NEW EVIDENCE & LOOKING AT OLD EVIDENCE

[Obscuregawdess]

Southwestern Institute of Forensic Sciences

[Obscuregawdess]

Letter from Ridge to Alabama Dept. of Forensic Sciences re: Baldwin's boots

[Obscuregawdess]

May 12, 1993 : WMPD

[Obscuregawdess]

Notes by Gitchell on conversations with Sakevicius and Channell

[Obscuregawdess]

Letter from Gitchell to the crime lab, asking numerous questions

[Obscuregawdess]

Ridge's list of items seized from Echols' residence and sent to crime lab

[Obscuregawdess]

Ridge's list of items seized from Misskelley's residence and sent to crime lab

[Obscuregawdess]

WMPD

[Obscuregawdess]

Gitchell's notes on conversation with Sakevicius re: pair of Baldwin's pants

[Obscuregawdess]

WMPD

[Obscuregawdess]

Letter and soil sample list from Ridge to Alabama Dept. of Forensic Sciences

[Obscuregawdess]

December 17, 1993

WMPD

[Obscuregawdess]

STAN BURCH: June the 10th, time is now 10:35. Im talking to Mr. Loveless and Mrs. Loveless at their home in Steele, Missouri. Mr. Loveless, I was reading your statement here and you state that on the 21st or the 22nd day of May, a youth visited the gravesite of Steven Branch. You said he the youth was around 15 years old?

MR.LOVELESS: 15 years old.

STAN BURCH: O.k. How was he dressed?

MR.LOVELESS: Just had casual clothes on, white t-shirt,

STAN BURCH: A white t-shirtand

MR.LOVELESS: And he had, had a cap on.

STAN BURCH: And a cap? O.k. How did he act when you was talking to him?

MR.LOVELESS: Very strange. Like he didnt want to talk to me.

STAN BURCH: Strange in what way?

MR.LOVELESS: Well, he wouldnt look at me.

STAN BURCH: He wouldnt make eye contact with you?

MR.LOVELESS: He wouldnt make eye contact with me.

STAN BURCH: O.k. And where was the first place you observed him at?

MR.LOVELESS: Walkin, comin across to the cemetery. He was he come from a southeast comin northeast.

STAN BURCH: And then he went to the grave. What did he do at the gravesite?

MR.LOVELESS: He he stood at the gravesite for a minute, and then he kneeled down, like he was praying. Stayed there for quite some time.

STAN BURCH: Was it on one knee or two knees?

MR.LOVELESS: One knee.

STAN BURCH: O.k. Was it at the foot of the gravesite or

MR.LOVELESS: At the foot of the gravesite.

STAN BURCH: How does he know where the gravesite was at?

MR.LOVELESS: He he asked my buddy, Lance Guthrie, and he was running a weed eater, and he asked him where the little boys grave was.

STAN BURCH: When you talked to him, what did you ask him?

MR.LOVELESS: I stopped my mower, and I said uh, hey Id like to talk to you. And he, he took three more steps and I said, I hollered at him again that Id like to talk to him. And uh, I asked him I said was you kin to the little Branch boy? And he turned around and said yes.

STAN BURCH: O.k.

MR.LOVELESS: But I, I observed one thing: If he was kin to the little boy, why didnt he know where he was buried at?

STAN BURCH: Thats true. Uh, theres an incident that took place about an automobile approaching the area. You wanna explain that to me?

MR.LOVELESS: There was a, there was a car coming through the cemetery, it resembled a police car a whole lot. But when he saw this car he thought it was stopping, he got ready to take off fast. But when he realized the car didnt stop, he turned around and come back.

STAN BURCH: Then he stood up and walked away from the grave?

MR.LOVELESS: Yes.

STAN BURCH: Then after the vehicle left, he came back?

MR.LOVELESS: He came back.

STAN BURCH: O.k. Mrs. Loveless, you have something you want to say?

MRS.LOVELESS: Yeah, when he seen the car, he started to walk off this way. I dont know what direction that is.

MR.LOVELESS: That would be south, southeast.

STAN BURCH: That would be southeast, yes.

MRS.LOVELESS: And then when, then when he seen the car wasnt stopping, he come back to the grave. Then when he left, he walked off that way a little.

STAN BURCH: Which would be-

MRS.LOVELESS: And then I didnt watch him anymore.

STAN BURCH: O.k. he walked-

MRS.LOVELESS: I dont know where he went when he got to the blacktop.

MR.LOVELESS: Well see, he walked off that way then he come back, and uh, he was talking to Lance about a Taylor grave or something there.

MRS.LOVELESS: Well I didnt see him anymore after he was headed that way.

STAN BURCH: O.k. And you have no prior knowledge of this youth whatsoever. You havent seen him before?

MR.LOVELESS: Ive never seen him before.

STAN BURCH: Alright in the photographs that I showed you, could you ID any one of the, the photographs as being him?

MR.LOVELESS: No.

STAN BURCH: O.k. This concludes the statement at this time which is 10:40.



GUTHRIE INTERVIEW:

STAN BURCH: This is detective Stan Burch. Im at the Mount Zion Cemetery. Im talking to a Mr

GUTHRIE: Lance

STAN BURCH: Lance

GUTHRIE: E. Guthrie

STAN BURCH: E. Guthrie. UhMr. Guthrie. Ive read your statement here and Id like to ask you some other questions concerning this young man that you observed out on the cemetery grounds at approximately 21 May. Are you sure of the date?

GUTHRIE: Yes, Im positive that was the date because I was weed eating around the headstones.

STAN BURCH: Alright. And about uhyou state in your statement here that the youth was somewhere between 13 and 14 years old?

GUTHRIE: About that age.

STAN BURCH: How was he how was he dressed?

GUTHRIE: He had blue jeans and a checkedy(?) shirt on and tennis shoes. And blond hair.

STAN BURCH: O.k. I am going to show you a picture, and could you possibly relate whether or not this is the youth you seen or not?

GUTHRIE: No that aint him nuh, uh, his hair wasnt long.

STAN BURCH: O.k. You say his hair was shorter than this?

GUTHRIE: Yeah, it was shorter.

STAN BURCH: O.k. About how short, what would you say?

GUTHRIE: It was up above the collar length, you know.

STAN BURCH: O.k. Uh, he asked you about the Steve Branch gravesite. What did you tell him?

GUTHRIE: I told him where Steve Branch was buried at. I asked him was he any kin to him, he said yeah, Im a cousin. And I said well, hes buried up there by that oak tree close to Jessie Scott. And then he told me hes kin to Bob Ziller (?), and was lookin around. I looked at his headstone and the date showed that he died way back there. I felt something funny about it but I didnt say nothin. I told him well if you wanna find the little Branch boy hes buried up there. And he went up there.

STAN BURCH: O.k. Did you observe anything that he did up there at the gravesite?

GUTHRIE: Nah, I went back to weed eating.

STAN BURCH: O.k. Did you see him again after that?

GUTHRIE: I seen him walk out of the graveyard but I didnt see which way he went.

STAN BURCH: O.k., which direction was he headed when you seen him walk-

GUTHRIE: Towards the interstate.

STAN BURCH: Towards the interstate? Which would besoutheast-

GUTHRIE: Southeast.

STAN BURCH: Of here? O.k. Is there anything else that youd like to add to this statement?

GUTHRIE: Nothing I can think of after I talked to old D about it. Mr. Dempsey here told me that he kneeled down by the grave and prayed, but I aint doubting his word because hes always been truthful to me.

STAN BURCH: O.k.

GUTHRIE: But I didnt see which way the boy went. I went back doing my weed eating job.

