Eighteen Years Ago Today
"Nothing Endures Like Change" ~ Diogenes Laertius
As the sun rises over West Memphis at 6:04 this morning, with the temperature predicted to rise to a very comfortable seventy degrees with fifty-eight per cent humidity, the day should feel very similar to this day in 1993 when Stevie Branch, Christopher Byers, and Michael Moore went out to play in the woods and never came back. While so much has changed over the past eighteen years, two facts remain the same: Stevie, Christopher and Michael are still dead, and Jason Baldwin, Jessie Misskelley, and Damien Echols are still in prison. The former will never change. The latter is less certain.
Todd and Dana Moore, now divorced, still miss Michael every day, but are certain that the right people have been put behind bars. Pam and Terry Hobbs are divorced as well, but Pam, along with a growing number of WM3 supporters, believe that Terry may have had something to do with the murders, but that in any case the WM3 did not. Mark Byers is much less equivocal than Pam Hobbs; he is 100% sure that Terry Hobbs killed his son. "I don't have any problem with saying his name", Byers told Larry King in December of 2007. "In my opinion, yes, I believe [Terry Hobbs] is the perpetrator of this crime." Both Mark and Terry have movie deals with Joe Berlinger and Bruce Sinofsky to make a third installment of the HBO Paradise Lost films. Documentarian Amy Berg (Deliver Us From Evil) also has a film in the works, and True Crime with Aphrodite Jones will run a one hour feature on the ID Channel on the eighteenth anniversary of the crime (10:00 p.m. EST). Will these shows have the impact that the first one did back in 1996? Echols and his supporters certainly hope so.
But the most dramatic change in the case since the WM3 were convicted in 1994 took place this spring, when Judge David N. Laser scheduled an evidentiary hearing to be held on December 5th of this year. The hearing was scheduled as the result of an Arkansas State Supreme Court (ASSC) unanimous decision rendered on November 4th, 2010, remanding the case to the Second Circuit Court. Judge Laser will hear all the new evidence collected by the defense over the last few years, as well as any older evidence that the defense chooses to present (some introduced at the criminal trial(s), some not). The evidentiary hearing will determine whether new trials will be granted to the West Memphis Three. Damien Echols had this to say after hearing the ASSC decision:
Reporter: "If you do get a new trial and it goes before a new jury there’s always that chance the jury could say guilty as charged. Do you think about that happening? Do you think that could happen?
Echols: "No I don’t. I don’t think after they hear everything we’ve collected over the past 17 years I don’t think there is any chance [at] all of that happening."
Reporter: "How confident are you that you will get a new trial?"
Echols: "100%."
Whether or not Echols is as confident as he seems, one thing is certain: the West Memphis Three have never had so much attention focused on their case, nor have they had the resources (read money) to mount such an aggressive appeal to the courts, and that represents the most significant change to date. In the last year alone there have been TV appearances (Larry King Live, 48 Hours Mystery, True Crime with Aphrodite Jones), a concert (Voices for Justice, with Johnny Depp, Eddie Vedder, Patti Smith, Natalie Maines, and Fistful of Mercy with Ben Harper and Dhani Harrison), and local and national news coverage from New York, to Washington, to Los Angeles. In the eighteen-year history of this case, there has never been a more hopeful time for the convicted men and their supporters.
. . . nor a more poignant one for the families of three little second graders who, as Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel put it, will never see middle school. And that’s something that is never going to change.
Rest In Peace Stevie, Christopher, and Michael.
Categories: uncategorized
Tags: Damien Echols John Mark Byers Natalie Maines Terry Hobbs West Memphis Three WM3
3 boys lost there lives that day,3 8 years old kids,just out playing , till that monster terry hobbs got his hands on them.the cops said it was a cult and arrested 3 boys for this horrible crime,how can so many people lie about what went on that day .we all know now they didn,t kill those 3 boys .i always new terry hoobs had something to do with the boys death,i always said terry kill those boys in his house,there your crime scene,then terry took them to the woods,where there bodies were found.why is justice taken so long,are they waiting for terry hobbs to die,which means no justice for him.the justice system there makes me sick,3 boys spent 18 years of there lives in jail for terry hobbs crime.where the justice here .its time to get that baster terry hobbs lock up and set the boys now men free.then there will be justice for all.justice for 6 innocence boys.
