Facts Predating Jessie Misskelley’s June 3, 1993 Confession

(Jessie Misskelley trying to hide his face as his confession is played.)

Through-out the course of the investigation and prior to his eventual confession to police on June 3, 1993, Jessie Misskelley would make numerous statements implicating both himself and his friends, Jason and Damien in the murders. Prior to making his original statement Jessie would even display odd behavior suggesting his guilt.

FACTS PREDATING MISSKELLEY’S CONFESSION-

Jessie’s documented confessions began in the few days following the murders. During Jessie’s confession to police on June 3, 1993, he informed investigators that he had given away the shoes he wore on the night of the murders to his friend Buddy Lucas.

DETECTIVE GITCHELL: Ok. So you had a white t-shirt with a basketball design on it? (22 second pause) Ok, uh, what about shoes. What kind of shoes did you have on?

MISSKELLEY: White and blue Adidas.

DETECTIVE GITCHELL: White and blue?

MISSKELLEY: Mm-hmm.

DETECTIVE GITCHELL: And who has those shoes now?

MISSKELLEY: Buddy Lucas.

DETECTIVE GITCHELL: And how old is Buddy?

MISSKELLEY: He’s about 18 or 19.

DETECTIVE GITCHELL: Why, why does he have your shoes?

MISSKELLEY: We went, we was coming home one day and it was raining and he didn’t have nothing else to wear so he put on one of my shoes.

DETECTIVE GITCHELL: Ok, and where does he live at?

MISSKELLEY: In Lakeshore.

 

When investigators spoke to Lucas on June 10, 1993 he produced for them the shoes Jessie had given to him, initially telling them, that Jessie had just given him a pair of shoes to wear home one day after his own had gotten muddy. However, a few months later, Buddy’s uncle, Eddy Wilson told the police that Buddy knew more than he was telling them, stating that when he had confronted Lucas about the shoes, he said that when Jessie had given them to him there appeared to be blood on them. Shortly there after, Lucas was picked up by police again on October 14, 1993, and it was at this time, he informed them that on May 6, 1993, the day immediately after the murders, he had gone to visit with Jessie. During this visit, Jessie suddenly began to cry and confessed to him that himself, along with Jason Baldwin, and Damien Echols, had hurt some boys the night before during a fight, and he didn’t know what to do. According to Lucas, Jessie wanted to turn Jason and Damien in to the police, but didn’t know how to do so without going to prison himself, because he had also hit the victims and chased them to prevent them from escaping. He then after confessing gave Lucas the shoes he wore on the night of the murders and said he didn’t want to see them again.

                   (Buddy Lucas.)

A full detailed summery of the confession to Buddy Lucas can be read at the link below:

The Buddy Lucas Confession.

Lee Rush, the live in girlfriend, of Jessie’s father, Jessie Misskelley Sr., had also noticed strange behavior from Jessie at the time after the murders. She told the police on the night of his confession, that he had had several instances where he woke up in the middle of the night screaming and had mysterious crying fits.

(Lee Rush.)

A full account of Jessie’s crying fits can be found at the link below:

Jessie’s Crying Fits.

During the time following the murders, Jessie began to talk a lot to an older female friend who he babysat for, named Vickie Hutcheson, discussing with her in detail his friend, Damien Echols and even agreeing to help Vickie meet with Damien on one occasion, in which he brought Damien over to Vickie’s house, and then on a second occasion driving around with her to try and find him. Jessie at the time had been unaware that Vickie was reporting the information she was getting from him about Damien to the police and was trying to catch Damien on tape confessing to the murders. This never happened, but Hutcheson eventually lied to the police and claimed that Jessie and Damien had taken her to a meeting of witches out in a wooded area. This meeting was known as an Esbat and involved teenagers participating in an orgy.

Vickie had evidently made up the story to try and collect on the large reward money being offered to anyone with information that led to the arrest of the killer of the three boys.

Immediately following the trial though, Vickie began to give statements in which she suggested she made up the entire claim of the Esbat, stating that Jessie was innocent, and that she knew he was innocent because of a statement he made to her:

Vickie made the following statement to Defense Investigator, Ron Lax.

Taken from page 410 of the book, “The Blood of Innocents.”

In the interview with Lax and Stidham, Hutcheson said Misskelley had joked before his arrest that he would tell police he committed the murders if he was ever questioned. Hutcheson said she’s sure this happened because “I was in my right set of mind that day.”

“I about died” when Misskelley made his joke, Hutcheson said. “Because he goes, “I’ll just tell them I did it.” And I said, “No you wouldn’t. You stupid? what’s wrong with you, boy?” And he started busting out laughing and he was like, “It was a joke.”

(Vickie Hutcheson.)

On July 21, 1993, investigators interviewed a prisoner by the name of Jesse Hurst, who alleged that Damien Echols had made some statements about Jessie Misskelley. The statement itself which Hurst gives is confusing, as Hurst mixes up the names Jason and Jessie, often referring to Jessie as Jason. While he does confuse the names, it seems obvious from the context of the conversation that he’s referring to Jessie Misskelley. Hurst also seems to confuse when the conversation took place. He says he was told it was two weeks before the crime, but there was no murders yet, so that wouldn’t exactly make sense, so the context of the conversation would be that it occurred two weeks after the murders.

RIDGE: ONE THING WAS MENTION EARLIER THAT JASON AND DAMIEN HAD, A CONVERSATION

JESSE: YEAH (YES)

RIDGE: WHEN WAS THAT CONVERSATION SUPPOSE TO OF HAVE TAKEN PLACE

JESSE: HE SAID TWO WEEKS BEFORE THE MURDERS

RIDGE: OKAY, WHAT WAS SAID ABOUT THAT CONVERSATION?

JESSE: HE SAID THAT JASON TOLD HIM THAT IF THE POLICE COME BY HIS HOUSE ASKING WHO DID IT, HE WAS GOING TO ADMIT TO IT AND SAY YEAH I DID IT.

RIDGE: OKAY, NOW THIS IS TWO WEEKS PRIOR TO THE MURDERS, BEFORE THE MURDERS, SO JASON WAS TELLING DAMIEN HE WAS GOING TO DO IT?

JESSE: YEAH (YES) AND DAMIEN TOLD ME THAT HE THOUGHT HE WAS JUST JOKING, HE DIDN’T THINK HE WAS SERIOUS

Audio of the conversation with Jesse Hurst can be found at this link:

Hurst Statement

The statements from Buddy Lucas, Jesse Hurst, and Vickie Hutcheson all state that Jessie Misskelley was wanting to confess to the murders, and had said that if the police had questioned him that he was going to tell them he did the murders.

It had also seemed very important for Damien to tell the police on May 10, 1993 during a police interview, that there was only one killer, and that if there was more than one killer, there would be a fear of someone talking.

From the transcribed report of Damien’s interview:

DAMIEN STATED THAT HE FELT THAT IT WAS PROBABLY ONE PERSON BECAUSE IF IT WERE MORE THAN ONE PERSON SOMEBODY WOULD PROBABLY TELL ABOUT IT SOONER OR LATER. HE SAID THAT THERE WOULD BE A FEAR OF SQUEALING BY ONE OF THE PERSON IN THE ACT IF IT WERE MORE THAN ONE PERSON.

The Full May 10, 1993 interview of Damien Echols.

During Jason Baldwin’s appeals, at his Rule 37 hearing, his mother, Gail Grinnell testified that Jason and Jessie had had a falling out right after the murders, involving some shirts that belonged to Jason which had gone missing. It was also stated that Jessie had tried to take a necklace that belonged to Jason as well:

Q] Uh, and describe, first, talk about Jessie. Were Jason and Jessie buddies?

A] No.

Q] Why not?

A] I don’t know, uh, something to do with some T-shirts and he went to the skatin’ ring one night and they tried to steal, Jason came home and told me that Jessie tried to steal a necklace of his. This was after the murders. At one time they had been friends.

Q] Uh-huh?

A] Kind of.

Q] Uh-huh?

A] And they moved from the trailer park and, uh, Jessie had stolen some shirts, uh, he got, uh, he had borrowed some shirts from Jason and Jason couldn’t, he gave ’em to somebody that Jason couldn’t get ’em back from.

Q] Uh-huh. So in May of 1993, were Jason and Jessie hanging out together as buddies?

A] No.

Q] Okay?

A] And you know, Jessie didn’t come to our house. He took off and went, he came over to our, he popped up before the murders of those children and came over to our house and said he had just got back from California.

Q] Are you talking about Jessie?

A] Yeah.

According Gail Grinnell, at some point after the murders, Jason told her that he and Jessie had had a falling out while at Skate World, skating rink. Jason had told his mother that Jessie had stolen a few shirts of his that had mysteriously gone missing after the murders, and mentioned that Jessie tried to take a necklace of his.

A necklace belonging to Jason and Damien Echols ended up becoming an important item of evidence in the case. Both teenagers, Jason and Damien apparently shared clothing, including a pendent necklace with an axe on the end of it.

 

   (Photo of Jason Baldwin wearing the Axe Pendent Necklace.)

                                                                (Drawing by Jason Baldwin of the necklace.)

(Damien Echols wearing the Axe Necklace at Skate World.)

It was later discovered that on this necklace was human blood from two different people. One of them, being Damien Echols, and the other possibly Stevie Branch, one of the victims.

Damien Echols and DNA

On May 15, 1993, Jessie Misskelley, and his older friend David Sims, who was 22-years-old at the time, and his younger friend, Dennis Carter, who was 15, had called the police from a bowling Alley stating they had seen three little boys, who were around 8 or 9 years old fleeing from a man near some train tracks. When the police arrived, they pointed the finger at a man named Tracy Laxton, saying that Laxton not only had tried to lure three little boys into the woods just moments prior, but had approached them as well, offering to let them drink in his camp in the near-by woods.

Ultimately Laxton was investigated and cleared of any involvement in the murders, but the people who implicated him in the murders was shocking.

According to Jessie’s friend, David Sims, on the night they went down to the police station to report Tracy Laxton as a suspect in the murders, Jessie told Sims that he thought Jason and Damien had done the murders.

(Statement by David Sims.)

Sims had also stated that Jessie was scared of Damien:

The facts surrounding the Tracy Laxton incident can be read at the link below:

Tracy Laxton Incident.

In the days after Jessie reported Tracy Laxton, there was still more statements made by Jessie. One girl, Felicia Williams reported a minor statement by Jessie from May 27th, in which he pointed the finger at another teen, named Robert Burch, who was rumored to have killed the victims with Damien Echols:

The last time we had a conversation was around May 27th & someone was having a party & me and my boyfriend & his nephew were outside & we talked to Jessie & then Robert Burch wanted to fight my boyfriend’s nephew & Jessie went to talk to Robert, & someone in the crowd said that they think Robert killed the 3 boys & Jessie just agreed. I can’t say I was surprised about him (Jessie) killing them, I am just shocked that it was someone that I know & live by.

Felicia Williams Statement.

More about Robert Burch can be read at the link below:

The Skating Rink Confessions.

A girl named Kim Floresca stated in a news story for the newspaper, The Commercial Appeal, that appeared on June 7, 1993, that the day before the police questioned him, that he confessed to her and a few other kids during a car ride:

Local teens often travel to the Stonehenge site at night to socialize and marvel at its legend and chilling atmosphere.

“Sometimes people think it’s funny trying to scare other people,” said Kim Floresca, 15, who just completed 10th grade at Marion High School. “It’s supposed to be a place where cults go out, and they’re supposed to sacrifice virgins and animals and stuff.”

Floresca said she once went to the Stonehenge site about two years ago with a group of teens who included Misskelley. The night was just a typical night, she said, and Misskelley did nothing out of the ordinary.

Floresca said she never heard of the other two suspects visiting the site.

Floresca said Misskelley told her and other students the day before he was arrested that he participated in the killings.

A group of students were driving last Wednesday after school to a friend’s house to go swimming when Misskelley began telling his bizarre tale, she said.

“He was saying he hit the little boy and the little boy ran off and he was taking him back to where Damien and the other boy were,” she said. According to Misskelley’s story, Echols had already killed the two other boys, she said.

Floresca said she didn’t believe Misskelley at the time.

Link to Commercial Appeal story.

Floresca in her statement to The Commercial Appeal, gave a detail of the crime that had not even appeared in Jessie’s June 3, 1993 confession:

“He was saying he hit the little boy and the little boy ran off and he was taking him back to where Damien and the other boy were.”

Jessie had according to Buddy Lucas, also made a similar statement:

LUCAS – COUPLE, I SAID WAS YOU INVOLVED? HE SAID YEA, I SAID WHAT DID YOU DO? I FINALLY GOT IT TALKED OUT OF HIM WHAT DID HE DO, HE SAID I HIT UH, A COUPLE IN THE BACK OF THE HEAD 

RIDGE – OKAY, AND 

LUCAS – AND EVERYTHING TO KEEP THEM FROM RUNNING AND EVERYTHING 

Jessie had only told the police in his initial confession, that he had chased down one of the victim’s, Michael Moore, and brought him back to where his friends, Jason and Damien were. Jessie had made no mention of hitting Moore and had denied to the police at that time that he had hit any of the victims or even killed any of the victims.

Jessie’s June 3, 1993 confession:

DETECTIVE RIDGE: Where does he run to?

MISSKELLEY: That one, he runs out, going out the, out the park and I chased him and grabbed him and brought him back.

DETECTIVE RIDGE: Which way does he go, I mean, does he go on back towards where the houses are

MISSKELLEY: He goes on back. . .

DETECTIVE RIDGE: He’s going to Blue Beacon, is he going out towards the fields,

MISSKELLEY: He’s going. . .

DETECTIVE RIDGE: Where’s he running to?

MISSKELLEY: Towards the houses.

DETECTIVE RIDGE: Towards the houses?

DETECTIVE GITCHELL: Where the pipe is that goes across the water?

MISSKELLEY: Yeah, he’s running out there and I caught him and brought him back, and then I took off.

Jessie later in his confession swears up and down that he only witnessed the murders and helped bring Michael Moore back, a statement which investigators were very skeptical on.

DETECTIVE RIDGE: Okay, let me ask you something, now this is real serious and I want you to be real truthful, and I want you to think about it before you answer it, don’t just say yes or no, real quick. I want you to think about it. Did you actually hit any of these boys?

MISSKELLEY: No.

DETECTIVE GITCHELL: Now, tell us the truth.

MISSKELLEY: No.

DETECTIVE RIDGE: Did you actually rape any of these boys?

MISSKELLEY: No.

DETECTIVE RIDGE: Did you actually kill any of these boys?

MISSKELLEY: No.

DETECTIVE RIDGE: Did you see any of the boys actually killed?

MISSKELLEY: Yes.

Much like what Jessie had told Buddy Lucas, he had been trying to implicate his friends, Jason and Damien in the murders without admitting his own involvement, because he didn’t want to go to prison as well.

A real question to ask here though, is how could Lucas and Floresca know that Jessie had chased down the boys and hit them in the head, when Jessie had not even confessed that detail yet? The only way either witness could know that detail was if Jessie had confessed to them just as they claimed.

Jessie would only begin to mention that he hit the boys following his February 4, 1994 conviction, beginning that very same day. Jessie suddenly began to admit that he played a much larger role in the murders than he had ever confessed to previously, saying he had actually hit the victims as well and admitting that he had lied to the police about various elements of his confession to try and avoid going to prison:

More can be read on these post conviction confessions at the following link:

The post conviction statements.

(Jessie in the back of a cop car moments before confessing again.)

And in an added bit of information, Heather Cliett, Jason Baldwin’s girlfriend, alleged in an undated statement that her best friend, Jennifer Bearden, who also was trying to date Damien Echols and spoke with him regularly, had informed her that Jessie Misskelley killed the victims with the help of Damien’s friend, Murray Farris and Damien’s girlfriend, Domini Teer.

 

It had been following Jessie’s reporting of Tracy Laxton on May 15, 1993 as a suspect in the murders, as well as Vickie Hutcheson’s statements to police, in which she lied and said he and Damien had taken her to an Esbat, that the police decided to finally speak with the 17-year-old, Jessie Misskelley, which ultimately resulted in the June 3, 1993 confession. And according to multiple people, Jessie had made several statements indicative of guilt prior to this confession, including statements that he had wanted to turn his friends in, but couldn’t because he had also participated in the murders.

 

Click here to read more about Jessie’s confession.

The Evan Williams Bottle

On, February 4, 1994, Jessie Lloyd Misskelley, Jr, was sentenced to life in prison for the murders of Christopher Byers, Michael Moore, and Stevie Branch. And it was at this time he was escorted out of the courthouse and to a police car to be transported. It was during this car ride, that Jessie began to talk with the officers driving him, saying that the jury was right to have convicted him, because he really did do it, and not only that, but he was more involved in the murders than he had confessed to, admitting that he had been lying trying to lessen his involvement when talking to police.