STAN BURCH: O.k. Thank you sir. This concludes the statement at this time. The time is 11:10 on the 10th of June.

http://westmemphisthreediscussion.yuku.com/topic/2120

[Obscuregawdess]

Scans

CR93-450
FILED
05 FEB-8 PM 4:34

Petitioner Damien Echol's Acknowledgment of Information on Destructive DNA Testing

Waiver of Statutory Rights to Retain Specific Biological Evidence for Retesting

1. I, Damien Echols, am the Petitioner and a Defendant in State v. Echols, Clay County Circuit Court, Case No. 93-450. I am currently represented by lawyers Dennis P. Riordan, Donald M. Horgan and Deborah Sallings in post-conviction proceedings, including proceedings brought under Arkansas Code 16-112-201 et seq.

2. I understand that these proceedings are being conducted to assist me and my lawyers in getting access to evidence in the case for the purpose of having that evidence retested at my request. Through my signature below, I am informing the Court, and all parties, that I have been made aware of the Petition and Motion filed by my lawyers to obtain an Order allowing the testing or retesting of the physical evidence related to my case; I have conferred with my lawyers on the subject of the Petition and Motion insofar as it involves the retesting or testing of evidence pertinent to my case; I have reviewed documents supplied to me by my lawyers and pertaining to this testing process.

3. I understand that DNA tests are to be conducted in my case, and that some of these tests will result in the partial, or complete, destruction of evidence, and I understand that this destruction will occur as part of the DNA testing process. I have further been informed, and understand, that the Arkansas Code Sections 16-112-20 et seq. provide that no post-conviction destructive testing is to be undertaken.

4. I have specifically been informed by my lawyers, and understand, that in my case it is likely that a number of hairs which were obtained as part of the investigation of my case, will be completely destroyed during the course of the DNA testing process which my lawyers and I have requested, and that there are no similar hairs that could be used for further testing should I be dissatisfied with the results of the DNA tests conducted.

5. I understand and acknowledge that destructive DNA testing will go forward in my case if the Court accepts this waiver of rights, and signs a DNA testing order that has been prepared in my case. I know that this means that evidence will be tested and destroyed, and that I will not be able to complain, or object about that destruction, and that the State has also agreed not to complain or object to such destructive testing.

6. Through this document, I now freely, knowingly, and voluntarily give up my right to insist that only non-destructive testing be conducted in my case. I freely, knowingly, and voluntarily consent to the use of destructive DNA testing on items of

1 of 3


evidence.

7. I intend for this acknowledgment of rights, and waiver, to apply only to the DNA testing that will be conducted by Bode Technologies, Inc..

8. No one has threatened me, made any promises to me, or offered me any inducements to obtain my signature below. No one has threatened members of my family, made any promises to them, or provided them inducements to influence me to place my signature below. I am doing so freely and voluntarily, after consultation with counsel.

9. My signature below is evidence that I have read and understood this document which is a waiver of important rights. I hereby consent to the use of destructive testing by Bode Technologies, Inc. in its processing of physical evidence in this case.

Date: 1-25-05

[signed]
DAMIEN ECHOLS

Witnessed by:
Date: 1-27-05

[signed Lorri Davis]
Signature

Lorri Davis architect
Please print name and occupation


2 of 3


I, Dennis P. Riordan, attest that, as his counsel, I am familiar with the signature of Damien Echols. I recognize the signature on the attached waiver to be his. Additionally, Mr. Echols has confirmed to me verbally that he signed the waiver on January 25, 2005. It is on that basis that I have witnessed his signature. Lorri Davis, Mr. Echols' wife, has witnessed his signature on the same basis.


Dated: February 3, 2005

[signed]
DENNIS P. RIORDAN


3 of 3



http://westmemphisthreediscussion.yuku.com/topic/2124

[Obscuregawdess]

briefcase.yahoo.com/wm3docs (in Poems folder)

EVIDENCE SUBMISSION SHEET

EVIDENCE NUMBER:______ DATE: 09/09/93

NAME: LAST Teer FIRST Domini MIDDLE Alia

10 Pages of Poems

CONTENT(S): On 09/09/93 11:30 A.M. Roxanne Harrison 504 Dover
West Memphis, Arkansas ,brought to the Police Dept.
10 Note book pages of poems written by Domini Teer
and given to her Daughter Jennifer Harrison Possibly
in 1992. Roxanne Harrison brought them to the Police
Department and gave them to Det. Allen stating that
she found them at her residence and didn't know if they
would be helpful.

CHAIN OF CUSTODY OF EVIDENCE

(1ST) OFFICER TAKING CONTROL OF EVIDENCE: Det. Mike Allen #233
DATE: 09/09/93 TIME: 11:30 AM BADGE#: 233
LOCATION RECOVERED: From Roxanne Harrison 735-6249
REASON FOR CONFISCATION: Roxanne Harrison gave them to Det. Allen
REMARKS REFERENCE EVIDENCE: Given to Insp. Gitchell

[Obscuregawdess]

home.dencity.com/alwm3doc...rham01.jpg
home.dencity.com/alwm3doc...rham02.jpg

Bill Durham

On May 9, 1993, Shane Griffin and I talked with Damien Echols, Dominic Teer and Jason Baldwin at 5:00PM, in the front yard at Jason Baldwin's house at 245 W. Lake Dr. S., Lake Shore.

They said that on Wednesday, 5-5-93, that they had gone to Jason's uncle's house and Jason had cut the lawn. Unsure of time they went or address. It is somewhere off Dover behind Blockbuster Video. Damien phoned his father to pick them up at the laundrymat at Missouri and N. Worthington. They said they were picked up at 6:00PM and Damien's father took Jason and Dominic home and Damien went home.

Shane Griffin, at this time started asking the questions on the sheet (questionaire) and did complete the sheet on Damien. He was asking Jason the questions when Jason Baldwin's mother arrived. We were standing in the front yard at Jason Baldwin's house trailer. Mrs. Baldwin was very upset and accused us of picking on her son and said she did not want us talking to him. I attempted to reason with her but to no avail. We, then left.

[Obscuregawdess]

Ragencajun wrote:

>>
Would you like to see some "differences" in what
Pam Echols says to WMPD 7 days after the murders,
and what she tells Fogleman in an interview
months later?
>>

I'm game. Let's take a look at those
inconsistencies.

Thanks to Ragencajun, the interview Pam
Hutchison gave to Bryn Ridge on 5-12-93,
to John Fogelman on 9-10-93, and the
interview Joe Hutchison gave to Fogelman
on 9-10- 93 are now available in the Case
Documents section of this board. They
make for valuable reading. I strongly urge
everyone to read them, and add to
this discussion as they will. For purposes
of this post, I will refer to Pam's 5-12 interview
as P-A, to her 9-10 interview as P-B, and to Joe's
interview as J. I will try to include a page number
reference for each comment made, e.g., (P-A, 12).

Though each interview contains an abundance
of interesting material, I am going to chiefly
confine myself to identifying the inconsistencies
to be found in cross-referencing the interviews to
one another, which I believe is what Ragencajun
wanted. There may well be many that I have
missed, so she or anyone else is invited to add
to the list.

Triple astericks (***) will precede statements
to indicate they contain an inconsistency, either
real or only apparent. Most will be referred to
in later portions of the text. Readers are advised
to refer back to them.


But first, to make some of the family relationships
and chronologies discussed in the interviews
easier to follow, here is a simple outline of their
background drawn from (P-B, 2-5), (J-3), and the book Blood of Innocents.

Pamela married Eddie Joe Hutchison in 1974.

Michael Wayne Hutchison was born on Dec. 11,
1974 in West Memphis, Arkansas.

Pamela and Joe were divorced in September of 1986.

A few days later, Pamela married Jack Echols .

Jack Echols adopted Michael and his sister Michelle
in 1989.

At the same time in 1989, Michael also had his
first name legally changed to Damien.

Sometime in 1991, Damien is introduced to Wiccan
beliefs by girlfriend Deanna Holcomb.

Pamela and Jack Echols are divorced in May of 1992.

On June 1, 1992, Damien was placed on a years
probation for a charge of breaking and entering
an abandoned house with girlfriend Deanna Holcomb,
whose parents had forbidden them to be together.
He was ordered sent to Charter Hospital in Little Rock, a mental health facility, for being suicidal. He was
discharged on June 25.