Reply to this
When I woke up on Thursday morning, it didn't occur to me that it was the 18th anniversary of the day this whole nightmare began. When I noticed the date, I informed my husband of the significance and we talked about it briefly - mostly about my interest in the case, but one thought kept going 'round in my head: These six families, the entire community they lived in, and especially the three men behind bars for a crime it will soon (I believe) be proven they did not commit - these folks cannot forget the devastation; painful memories associated with the 5th of May 1993. They can't move on, either, because there's still no closure in sight. I feel so sorry for them all. It is no way to live - no way to grieve and heal from the loss they've suffered.Of course my heart also breaks for Damien, Jason and Jessie as they still have yet to find justice either. What a sad day, but I pray they'll not lose hope. It may well be finally turning around, and not a moment too soon! Blessed Be, All of You.
Reply to this
I have watched almost all documentaries and videos on this matter. Yet I really do not know who committed this heinous crime. My curses are upon that person that he or she never finds peace in both lives. I truly grieve for these little innocent kids...I also have one little son. I emphatize with the families of the victims...
There are two tragedies here. 1-murder of these kids...2-stupidly handling of the trial.
I want to repeat that I do not know who is guilty. But the WM3 deserves a fair trial. And everybody involved in this is case is a potential suspect, including but not limited to Terry Hobbs and John Mark Byers who happen to be the stepfathers of the two of the victims.
Reply to this
Zak,
I think you're one of the few who get it. You and I are in the same camp (not a very popular one either) of people who freely admit that they do not know who killed the boys, but that it is obvious that the trials were not fair. I wasn't at the scene of the crime, and three of the people that were can't talk. But with a good legal and forensics team representing the three, and the public trying to smoke out the person or persons they feel are responsible, maybe justice can be served after all. If not, I pray for us all. Thanks for the comment.
Greg
Reply to this
I think you are correct as well. Though I am still an avid WM3 supporter, I admit to being slightly biased by the films in which John Mark Byers was loud and clear and center stage.
I admit I have believed he did it for many years, but only by face. I hadn't paid much attention to the case for some time when I first heard there was DNA evidence now linking Terry Hobbs to the crime.
When I came on this site, I was ultra-confused for a minute and thought it was Byers' DNA that was found at the scene because I forgot who was who...
Perhaps we can all learn some lessons in restraint from this experience. I hate to admit that the hysterical public reaction toward the Echols, Baldwin and Miskelley trials, etc closely mirrored my own immediate determination of John Mark Byers' guilt. That is not a part of myself I like very much. Despite my usually rational demeanor, it surprises me how intensely I can react to my "gut feeling".
I think most people started out that way...and hopefully as Greg put it the "thinkers" among us eventually calm down and start looking more objectively at the facts of this case. I am a paralegal and law student, so I am well aware emotion has no place in the law, but doesn't that go against everything it means to be human?
I suggest we forgive ourselves and others out there whose gut feelings may or may not have been wrong about Byers. I do have one question, however - IS IT POSSIBLE that hiding in plain sight (becoming a supporter, staying in the media, etc) is the most effective strategy to avoid pursuit when one knows the entire public's eyes are on him? It's as valid a question, I think, as any we've been addressing here...
This is the man who danced around flaming sticks he named after Damien, Jason and Jessie and light on fire - shot pumpkins (or whatever)and pretended they were the three boys he thought were guilty. Now Byers thinks they're innocent and jumps on the supporters' bandwagon?
Am I the only one who (no disrespect meant here whatsoever) sees this as a MAYBE, just MAYBE a kind of ploy to stay in everybody's good graces and keep positive light on himself?
I'm just asking, Greg...any thoughts?
P.S. Any way to contact "the pup" that you are aware of? You raised a good point about a lack of citations on the site. I'm trying to fact-check here.
Reply to this
Tina, it is very easy to get confused in a case this complex. You have three victims, three defendants, three convictions, one death sentence. As you mentioned, there is also the very unrestrained, boisterous persona of John Mark Byers. Mark calls all this a "red herring." That’s for you to decide.