Excerpt from the police car confession:

Jessie was asked how the boys were kept under control while being raped and not tied yet and he stated “They were like puppies, when you whoop a puppy and tell it to stay, it will.”

Report on Jessie’s police car confession.

(Jessie Misskelley on February 4, 1994.)

It was after this confession, that Jessie’s Lawyer, Dan Stidham spoke with him in regards to what he had told the officers.

Prosecutor, Brent Davis, related what followed in a hearing prior to Damien and Jason’s trial:

We then rode down to the Department of Corrections on Tuesday.  Mr. Stidham rode with me.  Mr. Fogleman and Mr. Gitchell met us at Brinkley, and we went to Pine Bluff.  At that time, Mr. Stidham talked with him for approximately ten or fifteen minutes, at which point he came out of the room, grabbed a Bible. went back in and — this is my personal observation — but approximately 30 to 45 minutes later Mr. Stidham exited.  He was very upset, unnerved, just kept mumbling things — “I don’t know what I’m supposed to do now.  I don’t know what to do now.”

From Jessie Misskelley’s February 8, 1994 confession with his lawyer, Dan Stidham:

STIDHAM: Okay. Jessie, a few minutes ago I asked you about making some statements to the Officers when they transported you from Piggott to Pine Bluff. You told me that you had told them some stuff. Is that Correct?

MISSKELLEY: Yes, sir.

STIDHAM: And at first you told me that you were just making it up, that you were lying to them, and then you placed your hand on the Bible and told me that you were there when these boys got killed.

MISSKELLEY: Yes, sir.

STIDHAM: Uh, what’s the truth, Jessie? I want to know the truth.

MISSKELLEY: The truth is, me and Jason and Damien done it.

STIDHAM: You were there when the boys were killed?

MISSKELLEY: Yes, sir.

STIDHAM: Now, what’s going to be very important is for you to tell me why it was that you have been maintaining that you weren’t there all this time?

MISSKELLEY: I was scared.

STIDHAM: what were you scared of?

MISSKELLEY: I always lied and I hadn’t ever put my hand on the Bible and swore. Nobody didn’t tell me to do that. If they would have told me that at first, I would have done it. Nobody told me to put my hand on the Bible.

STIDHAM: Okay. So basically, you’ve been lying to me and Mr. Crow for the past seven, or so months – about not being there when in fact you were there?

MISSKELLEY: Yes, sir.

During this confession, which he privately gave to Dan Stidham, Jessie admitted a greater involvement in the murders and even stated that he had fabricated previous claims from his first confession to police, because he didn’t want to go to prison for capital murder. It was also during this confession that Jessie provided a physical piece of corroborating evidence:

STIDHAM: Then what happened?

MISSKELLEY: Then Vickie went uh, went to the store and bought me some liquor.

STIDHAM: Vickie Hutcheson?

MISSKELLEY: Yes, sir.

STIDHAM: Okay, so about 6 o’clock. Is that, where did you run into her at?

MISSKELLEY: I went to her house.

STIDHAM: So you went by (inaudible) to Vickie’s house? This is on May 5th, the day the boys were killed?

MISSKELLEY: Yes, sir.

STIDHAM: And Vickie went to buy you some liquor?

MISSKELLEY: Yes, sir.

STIDHAM: Where’d she go, did you go with her?

MISSKELLEY: Huh-uh. (Negatively indicating)

STIDHAM: Did you stay at the house when she left, or tell me what happened?

MISSKELLEY: I was standing on the corner talking with Dennis, Dennis Carter.

STIDHAM: Standing on the corner where?

MISSKELLEY: By my house.

STIDHAM: So tell me how you went to Vickie and why she went to get you some liquor?

MISSKELLEY: I asked, no, Dennis asked uh, asked me, you know, did I know anybody to get us something to drink? I told him, Vickie will. So we gave Vickie some money and I went down her house and started talking just a little bit, and I asked her would she go to the store and buy me some liquor.

STIDHAM: And she said -?

MISSKELLEY: She said, yes. She said hand me the money, she said, I’ll go in a minute. I said, okay.

STIDHAM: You left her house, or what?

MISSKELLEY: I left her house, and me and Dennis went to my house and you know watched as she went around the corner and we sat there on the corner, sat there and talked about, you know, drinking. and stuff.

STIDHAM: So did Vickie bring you some liquor?

MISSKELLEY: Yes, she carried it to her house and me and Dennis went down there and got it.

STIDHAM: What did she buy you?

MISSKELLEY: Evan Williams.

STIDHAM: Evan Williams?

MISSKELLEY: Uh-huh.

STIDHAM: What is that, wine?

MISSKELLEY: Whiskey.

STIDHAM: Just one bottle?

MISSKELLEY: She bought two bottles.

STIDHAM: How big are the bottles?

MISSKELLEY: About – –

STIDHAM: Fifth?

MISSKELLEY: Yeah, about – –

STIDHAM: About this tall?

MISSKELLEY: Uh-huh. (Affirmatively indicating)

STIDHAM: Then what happened?

MISSKELLEY: Then I started drinking out, uh, Dennis’ bottle, and I told him I was going to Lakeshore.

STIDHAM: So, did you go to Lakeshore?

MISSKELLEY: Yeah.

STIDHAM: what happened when you went to Lakeshore?

MISSKELLEY: I met Damien and Jason Baldwin.

(Vickie Hutcheson.)

In his statement to Stidham, Jessie stated that he and his friend Dennis Carter had gone and asked Vickie Hutcheson, an adult friend that Jessie knew and babysat for, to buy them both some Evan Williams Whiskey.

One of Jessie’s best friends, Buddy Lucas stated that on May 5th, 1993 he had gone over to drop off some barbecue chicken for Jessie and his father, when he saw Jessie walking away from his house with another teen, matching Jessie’s story about him and Dennis Carter going to ask Vickie for some whisky:

LUCAS – AND EVERYTHING, SO ME AND MY COUSIN REX WENT OVER THERE, TOOK THEM SOME CHICKEN AND EVERYTHING. I ASK THEM WHERE’S LITTLE JESSIE AND EVERYTHING. HE, BIG JESSIE SAID THAT UM, HE WENT WALKING THAT WAY AND EVERYTHING, AND WE LOOKED OUT THE DOOR AND HE WAS WALKING OFF WITH SOMEBODY ELSE. 

RIDGE – OKAY, WHICH WAY ARE YOU DESCRIBING? 

LUCAS – TOWARD WEST MEMPHIS 

RIDGE – OKAY, AND JESSIE WAS WALKING AWAY 

LUCAS – THEY WERE HEADED OUT OF HIGHLAND TRAILER PARK 

RIDGE – OKAY, JESSIE AND SOMEBODY, BIG JESSIE DIDN’T KNOW? 

LUCAS – UH-HUH 

RIDGE – IS THAT RIGHT? 

LUCAS – YES SIR 

                          (Buddy Lucas.)

Several other witnesses provided information concerning Vickie Hutcheson to Ron Lax, a defense investigator working for Damien Echols’ lawyers. One of these witnesses, was 16-year-old, Jennifer Michelle Roberts, who stated that Vickie had purchased whiskey and cigarettes for her.

Lax: Okay. Now, you’re sixteen years old? Aren’t you?

Roberts: Yes, sir.

Lax: And Vickie was how old? Thirty-two? Thrity-three?

Roberts? Thirty–thirty?

Lax: Thirty? Okay. She was at least thirty, then?

Roberts: Yes, sir.

Lax: So, ya’ll shouldn’t have had too much in common?

Roberts: No, sir.

Lax: But yet you hung around a lot together?

Roberts: Yes, sir.

Lax: And she told you a lot of things?

Roberts: Yes, sir.

Lax: In fact, she even bought you whiskey to drink? Is that correct?

Roberts: Yes, sir.

Lax: And gave you cigarettes?

Roberts: Yes, sir.

It was according to Jessie, in that February 8, 1994 confession to his lawyer, that after obtaining the Evan Williams, he met up with Jason and Damien, who had a bag with them that had beer cans in it, and that they all then walked to Robin Hood Hills, and were drinking out in the woods when the victims showed up. Immediately after the murders, Jessie fled the crime scene and was walking home, and while walking home, passed under a bridge. While under this bridge, Jessie became angry over the murders and smashed the Evan Williams bottle.

STIDHAM: Okay. What did you do with the whiskey bottle?

MISSKELLEY: Well, after I’d done seen what Jason did to – I don’t know which boy it was – but he cut his penis and everything, and I was still mad and I still had whiskey in my bottle. I walked down the street drinking whiskey, and all of a sudden I just busted it.

STIDHAM: Where’d you bust it at?

MISSKELLEY: On the overpass.

STIDHAM: Which overpass?

MISSKELLEY: Going towards – came back that way.

STIDHAM: Did you walk over the top of the overpass?

MISSKELLEY: I went back the same way I came. Up – up under by Lakeshore – where I busted it was at Lakeshore, by the Lakeshore where – between Wal-Mart and Lakeshore, over that overpass. I busted it there.

STIDHAM: On top of the overpass?

MISSKELLEY: No. I was underneath walking. I didn’t walk over it, I just walked underneath on the grass and stuff all the way through. And that’s when I busted the bottle.

STIDHAM: Underneath it?

MISSKELLEY: Uh-huh. (Affirmatively indicating)

STIDHAM: Directly underneath it?

MISSKELLEY: I just threw it and hit the side.

STIDHAM: Which side? Do you remember?

MISSKELLEY: Which side? Like they was going – I mean the road was going towards –

STIDHAM: Did you throw up? You told the officers that you threw up.

MISSKELLEY: No, I got – I was dizzy.

STIDHAM: Okay, where did you go after you left the overpass where you busted the bottle?

MISSKELLEY: I walked straight home.

Prosecutor, Brent Davis discussing the Evan Williams bottle:

Mr. Stidham then went back into the room, at which time he did not allow us, nor did we request or insist on having contact with his client.  He went back inside and talked for another hour and came back and to paraphrase indicated that his client’s story matched with the facts much better and there were a few things we needed to do to be able to corroborate his statement.

At that point we got in our vehicles, and one of the things to corroborate his client’s statement was to determine if there was an Evan Williams whiskey bottle under an overpass in West Memphis.

To quote Mr. Stidham, I believe at that time, “If we can find a bottle like he says, then that will convince me that it happened.”  At 9:30 or 10:00 at night we drive — ten o’clock in the evening — we proceed, the four of us, to roam underneath the overpasses of West Memphis and lo and behold find a broken bottle in the location indicated by his client.

We then take the bottle to a local liquor store where we proceeded to spend the better part of an hour matching the bottle with certain items, and lo and behold it matches with the brand name bottle Mr. Stidham had indicated that we should be looking for in the first place.

At that point Mr. Stidham says that wasn’t good enough to convince him.

Full hearing discussing the Evan Williams Bottle.

(Bridge where Jessie smashed the Evan Williams bottle.)

Also possibly matching Jessie’s confession was the recovery of some beer cans found at the crime scene, along with a grocery bag from Road Runner Petro, a gas station in the area where Damien Echols’ father, Joe Hutcheson worked.

(Beer can recovered at the crime scene.)

(Road Runner Petro bag found at the crime scene.)

 

The Skating Rink Confessions

On May 7, 1993, the very day that police first spoke to Damien Echols concerning the murders, 12-year-old Brandy Wilson was sitting in the concessions area of a skating rink, known as Skate World, a local hang-out in West Memphis where Damien Echols and his friends liked to socialize.

(Photos of concession area at Skateworld.)

Wilson’s statement to police is as follows:

THIS IS DETECTIVE MIKE ALLEN OF THE WEST MEMPHIS POLICE DEPT TODAY’S DATE IS 06-16-93 PRESENTLY IN THE DETECTIVE DIVISION WITH BRANDY WILSON WHO 12 YEARS OLD AND MOTHER PENNY CUMMINGS THEY RESIDE AT 616 BAYLOR IN WEST MEMPHIS, AR. IT HAS BE BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION FROM ANOTHER OFFICER DON BRAY THAT YOU MAY HAVE KNOWLEDGE IN REFERNECE TO THIS HOMICIDE THAT WERE WORKING INVOLVING THE BYERS, BRANCH AND, MOORE. THE TIME IS NOW 3:00 P.M. BRANDY IF YOU WOULD EXPLAIN TO ME I UNDERSTAND YOU OVER HEARD OR HEARD A CONVERSATION AT THE SKATING RINK HERE WEST MEMPHIS CAN YOU EXACTLY WHO IT WAS YOU OVER HEARD AND WHAT YOU OVER HEARD? 

WILSON – DAMIEN ECHOLS WAS SITTING NEXT TO ME AND MY SISTER WAS SITTING NEST ME ALSO ON THE OTHER SIDE BUT SHE WAS NOT LISTENING, SHE WAS TALKING TO HER OTHER FRIEND AND I WAS LISTENING TO HIS CONVERSATION AND HIM AND JASON WERE SITTING AT THE TABLE TOGETHER WITH 

ALLEN – OKAY WHEN DO YOU 

WILSON – DOMINICK, DOMINICK, AND JASON’S GIRL FRIEND I THINK 

ALLEN – OKAY JASON WHO ARE YOU REFERRING TO WHEN YOU SAY JASON? 

WILSON – I DON’T KNOW, IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ONE OF THE BOYS WHO DID IT, BUT HE LOOKS JUST LIKE HIM, TERRY TOLD ME JASON MY SISTER DID. 

ALLEN – OKAY, AND THIS DAMIEN DID YOU KNOW OF HIS NAME ALSO? 

WILSON – YEAH, BECAUSE I HEARD IT FROM JENNIFER (INAUDIBLE) SHE TOLD ME AT SCHOOL AND STUFF. 

ALLEN – OKAY, UH, I’M SURE YOU HAVE SEEN THE TV AND NEWSPAPERS THIS PERSON YOUR REFERRING TO AS JASON AND THIS PERSON YOU ARE REFERRING TO A DAMIEN HAVE YOU SEEN THEM ON TV OR IN THE NEWSPAPERS? 

WILSON – (INAUDIBLE) 

ALLEN – OKAY IS THIS THE SAME 

WILSON – DAMIEN ECHOLS I KNEW WHO HE WAS BEFORE THEY EVEN SHOWED HIS NAME ON THE SCREEN IT SHOWED 3 PICTURES AND MY MOM ASK ME WHICH ONE WAS IT AND I POINTED IT OUT BEFORE IT EVEN SHOWED HIS NAME? 

ALLEN – WHAT COLOR HAIR DID THE ONE HAVE THAT YOUR CALLING DAMIEN? 

WILSON – BLACK 

ALLEN – AS FAR AS YOU KNOW WHAT KIND OF CLOTHING HE WAS WEARING THAT NIGHT? 

WILSON – I DON’T REMEMBER, HE WAS WEARING DARK CLOTHING AND HE HAD ON A DEVIL SIGN NECKLACE 

ALLEN – GO AHEAD WITH WHAT YOU HEARD? 

WILSON – WE WERE SITTING DOWN THERE AND DOMINICK WAS SITTING NEXT TO HIM, I WAS SITTING HERE IN THE CHAIRS ARE ARRANGED TO WHERE THERE’S LIKE FOUR HALF OF A CHAIR 

ALLEN – ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT A TABLE? 

WILSON – NO IT WAS A ROUND TABLE, ITS A ROUND TABLE 

ALLEN – OKAY ITS A ROUND TABLE 

WILSON – YEAH 

ALLEN – DOES IT HAVE CHAIRS LIKE THIS? 

WILSON – YEAH, AND MY SISTER WAS SITTING HERE, AND SOMEONE WAS STANDING HERE AND MY SISTER WAS TALKING TO THAT PERSON AND THEM I WAS SITTING HERE AND DAMIEN SITTING LIKE RIGHT HERE EXCEPT A LITTLE BIT CLOSER, DAMIEN SITTING HERE AND DOMINICK WAS SITTING HERE AND I GUESS JASON WAS SITTING HERE AND HIS GIRLFRIEND AND THEN SOME OTHER PEOPLE WERE TURN AROUND AT THE OTHER TABLES THAT ARE OVER HERE 

ALLEN – OKAY, NOW THIS, ARE THIS ISN’T OUT BY THE FLOOR THIS IS UP NEAR THE POOL TABLE AND REFRESHMENT STAND AREA 

WILSON – YEAH, THAT, OKAY, I WAS SITTING THERE AND JUST LISTENING AND HE SAID THAT HE HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THESE THREE BOYS AND HIM AND JASON JUST STARTED GIGGLING AND LAUGHING 

ALLEN – WHAT EXACTLY, I MEAN WHO WAS HE TALKING TO? 