At the end of June, 1992, Damien, Pam, Michelle and
Pams mother Frances moved to Aloha, Oregon
to live with Eddie Joe.

On September 2nd, 1992, Damien got into an
argument with Eddie Joe over knives, and was
admitted to St. Vincents Hospital in Portland,
Oregon for fear he might be violent and suicidal.

After being released from St. Vincents a few days later,
Damien returned to West Memphis to live with his
adoptive father Jack. Damien was arrested upon
arrival for violating parole by leaving Oregon without
notifying authorities. He was re-admitted to Charter
Hospital and stayed two weeks. Afterwards, he lived
some of the time with Jack Echols, and some of the
time at the home of girlfriend Domini Teer and her mother
Diane.

Pamela, Joe, Michelle, and Frances moved back to
West Memphis in February of 1993

Pamela remarried Joe Hutchison in late February of 1993.

Damiens and Michelles legal status as the adopted
children of Jack Echols is not changed by this.
Damien moved back in with Joe, Pam, Michelle
and his grandmother Frances upon their return to
West Memphis.

------------------

Pamelas May 12th, 1993 interview given to Bryn Ridge:

1) ***In (P-A,6), Pam states that she and her
husband Joe separated on Tuesday, May 4th,
1993, in the afternoon. He has entirely moved
out of the trailer by 9 PM. The reason she gives
for this split is "Because of my ex-husband.
He [Joe] doesn't want him [Jack Echols] to
have anything to do with my children."
She describes Damien's reaction to the break-up
as crying. The break-up came about without a
significant fight, "just people upset".



2) In (P-A, 10 - 16), Pam gives her alibi for Damien
for the date of May 5th, 1993. It can be summarized
as follows:

She took Damien to an appointment
at the East Arkansas Mental Health Center
(which she states he has on a regular basis,
because he was suicidal at one time (P-A,10)).
The visit ended just after noon. She and
Damien then drove to The Marion Discount
Pharmacy to drop off his prescription for
amecharine (actually imipramine, an anti-
manic-depression medication). ***She then
states (P-B, 12) that she did not pick-up
the filled prescription until Thursday morning,
May 6th.

Pam states (though is no sure) that she dropped
Damien off at Jasons trailer in Lakeshore Estates
around 1 PM. *** At approximately 3:45 PM.
she received a phone call from Damien saying that
he was at Alexanders Laundrymat on Missouri
Street with Domini Teer, his current girlfriend,
and asked to be picked up. He reported to her that
Jason had to mow his uncle Huberts
lawn, and that the visit was over. She picked
Damien and Domini up, dropped off Domini at
her trailer in Lakeshore, and was back home
with Damien by 4 oclock at their trailer on
South Grove Street..

*** Pam then states (P-A, 14) that sometime
over the course of the rest of the afternoon
some detectives (including Steve Jones) came
out to the trailer to question Damien. Incredulous,
Bryn Ridge says that there would be no reason
for this to have occurred that afternoon, since
Chris Byers, Michael Moore, and Steve Branch
were not missing yet. Pam admits to the mistake,
correcting herself by saying this did not occur
until the next day, Thursday, May 6th.

Pam states that no one left the trailer until 6 or
6:30 PM when they left to visit their friends
Randy and Susan Sanders in West Memphis.
Only a daughter was home, so they departed after
a few minutes. Damien stayed home the
rest of the evening.

*** During the evening, Pam states Damien
received two phone calls, one from a Jennifer
in Barlett, Mississippi, and one from Domini
Teer (P-A, 16). Damiens grandmother, who
mostly stays in her own room and watches
television, also received a phone call.

*** At the end of the evening Pam went to
bed, around midnight. Damien was in bed
at this time, as well.

*** Upon being asked by Ridge to clarify
who all went on the visit to the Sanders, Pam
states that it was she, her daughter Michelle,
Damien, and her husband Joe. This is an
anomaly, since previously she and Joe had
broken up the day before, May 4th, and that
he had moved out by 9 PM that same day.
Ridge does not ask to have this clarified.

***The following day, Thursday, May 6th, two
gentlemen including Steve Jones came out to
the trailer to question Damien and stayed till
shortly after noon. This is an anomaly/inconsistency
because in fact the bodies of the three murder victims
were not discovered until after 1 PM. Juvenile
Corrections Officer Steve Jones and WMPD Lt. James
Sudbury are on record as having visited Echols only
after the discovery of the bodies, whenupon Jones
had first raised the possibility of Damien as a suspect.


3) When asked by Ridge how she felt about her
sons white magic beliefs, Pam says Uh, I am not
real fond of it. But as long as I dont see that
hes hurting anyone, and he keeps it mostly to
himself, I dont have a problem with it.
*** She does not indicate that Damiens beliefs
are the source of any acrimony or concern
within the family (P-A, 19).


4) *** When asked by Ridge what is Damiens
reaction if he were not to take his medication,
Pam states that it makes him nauseated and
vomit, and It just makes him sick., (P-A, 22).
She describes his temper as only violent when he is continually pushed (P-A, 23). Later, (P-A, 29)
she reiterates that Damien is only violent
towards himself, not others. She mentions
without detail an incident which occurred between
him and Joe in Oregon, but adds, It was a lot
of screaming and hollering, but that was all that
took place.


5)*** When asked by Ridge if Damien suffered any
abuse as a child, Pam replies Mentally abused by
his adopted father [Jack Echols] (P-A, 24).
She goes to illustrate this by telling how Jack
Echols would scream and holler at Damien for
such things as tripping over a phone chord
or dropping a telephone. A short while later
in the interview, though, Pam describes the abuse as physical (P-A, 26), explaining the discrepancy
in her terminology to Ridge by saying . . . I felt
like, had I not been there,
it [physical abuse] would have resulted.




6) Near the end of the interview, Ridge says to Pam,
Where [sic] I to inform you that the time period of
when you picked him up at Alexanders has been
explained other, by other means and other witnesses
. . . between 7:30 and 8:00, are you steadfast that it
happened at about 3:30? (P-A, 31-32). Despite
hearing Ridge say this, Pam remains adamant it
was around 3:45 PM, and that these other people
do not know what they are talking about.

-------------------------

Turning to Pam Hutchisons September 10, 1993
interview with John Fogelman, we will examine
it both for inconsistencies with her prior statement
and as a source for perhaps new inconsistencies.


1) Pam now states that she picked up Damiens
prescription around 4:30 PM on the afternoon
of May 5th, not the morning of Thursday May 6th,
as she had previously stated to Ridge (P-B, 11).
This is a valid inconsistency, but Fogelman makes no
attempt to explore it.

2) The rest of her alibi for the afternoon remains
unchanged, except for new details. She reports
that Damien had to leave Jasons Uncle Hubert
Bartoushs property when Jason arrived there to
mow it, but does not elaborate. *** When asked
by Fogelman if Damien had talked to anybody while
there, she says, I believe he said he did speak
to Jasons Uncle (P-B, 13)
Some have identified this information as
evidence of lying on the part of both Pam and
Damien, because of a statement given to the
WMPD by Hubert Bartoush which can be found
on the WM3.org website. Bartoush states Jason
was there to mow the grass between 4 or 4:30
till 6:30, times he remembers by identifying what
was on TV. More importantly, Bartoush states
Jason was alone that day, though
Damien and a red-headed girl did accompany
Jason to his house on later occasions. Something
new Pam relates in the 9-10-93 interview, however,
may help make more credible her owns and Damiens recollection of events. She states Huberts house
is right around the corner from the laundrymat
where she received the phone call to pick Damien
up at 3:45 PM. Could it therefore be that Damien
and Domini accompanied Jason to the Bartoush
house and stayed briefly before making the
short walk to the laundrymat to place the call,
and Jasons Uncle simply could not remember their
being there, or perhaps was not out-doors at the
proper interval to see either he and Domini? It also
should be noted that Pam only said she thinks
Damien told her he talked to the uncle.


