much,
Lorri Davis
and the Damien Echols Legal Team
Attorneys seek to overturn the convictions of three young men who were found guilty of brutally killing three Cub Scouts in 1993.
By Henry Weinstein, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
October 30, 2007
Attorneys for a death row inmate found guilty of killing three 8-year-old boys in Arkansas in 1993 filed a motion in federal court to overturn his conviction based on new evidence, including DNA test results that found no genetic material on the victims' bodies from his client or two others convicted with him.
The sensational case in West Memphis concerned three Cub Scouts whose bodies were found submerged in a drainage ditch not far from their homes; one boy's body appeared to have been sexually mutilated. Two of the defendants frequently dressed in black and were described as "Goths." Accusations of satanic rituals were presented in court testimony.
In June 1993, three teenagers -- Damien Wayne Echols, 18 at the time of the killings, Charles "Jason" Baldwin, 16, and Jessie Lloyd Misskelley Jr., 17 -- were arrested and charged with murder. They were convicted a year later. Echols was sentenced to death, Baldwin received life without parole and Misskelley, who told prosecutors he saw Echols and Baldwin beat and assault the boys, got life with parole.
But skeptics have long doubted the guilt of the three young men. The case also has drawn the attention of documentary filmmakers and others.
Eddie Vedder, lead singer of the rock group Pearl Jam, performed at a benefit concert that helped fund the DNA tests and appellate work. Lorri Davis, a New York landscape architect who saw a film about the case in 1996 and became so interested that she moved to Little Rock, Ark., married Echols and took a key role in organizing post-trial investigations and appeals.
On Monday in Little Rock federal court, Echols' appellate attorney filed a habeas corpus petition, along with dozens of exhibits and affidavits, alleging that his client, along with the other two young men, had been wrongly convicted.
The brief states that DNA tests of items recovered at the crime scene show that no genetic material of three defendants was present on the victims' bodies.
"That is an exculpatory fact of great importance," according to the brief submitted by five attorneys led by Dennis P. Riordan and Donald M. Horgan of San Francisco. That, they said, undercut the confession of Misskelley, who said that he saw Echols and Baldwin beat and sexually attack Christopher Byers, Steve Branch and James Michael Moore.
In addition, an unidentified person's genetic material was found on the penis of one victim.
Tests also revealed that a hair containing DNA consistent with that of Terry Hobbs, the stepfather of one of the boys, was found on black-and-white shoelaces used to hog-tie another of the victims. Another hair found on a tree root at the crime scene contained the DNA of David Jacoby, who, according to court documents, was with his friend Hobbs in the hours before and after the victims disappeared.
The brief acknowledges that this evidence "does not establish guilt of Hobbs or Jacoby." Hobbs has said the hair on the shoelaces must have been innocently transferred from himself to one of the victims, who "played with our little boy regularly."
The new petition includes analyses done by seven forensic scientists, including Dr. Richard Souviron, chief forensic odontologist at the Miami-Dade County Medical Examiner Department, who played a significant role in Florida's successful 1979 prosecution of serial killer Ted Bundy. All of them challenge prosecutors' claims that Christopher had been sexually mutilated with a knife.
The forensic pathologists and odontologists, who separately reviewed autopsy tests, photos and trial testimony, state that the evidence strongly indicates that after Christopher was killed by blunt-force blows, animals ate parts of his body.
The brief also states that some of the key testimony asserting that the teenagers were part of a satanic cult -- something they have denied -- was presented by a so-called witchcraft expert with "a fraudulent PhD" from a California school that was put out of business by state authorities.
Echols' attorneys maintain that members of the jury that convicted and sentenced him to death in Jonesboro, Ark., in 1994 made misleading statements about what they knew about the case when questioned during voir dire, and considered Misskelley's confession during their deliberations -- something that the trial judge specifically told them not to do.
Misskelley was tried first. His attorneys maintained that he was borderline mentally retarded, and that he had only made a statement to prosecutors in the hope of being rewarded.
He was convicted, but it was established in court that he had changed key aspects of his story more than once. He initially told police that he saw the crimes occur at a time at which it was established that the three victims and Baldwin were in school, Echols was at the doctor's and Misskelley was at work on a roofing job.
During voir dire for the separate trial of Echols and Baldwin, the judge learned that virtually all of the jurors had heard a lot about the case from newspaper and television accounts.
The judge specifically told the jury not to consider anything they might have heard about Misskelley's statement to the police. But in recent interviews, three jurors -- including the foreman -- said the statement was a factor they considered. "How could you not?" the foreman said, according to court documents. "It was a primary and deciding factor."
The jury's consideration of the statement alone violated Echols' right to a fair trial, according to his attorneys.
Chief prosecutor Brent Davis did not respond to a call and an e-mail seeking comment.
On Monday, Davis said she was hopeful that her husband and the other defendants would eventually be freed. "After all this time, you have a case that was built on a lot of hysteria and satanic panic. . . . The truth is finally seeing the light of day."