WILSON – HE WAS TALKING TO DOMINICK AND JASON HE WAS JUST LIKE SHOWING OFF THAT HE DID IT AND I WAS LISTENING THE THIS WHOLE TIME AND MY SISTER WAS HOLDING ME DOWN AND SHE WAS TALKING TO ANOTER PERSON AND I WAS LISTENING THIS WHOLE TIME AND SAID HE HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THEM AND THAT THAT HE DID IT 

ALLEN – OKAY, DID HE EVER TALK DIRECTLY TO YOU? ARE IS THIS JUST SOMETHING YOU OVER HEARD? 

WILSON – I OVER HEARD HIM TALKING TO DOMINICK AND JASON AND 

ALLEN – OKAY, WAS, YOU SAID THERE WAS A GIRL THERE WITH JASON DO YOU KNOW WHO SHE WAS? 

WILSON – JASON I’M NOT SURE I DON’T HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT HER NAME WAS, BUT I KNOW, I THINK IT WAS DOMINICK WITH DAMIEN BECAUSE, BECAUSE I’VE HEARD THAT NAME AND STUFF, AND MR. BRAY ASK ME WHAT WAS HER NAME AND I WENT OVER TO MY FRIENDS HOUSE AND WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT IT YOU KNOW AND THEN SHE SAID DOMINICK IS HIS GIRLFRIEND SO I ASSUMED THAT MUST BE DOMINICK BECAUSE YOU KNOW UNLESS HE WAS 

ALLEN – OKAY, THIS NIGHT YOU WERE AT THE SKATING RINK AND HEARD THIS DO YOU KNOW IN RELATIONSHIP TO WHEN THEY FOUND THE 3 LITTLE BOYS, DO YOU KNOW HOW LONG AFTER THAT THIS, WHAT NIGHT IT WAS YOU WERE AT THE SKATING RINK? 

WILSON – IT WAS ON A FRIDAY NIGHT 

ALLEN – WAS IT ON A FRIDAY NIGHT 

WILSON – YES SIR. CAUSE EVERYBODY ALWAYS GOES UP THERE 

ALLEN – OKAY, DO YOU KNOW HOW LONG AFTER THEY DISCOVERED THE BOYS HAD BEEN KILLED IN RELATIONSHIP, WAS IT A WEEK, TWO WEEKS, THREE WEEKS, 

WILSON – I’M NOT SURE, I WASN’T THINKING ABOUT THE TIME THAT THEY WERE FOUND 

ALLEN – DID YOU TELL YOUR MOTHER ABOUT WHAT YOU HAD HEARD? 

WILSON – YES SIR 

ALLEN – WHEN DID YOU TELL YOUR MOTHER ABOUT THAT? 

WILSON – A WHILE LATER AFTER, I MEAN I JUST FORGOT ALL ABOUT IT UNTIL A WHILE LATER MR. BRAY CALLED ME, CALLED MY MAMA WENT UP TO MY SISTER’S SCHOOL AND TALKED TO HER BUT SHE DIDN’T HEAR IT 

ALLEN – YOUR SISTER DIDN’T HEAR IT 

Police interview with Brandy Wilson

 

Wilson’s statement is damning, as Damien and Jason Baldwin’s friend, Jason Crosby also reported to police that he had been at Skate World on May 7, 1993, and that Damien was with his girlfriend, Domini, and Jason was with his girlfriend, Heather Cliett.

And according to Crosby, he noticed something seemed wrong with Jason that night:

“States that Damien & Jason both had girls with them and Jason seemed to really be down in the dumps. States that he asked Jason what was wrong with him — he told him nothing — he just didn’t feel good.”

(Statement of Jason Crosby.)

Wilson was also able to describe Damien’s pentagram necklace, which Damien purchased around the same time that Wilson witnessed Damien’s confession. According to Damien’s friend, Chris Littrell, he picked up Damien in his step-father’s van, and they both went to the mall on May 7, 1993, at about 5:30 and came back home about a half-hour later.

(Statement by Chris Littrell during a police polygraph.)

Damien told a similar story to the police during his May 10th interview, that he purchased his pentagram necklace at the mall on Saturday, May 8, the day after Wilson saw him confess.

(Report on Damien’s May 10, 1993 police interview.)

Wilson knew what day Damien was at Skate World, she knew who he was with, and she knew about a necklace that he had just purchased earlier that day, making her a strong witness against Echols.

(Damien several weeks later with Domini Teer at Skate World.)

The next week, on May 14, 1993 Damien was once again at Skate World, when several other kids reported that they heard second-hand statements at the skating rink, in which kids were saying that Damien and a friend had killed the boys, and that he was going to kill two more before turning himself in.

A teenager, Joni Brown reported to police that on May 14, 1993, Whitney Nix and Jennifer Ashley told her a boy named Robert Burch had said that he and Damien Echols had murdered the three boys. The police statement reads:

“On Friday night, May 14th, about 8:30 p.m. or 9:00 p.m. Whitney Nix told me that Robert Burch had told her that him and Dameon Echols had murderd them three boys and that they were gonna murder 2 more kids before they turned themselves in to the police. And Jennifer Ashley told me before Whitney did. And then a guy came up to me and told me that he suggested that I stay away from them guys.”

Joni had also been told by her cousin, Toni Cissell, that she personally heard Damien confess to the murders, which is documented in a taped interview months later:

Taped interview with Joni Brown from Feb. 18, 1994

According to Joni, “They were going around bragging that they killed the three boys.” 

And according to Joni Brown and her mother Judy, in the recorded statement, someone approached Joni about her statement claiming to be an FBI agent, alleging that they were sent by Inspector Gary Gitchell. It was after this meeting with the man who claimed to be an FBI agent, that Joni Brown’s name turned up on the defense team’s potential witness list. The prosecution would allege that Ron Lax, a private investigator working for Damien Echols’ defense team was intimidating witnesses into recanting or getting them to refuse to testify, possibly by lying and saying he was with the FBI or Law Enforcement.

This became evident during a hearing at the Misskelley trial, over a witness named William Jones, who along with his mother and aunt, had said that Damien Echols had confessed to him.

The following exchange is between Prosecutors Brent Davis and John Fogleman:

MR. FOGLEMAN: We’ve got a problem that has developed that may or may not affect what the testimony is. We have now had the second witness that has told us one thing about incriminating information against one of the other defendants — the second one that has now after the investigator talks to them all of a sudden they see things in a whole new light and recant everything they have told the police. This particular witness that was to be called next has maintained since before the arrests that Damien Echols told him that he did it.

MR. DAVIS: Not only before the arrest before Jessie Misskelley’s statement or anything.

MR. FOGLEMAN: That’s right. And he has maintained it in a number of conversations with Detective Ridge. I have had one conversation with him personally on the telephone after he was subpoenaed for this trial, and he says now for the first time — yesterday Investigator Lax talked to him and all Investigator Lax asked him according to him is, is your statement true, and he says, no, it’s not. Now he’s saying it is all false. And, your Honor, there’s some information to indicate that this Lax may be intimidating witnesses and, frankly, I have never had this come up in a trial. In the other case we have a videotape statement of a guy who after giving his statement — I was present when he came out. I wasn’t there during his statement. After he came out the only concern he expressed to me was a fear of Jessie and his friends and then when I seek to talk to him further, all of a sudden the police department gets a telephone call from Ron Lax saying this guy will not be coming in at that time, that this witness decided he needs a lawyer and then recants his statement that he’s given the police. Your Honor, I’m tired of it and I don’t know what the Court can do, but we would like some kind of protective order to prevent this investigator from talking to witnesses unless one of us is present because I don’t know what he’s saying to these witnesses.

It was suggested heavily by the prosecution that Ron Lax and members of the defense team had approached witnesses suggesting he might be with the FBI or Law Enforcement and telling them that their statements were fabricated and accusing them of lying, and what the consequences would be for them if they went and testified, saying they’d commit perjury and be sent to prison. Lax had even been accused of keeping witnesses in his car for lengthy car rides where he talked back and fourth with the defense and coerced witnesses to recant.

Upon calling to the stand Cheryl Aycock, a lawyer working with Ron Lax during the same court hearing regarding William Jones, the following information was learned:

A. Ah, William got in the car and Ron said he wanted to talk to him about the statement he gave to the police. William said he wanted to talk to his mother before he talked to him.

Q. Is that all Ron said is, I want to talk to you about your statement?

A. He did say, I don’t think that it is true.

Q. So he did say that to William.

A. Um-hum.

Q. Did he point out any reason why he didn’t think it was true?

A. He said because the dates didn’t match.

Q. What else did he tell William Jones?

A. That is when William said, I want to talk to my mother before I talk to anybody. He said, do you want to call her now, and they called from the car phone. And we asked him if he wanted a ride to go up there. He said yes.

Q. What kind of car were y’all in?

A. ’88 BMW.

Q. So William gets in the car with you and Lax — in the BMW?

A. Um-hum.

Q. What discussion took place about this statement in the car?

A. Just what I said. He said, I want to talk to you about the statement you gave to the police. I think if I recall correctly William saying, what about it. And he said, I don’t think it is true. And he said, well, why do you think that and he said because the dates don’t match up and at that time —

MR. FOGLEMAN: What dates was he referring to?

THE WITNESS: Just some dates that were mentioned when he spoke with Damien and supposedly heard what Damien said and when he gave the statement.

BY MR. DAVIS:

Q. So then you get back at his house. How long did it take you to get from the grocery store to his house?

A. Um, twenty minutes.

Q. What else transpired during the twenty minutes? That’s maybe a two or three minute conversation. What happened during the other seventeen?

A. They talked about his car. I was in the backseat, and I really couldn’t hear.

Q. So you don’t know what they discussed?

A. The only discussion — there wasn’t much to it that I heard. What discussion I heard was about the car.

Q. Was any of that conversation taped?

MR. CROW: Excuse me. Let me interrupt. I believe at this point I made a phone call to Ron.

MR. FOGLEMAN: Let her testify.

THE WITNESS: I remember now. He was on the phone with several people during that time. I think he talked with Dan and Val. He carried on several conversations.

BY MR. DAVIS:

Q. Would the gist of his conversation be that he’s got William Jones with him in the vehicle to let them know he had the witness?

A. I don’t recall him saying that. He said he was on his way to — what’s the name of that town — Haford — Heafer.

Q. When you got to the house, what happened?

A. We went in and sat down, and Mrs. Dunham and William went to the back room and talked for a while and then she came back and got Ricky Dunham and he joined them.

Q. Anybody else back there during that conversation?

A. No. Ron and I stayed in the living room.

Q. Did Ron have any independent conversations with the boy’s mother?

A. Not out of everyone’s presence.

Q. What did he say in everyone’s presence?

A. She came back and asked first of all what kind of trouble William could get into if he were to say that he lied.

Q. Did Ron tell her that perjury was a felony?

A. He told her it was against the law to lie to the police.

Q. Did he tell her that the boy would go to prison if they showed that he was lying?

A. He told him he wasn’t a lawyer.

Q. But he told him it was a criminal offense, what he was getting ready to do?

A. He informed him it was against the law to lie to the police. That’s what he said. But he also said it’s against the law to get on the stand and lie.

Q. Was that conversation recorded?

A. No.

Q. At what point was the conversation recorded?

A. He asked William if he could take a statement and William agreed.

Q. Did William go over what he was going to say in that statement before he turned on the tape recorder?

A. He said, I’m going to talk to you about what we’ve discussed, and I want you to answer and tell me the truth.

Q. So if he used coercive tactics before the recorded statement, we wouldn’t know because he didn’t have the tape recorder turned on, correct?

MR. STIDHAM: That sounds familiar, Judge —

A. Correct.

MR. CROW: — sounds familiar —

THE COURT: All right. Let’s go.

BY MR. DAVIS:

Q. And when he took the statement, what did William Jones tell him?

A. He told him that he had lied to his mother and that he had told her that he knew something that he didn’t know. Then he didn’t think she would call the police but she did because she felt like it was the right thing to do. And he — well, she accompanied him to give the statement and he didn’t want to lie in front of her.

Q. Did he also mention that for the last seven months he had continued to give this story to the police?

A. No.

Q. Did he indicate that he had given this story to the police on four or five separate occasions?

A. No. I had no idea.

Q. Did he indicate that he had given the same story to Mr. Fogleman within a week of the time that y’all talked to him?

A. No. Like I said, he didn’t mention any other statements to the police or discussions with the police other than with Detective Ridge when he got the subpoena and he called and wanted to know when he was supposed to be there and what it was for.

(Ron Lax.)

Getting back to Joni Brown, an investigative report was made on the matter, stating that her cousin, Toni Cissell had heard Damien personally confess:

INVESTIGATIVE REPORT
TRIPLE HOMICIDE
BYERS/BRANCH/MOORE

ON 2/18/94, I CONTACTED JONI BROWN AT 803 N. 18TH AND INTERVIEWED HER IN REFERENCE TO HER BEING PLACED ON THE WITNESS LIST FOR THE DEFENSE. SHE INFORMED ME THAT SHE HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE MURDERS AND THAT SHE HAD ONLY BEEN INTERVIEWED ONE TIME AFTER THE MURDERS BY A WHITE MALE SHE AND HER MOTHER DESCRIBED AS BEING WITH THE FBI. JUDY, JONI’S MOTHER, STATED THAT THE INVESTIGATOR HAD BEEN SENT TO HER HOUSE BY INSPECTOR GITCHELL IN REFERENCE TO A CONVERSATION THAT JONI MAY HAVE HEARD IN WHICH DAMIEN MAY HAVE CONFESSED TO SOME CHILDREN AT THE SKATING RINK THAT HE HAD KILLED THE KIDS. JONI GAVE A TAPED STATEMENT TO ME CONCERNING HER RECOLLECTION OF THE EVENTS AT THE SKATING RINK. SHE STATED THAT SHE WAS AT THE SKATING RINK WITH HER FRIEND TONI CISSELL AND THAT SHE SAW DAMIEN ECHOLS, JASON BALDWIN AND JESSIE MISSKELLEY JR. COME INTO THE SKATING RINK AND STAY TOGETHER THROUGHOUT THE NIGHT. SHE STATED THAT TONI HAD TOLD HER THAT SHE OVERHEARD DAMIEN TELL SOME OTHER KIDS AT THE RINK THAT NIGHT THAT HE HAD KILLED THE THREE KIDS AT ROBIN HOOD WOODS.

A TAPED STATEMENT WAS TAKEN FROM JONI WITH HER MOTHER PRESENT DURING THE TAPED INTERVIEW. THE TAPED INTERVIEW WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION IN THE CASE FILE.

DETECTIVE B. RIDGE
WEST MEMPHIS POLICE DEPARTMENT

Whitney Nix, who had been mentioned by Joni Brown as one of her sources, reported to police that she often went to Skate World, where she frequently saw Jason, Damien, and Jessie hanging out. She also said she heard from her friend, Nicole Bumbaugh, that Damien Echols had killed the boys, but had no first hand information herself.

(11-year-old, Whitney Nix.)

When the police talked to Toni Cissell on May 22, 1993 she only informed them that she heard from some friends that  Damien confessed, which is documented in police notes from the interview:

“Crystal Hensley & Jennifer Ashley told Toni Cissell that Damien Echols told Toni Cissell that Damien & Robert Burch had killed the 3 boys & were going to kill 2 more before they turned themselves in.”

In a handwritten statement also taken on May 22, 1993, she stated that her friends Crystal Hensley and Jennifer Ashley told her about Damien’s confession, and that the two girls told her not to tell anyone:

“On Friday Night on May 14, 1993 about 8:30p.m. or 9:00p.m. Crystal Hensley and Jennifer Ashley told me that Robert Burch and Damien Echols killed those three little boys and they said that they were going to kill 2 more people before they turn their self in. Crystal told me not to say anything so did Jennifer ashley. They also said try to stay away from them.”

Handwritten statement of Toni Cissell

This information was slightly contradicted though by her cousin, Joni Brown in her February 18, 1994 police interview, in which Brown alleged that Toni Cissell had also told her that she had personally heard Damien brag about the murders. And Cissell’s statement to police was awfully similar to what other witnesses testified Damien had said at a softball game, such as Jodee Medford, who heard Damien state:

“I killed the three little boys and before I turn myself in, I’m gonna kill two more and I already have one of ’em picked out.”

Damien bragging about the murders at a softball game.

The only difference between those who heard Damien confess at the softball game and those who reported the confessions at the skating rink was the added bit about Robert Burch, who had told the police that he had a conversation with Jason Baldwin on May 14, 1993, the day Cissell and several other girls was alleged to have heard Damien confess:

“ROBERT STATED THAT HE WAS AT THE SKATING RINK LAST NIGHT AND THAT HE SAID JASON BALDWIN WAS THERE. JASON BALDWIN STATED THAT SOME PRIVATE DETECTIVES HAD STATED THAT HE AND JASON WERE THE ONES WHO DID THE MURDERS.”

Police interview with Robert Burch.