3) Pam states that, after picking up Damien and Domini
at 3:45 at Alexanders Laundrymat, she, Joe, Michelle,
Damien and Domini proceeded to the pharmacy to pick
up Damiens prescription. (P-B, 14). Domini is dropped
off, the Echols spend some time at home, and around
7:30 drop in at the home of Randy and Susan
Sanders, to be gret only by their daughter.
*** During their brief time there, Pam states
Damien sat on the couch with Joe and Michelle.


4) Once back at their trailer on South Grove, Pam
reports Damien was on the phone much of the time
between 7:30 PM and 10:30 PM. (P-B, 18) .
*** According to her, he talked to Jason, the girl
she did not know named Jennifer, a girl named
Holly and Domini Teer. This is inconsistent with
her interview on May 12th, 1993, where she only
describes Damien being on the phone with Jennifer
and Domini.
It has been pointed out by non-supporters
of The West Memphis Three that this information
is inconsistent with the details contained in a
statement given by Jennifer Bearden September
10th,1993, available at the WM3.org website,
wherein Jennifer says that she called the Echols
residence at about 8 PM, and was told by Pams
mother (Damiens grandmother) that Damien
was not home. However, Pam has included in
her interview a statement that the grandmother
sits in her bedroom and watches TV (P-B, 17).
It seems possible Damien may in fact have been
home and she was simply not aware
of this. It is also possible that the Echols family
had not yet returned home yet from the Sanders.
Jennifers statement does contain one
other serious conflict with Pams account. Jennifer
states that somewhere in between 4:15 and 5,
something like that 5, 5:30 , she called Jasons
trailer, and talked to both Jason and Damien.
According to Pam,Damien was with her during
the entire range of times Jennifer offers. Whether
confusion over times and flawed recollecting is
at the heart of this or not, it is an inconsistency.


5) Fogelman questions Pam about her temporary
separation from Joe (P-B, 19). This time, Pam
states that the (temporary as it turned out)
break-up occurred on May 9th, the date of Joes
birthday, instead of the day prior to the murders.
She explains that she can now remember there was
a birthday cake on the table during the day in question.
The case for this being the truth is reinforced
by the fact that, in her May 12th statement, Pam
did indeed tell Byrn Ridge Joe accompanied her,
Damien and Michelle to the Sanders. It would not
make sense for Joe to be on this trip if the separation
had indeed occurred on May 4th.


6) Pam now claims to Fogelman that she went to bed
a little after 11 PM on the fifth, instead of midnight as
previously stated (P-B, 21). This may not be much of
an inconsistency, but in the interests of being
complete it should be included.



----------------------------------------

Turning now to the Eddie Joe Hutchison September
10th interview given to John Fogelman, we will
examine it for inconsistencies with either of
Pams interviews, as well as a few other pertinent
records.

1) Joe offers Fogelman his version of the events
which occurred the previous September in Oregon
leading to his calling the police on Damien
and hospitalizing him (J, 4-7 [page 5 missing]).
Damiens grandmother reported to Joe she had
seen Damien carry a knife from a kitchen drawer
into his bedroom. Joe enters Damiens room to
confront him over this and search for it, but does
not find the knife. Joe describes Damien as
resentful his father had taken the grandmothers
word over his own. (Much later in the evening,
as it turns out, Joe finds a spoon on the floor
of the bedroom Damien had taken to eat ice
cream, and suggests that in hindsight this is
what he believes the grandmother saw him take).
At some point, being highly upset, Damien straps
up to three knives from his collection and shuts
himself up in his bedroom. Concerned,
and aware of his sons history of mental
disturbance, Joe calls the police. Before they
can arrive, however, Joe enters the bedroom,
sits down on the bed with Damien, and talks
to him. Damien says he is not going to let the
police take him alive. However, he calmly hands
over the knives upon request.
Joe states to Fogelman that he did not fear
for his own safety. You know, Damien wouldnt
hurt me. Joe does say, however, that he was
concerned Damiens anger might explode.
Joe states that the only altercation that
occurred between he and Damien happened later
at the hospital, when he stepped in between
Damien and someone in the waiting room in
order to prevent a fight between them. He does
not report what Damien said to him during this.
Joes account to Fogelman has been cited
for several inconsistencies based on the
admittance papers he filed that evening at St.
Vincents Hospital. These papers have been
examined by non-supporters of the West Memphis
Three, and they claim it portrays a far more
violent picture of the events of that evening.
Allegedly, Joe and Pam Hutchinson tell
mental health workers they no longer want Damien
to live with them. Non-supporters proffer this to
explain why Damien was sent by bus back to
Arkansas as soon as he was released from St.
Vincent. Also, the St. Vincent papers allegedly
contain threats made by Damien to Joe, contain
the parents concern about their sons involvement with satanism, which Pam denied to Ridge in
her May 12th statement, and contain their
concerns for their own safety around him.
It can be argued emotions certainly got
out of hand that evening. Also, the information
told admission case workers at mental health
facilities may often be exaggerated or presented
over-simplistically in order to further the chances
of the person in question being allowed admission,
or their problems treated more seriously.
Given time and perspective, a cooler evaluation
of what actually occurred may be responsible for
the tempering Joe gives the story when he
relates it to Fogelman. But the accounts do
remain inconsistent.



2) Joe essentially repeats Pams version of the
events of May 5th, 1993. However, he says he
cannot remember one way or the other whether
Damien accompanied he, Pam and Michelle to the
Sanders that evening (J, 17). He remembers sitting
on the Sanders couch with Pam, but does not say
he sat on the couch with Damien and Michelle, as
Pam had described to Fogelman. He thinks they
arrived home from the Sanders around 7 PM
(J, 19).


3) Joe states that he remembers Damien was
home that evening because he can remember
Damien talking on the telephone . At 10:30 PM,
he told Pam, No more phone calls tonight..
It was 10:30. To me, it was too late for phone
calls (J, 20).

4) Joe states that, from what he can recall, he
temporarily separated from Pam somewhere
around the middle of May (J, 21-22). This may
have only been offered as an estimate, but it is
inconsistent with both of Pams statements, where
she places it at either May 4th or May 9th.
However, the couple will have had to have been
separated by the time Pam informed Ridge of the
split during her May 12th interview, so it may be
argued that it is still more likely May 9th is closer
to the actual date than May 4th , since the 9th
is closer to the middle of a month than the 4th,
and Joe remembers still being home the date
of the 5th, when the visit to the Sanders occurred.

----------------

I believe these are the major inconsistencies to
be found in the three statements Ragencajun
has provided. I also believe it is fair to suggest
at least a fair portion of these inconsistencies can be attributed to honest confusion on the part of
Pam, or Joe, or both. Whether they all
can be, or whether some are the result of
prevarication by parents trying to shield a son,
is something we can probably only debate, and
never know for sure.

And finally, whether an absolutely verifiable alibi
is necessary for a defense of innocence is another
consideration we must not lose sight of, either.

Chris

(from a very good post on yuku/ ChrisW)

http://westmemphisthreediscussion.yuku.com/topic/2104

[Obscuregawdess]

(extraordinary post by CCKilnfired)

http://westmemphisthreediscussion.yuku.com/topic/2102

Why didnt Doug Cooper get called to testify in the Echols/Baldwin trial? John Mark Byers gave the Kershaw knife to him. He gave a statement about it -
www.wm3.org/html/evidence...tement.jpg

STATEMENT OF: Doug Cooper
DATE: 1/25/94 PAGE: 1
ADDRESS: P.O. Box 257
PHONE #:
DOB: 6/15/61 M W WORK PLACE:
CASE FILE #
COMPLAINT #

On Dec 19, 1993 Doug Cooper received a hunting-knife from Mr. Mark Byers at Mr. Byers home during the late afternoon/early evening. The knife had a dark synthetic handle which the blade folded into (total length of the knife unfolded was approx 9 inches) Mr. Cooper presented the knife to Mr. Joseph Berlinger & Mr. Bruce Sinfosky who in turn reported it to HBO upon being informed HBO demanded the knife be returned to West Memphis Police, upon this request Mr. Cooper transfered custody of the knife to Berlinger & Sinfosky whom then sent the knife via Federal Express to Inspector Gary Gitchell in West Memphis.