New York Times
By SHAILA DEWAN
Published: October 30, 2007
ATLANTA, Oct. 29 — In 1994, three teenagers in the small city of West Memphis, Ark., were convicted of killing three 8-year-old boys in what prosecutors portrayed as a satanic sacrifice involving sexual abuse and genital mutilation. So shocking were the crimes that when the teenagers were led from the courthouse after their arrest, they were met by 200 local residents yelling, “Burn in hell.”
Damien W. Echols is challenging his conviction in the killing of three young Arkansas boys.
But according to long-awaited new evidence filed by the defense in federal court on Monday, there was no DNA from the three defendants found at the scene, the mutilation was actually the work of animals and at least one person other than the defendants may have been present at the crime scene.
Supporters of the defendants hope the legal filing will provide the defense with a breakthrough. Two of the men, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley, are serving life in prison, while one, Damien W. Echols, is on death row. There was no physical evidence linking the teenagers, now known as the West Memphis 3, to the crime.
“This is the first time that the evidence has ever really been tested,” said Gerald Skahan, a member of the defense team. “The first trial was pretty much a witch hunt.”
Brent Davis, the local prosecutor, did not respond to requests for comment about the new evidence and the case, but in general prosecutors and investigators have continued to express confidence in their investigation.
The story the defendants’ supporters have presented — of three misfits whose fondness for heavy-metal music made them police targets — has won the men the support of celebrities like Eddie Vedder of Pearl Jam, Marilyn Manson and the creators of “South Park.” Many learned of the case through an HBO documentary, “Paradise Lost,” and a sequel.
The prosecution hinged on a confession riddled with factual errors and a Satanic cult expert with a mail-order degree. Mr. Echols’s own lawyer called him “weird” and “not the all-American boy.”
Many viewers who watched the sequel, in fact, concluded that the police should have been investigating John Mark Byers, the stepfather of one of the children, who made seemingly drug-addled, messianic speeches on camera, gave the filmmakers a blood-stained knife, and had a history of violence and run-ins with the police. His child, Christopher Byers, was the most badly mutilated of the three.
But there was a surprise in the new forensic report filed by Mr. Echols’s lawyers: a hair found in one of the knots binding the children belonged most likely to the stepfather of another of the victims, not to Mr. Byers.
The three victims — Christopher, Steve Branch and James Michael Moore — were last seen riding their bikes on May 5, 1993. They were found the next day in a drainage ditch in Robin Hood Hills, near West Memphis, a low-rent town across the Mississippi River from Memphis. The boys were naked and hogtied with shoelaces.
The police quickly zeroed in on Mr. Echols, then 18, who was familiar to them because he was on probation for trying to run away with his girlfriend. They also believed he was involved in cult activities.
But they could find little evidence against him until Mr. Misskelley, mildly retarded and with a history of substance abuse, came in to speak with them. At the time there was a $30,000 reward.
After hours of questioning, Mr. Misskelley, 17, gave the police a taped statement that implicated himself, Mr. Baldwin, then 16, and Mr. Echols, then 19. Despite coaching by the investigators, Mr. Misskelley was incorrect in several significant details, including the time of the crime, the way the victims were tied and the manner of death. He said the children had been sodomized, an assertion that even the state medical examiner’s testimony appears to refute.
The team of forensic experts assembled by Mr. Echols’s lawyers, which included Dr. Michael Baden, the former medical examiner of New York City, also said there was no evidence of sexual abuse. Many of the wounds sustained by the victims were caused by animals, they said, including the castration of Christopher.
As for the stray hair, the West Memphis Police Department and the stepfather it appears to belong to, Terry Hobbs, have discounted the finding, saying it could easily have been picked up at home by his stepson, Steve Branch. But Dennis P. Riordan, a lawyer for Mr. Echols, said the hair was found in the shoelaces tying Michael Moore, not Steve Branch.
Further, Mr. Riordan said, a hair was found at the scene that most likely belongs to a friend of Mr. Hobbs who was with him for part of the evening.
The court filing also argues that jurors relied on the statement Mr. Misskelley gave the police to convict Mr. Echols and Mr. Baldwin, even though it was deemed inadmissible except in Mr. Misskelley’s trial. Several jurors have acknowledged that they knew about the confession before the trial, though they did not say so during jury selection.
The passing of time has not only allowed the defense to gather new information, but has also softened the public’s belief in the guilt of the convicted men, said Mara Leveritt, the author of “Devil’s Knot: The True Story of the West Memphis Three.”
“What I’ve seen in the past 14 years has been not quite a 180-degree, but maybe a 170-degree turn,” Ms. Leveritt said. “It all comes down to, ‘Where’s the evidence?’”
My Groups
-
Human Rights Updated: A moment ago
Neighborhood
Explore friends, family, friends & family, or entire neighborhood.