It’s possible that the information that Jason relayed was misconstrued, because Jason and Damien had just been questioned by police on May 9th, days before the May 14th confession was alleged to have taken place. Jason could have meant, himself and Damien, not himself and Robert Burch.

 

The Softball Game Confession

(Softball Field at J.W. Rich Girls Club.)

On the day of Thursday, May 27, 1993, at around 5:30 or 6:00 PM, Damien Echols, along with his friends, Jason Baldwin, Jessie Misskelley, Heather Cliett, and several other friends, all showed up to a girl’s softball game at the J.W. Rich Girls Club, because several girls that Damien knew were playing softball that day, including Heather Cliett. That same day, Donna Medford brought her three daughters, Jessica Medford; Jackee Medford, and Jodee Medford, along with her daughter Jackie’s friend, Christy VanVickle to the softball field, because all three of her daughters had a game that day. Donna Medford’s niece Katie Hendrix also arrived at the field as well, traveling in a separate car.

As Donna entered the area of the three separate softball diamonds, she noticed a teenager walking behind her, traveling toward the bleachers, dressed all in black, wearing a black trench coat, and with long black hair, who seemed sorta odd. This teenager would turn out to be Damien Echols.

(Damien Echols at Skate World wearing his black trench coat.)

Both groups, the Medfords, and Damien and his friends both sat in two separate areas, with Damien sitting near to the concession stand, behind the bleachers. At some point after this, 14-year-old Jodee Medford, and 11-year-olds’, Jackee Medford, and her friend Christy VanVickle walked to the concession stand.

Jodee Medford had been walking ahead of her sister and her friend, and started to walk around the corner toward the concession stand, and as she did, she heard Damien state, “I killed the three little boys and before I turn myself in, I’m gonna kill two more and I already have one of ’em picked out.” Jodee had immediately turned around mid-sentence, because as she put it, “that didn’t sound right.” When she turned around she saw Echols sitting at a distance facing toward her, with the backs of his friends in her direction. She could see her sister and Christy VanVickle having run off immediately telling Jodee’s mother, Donna what they had all heard.

Jackee and Christy had only heard Damien say he killed the boys, but were terrified upon hearing it, and ran off and told Donna Medford right away.

According to Donna Medford, her niece, Katie Hendrix then confronted Damien from a distance, resulting in an altercation, where Echols then walked off. Her statement saying as follows:

“Katie Hendrix was also with me that night & repeated the same story. She also told me he had said he was going to bite her titties off. When he left she yelled ‘Did you really kill those 3 boys & he yelled ‘yes’.”

 

(Handwritten statement by Donna Medford.)

Heather Cliett, Jason Baldwin’s former girlfriend corroborated this account years later in a 2009 affidavit, writing that she had heard the commotion caused by Damien’s confession, stating that lots of people began shouting at him asking if he had killed the boys, matching the description about what Katie Hendrix had told Donna Medford. Cliett however claimed that people shouting questions at Damien about the murders was why Damien bragged about doing them in the first place, and that he was just trying to draw attention to himself:

“I was playing in a softball game on the day that Damien Echols showed up with Jason and some kids in the crowd at the game started shouting at Damien. They were saying things to him about having killed kids, and he was saying things back to people in the crowd. It was typical of Damien, and it was clear to me that he was calling attention to himself. Since I knew I had been on the phone with him on the night of the killings, I did not believe that he had anything to do with the situation.”

Cliett said she dismissed Damien’s confession, because she had been on the phone with him at around 9:30 or 10:30 on the night of the murders, and thus he couldn’t have attacked the victims around 6:45 PM,  then come home later that night and talked to her on the phone.

2009 Affidavit of Heather Cliett

Other eye witness accounts were also reported, including Katie LaFoy, who wrote in a police statement:

“I heard Damien Echols talking to a bunch of girls, one was a Jody Medford. I heard him say ‘Yea that I’m going to do it to some more people too.’

According to LaFoy she had also heard Damien threaten one of the people he was confessing to, saying, that if anyone he was speaking to told anyone, he’d “get them too to just see what was coming next.” 

Statement of Katie LaFoy

Another set of gossip confession statements also were reported, but a source was never verified. This all started with one set of witnesses, which included 8-year-old Juliann Deacon and her 13-year-old sister Jenni Deacon, who on June 1, 1993 were at a softball game at the J.W. Rich Girls Club, when a girl named Rachel Myers, told them, that she had heard Damien brag “about killing the three little boys and wanting to kill two more.” Jenni Deacon, the older of the two sisters came home following the game and told her mother about what Damien had allegedly said. A police report was taken of this incident seven days later.

Link to Deacon report.

Rachel Myers would then tell the police after that she had been told of Damien confessing at the softball game, by a boy named, Shannon Wolf, who Myers said claimed he heard it.

J’Nevelyn Blackmon would also state on June 10, 1993 that she heard from Shannon Wolf about roughly 2 weeks prior that Damien had confessed to the murders:

“Shannon Way came up and started telling us that Damien Echols had murdered those 3 little boys.”

J’Nevelyn also said:

“I heard that there was going to be a sacrifice of two virgins by a cult that Damien was alleged to be in. But I can’t remember where I heard it.”

Another boy, John Dudley Boals III, had also been told about Damien’s confession from Shannon Wolf. According to John Boals, he had been at his friend, David Smith’s house when Shannon Wolf came over. The three teens were watching a news story about the murders, when Wolf informed his friends that he had heard Damien brag about “killing these 3 boys.” Around 6:00 that day, the three teens went to the J.W. Rich Girls Club for a softball game and saw Damien and Jason Baldwin hanging out at the game.

When police eventually spoke with Shannon Wolf, he said he was told about Damien’s softball game confession by his friend, Shannon Boals. However, when police tracked down and spoke with Shannon Boals, she told them that Michele Carter had been the one who told her about the confession. And according to Boals, Carter told her “that Damien Echols came up to her and said that he killed those boys.”  Boals stated that later on, Michele Carter seemed concerned and asked her about if she was questioned or told the police anything about what she told her.

Statement of Shannon Boals

It was also when speaking with Shannon Boals, that the police met Katie LaFoy, who told them about her account of the event.

Shortly after receiving information on 14-year-old, Michele Carter, the investigators went and spoke with her as well, but upon speaking with Carter she denied that she was the one who told Shannon Boals about Damien’s confession, instead, asserting that Shannon was the one who told her about it.

Carter’s written statement reads as follows:

“I was told by Shannon Boals from Marion that there was a boy named Damien that said he killed the boys and he didn’t cut their thing off he bite it off. Shannon showed him to me and pointed him out to me. Shelley Wolf from Marion also told me that she cut herself one day and he ask her if he could suck her blood. Later on more of my friends Tara Cupples, Cory Catt, and Shannon Boals were standing with me in front on the consetion stand and we decided to go over and sit with her brother Trey Boals and a bunch of his other friends I am not sure what their names are. We all sat down and as we sat behind the blechers we saw Damien sitting beside us. We tried not to look at him so we moved over a little. He never talked to me except he asked who we were I told him Michele Carter he never said another word to me. Cory Catt and Tara Cupples left and it was me, Shannon Boals and Trey Boals sitting on the grass still and I just happened to hear Damien say something about him and the Devil so I decided to get up. Right before my game started Shannon Boals also told me that he wanted to kill two more people and he knew one of them was his ex-girlfriend. Shannon Boals said her brother Trey Boals knew more and that it was his friend Shawn something that told him. I think that was his name. I never saw him after that.”

From the story that Shannon Boals and Michele Carter told, one or both of the girls may have been witnesses to the confession, and perhaps may have even been some of the teens sitting with him who were threatened by Echols not to talk. Both girls pointed the finger at the other as the source of information however, but Carter despite saying that Boals was purely the source of her information describes herself as being part of the event, even saying she saw Damien sitting beside her, and how she tried not to look at him.

Another interesting detail in her statement was that Echols allegedly said he bit a victim on the penis. It was a fact of the crime, that Stevie Branch had an injury to the tip of his penis, testified to by Dr. Frank Peretti, like someone had pinched or bit it. And Jessie Misskelley would also confess to his lawyer, Dan Stidham, that he watched Echols, put his head between Stevie’s legs, and bite his penis.

STIDHAM: Did Damien ever suck on that boy’s penis?

MISSKELLEY: (long pause) That – the one that he was going to get, you know, screw him from behind. He went on him – he went down on him.

STIDHAM: Damien sucked that little boy’s penis?

MISSKELLEY: He didn’t suck on it, he bit it.

STIDHAM: What do you mean he bit it?

MISSKELLEY: Bit the top – the head of it.

STIDHAM: How do you know he did it?

MISSKELLEY: Not hard, but – I’m – I’m going to say he didn’t do it hard.

STIDHAM: How do you know that’s what he did?

MISSKELLEY: I seen him – I seen his head going down that way. I don’t know, you know, I don’t know if he – I don’t know if he did or not, but I seen his head go between that boy’s legs.

Another interesting tid-bit found in Carter’s statement was that his next victim was to be his ex-girlfriend. Echols had been arrested and in a mental hospital on three separate occasions, directly relating to an incident in which he ran away with his former girlfriend, Deanna Holcomb, because her parents didn’t want her seeing him.

Getting back to the day of the confession, shortly after the softball game, as Donna Medford, and her 3 daughters, along with Christy VanVickle were driving home that night, her daughters and VanVickle, kept talking about what they heard from the strange teenager in the black trench coat. The incident was so concerning that the Medfords continued to talk about it for days, until after the June 3, 1993 arrests, when Jodee Medford was babysitting and saw the news that Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin, and Jessie Misskelley had been arrested. Jodee recognized Echols as the teenager she heard bragging about the murders that night, and had even seen him again at the softball game the night after.

Upon recognizing Damien, she phoned her mother at work, who said to her, “well, I’m gonna have to wait to, you know, to-until I see that for myself.” Donna after getting home also recognized Damien as the strange teen in black that she had seen at the softball game, entering the field behind her.

Shortly there after, Donna drove to the J.W. Rich Girls Club with her daughter Jackee, and spoke with the director, Peggy Simmons, and told her that Damien Echols had confessed to the murders in front of her daughters. Simmons then reported the incident to police.

(Christy VanVickle, walking to take the witness stand in the documentary, “Paradise Lost”.)

At trial, Christy VanVickle, Jodee Medford, and her mother Donna testified to the confession, implicating Echols directly with his own words.

While on the witness stand Echols insisted that the witnesses all made it up:

Q. Do you know why the VanVickle girl would get up here and have any reason to fabricate a story under oath about you?

A. There have been Damien sightings since I can remember. People were calling the police department saying they saw me marching around through Marion carrying black candles while I was all the way on the other side of the country.

Q. We aren’t talking about a fake sighting.

A. It is the same principle. It was a fake sighting.

Q. You were there, right?

A. The second night I was not.

Q. But the first night is when she said you made the statement. You were there that night, right?

A. Yes.

Q. And your group was standing around you?

A. Um-hum.

Q. You had on the big black coat and long black hair?

A. Um-hum.

Q. And Jason was there?

A. Um-hum.

Q. She’s right about all those things, correct?

A. Yes.

Q. You don’t know why in the world she would get up here and under oath testify that you said those things? 

A. Little kids say that kind of stuff all the time to get attention.

Q. Do you know any reason why the one who was a little older, the Medford girl, would say that?

A. Probably because she mentioned something like that to her mom or something, and her mom carried it too far so she had no other choice than to get up here and talk about it.

Q. I guess Ms. Medford — do you have any reason to know why she would get up here and give that testimony under oath?

A. Because her daughters probably did tell her that.

 

Jason’s girlfriend, Heather Cliett later destroyed Damien’s assertions that the girls were lying, insisting that he confessed, but that it was just Damien wanting attention, and that she knew Damien better than anyone else, despite by her own admission only knowing him for a manner of weeks:

“I was surprised when I later found that some girls who I knew who were at the game claimed that Damien had said something about having killed children or words to that effect. The girls who reported those things did not know either Jason or Damien the way I knew them.”

In addition to Cliett, Damien’s own defense lawyers and their private investigator, Ron Lax had grilled Damien repeatedly prior to trial about the numerous confessions he had made in the weeks following the murders, to which Damien was highly evasive on their questions and at times refused to answer their questions.

Details on these questions are located in the book “Devil’s Knot” by Mara Leveritt, found on page 139:

“[Ron Lax’s assistant Gloria] Shettles wrote Damien ‘admitted that prior to arrest he made remarks to various persons when asked about the murders that might be misconstrued.’ However she added, ‘He did not make any remarks in a serious nature although his comments could have been misinterpreted.’ Now that Lax was visiting, he pressed Damien to be more specific. But Damien seemed unwilling or unable to acknowledge to the investigator that he may have hurt his own case. Lax wrote, ‘When I asked him about the numerous references in the police files regarding individuals who say Damien either told them he was responsible, or they overheard Damien say this, he does not answer, but merely sits there and stares.'” 

Shortly after Ron Lax and his defense lawyers questioned him about his confessions, Damien wrote a letter to his family, stating, “I don’t think Ron believes I’m telling the truth. Jason’s lawyers said they they believe he is innocent but they think I’m guilty.”

(Letter Damien wrote to his family from jail.)

 

(Damien Echols being interviewed on Death Row by, CBS reporter Erin Moriarty for the documentary, “48 hours: A Cry for Innocence.”)

Damien Echols, despite for many years maintaining that all the eye witnesses lied, changed his story in an interview with CBS reporter Erin Moriarty, admitting that he had confessed to the crime at the Softball Game, but stated that in his own words, it must have been a “joke” when he made the confession, and those eye witnesses all misunderstood him. Quotes of the interview are found in a CBS news article, and the interview itself is found in the CBS “48 Hours” episode, “A Cry for Innocence.” The article reads as follows:

But the two girls who were at that softball game that Damien attended testified that they overheard him admit to the murders. 

“I don’t remember saying that at the time because to me, it – I didn’t actually do it. It would have been like a joke,” he says. 

“Help me understand why you would think that’s a joke back then,” says Moriarty.

“It’s the person I was and it’s the way I thought at that time in my life, and I – I can’t make excuses for it.”

 

Link to article

A Rebuttal of the Predation Claims

“Seeing is believing,” as the saying goes, or as a defense attorney would say, “Who are ya gunna believe, me or your lying eyes?”

In effect, this is the situation as the case goes whenever the subject is raised in regards to the cause of the injuries to Michael Moore, Stevie Branch, and Christopher Byers.

At trial, the prosecution was able to present a fairly compelling case that the knife pulled from the lake behind Jason Baldwin’s trailer had been the murder weapon, even going so far as to demonstrate on a piece of fruit the pattern the back of the knife was able to produce.

(The murder weapon being recovered from behind Jason Baldwin’s home.)

Attorney for Damien Ehcols, Dennis Riordan in the documentary, “West of Memphis”:

“If you ask me the single greatest offense committed in this case, is what was done by John Fogleman with the knife in the lake.”

The issue in the case for the defense was to try their hardest to discredit the murder weapon, which had so strongly been demonstrated at trial to have inflicted the injuries on the victims. It was then with that in mind that after several years the defense invented a new claim, that there were no wounds inflicted by the “Lake Knife”, because the wounds had been the result of animals feeding on the bodies.

In this effort the defense attempted to elicit public support for this theory by arguing the case in the press through consensus and not by fact. The goal being that if they had enough highly regarded experts stating a similar opinion, that it would give the illusion that the defense claims were right and true, regardless of what each expert said, no matter how questionable.

Working with donations from Hollywood Director Peter Jackson, the defense went about hiring experts such as Vincent Di Maio, who himself has been at the center of controversy over the years.

(Vincent Di Maio in West of Memphis.)

(Vincent Di Maio testifying on behalf of the defense in the George Zimmerman Trial.)

Vincent Di Maio appeared in the documentary West of Memphis, and provided what appeared to be deliberately misleading information on the case, applying flawed logic and misrepresenting the prosecution’s claims on the knife injuries and emphasizing his point with blown up and out of context autopsy photos.

Vincent Di Maio in “West of Memphis“:

 “The thing that’s most interesting in this case, is that while the autopsies are done in exquisite detail, to me the interpretation of the findings are completely wrong. There is nothing here that I would say is due to a knife. Either the cutting edge, the tip, or the back of the knife. If you think about how stupid it is, they’re saying that they’re killing these kids and you know, dragging the back of a knife across them. When I looked at the photographs, it’s obvious that by the appearance of the wounds they had occurred after death. If you’re gonna torture, mutilate someone, that’s to cause pain to them, but these wounds are post-mortem. So, why are you torturing and mutilating dead bodies? It doesn’t make sense. The irregular nature of the wounds, some scratches, there’s no bleeding, there’s no pattern. To me, it’s obvious animal activity.”