I have written this statement consisting of 1 page(s), and I affirm to the truth and accuracy of the facts contained therein. [next sentence scratched out]

This statement was completed at 12:45 PM., on the 24th day of January 1994. WITNESS :Inspector Gary Gitchell [illegible] Signature of person giving voluntary statement
=================

and so did Joe and Bruce -www.wm3.org/html/evidence...tement.jpg
www.wm3.org/html/evidence...fsky_b.jpg

Im no cryptographer, but the handwriting at the top of Coopers statement does not look like the writing in the body of the statement.
The writing at the top is small, controlled, with a slight right, even, slant. It has upper and lower case letters. The writing farther down is messy, and all in capitol block letters, with an uneven slant both right and left. Why was it written in the third person? What are the words crossed out at the bottom? The first 3 words are The above statement... but thats all I can make out. Joe and Bruces statements have consistent writing style. Also, the time and date are the same for all three statements, but Doug Coopers was changed at the top to 1-25-94, but the bottom wasnt.

Im assuming Cooper talked to Gitchell on the phone, than came in the next day to sign the statement. My question is, was it written for him? Its very different from the notes Gitchell took of their conversation.
These are much more interesting.

www.wm3.org/html/evidence...notes1.jpg


===============
525-5491
1-24-94 - Room 751 Ramada Inn #1
Memphis, TN

Doug Cooper-Interview

Rec. knife on Sunday 12-19-93 late afternoon from Mark Byers while at his residence.

knife-folding type hunting knife-serrated(?) edge blade
blade about 3 1/2 - 4 1/2 inches folding into handle.
Handle- composite type-black in color

Said by: Byers
If I liked or appreciated knives - was filming all day- I had been asleep on his couch.
He left and came back with knife, took knife out. I want to give you something(?)
Byers - I want to keep it in your car
Told him I didnt want the gift, couldnt understand why he gave it to me.

#2
He said it was sharp. Cut a piece of paper.
Its between us.

We have something between us. I want you to think of me if you should ever use it.
Safety-protection.

Stay maybe - 1/2 hour - 45 minutes then left.

Took knife back to NY with me. Could tell the knife had been used(?) for a while. Looked like a serrated(?) blade. Cut leg off a deer in November.

I had suspicions & my colleagues brought it to attention of HBO-Documentary production.
Our poss made known to them. They advised the knife be turned over to police. I gave verbal permission for the (illegible) person.
Joe Bruce & Joe together mailed the knife to
#3
Inspector Gitchell.
( Federal Express )
Shown as Gitchell sending & Gitchell receiving in order to protect our identity.
We videotaped the poss of knife poss of Fed Ex slip.
=========


After Doug Cooper returned to NY and talked to the producers of Paradise Lost and HBO, they insisted it be turned over. The producers videotaped themselves with the knife and the Fed Ex label they used to ship it back.
Gitchell received it on January 8, 1994. It was sent out for testing and the 3 statements were given on Jan. 24 & 25, 1994. JMB was questioned about the knife on Jan. 26th, because:
THE WITNESS: It was at Mr. Stidham and Crow's insistence that we speak to Mr. Byers. (TR 2060) ( Gitchell Abstract E/B trial.)


When did JMB give the knife to Cooper? From the film guys statements, it was Sunday, Dec. 19th. Why is that important?

From Lisa Sakevicious trial abstract:
It is not common practice for me to (search) the homes of the victims to see if there is any items there that might possibly match questioned hairs and fibers that I find. Actually, none of this case has been common practice for me. This is the first time I ever participated in a search of Defendants' or victims' homes. (snip) On December 20, 1993, I went to the former homes of the victims, Byers and Moore.

Heres the search consent signed by JMB at 11:21am, Monday, Dec. 20th, 1993, less than 24 hours after giving Doug Cooper the Kershaw knife. www.wm3.org/html/evidence...search.jpg

In December, the Byers and Moores were not considered suspects (the Hobbs had moved by this time, so their former house was not searched). Lisa Sakevicious and Gary Gitchell did not surprise the families the week of Christmas (their 1st without their murdered children) by dropping in unannounced. Not even the WMPD would be that callous and stupid. This was arranged ahead of time. Byers KNEW they were going to search the house. Lisa Sakevicius was not a buddy, like the rest of the WMPD whod been to pool parties at the Byers home, she was a scientist who wouldnt even hear JMBs bullshit stories. She could and would bust him.


Most importantly, why didnt big alarms go off for Gitchell? A possible suspect (even if remote in Gitchells mind) in a triple homicide just happens to get rid of a knife with blood on it that matches a victim and the suspect, less than 24 hours before his home is searched (and Gitchell was there for the search, his signature is on the search consent), by giving it to a guy staying at the suspects house and specifically saying keep this in your car where the search warrant is useless. Byers gave 3 different stories about the blood on the knife in one interview. Gitchell KNOWS all this on 1/26, but does he bust Byers on any of it? No. Why the hell not?

Now the whole question of why would he give a knife to a member of the film crew? takes on new meaning. Since he was asked to consent to a search, it makes perfect sense. It got the knife out of the way, and once Cooper took it to NY, its so far away it doesnt matter anymore.



***PROBLEM #1

JMBs 1/26/94 statement:

GITCHELL: ALRIGHT WHEN DID YOU UH GAVE HIM THAT KNIFE?
BYERS: IT WAS THE LAST TIME THEY WERE DOWN HERE WHICH WAS UH, SEEM LIKE THEY WERE DOWN HERE IN NOVEMBER

From Gitchells notes of int. w/Cooper:
Rec. knife on Sunday 12-19-93 late afternoon from Mark Byers while at his residence.

*Byers is off by a month here. Gitchells response? Nada.*


***PROBLEM #2

Jmbs 1/26/94 Statement
GITCHELL: HAD YOU EVER TAKEN THAT HUNTING OR USE IT RECENTLY JUST PRIOR TO GIVING IT TO UM, WHAT DID YOU SAY HIS NAME WAS KOOK?
BYERS: I THINK KOOK, NO THAT KNIFE HAD NOT BEEN USED AT ALL, IT JUST BEEN KEPT UP, PUT IN MY DRESSER AND I DIDN'T USE IT AND THE REASON WHY WAS IS BECAUSE OF THOSE SERRATED EDGES
GITCHELL: UH-HUH
BYERS: YOU COULDN'T KEEP IT SHARP (snip), AND HE THOUGHT IT WAS NEAR (neat?) BECAUSE IT HAD A VELCRO CASE THAT YOU COULD CARRY IT ON YOUR BELT WITH, AND IT KINDA HAD A GRIP ON IT THAT FELT LIKE PACHMAYR'S ON A GUN, AND HE JUST REALLY LIKE IT AND ADMIRED IT AND I REALLY DIDN'T LIKE IT SO I GAVE IT TO HIM.

Gitchells notes 1/24/94 - DCooper Int.
He said it was sharp. Cut a piece of paper.

*Byers tells Gitchell the knife cant be kept sharp, but tells Cooper its sharp and demonstrates it in front of him.*

***PROBLEM #3

Jmbs 1/26/94 Statement
RIDGE: DID YOU USE THE KNIFE?
BYERS: I NEVER USED IT, I WOULD HAVE USED IT HOPEFULLY, I WAS GOING TO USE IT FOR DEER HUNTING THAT'S ALL I DO IS DEER HUNT BUT I NEVER HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO USE IT ON A DEER.

Gitchells notes 1/24/94 - DCooper
Took knife back to NY with me. Could tell the knife had been
(illegible)(used? around?) for a while. Looked like a (illegible)(snled/srrted?) blade. Cut leg off a deer in November.