I also agree that it is right to ask all relevant questions. However, to suggest that Byers would commit a heinous homicide, including that of his own little boy, with no apparent motive, and then construct the elaborate coverup you’ve suggested is, well, implausible at best, wouldn’t you agree? Rather than "stay in everybody’s good graces", he has had ample opportunity to just lay low and fade away. Just as someone else has done.
Speaking of which, I really don’t have much to say about Terry Hobbs. The police screwed up in a major way by not talking to him back in 1993, but anything else I’ll leave to the lawyers. Exonerating the West Memphis Three pins nothing on Hobbs, though it would surely make things uncomfortable for him since aside from Mark Byers, he is the only other "suspect." . There is circumstantial evidence against Hobbs—how much only the Echols defense team knows for sure—and some fairly weak DNA evidence. There is some seventeen-year-old testimony from Hobbs’ neighbors, 13 and 11 year-old-girls at the time, saying they saw the boys with Hobbs the day of the murder, when he claimed not to have seen Stevie at all on May the 5th. There are the discrepancies in Hobbs’ alibi, as well as the stories told by Hobbs and David Jacoby about the time line for that night, who searched where and when, and whether or not Jacoby crossed the pipe bridge into the woods that night. Perhaps when they are cross-examined in December (a presumption on my part) we’ll know more.
As to Byers’ actions—antics many would call them—in the Paradise Lost films, there are many reasons for that., and Mark has been fairly public about it. I also cover it extensively in the book. so I think I’ll leave it at that.
I have no idea how to reach Jivepuppi. If you go to http://westmemphisthreediscussion.yuku.com/, someone there may know.
Reply to this
Hello again, Greg - Thanks for responding. I just wanted to clarify that I wasn't stating any theory, necessarily, about the veracity of Mark Byers' new support of the West Memphis Three, nor presuming to do anything beyond ask questions I sort of toy with in my own head (or notebook) from time to time. I'm ecstatic to see the families of the three victims coming out in support of the Three. It gives me a lot of hope that perhaps justice might just prevail after all.
True, the defense's exoneration does not really pin anything on Hobbs, Byers or anyone else. However, I wouldn't want to be the guy whose DNA was found at the crime scene, once Damien, Jason and Jessie are set free - would you? I saw you refer to it as "weak" but isn't DNA the best link to who was present when the boys were killed/dumped?
I understand the difference between mitochondrial DNA and other forms as it being the most conclusive. Is that your understanding as well or am I wrong?
Rest assured, I will buy your book. I am very interested to read your take on Byers' story...and yes, I will see you in December! I made arrangements this week and will fly in on Saturday to get settled before Court begins on Monday morning. Thanks for the link to locate jivepuppi.
Take Care.
Tina
Reply to this
Hi Tina. No worries, I understood what you were saying. I ask a lot of questions myself, and don't always understand or agree with the answers. And a minor correction about the families of the victims' support for the three: Steve Branch Sr., who has been virtually silent for all these years, recently read a statement reaffirming his belief that the right men are in prison.(If I can find the clip I'll post the link).
As far as the DNA goes, I'm no expert either. mtDNA narrows the field down to something like 7% of the caucasian population for Hobbs as I recall, and a similar number for Jacoby. And yes, it is very troubling that DNA possibly linking Hobbs and Jacoby to the crime scene was identified, while nothing connecting the three was found. Still, not every piece of evidence was tested, which leaves the possibility that other forensic evidence linking the three to the murders was not tested, or if it was, isn't being revealed. AG Dustin McDaniel has indicated that the state has some new evidence as well, so we'll have to wait and see. The burden of proof is now on Echols and he will have a tough row to hoe, but there has been a changing of attitude on the state's part, as evidenced by the ASSC granting the evidentiary hearing to begin with. If this was being heard before Judge Burnett I'd say Echols' chances were greatly diminished. No telling How Judge David Laser will see the case. His take on the instructions from the ASSC is that the justices want the case "pre-tried" before a judge. He says he is "not limiting what can be presented" in the hearing, so it' surely sounds like he intends to be fair.
See you in December.
Reply to this