Through his wording he incorrectly gave an impression that all mutilations, particularly in this case were for the purposes of torture, and that if the victims were dead this rules out that they were mutilated. He also seemed to suggest there was no such thing as a post-mortem mutilation, or dismisses that the injuries could have been for the purpose of killing the boys. A flawed kind of circular reasoning that he uses to reinforce the opinion that these are turtle bites and scratches.

He also says that the knife wounds only work if you’re dragging the knife across someone. An incorrect assertion. He’s using a suggestion by Peretti on the scrapes on Michael Moore’s chest and shoulder to discredit completely a knife. Peretti himself suggested that some of the matches to the knife were only possibilities, and those were just based on his limited time comparing the knife to the bodies, essentially saying that some of the weapon comparisons are done on the fly, but these injuries will be discussed more in depth later.

Photo shown by Vincent DiMaio in West of Memphis

The implication that Di Maio was making was that the Prosecution was claiming that Michael Moore’s injuries were supposedly torture inflicted by having a knife dragged over your body. This was not the Prosecution’s theory however, nor had it ever been.

According to Dr. Frank Peretti, Michael Moore had been punched in the chest and shoulder area by someone holding a serrated weapon in their clenched fist, likely a knife. He testified that the serrations on the chest were situated over bruises, and if there were bruises present, then that meant that the serrated pattern was inflicted while Moore was alive.

Peretti’s claims were bolstered by evidence at the crime scene, which included a ligature used to bind Michael Moore. The ligature used to tie up Michael Moore was made out of one of the victim shoe laces, which had been cut in half.

Notes from the crime scene describe, finding one of the shoes belonging to the victims with a single shoe lace still intact.

“None(sic) of the tennis shoes that – the left foot of the black and purple CUGA shoe has a black shoelace still intact. The – the rest of the shoes that were found do not contain shoelaces. It appears that possibly the material used to bind the victims’ hands and feet were the shoelaces from the shoes.”

http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/crime_scene_notes_dictated.html

“Left Shoe – Tennis (CUGA – Shoe) – Black / Purple Shoe /
Black lace is still there.
Rest of the tennis Shoes located do not have shoe strings in
them.”

http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/csn.html

The fact was that one shoe lace belonging to the victims remained intact, but how could that be, if there were only 6 shoes, and 6 shoe laces used to tie up the victims? Yet there was a 7th shoe lace intact in one of the shoes.

(Shoe belonging to one of the victims with a lace still intact.)

Lisa Sakevicius, a prosecution expert noted in her notes while looking at Michael Moore’s ligatures, that they appeared to be made from a single shoe lace that had been cut in half.

(They frayed end of the shoe lace used to bind Moore.)

Photos from the autopsy clearly supported Sakevicius’s notes, as there was no end cap on the shoe lace shown in the picture above, and the end of the binding where the cap should be, is instead frayed, like it had been cut.

The defense themselves also admitted in a document during their appeals that the shoe lace binding Moore had been cut in half, just like Lisa Sakevicius did in her notes.

(Defense document, stating that a shoe lace from Michael Moore had been cut in half.)

Link to the defense document in question.

The fact that Moore was tied up with a single shoe lace, which had been cut in half, meant that whoever was killing Michael Moore, had a knife. This is further backed up by defensive knife injuries found on Moore’s hand.

Between the injuries to Moore’s hand, and the fact that the ligatures used to bind him were cut in half, it can only lead to the conclusion that a knife was used in Moore’s murder, however he was not mutilated or stabbed with the weapon.

So, Di Maio’s assertion that there are no knife injuries on the basis of the scrapes on Moore’s chest is ridiculous when factored in with the shoe lace evidence and the defensive knife wound evidence to Moore’s hand, which seem to corroborate Peretti’s findings that Moore was either beaten by someone who was holding a knife or struggled with someone who was holding a knife, resulting in his bruises with scrapes over them and the injuries to his hand.

The prosecution in addition during the Rule 37 appeals hearings for Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley, submitted photos of other examples of serrated knife injuries; black and white images of those photos can be found in the links below.

https://thewm3revelations.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/serrations8.png

https://thewm3revelations.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/serrations6.png

https://thewm3revelations.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/serrations5.png

https://thewm3revelations.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/serrations4.png

Similar photos can also be found in such Criminal Justice books, such “Practical Homicide Investigation,” by Vernon J. Geberth. The below image is of a victim who was attacked with a serrated knife.

https://thewm3revelations.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/knifeinjury.png

This injury is remarkably similar to the one found on Michael Moore’s chest.

Comparison between injuries

Comparison between injuries

And when one looks at the knife next to this same injury it becomes fairly obvious that it’s the weapon that created the serrated pattern on Moore’s shoulder and chest.

Comparison between knife and injury

In that very same scene featuring Di Maio, the filmmakers show a cropped and blown up photo of an injury to the right lower jaw portion of Stevie Branch’s face. The image is deliberately out of context to suggest turtle bites may be present, and then the film, shows the serration pattern to Moore and some knife slashes on Christopher Byers to suggest that the injuries are claw marks from snapping turtles.

John Douglas in his book, “Law and Disorder,” suggested that Fran Walsh the wife of celebrity, Peter Jackson had formulated the idea that the injuries were created by turtles with the help of an attorney, Steve Mark.

Found on pages 364-365 of “Law and Disorder, Douglas says the following about Jackson’s wife Fran Walsh:

“Experiments clearly demonstrated that the bite marks on all three bodies corresponded exactly with test bites inflicted by alligator snapping turtles. Interestingly, it was our personal attorney, Steve Mark, who first discussed this possibility with Fran Walsh, simply by speculating about other alternatives to the court testimony and researching the types of animal predators indigenous to the area. Steve and Fran developed the idea over a series of emails.”

Photo of the alleged bite mark displayed in West of Memphis

Below is an example of a turtle bite shown in the film.

Another interesting tid-bit about this turtle video montage shown in “West of Memphis,” can be found in Vincent Di Maio’s book, “Morgue: A Life in Death,” in which Di Maio says the following on Page 225:

” The makers of the 2012 documentary, West of Memphis, tested the theory. They released several snapping turtles, like those found in the West Memphis area, near a pig carcass. The wounds they inflicted in a very short time looked nearly identical to the wounds I saw in the autopsy photos, wounds that investigators and prosecutors attributed to a serrated-blade knife and occult rituals.”

Does a staged and edited video montage, created by a Hollywood director’s wife and her lawyer, showing a few turtles eating a pig carcass constitute compelling evidence in support of animal predation? Well, Di Maio seemed to think so according to his book and his “West of Memphis” appearance, or at least seemed to be using this montage in defense of his claims that he made in the documentary.

In regards to the case, Di Maio states the following on page 229 of “Morgue: A Life in Death,” seeming to show that at some point he later looked up the case on-line to read more about the crime:

” Trying to slog through the rest of the West Memphis Three case is like wading in the filthy ditch of the Robin Hood woods. It’s murky and impossible to gain a secure foothold. Collecting facts is made especially treacherous by misinformation and disinformation, recantations, conjecture, bad journalism, Internet trolling, ‘new evidence’ submitted by partisans, armchair sleuthing from a thousand mothers’ basements, and the usual internet noise. Every account is sliced and diced, parsed into oblivion by zealous fans and foes seeking only the pieces that fit a puzzle they’ve already solved. This case stands now as both an example of everything that’s right and wrong with our system of crime and punishment. Confusion reigns.”

Was Di Maio not as familiar with the case at the time time that he rendered his opinion in “West of Memphis”? He didn’t mention the cut shoe laces on Michael Moore for example, and it’s clear from what he’s said that he’s aware of on-line “trolls” in the case and the amount of discussion the case has garnered on-line.

But on page 230, he ends the chapter on the West Memphis Three case, in a some what a shocking manner, saying:

” All I know is that in those grim photos, I saw reasonable doubt. It isn’t that I believe, as some do passionately, that Echols, Baldwin, and Misskelley didn’t kill those children. They are good suspects. But when I look closely at the evidence with almost forty years of forensic experience, I believe the police and prosecutors didn’t prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.”

He goes back to the photos, seeming to use the “West of Memphis” turtle montage as his defense, saying he just saw reasonable doubt in regards to the injuries, but then all of a sudden says that he’s not as passionate about the innocence claims of the accused and that they’re “GOOD” suspects in the murders. So if they’re good suspects, doesn’t that further put his opinions from “West of Memphis” in question?

Getting back to the injuries,; the injury to Stevie Branch’s face was inflicted while he was alive. In greater context it’s clustered together with several injuries and appears to be the result of a severe beating. Testimony during appeals about this particular injury also state that it was inflicted while Stevie was still alive. And that Stevie had been hit with such force that the back of his skull fractured from his head slamming back against whatever surface he was laying on at the time of the impact.

The full injury to Stevie’s face

According to the testimony by Dr. Peretti, this was inflicted while Stevie was alive, and could not have been a turtle bite, there was even massive damage inside of Stevie’s mouth, which again reflected that he was struck in the mouth, and this was the cause for the so called “turtle bite” injury.

Injuries to inside Stevie’s mouth.

You can read more about the “turtle bite” and it’s possible cause at this link.

And the last injury shown out of context by Dr. Di Maio and the documentary “West of Memphis,” is that of the slashes found to the left buttock region of Christopher Byers.  To best understand this injury is to understand the surrounding injuries and how they relate to the alleged murder weapon; the knife pulled from the lake behind Jason Baldwin’s home.

Below is a diagram showing the knife and the injuries located on the right and left thigh as well as the lower abdomen of Christopher Byers.

On the right inner thigh, shown above was a series of cuts shaped like a row of dots, believed by the prosecution to be a serrated knife pattern. On the left inner thigh, situated on the left buttock was a series of slashes into the skin. These slashes are featured incorrectly in “West of Memphis” as “serration” injuries. And lastly on the right side of the lower abdomen is a red impression that forms two thick red lines near Christopher’s groin, suspected to be an impression from the handle of the knife.

The prosecution stated that the knife when jammed between Byers’ thighs, sliced up both thighs during the castration, because it has a saw on one side, hence the dots on the one thigh. Below is a link to a photo of this injury.

Photo of the serration injury

Pattern of the serration injury highlighted

In this document below, Peretti states to Jason Baldwin’s lawyer that the pattern was consistent with the saw on the back of the Lake Knife.

The prosecution contended that the the slashes to the left buttock were caused by the front of the knife. It was also possible that the red marks to the abdomen were caused by the hilt or handle region of the murder weapon, which were described by defense Criminal Profiler, Brent Turvey to Jessie Misskelley’s lawyer, Dan Stidham, in the documentary “Paradise Lost 2: Revelations”.

(Turvey and Stidham discussing the castration injuries in “Paradise Lost 2: Revelations.”)

Brent Turvey in the documentary, “Paradise Lost 2”:

“On really close examination, and that’s why I brought you the magnifying glass, because I want you to look, right here, you can see the impression of the handle of the knife as it is being plunged. See that little squareness right there. So whoever did this went like this, and grabbed this and went like that, (Turvey then indicates in a quick stabbing motion with his hand) and that’s how they cut it up. No precision, no accuracy, no skill required to do that. And it actually to me it is consistent to what is a fishing knife. That’s got the blade on one side, and the serrated top on the other.”

A link to a photo of the knife hilt/handle impression that Turvey describes in the above scene.

Hilt/Handle Injury Photo

Turvey further described in an online chat this injury along with a host of other injuries and theories on their cause that the defense were looking into:

<Ratgrrl> What are pattern wounds exactly and what other kinds of wounds did you see on the kids?

<Brent_Tur> Rat– Potential footwear impression on the back of Stevie Branches head. Belt marks from a severe whipping, cutting deep into the tissue on Chris Byers thigh, and an impression from the knife hilt in the genital area of chris byers, where he was emasculated.

Link to full chat.

An exact duplicate of the knife is shown here in a series of demonstration images, which will be discussed below.

In the photo, you can see the back of the knife presses into the right thigh, while the blade slides up underneath the left buttock region of the person in the photo.

The back of the knife can be seen to have a fairly sharp saw portion on it.

And as the prosecution stated, the saw on the knife dug into Christopher’s bare thigh, leaving the serrated pattern.

(Close-up of the saw digging into a thigh.)

Going back to Turvey’s statement in Paradise Lost 2, this defense expert cites the murder weapon as having two different cutting surfaces, a regular blade on one side and a serrated blade on the other:

“And it actually to me it is consistent to what is a fishing knife. That’s got the blade on one side, and the serrated top on the other.”

Demonstrations of the duplicate knife produced similar serration marks as those found on the inner right thigh of Chris Byers.

And infact pressing the back of the duplicate knife into your skin, the weapon could easily leave a visible pattern, consistent with that of the injury on Christopher’s thigh.

Comparison with Christopher’s injuries

It is this reason, that John Fogleman at trial, demonstrated the knife’s pattern on a grapefruit for the jury.

He then let the jury see the pattern and compared them to the thigh injury:

Further, looking at scrapes on someone’s arm made with the front blade portion of the duplicate knife, appear similar in appearance to slashes on Christopher’s buttock.

Comparison with knife slashes

A comparison photo, shows that the slash marks are located on the left buttock, the exact location the knife is in during the demonstration photo.

Comparison with Demonstration Photo

You can see with your own two eyes, that the Lake Knife is consistent with the injuries then on both Michael Moore and Christopher Byers. Further there were other injuries of interest such as the possible knife hilt injury mentioned before and some knife gouges located in the groin region.

Knife hilt injury?

Knife Gouges

Lastly the injuries to Stevie Branch were extensive. Much like Michael Moore, someone had punched or struck him while they held a knife clenched in their fist. There was also numerous cuts with similar serration patterns as those found on Chris Byers’ inner thigh.

Located all over his face were several circle shaped injures, which were testified to by both Dr. William Sturner and Dr. Frank Peretti during the Rule 37 appeals. Sturner stated that it was as if a cylinder shaped object like a pipe had left the injuries. Two tool experts, Peter Loomis, and Homer Campbell stated that at least one of these injuries that Sturner described as being from an object shaped like a pipe, was infact consistent with the handle of the “Lake Knife”, and that the marks found below the injury were serration marks, likely caused by the saw on the same knife.

The Knife Handle Injury on Stevie Branch’s forehead.

Homer Campbell in an email regarding the injury:

“I believe the injurie to the left forehead and upper lid of the left eye were produced by the knife recovered or one similar. I also sent the photos of the injuries and the knife to another for evaluation and he agrees.

“Have fun with this and thank you for sending it to me.
Homer”

Peter Loomis in his communication with Homer Campbell, confirming for Campbell, that the injury was indeed inflicted most likely by the “Lake Knife”:

“Homer,

“Bingo. The circular mark sure looks like the butt of the survival knife. The measurements fit. The diameter of the injury is 30mm, and the diameter of the prominent circular area of the butt of the knife is 29.8mm.

“The 3 lacerations under the eyebrow look like they were made by the serrations on the back side of the knife. The measurements also fit here. The lacerations measure 11.2mm between them, and the serrated points on the knife vary between 11.1 and 11.4 mm. Of course the photo with the wooden ruler is blurry depicting these serrations but I can still measure them.”

“Peter”

(Handle of a duplicate of the murder weapon. The bottom of the knife is circular.)

If one looks you can also see several examples of the serration pattern present on Stevie’s face. There are even locations in his cuts that appear fairly uniform; more like a slice from a tool or weapon of some kind rather than an animal.

A serration pattern on Stevie’s face.

More serration patterns on Stevie’s face.

When viewing Stevie’s injuries, it was like a knife plunged into the front of his face and out the side of his cheek, forming a large entrance and exit wound. Surrounding this were numerous examples of serration marks consistent with the “Lake Knife.”

Photo of the stab wound in Stevie’s face.

Another photo of the stab wound.

The stab wound going out the cheek.

It is with all this said, that there can be no injury pointed to on any of the murder victims that can be said to be caused by an animal of any kind. The very fact that Michael Moore was tied up with a single shoe lace that had been cut in half proves the presence of a knife in these murders. And the demonstration photos with the duplicate knife further explain the injuries on Chris Byers. You can visibly see circular patterns on Stevie’s face, and those patterns are again consistent with the knife handle.

With all that said, one must ask if it is sinister in any way for a knife to be suspiciously disposed of at the bottom of a lake right behind the home of a murder suspect?

What are we left with? Theories from non-experts, such as the wife of celebrity, Peter Jackson and her lawyer? Cropped photos shown in a manipulative manner like in the film “West of Memphis”? Injuries portrayed as predation, but were in reality antemortem as testified to during the appeals?

In arguing in favor of animal predation, defense expert, Dr. Michael Baden insisted that he knew the injuries were predation, just because… not for any other reason, just that he knew it just because he knew it and had no scientific basis for reaching such a conclusion.

Baden’s testimony at Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley’s Rule 37 hearing:

Q] And, uh, was this conclusion something that you had to study the photos for a long time in order to make sure, or is this something that just sort of jumped out at you, or how
would you charaqcterize it?