*Byers tells Gitchell its never been used, but told Cooper hed cut a leg off a deer in November*

***PROBLEM #4

JMB statement 1/26/94
BYERS: (snip) AND HE THOUGHT IT WAS NEAR (neat?) BECAUSE IT HAD A VELCRO CASE THAT YOU COULD CARRY IT ON YOUR BELT WITH, AND IT KINDA HAD A GRIP ON IT THAT FELT LIKE PACHMAYR'S ON A GUN, AND HE JUST REALLY LIKE IT AND ADMIRED IT AND I REALLY DIDN'T LIKE IT SO I GAVE IT TO HIM.

Gitchells notes 1/24/94 - DCooper
Said by: Byers
If I liked or appreciated knives - was fishing all day- I had been asleep on his couch.
He left and came back with knife, took knife out. I want to give you something.
I want to keep it in your car
Told him I didnt want the gift, couldnt understand why he gave it to me.

This is proof that JMB was trying to get the knife out of the house. Getting it into Coopers car is quick and nearly foolproof. Theres no reason to search for fibers to match from Coopers car, and no search warrant will cover Coopers car.

Part II

Mara Leveritt writes about this in her book Devils Knot, and she has more information on the situation. In an interview with Melissa Byers parents, [detailed in footnote 204] they told Leveritt they were at a Thanksgiving dinner at the Byers house when JMB gave the knife to a member of the film crew.
(...Kilburn DeFir said We were there. I saw Mark hand him the knife.)

So now PROBLEM #1 switches from what I has assumed was JMBs inconsistency (to put it politely) to the film crews. Why would Doug Cooper keep quiet that long? Why would they all say it was Dec. 19th?
And why is the knife supposedly given in a completely different situation? Its not just the date thats a question. Either JMB and Cooper were alone, or it was Thanksgiving dinner.

It gets more confusing. This is from DK page 149:
---...he (Ron Lax) spoke with Sinofsky and Berlinger, who told him, as he wrote, that they had spoken with Fogleman and Gitchell in December 1993...and apparently provided them with details of the knife. [201] No record of that discussion was supplied by the West Memphis police.
The knifes existence was not reported to the defense attorneys until almost a month later-after Jessies trial had already started.---


In either case Gitchell knew the knife was a problem before he received it in January. He could have done the honorable thing and demanded the knife be given to him then, notify the defense and get tests on the knife. He didnt. He waited until there was a traceable FedEx package to prove he had it before he did a damn thing.

Im more angry now than when I first wrote this, and Im not even halfway thru the book!

...to be continued..

[Obscuregawdess]

(insightful post from a wm3db, poster- BCandScott)

http://westmemphisthreediscussion.yuku.com/topic/2101

EVIDENCE DEMONSTRATING ACCOMPLICES -- MULTIPLE TYPES OF ROPE KNOTS From the Echols/Baldwin Opinion, page 53: Both Echols and Baldwin objected to the trial court giving the accomplice instruction. . . The trial court correctly gave the instruction because . . . two different types of knots were used to tie the victims; there were three victims, and there was sufficient evidence from which a jury could have concluded that the murders were not committed by one person.

As far as I know, Lisa Sakevicius of the state crime lab testified to the following at Jessie's trial...

Michael Moore, 2 black shoestrings -
square knots on left side and half-hitches on the right side.
Steven Branch, black shoestring on right in half-hitches - white shoestring on left in half-hitches.
Christopher Byers, black shoestring in half-hitches on right side - white shoestring in half-hitches on left side.

Knots: From www.22ndfarnworth.freeserve.co.uk/knots/

The 22nd Farnworth Scout Group

A half hitch is a single hitch made about the ropes own standing part. On its own it is insecure but forms part of many other knots.

To Tie: Loop the rope about the rail and take a turn about the standing part.




The distinction between the half hitch and the single hitch is often not made in modern use and the term 'half-hitch' used regardless of whether it is made about its own standing part or another object.


Reef Knot



The reef knot is one of the best known and most widely misused knots in the world. Best known as it is (in its double-slipped form) the knot used to fasten shoelaces; most misused as it is commonly used as a bend, a use to which it is particularly poorly suited.




It is a flat, symmetrical knot which should be used purely as a binding knot; the first half-knot draws up against the object and the second secures it. It can be used for parcelling, bandaging and for reefing sails, hence it's name. The Americans know this as the square knot, which is not be confused with the square knot! The best way to untie the reef knot is to pull one of the ends to create a larkshead which can then be slid off.

To Tie: Tie a half knot in the ends of the line and draw it tight about the object, then add a second half knot ensuring that one is left-handed and that the other is right-handed. The usual way to remember this is "left over right and under, right over left and under.





If we look at these knots and the differences between them, we see that the reef knot or as we Americans know it, the square knot is basically two opposing half hitches. The idea that different types of knots indicate more than one perpetrator of the crime seems less likely when one realizes that in tying a number of half hitches, some combinations of those half hitches will create the American square knot.

[Obscuregawdess]

[Obscuregawdess]

http://home.comcast.net/~wm3files/ET03.02.94_01.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~wm3files/ET03.02.94_02.jpg

Evening Times
March 2, 1994
Wednesday

3 died after midnight, medical examiner says

By Kathleen Burt
Evening Times Staff Writer

Jonesboro

A state medical examiner today estimated three West Memphis boys died between 1 and 5 a.m. May 6, as much as 12 hours after they were last seen.
The testimony from Dr. Frank Peretti was the first time a time of death had been mentioned on the basis of scientific tests. Jessie Misskelley Jr., convicted of the three boys' deaths last month, first told police in a statement the deaths happened about noon on May 5, and later changed that time to "about dark".
The doctor's testimony came on the trials of Damien Wayne Echols, 19, and Charles Jason Baldwin, 16. They, along with Misskelley, were charged with the murders of Steve Branch, Chris Byers and Michael Moore.
Peretti said he based his estimate of time on death on the lividity, or blood settling, in the three boys' bodies. Two other important factors that would have helped determine a more exact time of death - body temperature and degree of rigor mortis - were not available, he said.
Crucial information was left out of the coroner's report that would have aided him, Peretti said. "The coroner's report was not written to the standards it should have been. I'm not being critical of anyone in particular, but since Arkansas has a coroner system, the coroner is responsible for the information when they go to a crime scene to make a report", he said.
There were no records in the initial report of body temperature or of rigor mortis, the degree of stiffness of the bodies, Peretti said. He added that the tests for rigor mortis probably weren't performed because the bindings on the boys' bodies would have had to be removed. A body temperature is taken rectally, which might have altered evidence of sexual abuse, he said.
Peretti also testified about a knife reportedly aquired from Mark Byers, Chris Byers' father, which had some red fabric inside the handle. The Kershaw locking blade knife had serrations consistent with some of the wounds on the boys' bodies, Peretti said on Tuesday.
The medical examiner also testified he found several old scars on Byers' body, including one on the right side of his forehead, another next to the bridge of his nose and a third on his chest. Bruising on the boys' left buttock could have been caused by a belt, Peretti said.
On Tuesday, Peretti testified about another knife that was found in the lake behind Baldwin's trailer that is also consistent with some wounds the boys received.
Jurors saw the survival knife and heard Peretti outline -

(see Trial on page 2)


PHOTO: Officers escort Damien Echols from courtroom Tuesday.



Trial

(continued from page 1)

the multiple injuries sustained by the three victims, and how they were consistent with that knife blade. In photos of Moore's body, a serrated pattern was evident in a cut on his chest. Branch suffered multiple facial abrasions consistent with a knife, Peretti testified.
The folding knife, which had a serrated blade, was first introduced during a hearing outside the presence of the jury Tuesday afternoon before prosecutors put Peretti on the stand.
Val Price, one of Echols' attorneys, showed Peretti the knife, which was pulled from a black sheath closed with Velcro.
During the hearing, Peretti admitted that the knife could have caused the smaller serrations and injuries sustained by the victims.
The black handled knife allegedly was given to members of a documentary film crew, which in turn turned it over to police.
Byers sustained sexual mutilation and had gouging wounds on his inner thighs which Peretti said were consistent with those seen in female rape victims.
Branch and Moore drowned, but Peretti said severe head injuries would have caused their deaths if they had not breathed in water. Byers bled to death, Peretti said, but he also sustained a severe injury at the base of his skull.
Peretti also said he found no evidence of insect bites on any of the bodies.
During Monday's testimony, West Memphis police officer Regina Meek said the mosquitos were so bad near the ditch, she dismissed the idea that the then-missing boys would be in that area.
Their beaten and bound bodies were found in the ditch May 6, naked and hogtied right hand to right ankle and left hand to left ankle with shoelaces.
Each boy had numerous wounds from head to toe, Peretti said, so many that he grouped the injuries by area.
"If I hadn't, the autopsy reports would have been 40 or 50 pages long," he said.
Circuit Judge David Burnett left the jury with the images of the autopsy photos as court recessed Tuesday afternoon.
The significance of the smaller knife is yet to be proven, but a third defendant in the case, Jessie Lloyd Misskelley Jr., said in a statement to police that a folding knife was used to cut the boys.
It has yet to be determined if Misskelley will testify against the pair, but the previous statement will not be admissible under Arkansas law unless he does.
Specially appointed attorney Phillip Wells and Misskelley's defense attorney Dan Stidham met with him for about an hour Tuesday evening in the Craighead County jail.
Although Wells would not comment on the specifics of the meeting, Wells said he would report to Burnett today as time dwindles down for Misskelley to decide if he will testify against Echols and Baldwin.
Most of Tuesday was consumed by the continuing testimony of Det. Bryn Ridge, who exhaustively described the search for evidence in the days following the discovery of the boys' bodies in the creek.
Defense attorneys began to punch holes in the testimony as they questioned Ridge about a black man allegedly seen at Bojangles restaurant the night the boys were reported missing.
Price questioned Ridge about blood samples taken from the ladies' room on the day following the report.
"What day were those samples sent to the crime lab?" Price queried.
"They were never sent." Ridge replied. "It's my fault. I lost a piece of evidence."
Ridge added he did not recall receiving a pair of sunglasses from Bojangles manager Marty King that were left by a mysterious bleeding black man.
King is listed as a potential witness. He testified in Misskelley's trial.
Discussion was also held out of the jury's hearing regarding a statement made to Ridge by Kim Williams.
According to Price, Williams said she saw two black males and a white male coming out of Robin Hood Hill at 5:30 or 6 p.m. on the night the boys were reported missing.
Price wanted to question Ridge about the statement as it related to cult activity. He said in some cases cult members paint their faces black.
Price asked the prosecutors if they would be introducing evidence linking the crimes to Satanic rituals.
Deputy prosecutor John Fogleman said it has not been determined if a motive for the crimes will be shown. Burnett reminded the jurors motive does not have to be proven.
A jury of eight women and four men will decide the fate of the two remaining defendants in the coming weeks. Echols and Baldwin each face life in prison or the death penalty if convicted of the three deaths.
As if having their son murdered wasn't enough, Todd and Diana Moore were victims of another crime while attending the trial here Tuesday.
Their pick-up truck was broken into and about $300 in cash was stolen. Since crimes of this nature are nearly impossible to solve, Jonesboro police rounded up donations around town and presented the Moores with enough money to replace the stolen amount.
Both said they appreciated the effort.

[Obscuregawdess]

Evening Times
1/31/94

Parents want more evidence

CORNING (AP) -

The parents of one of the three 8-year-old boys killed at West Memphis were hoping to see more evidence connecting a defendant to the slayings when testimony resumed today in his trial.

Jessie Lloyd Misskelley, 18, is charged with capital murder. He is being tried separately from two other defendants in the May 5 deaths of Steve Branch, Chris Byers and Michael Moore. Their bound bodies were found a day after they disappeared while riding bicycles in their West Memphis neighborhoods.

Terry Hobbs, stepfather of Steve Branch, said after testimony ended Friday that he was troubled by the prosecution's presentation so far.

After an agonizing day of hearing police investigators and a medical examiner recount grisly details about the boys' deaths -- and evidence that three teens charged in the killings were members of a satanic cult -- the victims' parents had waited eagerly for the prosecutions' knockout punch.

But on Friday, the family members sat perplexed as the prosecution presented a procession of expert witnesses who testified that a battery of tests on hair, cloth fibers and other items failed to produce any physical evidence linking the accused to the crime.

"Maybe it's their technique or whatever you want to call it, but I didn't see no logic in it," Hobbs said.

"It's not over yet," Steve's mother, Pam Hobbs, said of the prosecution's case. "Maybe they'll do a better job (this) week."

Testimony was to resume today in Clay County Circuit Court.

The other two defendants -- Damien Echols, 19, and Charles Jason Baldwin, 16 -- are to go on trial Feb. 22 in Jonesboro. Circuit Judge David Burnett moved both trials out of Crittenden County, where the slaying occurred, because he said intense publicity might have made it difficult for the defendants to get a fair trial.

The first three days of testimony produced some poignant moments -- the victims' parents bolted from the courtroom in tears as jurors were shown photographs of the boys' bludgeoned bodies -- but little information that hadn't been revealed during pre-trial hearings.

In two recorded statements to police played during the trial, Misskelley said Echols and Baldwin committed the slayings and that he stood and watched as the three boys were beaten, two of them raped and one of them castrated.

Burnett has not placed a gag order on the attorneys in Misskelley's trial, but neither defense attorneys nor prosecutors have been willing to talk about the case.

PHOTO: Prosecutor Brent Davis, deputy prosecutor John Fogleman confer during trial.

http://home.comcast.net/~wm3files/ET01.31.94c_01.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~wm3files/ET01.31.94c_02.jpg

[Obscuregawdess]

THE COMMERCIAL APPEAL

LAB OFFERS NOTHING NEW IN SLAYINGS

Date: May 29, 1993
Section: News
Page: A10
Source: The Associated Press Staff reporter Bartholomew Sullivan contributed to this story.
Dateline: LITTLE ROCK
Edition: Final

The state Crime Lab director Friday lamented the beating inflicted on three slain 8-year-old boys but shed no new light on their deaths. Crime Lab Director Jim Clark mailed a final report to West Memphis police Friday on autopsies conducted on the bodies of Chris Byers, Steven Edward Branch and Michael Moore.

Their battered bodies were pulled from a watery ditch near their homes May 6, a day after they disappeared while riding bikes after school.

Police said they died of blows to the head. Clark said the extent of the punishment inflicted on the youths was emotionally taxing for medical personnel who examined the bodies.

West Memphis police still have no suspects in the deaths, Gitchell said.

Gitchell said he had not received the final autopsy report.

Also Friday, a church-sponsored bank account to aid the families of the three West Memphis youths was closed after raising $19,770.

Kim Spears, secretary for Trinity Missionary Baptist Church, said $5,865 had been disbursed to the families. The final distribution is scheduled for Tuesday.

Rev. Fred Tinsley, rector of Holy Cross Episcopal Church in West Memphis, said Friday that contributions to his church's account for the families contained slightly more than $26,000.

http://westmemphisthreediscussion.yuku.com/topic/2788

[Obscuregawdess]

Submission to the Alabama Dept of Forensic Sciences report, January 5, 1994.
Q9 is the hair from beneath Chris Byers' ligature.

A hair beneath Michael Moore's ligature was found to match the mitchondrial DNA of Terry Hobbs, the stepfather of victim, Stevie Branch. MtDNA can exclude who is not the source of the hair and the probability of a false match from an unrelated individual is in the area of 1 in 500 to 1 in 10000. The suggestion that there are many people in a metropolitan area with similar profiles, is a weak statistical argument - almost all other types of evidence are less stringent. It may play an important in future judicial proceedings.

The DNA of the murderer.

Another piece of DNA evidence may go further to identify the killer. The mtDNA of the hair beneath Chris Byers' ligature was sucessfully sequenced. This hair was originally referenced in the January 5, 1994 evidence submission to Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences and its sequence was reported by Bode Research Institute on page 10 of their September 27, 2007 report.