A] No, it was looking at your grandmother. You know it’s your grandmother – – it’s either your grandmother or not. It’s looking at the photos, uh, these look very much like postmortem
animal activity. I had that opinion very quickly.

Baden however was countered by his good friend and fellow Forensic Pathologist, William Sturner, who said that Baden’s insistence that he knew it was predation just because he knew it, was unscientific.

The very clear reality is that the defense attempted to pile on as many famous experts in their favor to try and litigate their case in the media, by suggesting that the number of experts they hired some how out-weighed the facts of the case.

Experts hired by the defense included Vincent Di Maio, who worked for George Zimmerman’s defense team, Michael Baden, who worked for OJ Simpson as well as the Church of Scientology in the Lisa McPherson case, and Werner Spitz who worked for such defense teams as those of serial killer, Richard Ramirez, Casey Anthony, and Phil Spector.

(Werner Spitz at the trial of Casey Anthony.)

Werner Spitz’s credibility as a defense expert has frequently been challenged in recent years, particularly due to his defense of alleged child killer Casey Anthony.

Dr. Spitz from former prosecutor Jeff Ashton’s book “Imperfect Justice,” discussing his testimony in the Anthony case:

“Dr Werner Spitz was a forensic anthropologist who was over the age of eighty. Back in the eighties and early nineties, he was one of the leaders in his field. Over the last ten years or so, he had inserted himself into a number of high profile cases; O.J. was one, Phil Spector was another. Now he had involved himself in this case. I felt he was desperately searching for a way to maintain some relevance in his field.

“His testimony was twofold. First, Dr. Spitz attacked Dr. Garavaglia for having not opened Caylee’s skull at autopsy. She had left it intact. That was a violation of basic autopsy protocol, he continued. Second, he was the only witness trying to render the opinion the skull had been removed from the crime scene. He testified that someone could have removed it, taken it home, put duct tape on it, and returned it to the scene.

“When Dr. Spitz had performed his own autopsy, he had opened the skull and found some residue, which he claimed to be able to recognize from sight as the decomposition of the brain. To him, the residue indicated that the skull had been on its side when the brains decomposed. I called this the “brain dust” testimony.

“On cross, I started with his criticism of Dr. Garavaglia’s autopsy, about the violation of protocol claim, that Dr. G had not opened the skull. Dr. Spitz had been one of the authors of a basic text book on forensic anthropology. I took his book up to the stand, put it down in front of him, and said, “Show me where you say it is protocol to open the skull when it is skeletonized.”

“He leafed through the pages and did not find any reference to his claim. I next asked him if he was familiar with any other written protocol on the opening of the skull at autopsy. And he answered no. Next, I addressed the “removal and return of the skull” theory. I went through what I thought would be necessary to carry out what he was alleging. Someone would have to take the skull and the mandible home, put them in an anatomically correct position, tape the two pieces together, and put the skull back in the exact location where it had been. Dr. Spitz argued that though it would be difficult, it could be done.

“I showed him the photo taken at the medical examiner’s office, showing that strands of hair were draped over the skull. I asked him how the hair could fall so perfectly back to its original position in a re-created scene. I pointed out that the manner of the hair falling on the skull was not consistent with being on its side.

“Dr. Spitz got belligerent with me, to a point where he didn’t know how to answer. He said that maybe the medical examiner had staged the photo. So I showed him the photo taken at the scene with the strands of hair in exactly the same position. He then claimed that maybe the police had staged the skull. In my opinion, Dr. Spitz’s testimony ended up being completely discredited.”

Spitz’s discussing the Casey Anthony verdict.

It was Spitz, who along with Baden testified during Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley’s Rule 37 appeals, and it was Spitz who suggested that wild dogs feasted on the victims while they were still alive and submerged under water.  He even said that these dogs grabbed the victims by their heads and slammed and shook them around, bashing their heads on rocks and such, causing the head injuries.

Spitz on the head injuries:

“My interpretation of the injuries to the head was that first, there is no evidence of bleeding in the brain. My interpretation is that they may have been handled by large animals, shaken around.”

“The injuries that I saw are entirely consistent and compatible with animal predation and the shaking of the bodies by an animal. The injuries to the face, to the head, the degloving of the penis, the tearing off of the scrotum, those injuries are not man-made.”

Return to Michael Baden, on July 20, 2017 Fox News host, Tucker Carlson had Michael Baden and Mark Fuhrman on his show to discuss OJ Simpson’s then recent parole. During the course of this show Carlson point blank accused Baden of having lied during the OJ Simpson trial to help set Simpson free-

Tucker Carlson: “Let’s exit the legal world and enter the real world. I think most people would agree this guy committed a double murder and beat his wife and is kind of a horrible person and you helped get him off. So my question is how do you feel about that?”

Michael Baden: “I think that the 12 jurors didn’t feel that the prosecution presented a case, I was involved as a forensic pathologist, who went over all the forensic evidence, which is independent of whether he did it or not; the evidence is the evidence. The jury felt that what was presented to them in the criminal trial was not sufficent to find guilty, and then in the civil case they heard evidence, and presented better, and they convicted him. And I think the probation–parole comes about because he was a model prisoner.”

News story about the exchange.

Youtube video of the episode:

To end this article, Prosecutor Brent Davis stated as follows during his closing arguments on the knife at trial:

“The other thing to keep in mind is– and John didn’t mention this, but remember this knife has two cutting surfaces. It’s got one here and it’s got this serrated portion back here. Now, the ripping type injuries you see on the children are on the inside of the thighs and the back of the thighs and the inside of the buttocks. Ok. When this surface is being used to remove the genitals and the knife is worked in and they’re trying to remove the genitals this back surface is what’s going to be coming in contact with the inside of the thigh and the back of the buttocks. The knife that you were shown over here, the Byers knife, it has but one cutting surface. If they’re using that knife to remove the genitals, then the back of that knife has no cutting surface at all and wouldn’t leave any marks on the inside of the leg or the back of the leg. And I ask you to go back there and look at this and think, when you look at those photographs and where those injuries are–think of how this knife is used, and I know it’s not pleasant. But think of it and then look at where those marks are and how they match up with this particular size of blade.” 

You can read further about the murder weapon at the link below:

The Lake Knife

Damien and The Great Dane

   (A dead dog mutilated by serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer when he was a teenager.)

According to Jason Baldwin’s cousin, Joe Bartoush, about less than 8 months prior to the murders, on October 27, 1992, he and Damien Echols had found a dog, described as a Great Dane, which appeared to be sick. Echols, according to Bartoush killed the dog and was apparently going to keep it’s skull, because he was keeping a collection of animal skulls in his room.

 

“On 10-27-92 I was at Lakeshore Trailer Park with Damien Echols when he killed a Black Great Dane. The dog was already sick and he hit the dog in the back of the head. He pulled the intestines out of the dog and started stomping the dog until blood came out of his mouth. He was going to come back later with battery acid so that he could burn the hair and skin off of the dog’s head. He had two cat skulls, a dog skull and a rat skull that I already knew about. He kept these skulls in his bedroom at Jack Echols house in Lakeshore. He was trying to make the eyeballs of the dog he killed pop out when he was stomping. Damien had a camoflouge survival knife to cut the guts out of the dog with. This statement was written by Det. Ridge at my request.”

 

Damien Echols at trial, testifying about knives he had. In the context of his statement he was denying that he ever owned or had possession of the alleged murder weapon, a large black handled survival knife, known as the “Lake Knife”.

 I had one sort of like that, but mine didn’t have a black handle. The handle on mine was camouflaged, and it had the camouflage case and everything. The blade on mine was black. It wasn’t silver like that. 

Just like in Joe Bartoush’s statement, Echols said he owned a camouflage survival knife, seeming to provide some substantiation to Bartoush’s story.

This story is also corroborated by another teenager by the name of Timothy Blaine Hodge.

“there was a big black Great Dane Dog at lakeshore that I saw on the trail over the Bridge to the right as you go over the bridge it was Dead It’s intestines was strung out of his butt A boy named Adam told me he heard Damien did it. Adam’s last name is Phillips he lives in lakeshore” 

 

(Timothy Blaine Hodge’s written statement to police from June 22, 1993.)

An account from Jason Baldwin’s girlfriend, Heather Cliett also described a conversation with Damien, in which he told her about how he mutilated a dog before. A police report describes what he told her:

“At the skating rink Damien told her he stuck a stick in a dogs eye and then jumped on it and then burned it.” 

(Heather Cliett police report from June 7, 1993.)

 

Damien Echols in his own words from the book, “Almost Home,” an autobiography of sorts, which Echols wrote while in Prison, states in detail how he used to roam Lakeshore Trailer Park, and play with dead animals, both cats and dogs, just like Joe Bartoush had stated.

“Almost Home”, page 81:

“It sounds kind of odd to have a skull collection, but it’s easily explainable. There’s a hard-packed dirt path behind Lakeshore that the local youth wandered on. It doesn’t go anywhere specific, just sort of meanders around a small lake and a few fields. For some reason I always found odd pieces of skeletons that had died out there–possums, raccoons, squirrels, birds, and even the occasional dog or cat. I began collecting them because my teenage mind thought they ‘looked cool.’ I’ve never denied having questionable taste when it comes to interior decorating. The oddest thing we ever found was a beer bottle with two tiny skulls inside. The problem was that they were slightly too large to get out of the bottle. We spent hours trying to figure out how they got in the bottle in the first place.”

A document from a report on Damien’s 1992 arrest describes items removed by police from his room…

(Police report detailing items in Damien’s room from his initial 1992 arrest.)

The underlined portions describe a dog skull, which the police recovered from Damien’s room. As to how he obtained this skull, there were two different accounts.

His mother Pamela Hutchison stated in an interview on May 12, 1993, that Damien had one day brought home a dog skull that he found on the side of the road in Lakeshore.

RIDGE: OKAY, HAS HE ATTEMPTED TO GET YOU TO UNDERSTANDING HIS RELIGION?

HUTCHISON: YES, HE HAS

RIDGE: AND, IN THE EXPLAINING OF THIS, I UNDERSTAND FROM OTHER PEOPLE THAT HE MAY HAVE ANIMAL SKULLS OR SOMETHING SYMBOLISM IN THIS?

HUTCHISON: THIS ANIMAL SKULLS THAT HE HAD, WHEN I LIVED AT LAKESHORE, WAS JUST A SKULL THAT HAD BEEN FOUND LAYING ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. IT HAD BEEN THERE FOR I DON’T KNOW HOW LONG, AND HE PICKED IT UP.

RIDGE: OF COURSE I AM NOT SAYING THAT IT IS ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT EITHER, BECAUSE I’VE SEEN SOME BEAUTIFUL ART WORK ON ANIMALS SKULLS, I’VE SEEN AT TRUCK STOPS, SO I AM NOT CONDEMNING OR SAYING THAT THERE IS ANYTHING WRONG WITH IT. BUT WHAT, HOW DOES HE PERCEIVE IT. SOMETHING PRETTY, OR JUST SEEM TO THINK THAT IT IS SOME KIND OF POWER?

HUTCHISON: NAW, I THINK THAT IT IS JUST INTERESTING THAN ANYTHING.

In an interview on September 10, 1993 with Deputy Prosecutor, John Fogleman, she described the events surrounding the skull in more detail:

FOGLEMAN- ALRIGHT. DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT DAMION HAVING CAT SKULLS AND CARRYING THEM AROUND?

PAM- IT WASN’T A CAT SKULL. IT WAS A DOG SKULL.

FOGLEMAN- ALRIGHT. WHERE WAS THAT?

PAM- IT WAS HANGING ON MY CLOTHES LINE IN THE BACK YARD WHERE I MADE HIM LEAVE IT OUT THERE TO DRY BEFORE HE CARRIES IT TO SCHOOL.

FOGLEMAN- OKAY. LEAVE IT OUT THERE TO DRY. WHAT HAD HE DONE TO IT?

PAM- HE FOUND IT ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD.

FOGLEMAN- OKAY, BUT I MEAN, WHAT DID IT NEEDED DRY FROM?

PAM- IT JUST SMELLED BAD AND I MADE HIM HAND IT OUT THERE IN THE SUN.

FOGLEMAN- OKAY. AND YOU DON’T KNOW OF HIM CARRYING A CAT SKULL AT SCHOOL.

PAM- NO.

FOGLEMAN- OKAY. DO YOU KNOW OF HIM HAVING ANY OTHER SKULLS?

PAM- NO.

FOGLEMAN- OKAY. DO YOU KNOW WHY HE CARRIED A DOG SKULL TO SCHOOL?

PAM- UM, HE HAD TOLD ME THAT HE WAS GOING TO CARRY IT TO SCHOOL FOR, SOMETHING LIKE THEY HAD SHOW AND TELL. OR SOME TYPE OF SCIENCE PROJECT.

FOGLEMAN- OKAY.

PAM- AND HE ONLY CARRIED IT THE ONE DAY.

During Damien’s trial testimony, he himself changed the story on how he obtained the skull, instead of saying he found it, it was now his step-dad, Jack Echols who found the skull.

Q: In addition, there was a skull of some kind – it looks like an animal skull – State’s Exhibit 116. Are you familiar with this?

A: Yes, I am.

Q: What is that?

A: It was a skull me and my step-dad, Jack Echols, had found and I just thought it was kind of cool. And before he gave it to me, he bleached it out and everything to make sure there wasn’t any germs or anything on it. It was a decoration for my room.

 

Damien, in his own words and actions described himself partaking in actions most common of serial killers, such as Jeffrey Dahmer, who had a fascination with death. Bartoush’s statement was corroborated by Timothy Blaine Hodge, and Damien himself admitted having a camouflage survival knife like the one Bartoush stated he saw. And he himself stated in Almost Home to playing with dead animals and their skulls, which he found in Lakeshore Trailer Park, much like Bartoush said he did. And in 1992, when he and Deanna Holcomb were arrested, the police found a dog skull in his possession, again verifying Bartoush’s claims that Echols collected skulls from dead animals.

The Muddy Boots

 

 

 

 

 

        (Photo of Damien’s boots from June 3, 1993 search of his family’s trailer. The photo is incorrectly labeled 9-3-93.)

  On May 7th, 1993, Lt. James Sudbury and Juvenile Officer Steve Jones interviewed Damien Echols the day after the victims’ bodies were discovered. It was during this visit that Steve Jones would later allege he saw something suspicious. This account is documented in the book, “The Blood of Innocents,” by Guy Reel, Marc Perrusquia, and Bartholomew Sullivan.

(Cover of “The Blood of Innocents.”)

   “The Blood of Innocents,” page 95:

  By the door sat Damien’s black combat boots beside a pair of tennis shoes. Both were caked in mud, the juvenile officer later would recall.

 

  Later in the book, Damien Echols himself is asked about Steve Jones allegation in a death row interview.

  Pages 416-417:

  Inside the trailer, Jones said he saw a pair of tennis shoes and Echols’ black boots, all caked in mud–again, information that never came out at the trials.

  “What am I, a dang fool?” Echols said, when told of Jones’ contention. “The tennis shoes did have mud on them, the boots did not. I kept the boots in perfect condition because they were always what I wore when I went out. The tennis shoes I didn’t care anything about, when it was raining or something like that I would wear them out to keep from messing my boots up.”

 

  Echols acknowledged in the interview that Steve Jones did in-fact see a pair of tennis shoes with mud caked on them, but disputed Jones’ assertion that his boots had mud on them as well, arguing that Jones was only half right.

  John Douglas, a famous FBI Criminal Profiler hired by Lord of the Rings Director, Peter Jackson, stated as follows in the documentary, “West of Memphis”:

  “To do what he did to the children, hide the clothing, and hide the children–he got in the water, he got muddy.”

(The ditch where the bodies were found.)

  On a final note, on the night of the murders two other items of information stick out. The first is a sighting of muddy footprints all over the bridge entering the crime scene. The killer had tossed the victim’s bikes off the bridge and into the water shortly after the murders.

(The Pipe Bridge leading into Robin Hood Hills.)

  David Jacoby and Terry Hobbs searched around the Pipe Bridge on May 5th, shortly before it got dark out that night. According to Jacoby in his interview with police, he noticed muddy footprints all over the pipe and assumed they must have been from the missing victims.

Jacoby: At one point we got to ah ditch I remember seeing some foot prints going down I know it was bicycle tire prints going down in the ditch, and then we got up to ah there was a pipe that crossed the ditch got up to walk across that pipe and there was some muddy footprints on the pipe. And uh that I can remember that I just don’t remember I thank we went on across the pipe and walked on threw you know down along the ditch bank and threw more woods.