Most interesting is who it does not belong to, virtually ruling out passive transfer.

It does not belong to:

The victims.
Terry Hobbs - it does not match his mtDNA which has been sequenced.
Pamela Hobbs. Mitochondrial DNA is maternally passed down with its sequence intact. Pamela Hobbs mtDNA is the same as Steve Branch's mtDNA and, since the hair's mtDNA does not match the victims, it can not be from Pamela Hobbs.
Due to an extension of the same reason, it can not be Amanda Hobbs hair. She also received her mother's mtDNA. So, it can not have come from the Hobbs immediate household.
It can not be Melissa Byers hair (same sequence as Chris Byers).
It can not be Ryan Clark's hair (same sequence as Chris Byers).
It can not be Diane Moore's hair (same sequence as Michael Moore).
It can not be Dawn Moore's hair (same sequence as Michael Moore).
The three in prison (sequenced).

Among the immediate household members, it could only be John Mark Byers or Todd Moore's hair. (I am not trying to cast aspersions in their direction, I'm only trying to say they haven't been eliminated, the way, for example, Bryn Ridge who picked up the bodies hasn't been eliminated.)

The Serological Research Institute sequenced a set of mtDNA sequences, 1 through 6, the identity of which are not provided in the court documents. It is quite possible these are from John Mark Byers, as he was a "person of interest." Since, no note of matching was mentioned, it would follow he is not the source of this hair.

So whose hair is it? If the hair belongs to a reasonable suspect, then that person would be the murderer. To assume an innocent explanation for both a hair match beneath the ligature with no benign explanation for contact with victim Chris Byers, would be absurd.


The mitochondrial DNA sequence of the hair beneath Chris Byers ligature.




http://www.jivepuppi.com/DNA_results_part_five.html

[Obscuregawdess]

Hairs being compared under the microscope.

Anomalous hairs were retrieved from the victims, their clothing, the crime scene and other items entered into evidence. These are

Four hairs removed from the body of Michael Moore. One was described as being recovered from his ligature. One was described as a dyed dark brown hair among head hair combed from Moore's scalp. Two were described as Caucasian hairs found among the hair shaved from the head of Michael Moore during the autopsy.
Two hairs (FP5 93-05717) removed from the body of Stevie Branch. These were described as razor proximal cut and found among the hair shaved from Stevie Branch head during the autopsy. Alabama describes these as three hairs. Similarities to this set of hairs are described below.
Four hairs removed from the body of Christopher Byers. These included one described as found on his body, one found on his lower body, one from his perineum, and one from beneath a ligature.
One hair fragment described as being Negroid in origin from the white sheet used during transport of Chris Byers to the medical examiner.
Two hairs found on the children's clothing, one on the blue pants and a light brown hair on the Scout cap.
One Caucasian brown hair (possibly a pubic hair) found on a tree stump near the crime scene. Numerous Caucasian hairs were found among the items in a bag found at the crime scene.
Other hairs described as being found on knives: one hair each from two knives belonging to Richard Cummings, one from a knife seized from the home of Domini Teer, and a brown Caucasian hair, possibly pubic in origin, from the knife of Jason Crosby.
The above list was compiled from the DNA testing motions and the evidence lists. The case summary added this comment: "A dark colored hair, most likely Caucasian, was located on the buttock of one victim and the neck area of another;" although this does not correspond to any of those in the above list. Only the hairs removed from Stevie Branch's head were described as proximal cut. The Negroid hair and hairs from E147 "knife with black sheath" were described as fragments. Hairs with roots can be tested by either mtDNA or STR DNA analysis while hairs missing the roots can only be tested by mtDNA.

Hairs were compared by microscope for similarities with hairs taken from suspects and family members by the forensic laboratories in Arkansas and Alabama. These analyses were performed on several occasions as more samples became available.

In the first set of analyses, the Arkansas State Criminal Laboratories reported on May 24, 1993, the hairs from Stevie Branch (FP5 93-05717) were compared to those from Damien Echols submitted for evidence on May 11th. The results were described as inconclusive and more hairs from Damien Echols were requested.

After the arrests, a second set of hairs were obtained from Damien Echols and on June 29, 1993 another report was issued. In this case the same hairs from Stevie Branch were found to be similar to the new sample from Echols and also to hairs from suspect Tim Dodson. Some of the Echols and Dodson's hairs were described as very similar to each other. Also in this report the hair found on Chris Byers perineum was described as being similar to other hairs from Chris Byers' head.

A second set of hairs were obtained from Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley, Jr. [E143 and E146, respectively]. These were compared to the queried hairs. A report dated September 9, 1993 from the Arkansas Laboratory stated: "Due to submission of addition standards, a caucasian head hair recovered from the ligatures (FP8 - 5718) [Christopher Byers] was found to be microscopically similar to hairs in E143a. [Jason Baldwin]"

Alabama Department of Forensic Science examined slides with the hairs retrieved from Stevie Branch (FP5 93-05717, the same referred to in the Arkansas reports) along with two hairs retrieved from Chris Byers, one from his leg and one from beneath his ligature, and one hair found on the Cub Scout cap. Not examined were the Negroid hair, the dyed hair, the hair found near the tree trunk, or any of the other hairs found on the bodies or the victims' clothing. On January 5, 1994, they reported the hairs found on Stevie Branch "exhibited some similarities to both the known hair of Echols and Dodson." They also found the hair on the lower leg of Chris Byers to be similar to the hairs from Echols (although Arkansas hadn't come to this conclusion). The other hairs were deemed "either dissimilar to the known hairs of the suspects or in this examiner's opinion lack sufficient microscopic characteristics for an adequate comparison."

On January 20 the Arkansas State Crime Laboratory reported on the questioned hairs from the lower leg of Byers and those from Stevie Branch to hairs taken from family members. The hairs from Stevie Branch were also found similar to those from his biological father, Steve Branch, Sr. Although Alabama had hair samples from Steve Branch, Sr., they did not reach this conclusion.

Only one hair, that from an unspecified knife, was analyzed by HLA DQalpha. The results came back with 1.1, 4 matching that of Chris and John Mark Byers. These results were only referred to in passing in the Echols/Baldwin trial with no follow-up by the prosecutor or by the defense. Prosecutor Fogleman questioning the head of Genetic Designs Lab, Michael DeGuglielmo:

Fogleman: But other than those things, nothing matched anybody?
DeGuglielmo: Up until the knife and the hair specimen -
Fogleman: Right.
DeGuglielmo: No sir, that's correct.
Fogleman: I don't have any further questions.

The findings from the hair analyses were not part of the prosecution's case. The reason may have been due to the multiple unexplained hairs that were not found similar to the suspects or else due to the fact that the ones that were found similar were also found similar to multiple sources. The Alabama and Arkansas laboratories had different conclusions. For the sample from Steve Branch, Arkansas found some of the questioned hairs similar to Echols, Dodson and Branch, Sr. and Alabama finding similarities only to Echols and Dodson. Arkansas found similarities between Baldwin's hair and a queried hair from Christopher Byers ligature. The criteria for determining similarity was also different between labs. Alabama excluded both hairs which lacked sufficient microscopic characteristics for comparison and those that were not found similar, while Arkansas requested a second sample from Echols after the results from the first set of hairs were inconclusive and a second set from Baldwin and Misskelley after no similarities were found after comparisons with the first set.

The defense attorneys brought up the unexplained Negroid hair as possibly pointing to another perpetrator - but did not bring up the other unsourced hairs. In the defense's summation, the mysterious Bojangles man was suggested to be a source of the Negroid hair.

Although the hair evidence didn't play a prominent role in the trial, most of the potentially meaningful biological evidence from the crime scene for the DNA analyses is in the hairs. All previous findings of similarity or exclusion will become moot with the DNA results.


Richard Cummings, recent. Hairs found
on two different knives seized from his
home were sent for comparison.




http://www.jivepuppi.com/hairs.html