  Jacoby later in his statement again described the prints that he saw on the bridge…

Jacoby: I thank uh we all kinda of walked down toward the edge of the water it was a little grassy then all of a sudden it was just muddy uh I don’t thank none of us really got in the mud. I remember myself when I seen it I walked down towards it I didn’t step in the mud and I seen I thank it was tire tracks I’m pretty sure it was and I told the rest of em it look like they took their bikes threw the ditch right here but you could look to the other side and didn’t see nothing coming out and I thought maybe they backed up so we Walked to where we could git to that I was wanting to say it was a black pipe going across there and there was you know foot prints from the mud on there so you know I assumed they had crossed it there and it really never dawn on me how they got their bikes across unless they carried it and they were all little kids so, I mean there was a West Memphis Police Officer there when we got in the woods and you know I told him this. I mean I don’t where it went to but it was kind of frantic that night but…

David Jacoby’s account to police of May 5, 1993.

 

(Narlene Hollingsworth, the aunt of Damien’s girlfriend, Domini Teer.)

  Late in the night on May 5, 1993, Narlene Hollingsworth and her family were driving along the busy service road that passed along the side of Robin Hood Hills, when they spotted two individuals walking just past Robin Hood and in the direction of Lakeshore Trailer Park. According to Narlene Hollingsworth, one of them was Damien Echols, and in addition there was a second person with him, who had long hair and a black t-shirt and jeans on, which Narlene had thought was her niece Domini Teer. And according to her, these two people looked wet and muddy.

(Narlene’s written statement to police.)

 

(The area Narlene saw Damien walking with muddy clothes.)

 

  Re-capping, Criminal Profiler, John Douglas stated that the killer should be wet and muddy, because he would have had to have gotten into the ditch with the victims. David Jacoby in turn saw muddy shoe prints all over the bridge leading into the crime scene, and the killer would have had to have walked on that bridge at some point on May 5th in order to dispose of the victims’ bikes. And later on May 5th, Narlene Hollingsworth spotted Damien Echols in muddy clothing walking around near Robin Hood Hills. Steve Jones also stated that on May 7th, when the police interviewed Damien, that he had a pair of caked muddy shoes and muddy boots sitting in his trailer.

Lee Rush and Jessie’s Crying Fits

(Lee Rush during an interview in the documentary Paradise Lost.)

On the early hours of June 4th, shortly after police arrested Jessie Misskelley Jr., three officers enforcing a search warrant of Jessie’s trailer, sat down and talked with Jessie Misskelley Sr., and his live in girlfriend, Lee Rush while they waited for crime scene investigators to arrive.

During the course of talking with the officers, Rush stated, “I knew that something was wrong, a few nights ago little Jessie was in his room crying so loud and sobbing so hard that it woke me up, I went in and asked him what was wrong? His reply was that his girl friend was moving to Florida.”

http://callahan.mysite.com/images/report_06-07-93.jpg

A few moments later, Rush again repeated her statements, saying Jessie had recently over the course of several nights had mysterious crying fits and waking nightmares. And every time she walked into Jessie Jr.’s room and asked him what was wrong, he repeated that he was upset over how his girlfriend Susie Brewer might move away to Florida.

“She told us it happened a number of times, and that she could not believe his girlfriends’ moving would cause that kind of hysterical behavior, but that little Jessie had been acting strange.”

http://callahan.mysite.com/wm3/cdabbs.html

 

Immediately during an interview for the documentary Paradise Lost, while being filmed sitting in the living room of their trailer, Jessie Misskelley Sr. and his girlfriend, Lee Rush openly argued about Jessie’s guilt, as Rush repeatedly seems to question Jessie’s innocence.

Lee Rush: “We don’t know what the truth is, but when it really gets down to brass tax. His daddy and I are gonna look him square in the eyes and say ‘son did you do this? D-were you even there?’ That’s when we will believe.”

Jessie Sr.: “Well, if he told me he did it, which I don’t believe he did, but if he told me he did it, he’d have to do his time. Suffer the consequences.”

Lee Rush: “If he admits to this he would be strictly on his own, we wouldn’t even send him a dollar for a pack of cigarettes.”

Jessie Sr.: “No, no, you’re wrong there.

Lee Rush: “Yes we would.”

Jessie Sr.: “No I would. He’s my son! I’ll send him money, but he will have to do his time.”

Lee Rush: “I wouldn’t give him a nickle.”

Jessie Sr.: “He’s my son.”

Lee Rush: “Now We could be talking about-“

Jessie Sr.: “He’s my flesh and blood!”

Lee Rush: “We could be talking about my son.”

Jessie Sr.: “Well…

Lee Rush: “If my son did something that horrible that, I wouldn’t give him a nickle, let him suffer.”

Jessie Sr.: “You can’t turn your blood away.”

Lee Rush: “I don’t know how you say you could and we’re gonna have a problem over this.”

Jessie Sr.: “But I know how it is being up in jail without having anything.”

Lee Rush: “Well that’s beside the point, if he, if he’s guilty, if he’s guilty of doing this to these little boys, no!

Jessie Sr.: “But he’s not.”

Lee Rush: “Well, I’m saying he’s not too, but if he happens to be, if it’s proven, no! forget it, no, no.”

Jessie Sr.: “But I don’t believe he did it. I’ll never believe he did it.”

Shortly after this filmed incident, the relationship with Jessie Misskelley Sr. and Lee Rush came to an end.

Jessie Misskelley: THE TRACY LAXTON INCIDENT

On May 15, 1993, Jessie Misskelley, and his older friend David Sims, who was 22-years-old at the time, and his younger friend, Dennis Carter, who was 15, had called the police from a bowling Alley stating they had seen three little boys, who were around 8 or 9 years old fleeing from a man near some train tracks. When the police arrived, they pointed the finger at a man named Tracy Laxton, saying that Laxton not only had tried to lure three little boys into the woods just moments prior, but had approached them as well, offering to let them drink in his camp in the near-by woods.

Ultimately Laxton was investigated and cleared, but the people who implicated him in the murders was shocking.

From the report:

Upon seeing officers, they came up & stated that they were walking on railroad tracks & had just bought something to drink at (indecipherable) and three white males who were (indecipherable) walking on tracks. Saw them & started running (indecipherable). Above described #1, #2 & #3 stated that as they got up on the tracks behind Goodyear they observed a W/M with reddish/blond hair come out of the woods and started trying to talk to them he said his name was Tracy & that he was from Mississippi & that his car had broken down at a church in Mississippi, Subject #1, #2 & #3 stated that the guy asked if they wanted to come over to his camp & drink some beer, #1, #2 & 3 stated they got scared because of the recent murders of the white males & that they ran to the phone in front of Howards Donuts & called the Police, then walked to the bowling alley. See Attached Subject Descriptions on #1, #2, #3

(The police report filed on May 15, 1993.)

(The police report filed on May 15, 1993.)

Following his confession to police, Dennis Carter, who had taken part in accusing Laxton, expressed that he wasn’t surprised that Jessie was arrested for the murders.

“Dennis states that he was not really surprised when he heard that Jesse was arrested for the homicide. States that he was always nice to him but it didn’t really surprise him that he was involved. States that Jesse never mentioned the murders to him.”

Link to transcribed notes of interview with Dennis Carter

David Sims, the other participant in the Laxton accusations also said the following about the events on May 15th:

“Jessie Misskelley never said anything about knowing about the murders, except the night we were at the police dept & he said (Jessie) that he thought Damien & Jason did the murders.”

(July 16, 1993 statement by David Sims discussing the Laxton incident.)

Sims further told the police that Jessie was “scared of Damien.”

(Excerpt from David Sims’ July 16, 1993 statement to police.)

The three 8-year-old boys that Jessie Misskelley and his two friends, David Sims and Dennis Carter had claimed they saw fleeing from Laxton were never found.

It was this incident that directed police to Jessie Misskelley on June 3, 1993 and the eventual confession to the murders of Stevie Branch, Michael Moore, and Christopher Byers.

Reluctant Witness: Buddy Lucas

(Recent photo of Buddy Lucas)

 

Buddy Sydney Lucas was perhaps one of the strongest witnesses in the case against the WM3, yet, for the most part he’s fallen off the face of the earth and remained silent on who killed Stevie Branch, Michael Moore, and Christopher Byers. But in 1993 and 1994, that would all be a different story…

During Jessie Misskelley’s confession to police on June 3, 1993, he informed investigators that he had given away the shoes he wore on the night of the murders to his friend Buddy Lucas:

 

DETECTIVE GITCHELL: Ok. So you had a white t-shirt with a basketball design on it? (22 second pause) Ok, uh, what about shoes. What kind of shoes did you have on?

 

MISSKELLEY: White and blue Adidas.

 

DETECTIVE GITCHELL: White and blue?

 

MISSKELLEY: Mm-hmm.

 

DETECTIVE GITCHELL: And who has those shoes now?

 

MISSKELLEY: Buddy Lucas.

 

DETECTIVE GITCHELL: And how old is Buddy?

 

MISSKELLEY: He’s about 18 or 19.

 

DETECTIVE GITCHELL: Why, why does he have your shoes?

 

MISSKELLEY: We went, we was coming home one day and it was raining and he didn’t have nothing else to wear so he put on one of my shoes.

 

DETECTIVE GITCHELL: Ok, and where does he live at?

 

MISSKELLEY: In Lakeshore.

A few days later, on June 10th, Officer Bryn Ridge visited Buddy Lucas and his mother, May Hudson at their trailer in Lakeshore Trailer Park.

                          (Photo of Buddy Lucas from 1993.)

During contact with the police, Buddy told Ridge a story that several months earlier, himself(Buddy Lucas), Jessie Misskelley, and another boy, Billy McGee had driven around on a 4-wheeler in some mud,  that afterwords his shoes were caked in mud, so Jessie gave him a pair of shoes to wear home. However Buddy alleged this occurred 4 months prior, making the incident take place well before the murders. This statement was then written down in a report by Buddy’s mother, May Hudson, and the police then took possession from Buddy a pair of blue and white Adidas shoes, which Buddy said were the ones that Jessie gave him. These shoes also happened to match the description of the shoes, in Jessie’s confession.

 

 (June 10, 1993 Statement by Buddy Lucas.)

But this would not be the last contact with Buddy Lucas…

The next contact with police was on September 8, 1993, in which police asked him about his taking part in a violent assault committed by Jessie Misskelley and some other teens. The incident involved Jessie beating up a teenager with Jason Baldwin and Damien Echols, as well as other boys such as Buddy Lucas. The teen who was beaten up was John Perschke, who eye witnesses said Jessie threatened with a knife, pushing it toward Perschke’s throat and asking him, “would you like to be dead?”

Lucas told police that he did not participate in the incident, but had watched it from afar, saying he saw Jessie and about 6 other people there threaten John Perschke, and that he did in fact see Jessie press a knife to John’s throat.

(September 8, 1993 statement by Buddy Lucas.)

The next time the police spoke to Buddy was on October 14, 1993. The reason Buddy was picked up was the result of a tip from his own uncle, who later gave a statement months later, on January 3, 1994, saying that his uncle, Eddie Wilson had heard from some people, that Buddy was telling people from his work details of the crime. Eddie then confronted Buddy on this, and Lucas allegedly admitted to his uncle that Jessie Misskelley had given him a pair of shoes which had blood on them.

 

(Report on the statement from Buddy’s Uncle Eddie Wilson.)

Following this information, the police picked up Buddy from his work, and took him down to the police station and took a taped interview from him. It was during this interview, Buddy admitted new and crucial information about the shoes. Lucas had also told the police that the reason he had not told them the truth before, was due to being scared the police might arrest him too.

RIDGE – OKAY, SO YOU DIDN’T COME TO THE POLICE EITHER? 

 

LUCAS – UH-UH 

 

RIDGE – WHY DID YOU NOT COME TO THE POLICE? 

 

LUCAS – I WAS AFRAID THAT YOU ALL WOULD LOCK ME UP FOR IT, I DIDN’T HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IT 

Lucas also expressed his fear that if if he had told the police, that he was worried someone might try to kill him as well, after-all, Jessie had told him he had killed the boys with his friends Jason and Damien, and he himself personally witnessed Jessie put a knife to John Perschke’s throat:

RIDGE – WERE YOU JUST SCARED OF US OR SCARED YOU WERE HURTING JESSIE, WHAT WERE YOU SCARED OF? 

 

LUCAS – THE REASON I DIDN’T COME UH, THEN BEFORE HE TOLD YOU ALL EVERYTHING, BECAUSE I WAS AFRAID IF I DID THAT HE WOULD HAVE SOMEBODY HURT ME 

 

RIDGE – YOU WERE AFRAID JESSIE WOULD HAVE SOMEBODY TO HURT YOU? 

 

LUCAS – YES SIR, HE KNOWS ALOT OF PEOPLE, THAT I DON’T KNOW 

 

RIDGE – OKAY 

 

LUCAS – I’M AFRAID HE WOULD HAVE SOME BODY HURT ME AND EVERYTHING 

It was then according to Lucas, that he revealed to police, that on May 6th, the day after the murders, he and Jessie were hanging out at Jessie’s trailer, and it was during this time that Jessie gave Lucas a pair of shoes to wear, saying he did not want to see them again. Jessie had also broken down crying and confessed to the murders, stating that he, Jason, and Damien had hurt some boys and were in trouble. Accordingly, Jessie told Buddy that he wanted to tell the police about the crime, and thus turn his friends in, but didn’t know how to do so without also going to jail for his part in the murders.

LUCAS – WE WAS UH, WAS TALKING ABOUT GOING OVER UH, BOBBY DOLLARS WIFE’S HOUSE TO GET MY HAIR CUT, BECAUSE SHE CUT LITTLE HAIR NOW AND THEN 

 

RIDGE – OKAY 

 

LUCAS – SO I WAS GOING TO GO OVER THERE, SO I SAID LETS GO OVER SEE ABOUT GETTING HER TO CUT MY HAIR, WE WENT OVER THERE, SHE CUT MY HAIR, HE SIT THERE AND PLAYED THE NINTENDO WITH HER LITTLE BOYS 

 

RIDGE – OKAY 

 

LUCAS – AND EVERYTHING, CAUSE HE USED TO, HE CLEANED UP HER HOUSE, WATCHES HER KIDS FOR HER, SO WE LEFT WE WENT BACK TO HIS HOUSE, I STARTED, I TOLD HIM, MAN, UH, THANKS FOR GOING OVER UH, BOBBY’S WIFE’S WITH ME AND EVERYTHING TO GET MY HAIR CUT, I GOING TO HOWLER AT YOU LATER, HE SAID NO MAN I GOT TO TELL YOU SOMETHING, AND EVERYTHING AND HE WAS BREAKING OUT IN A SWEAT 

 

RIDGE – YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT HIS EYES WHEN WE TALKED EARLIER WHAT WAS IT ABOUT HIS EYES 

 

LUCAS – THEY… THEY HAD WATER DROPPING FROM THEM 

 

RIDGE – HE HAD BEEN CRYING? 

 

LUCAS – UH-HUH SOMETHING LIKE THAT 

 

RIDGE – THAT’S JUST WHAT YOU THOUGHT? 

 

LUCAS – UH-HUH 

 

RIDGE – DID HE TELL YOU HE HAD BEEN CRYING? 

 

LUCAS – UH-UH 

 

RIDGE – OKAY, SO WHAT HAPPENS WHEN HE TELLS YOU HE HAS TO TELL YOU SOMETHING? 

 

LUCAS – SO WE SIT THERE, SIT THERE, AND I SAID, HE SAID MAN ME JASON AND DAMIEN WE WENT WALKING LAST NIGHT IN THE TOWN OF WEST MEMPHIS, I SAID WHY DIDN’T YOU ALL COME BY AND GET ME? WE WILL WE UH, WE WERE IN A HURRY AND EVERYTHING GO UP THERE AND COME BACK HOME. I SAID ALRIGHT I UNDERSTAND (INAUDIBLE) NOW SINCE I FOUND OUT I’M KINDA GLAD HE DIDN’T COME BY AND GET ME 

RIDGE – OKAY, WHAT DID HE TELL YOU HE DO? 

 

LUCAS – WE…. HE TOLD ME THAT UH, THAT HE GOT IN A FIGHT, THAT’S WHAT HE TOLD ME AT FIRST 

 

RIDGE – OKAY 

 

LUCAS – I SAID DAMIEN AND JASON THEY HELPED YOU? HE SAID UM-YEA AND EVERYTHING SO I SAID WELL DID YOU ALL HURT ANYBODY? AND HE SAID YEA, I DIDN’T THINK IT WAS THOSE 8 YEAR OLD KIDS OR ANYTHING, SO I TURN AROUND AND COME TO FOUND OUT THAT JASON HE WAS WITH JASON AND DAMIEN WHEN THEY SACRIFICED THEM LITTLE KIDS. I WAS COME AND TELL YOU ALL 

 

RIDGE – OKAY 

 

LUCAS – AND HE SAID NO I’LL DO IT 

 

RIDGE – SO HE TELLS YOU HE WILL COME TO THE POLICE 

 

LUCAS: UH-HUH, AND ALRIGHT THAT WEEKEND I CAME BACK OVER AT MY MOM’S AND EVERYTHING 

 

RIDGE – UH-HUH 

 

LUCAS – I READ ABOUT IT IN THE PAPER AND EVERYTHING AND COME TO FOUND OUT HE DID FRONT HIS SELF THAT HE DID DO IT CAUSE HE TOLD ME HE WOULD 

 

RIDGE – OKAY 

 

LUCAS – AND EVERYTHING 

 

RIDGE – DID YOU CALL HIM? 

 

LUCAS – UH? 

 

RIDGE – WHEN YOU READ THING IN THE PAPER DID YOU CALL JESSIE OR TALK TO HIM AGAIN? 

 

LUCAS – UH-UH, CAUSE HE WAS ALREADY LOCKED UP WHEN I HEARD ABOUT IT, IN THE PAPER 

 

RIDGE – OKAY 

 

LUCAS – AND EVERYTHING, CAUSE IT HAD THEIR PICTURE ON THE FRONT PAGE 

 

RIDGE – OKAY, THURSDAY MORNING AFTER THIS WEDNESDAY YOU WENT TO HIS HOUSE 

 

LUCAS – UH-HUH 

 

RIDGE – HE TELLS YOU HE’S IN SOME TROUBLE? 

 

LUCAS – UH-HUH 

 

RIDGE – AND WHAT DID HE TELL YOU HE WAS IN TROUBLE OVER? 

 

LUCAS – THAT HE REALLY, HE SAID UM, WE HURT, UH…. UH WE HURT A COUPLE OF BOYS, THAT JASON AND DAMIEN KILLED 

 

RIDGE – OKAY 

 

LUCAS – COUPLE, I SAID WAS YOU INVOLVED? HE SAID YEA, I SAID WHAT DID YOU DO? I FINALLY GOT IT TALKED OUT OF HIM WHAT DID HE DO, HE SAID I HIT UH, A COUPLE IN THE BACK OF THE HEAD 

 

RIDGE – OKAY, AND 

 

LUCAS – AND EVERYTHING TO KEEP THEM FROM RUNNING AND EVERYTHING 

 

RIDGE – AND THAT’S WHAT HE TOLD YOU? 

 

LUCAS – YES SIR 

 

RIDGE – AND THIS IS ON THURSDAY MORNING? 

 

LUCAS – UH-HUH 

 

RIDGE – OKAY. 

 

LUCAS – THE TWO SHOES HE GAVE ME, AND EVERYTHING 

 

RIDGE – DID HE GIVE YOU SOME SHOES ON THAT THURSDAY MORNING? 

 

LUCAS – UH-HUH 

 

RIDGE – OKAY, AND DESCRIBE TO ME HOW HE GAVE YOU THOSE SHOES? 

 

LUCAS – HE… HE PICKED UP AND STARTED TO HAND THEM TO ME. ALL THE SUDDENLY HE DROPPED THEM, AND BROKE OUT IN SWEAT, CRYING EVERYTHING ELSE, HE SAID MAN TAKE THOSE SHOES I DON’T WANT TO SEE THEM NO MORE, I SAID YOUR SURE? AND EVERYTHING, I DON’T REMEMBER SEEING THOSE SHOES AT HIS HOUSE, HE SAID, I SAID ARE THEY YOURS? HE SAID YEA. SO I SAID, HE SAID TAKE THEM I DON;T WANT TO SEE THEM NO MORE, I SAID ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT ME TO TAKE THEM? AND HE SAID YEA, AND EVERYTHING SO THERE WASN’T NOTHING ON THE SHOES AND EVERYTHING SO TURN AROUND HE GOING, I GOT THE SHOES I WENT HOME AND EVERYTHING 

 

RIDGE – AFTER YOU GOT THE SHOES DID HE SAY, WHAT DID HE SAY EXACTLY TO YOU ABOUT THOSE SHOES? 

 

LUCAS – THAT HE DIDN’T WANT TO SEE THEM ANYMORE AND 

 

RIDGE – OKAY 

 

LUCAS – AND EVERYTHING HE DIDN’T WANT TO HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM SHOES 

Immediately following his taped interview, Lucas was administered a polygraph. It was during this polygraph interview, that Lucas suddenly began to recant the statement he just gave moments before. He was now claiming that none of the events he described had happened.

(Polygraph report on Buddy Lucas, showing he failed when he denied his prior statements were true.)

After being confronted with the fact that the polygraph detected deception in his answers now denying that he knew anything about the crime, Lucas admitted he was trying to take back his statement, because he was scared of what might happen to himself or his family if he agreed to testify against Jessie Misskelley.

After the polygraph Lucas spoke with Deputy Prosecutor, John Fogleman and told him he had tried to recant, because he was scared that Jessie’s friends, Dennis Carter and Dino Perfetti might try to harm him or his family if he testified. He then provided the police with another pair of shoes and agreed to give them the shoes he was wearing, so they could investigate him as a possible suspect since he had now stated he had knowledge of the crime which he tried to hide from investigators.

Shortly after this, a defense investigator, working for Damien Echols, by the name of Ron Lax had approached Buddy Lucas and his family. Lucas had made contradictory statements, first saying that Jessie had given him the shoes before the murders, then admitted to lying to police and even to having knowledge of the murders. It was after this meeting with Lax, that Lucas suddenly stopped cooperating with police and began looking for alibi witnesses to try and alibi himself for the night of the murders.

It was Deputy Prosecutor, John Folgleman’s opinion, that Ron Lax had scared Lucas into refusing to testify, which Lucas seemed to agree with during a taped phone call between Fogleman and Lucas and his mother May Hudson. During the call, Buddy insists his uncle is lying, and says he became scared when Detective Bill Durham, who had been giving him the polygraph had confronted him when he failed the polygraph and was shown to be lying:

Fogleman: Nobody’s saying that you were involved in the murders, Buddy 

 

Buddy: I didn’t want to be brought up in it and I don’t — Mr. John, I won’t go to court on Damien and Jason 

 

Fogleman: And you’re not going to be asked to go to court, Buddy. But did Ron Lax tell you that you were going to be brought up in the middle of it? 

 

Buddy: No. Uh uh. I just thought that I didn’t want to be brought up in it, and he said that — 

 

Fogleman: Buddy, you’ve been listening on the other end, right? And you know what I told your mom about — 

 

Mary: No, he just got on 

 

Fogleman: You just got on? 

 

Buddy: uh huh 

 

Fogleman: Well tell your momma what you told Eddie Wilson about the bloody tennis shoes 

 

Buddy: I didn’t say nothing to Eddie Wilson 

 

Fogleman: Now Buddy. Why would Eddie tell the police that you did? 

 

Buddy: I didn’t say nothing to Eddie. I didn’t even say anything to Eddie. 

 

Fogleman: Well I’m not talking about lately. I’m talking about some time ago. 

 

Mary: Did you tell Eddie and Amy and everything that Jessie gave you a pair of bloody tennis shoes? 

 

Buddy: nuh uh. I told him that uh when I went hunting with Uncle Ronny that pair of shoes I gave little Eddie 

 

Mary: uh huh 

 

Buddy: and he asked me where that stain come from and I told him when me and Ronny went hunting. And he asked Uncle Ronny and Uncle Ronny told him yeah 

 

Fogleman: Well, Buddy, why do you think if that’s all you told him then why would Eddie go to the police with that? 

 

Buddy: Because he thought I had something to do with it. that’s when they kicked me out. 

 

Fogleman: They kicked you out of the house because they thought you had something to do with it? 

 

Buddy: Yes sir, cause they kept on jumping down my throat and I told them look just get off my back cause I don’t know nothing about it. And I left. They kept jumping down my throat. I told them look I don’t know nothing about it. 

 

Fogleman: Buddy, and listen, it’s all over with and nobody thinks you had anything to do with murdering those boys. Nobody does. But — 

 

Buddy: My family didn’t believe that 

 

Fogleman: (laughs) 

 

Mary: Nobody didn’t think you did 

 

Fogleman: But nobody thinks that you had anything to do with it Buddy. And all I’m trying — all that’s over with. You’re not gonna be called to testify. You know Jessie’s trial is over with — 

 

Buddy: You all won’t bother me no more, will you? 

 

Fogleman: No, we’re not going to bother you Buddy. We just want to know the truth about it because you know these people are telling us things and this investigator this Lax guy is going around getting all kinds of witnesses to change their stories. And I never had — I’ve been doing this for over ten years and I’ve never had one witness change their story. Once they tell the police, I’ve never had them do it and we’ve had at least three in this case do it. And I’m just trying to find out what in the world is going on. 

 

Buddy: I know they hollered at me Mr. John and that ain’t no lie 

 

Fogleman: well 

 

Buddy: That Durham guy 

 

Fogleman: Yeah well if he did he shouldn’t have done that but why — 

 

Buddy: Mr. John I was scared, crying, didn’t know what to do. I figured they was gonna throw me in jail. And I ain’t never been locked up in my life.

 

Fogleman: Well and you’re not gonna be locked up. You know I’m just wanting to know you know like Eddie and Amy Wilson they called the police and said that he had heard – he said that he had heard that you’d been talking around your job saying that you had something to do with it. And he said — wait, let me finish — he said that he went down and confronted you about it and that you said naw I didn’t have anything to do with it and I hadn’t been saying that but he did Jessie did give me these bloody tennis shoes. 

 

Buddy: nuh uh 

 

Mary: The shoes that Jessie gave Buddy Mr. John the police dept got them when they first comed and questioned Buddy 

Buddy: The blue and white adidas ones – the only pair of shoes Jessie gave me Mr. John 

 

Fogleman: Well and another thing that confused me about that Buddy is that you know you’d said that you’d gotten those shoes from Jessie like way back in Feb? 

 

Buddy: yuh huh 

 

Fogleman: Well you know when Jessie told the police about what happened he says that the shoes that he was wearing that day were white and blue adidas and that he gave them to you. And then when the police come and talk to you the first time you give them a pair of white and blue adidas 

 

Mary: yeah 

 

Buddy: uh huh 

 

Fogleman: Now why in the world would Jessie say you know pull out of the sky a pair of white and blue adidas that he had had given to you three months before? 

 

Buddy: Try to cover up for the real shoes 

 

Fogleman: Well and well, is Jessie that smart? To try to cover up for the real shoes? 

 

Buddy: I just guessed that I mean — we was all four-wheel riding 

 

Fogleman: even if — 

 

Buddy: uh huh and he gave me shoes back in February to wear home cause I got mine wet and muddy 

 

Fogleman: Ok. Well Buddy, even if he did give you some bloody shoes that wouldn’t mean that you were in trouble or that somehow that would mean that you were guilty of anything 

 

Buddy: I just don’t want to be brought up in it 

 

Fogleman: Well, you’re not going to be but I just want to find out the truth. I mean I can give you my word you’re not going to be called as a witness. And you know me and your momma knows me, and I’ve never steered you all wrong. 

 

Buddy: But Mr. John I wanted to tell you about with him hollering at me 

 

Fogleman: uh huh 

 

Buddy: But I was just scared and stuff. my mom told me she said you can tell Mr. John and Mr. John would take of it 

 

Fogleman: Kind of hurt my feelings when you wouldn’t talk to me and then I get a call from a lawyer and 

 

Buddy: But I was scared though. He was hollering at me. I didn’t know what to do, I thought he was going to throw me in jail 

 

Mary: What I decided that was me about the lawyer Mr. John 

 

Fogleman: uh huh 

 

Mary: And everything. Because I was I mean if Buddy had to go to court 

 

Fogleman: uh huh 

 

Mary: And I walked into that courtroom and Buddy told me that man screamed and hollered at him I would grab that man 

 

Fogleman: well 

 

Mary: I believe in the law 

 

Fogleman: uh huh 

 

Mary: and I believe in everything right and I think that you do too 

 

Fogleman: uh huh 

 

Mary: I mean we’re taxpayers we pay 

 

Fogleman: Sure, that’s right 

 

Mary: And he’s supposed to do right. if you don’t, get out of the system 

 

Fogleman: mm hmmm. Yep. Well I can’t argue with what you’re saying. It’s just I just wanted you Mary to understand that the police just didn’t dream this up but that they had some basis for talking to Buddy about where these shoes came from some more 

 

Mary: that’s what I tried to tell Buddy. I said somebody had to be talking. 

 

Buddy: but Mr. John 

 

Fogleman: yes sir 

 

Buddy: You can ask my family. You can’t believe little Eddie in nothing. I swear you cannot believe — 

 

Fogleman: who? 

 

Buddy: You can ask any part of my family. You cannot believe little Eddie and Amy. 

 

Fogleman: uh huh 

 

Buddy: Eddie Wilson 

 

Mary: and Mr. John about little Eddie and Amy 

 

Fogleman: uh huh 

 

Mary: You oughta check their brother’s record. Chris. 

 

Fogleman: uh huh 

 

Mary: and everything. Little Eddie’s not so bad. Little Eddie’s pretty good, but it’s his wife and the crowds he moves around with 

 

Fogleman: uh huh. Well Buddy and again you’re not going to be brought up into anything but what we’re trying to find out. What we really believe — even though this investigator was being nice to you when he talks to you, we think that he’s doing more than just talking. And you know maybe suggesting some things about us that aren’t true. 

 

Buddy: I know he didn’t, Mr. John, I swear he did not bribe me 

 

Fogleman: oh no I’m not suggesting he bribed you. I didn’t say anything about anyone paying — did I say anything about anyone paying any money? 

 

Buddy: nuh uh 

 

Fogleman: no I didn’t and I didn’t mean that. But I mean there are ways that people do things like for instance suggesting that or you know if you [?] that could get you in trouble. And saying something like that. Did he ever say anything like that? 

 

Buddy: uh uh. But bout them shoes, you cannot believe little Eddie and Amy. I mean if you check on those records and people they hang around with I mean 

 

Fogleman: Buddy I — you know I told you before you know that that’s over with 

 

Buddy: uh huh 

 

Fogleman: You know that only mattered in Jessie’s trial 

 

Buddy: uh huh 

 

Fogleman: ok? 

 

Buddy: uh huh 

 

Fogleman: That’s all that mattered, was in Jessie’s trial. Jessie’s trial’s over with 

 

Buddy: yes sir 

 

Fogleman: So you don’t have to worry about that, ok? 

 

Buddy: Alright. You ain’t mad at me, Mr. John? 

 

Fogleman: I’m not mad at you, Buddy 

And just like that, Buddy Lucas accused his own family members of lying against him, suggested that he might for some reason be arrested for his involvement in the crime, and lawyered up rather than testify to what he knew.

Despite his statements to police, that Jessie Misskelley did the murders and was trying to implicate Jason and Damien without going to prison himself, supporters of the West Memphis Three sometimes parade around Buddy Lucas as if he had participated in the murders, instead alleging that Lucas committed the murders with LG Hollingsworth, a friend of Damien Echols and related to Echols’ girlfriend Domini Teer, and that the two committed the murders with Stevie Branch’s step-dad Terry Hobbs and his friend David Jacoby.

From a news story from March 13, 2013 in which the accusation first emerged:

An attorney for one of the victim’s mother dropped the bombshell in court today that she believes her ex-husband Terry Hobbs took part in the killings.

The hearing was to allow the victim’s parents to see all the evidence in the case.

During the hearing the attorney filed a motion and brief with the court.

In the court document the attorney said new witnesses shed new light on what may have happened to the three West Memphis boys on May 5th 1993.

“The truth is right here,” Mark Byers said.

Byers’ son was one of three boys murdered.

He believes the truth of what happened to his son Christopher, Steve Branch and Michael Moore is in an affidavit from a man named Bennie Guy.

Guy claims there were four people involved in the murders and two of them confessed to him.

He said Buddy Lucas confided in him nearly a year after the murders.

“I asked what did you do? He then said, me L G Hollingsworth and two men, we was there with them boys. We did it.”

He said he didn’t tell anyone because he “didn’t want the boy to get into trouble for something i could not believe he had done.”

Link to story

So, which is it with Buddy Lucas? Was he a witness against the WM3 or a suspect in the crime, or both? Supporters of the WM3 will always dismiss Lucas as a witness when it comes to Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin, and Jessie Misskelley, but consistently prop him up as a suspect in the murders whenever it fits their agenda of saying that someone else did it.

Was Eddie Wilson lying?

Why did Buddy fail the polygraph?

Why did Buddy make the statement to police about Jessie’s confession?

Why did he mention to police that Jessie hit some of the victims to stop them from running away?Jessie had told the police that he had to chase down Michael Moore to prevent him from running away, the statement is shocking then that Lucas would make a similar statement.

And what of those shoes? Isn’t it odd that Buddy immediately turns over a pair of blue and white Adidas shoes after Jessie tells the police on the night of the murders he was wearing a pair of blue and white Adidas?