Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15
  1. #11
    Modstapo Lite Nate505's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Lakewood, CO
    Posts
    7,477
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    14872
    Rep Adjustment Power
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by Hack View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Actually false. There is a lot of evidence against them. Including confessions.

    Dont believe the Hollywood B.S. check it out for yourself.
    There is not. If there was any physical evidence they never would have got out. They did DNA tests on the crime scene and nothing was linked to the three.

    As for the testimony, the one kid who to be very generous was not bright, claimed they raped the boys yet no evidence of sexual assault was found. The other lady has since recanted her testimony. They were both extremely unreliable. So with no physical evidence and no reliable witnesses they have nothing.

    But by all means, spell out the evidence against them. And be a dear and at least summarize the evidence from the site that's essentially a propaganda site against them.
    In Lindsay We Trust

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Advertising world
    Posts
    Many
     

  3. #12
    Senior Member candrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    5,695
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    10678
    Rep Adjustment Power
    63
    Jessie Misskelly was grilled by the police for 12 hours without his family or a lawyer. Only about 45 minutes of it was recorded or transcribed. The confession portion has many starts and stops where they coached him or corrected him as to what to say. It was also revealed that during the questioning the police hinted that Misskelly would be eligble for some of the reward money if he knew who the killer was. All this coupled with the fact that you're talking about a teenage boy with an IQ of 72 (under 70 is considered retarted).

    As for the rest of the stuff, half of it just proves that Damian Echols was a creepy and troubled kid; which he was and which is why he was arrested in the first place. The rest of it was just mundane nonsense. None of it was really that compelling or even comes close to proving his guilt.
    Last edited by candrew; 12-02-2012 at 11:20 PM.

  4. #13
    Senior Member Computer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    17,043
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    50515
    Rep Adjustment Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Nate505 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There is not. If there was any physical evidence they never would have got out. They did DNA tests on the crime scene and nothing was linked to the three.

    As for the testimony, the one kid who to be very generous was not bright, claimed they raped the boys yet no evidence of sexual assault was found. The other lady has since recanted her testimony. They were both extremely unreliable. So with no physical evidence and no reliable witnesses they have nothing.

    But by all means, spell out the evidence against them. And be a dear and at least summarize the evidence from the site that's essentially a propaganda site against them.

    Ok. Ill get to it. It will take a little bit of time though.

    Those websites aren't propaganda websites either. It lays out every single piece of evidence step by step. Not just made up evidence either. The same evidence that a jury convicted them on. And the same evidence that those documentary makers conveniently left out. It's actual documents from the court. No there isnt mountains of physical evidence but plenty of other types of evidence that I believe proves their guilt.

    This isnt the case of a witch hunt. Its a case of justice was served but it got flipped on its head because some stupid ass people mistakenly took up for these guys and turned it into a money making real life drama to be sold. They used all their money, power and influence to to get what they want and convince millions that these kids were innocent when they are not.

    Like I said, I was on the other side at first. They got me too. But after hearing everything from the other side and not just what the one side wanted me to hear, I saw it in a whole different light.

    I would invite you to take a look at it for yourself. I can almost guarantee you will change your mind.
    OS - Post and Roast 2.0

  5. #14
    Senior Member Computer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    17,043
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    50515
    Rep Adjustment Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Nate505 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There is not. If there was any physical evidence they never would have got out. They did DNA tests on the crime scene and nothing was linked to the three.

    As for the testimony, the one kid who to be very generous was not bright, claimed they raped the boys yet no evidence of sexual assault was found. The other lady has since recanted her testimony. They were both extremely unreliable. So with no physical evidence and no reliable witnesses they have nothing.

    But by all means, spell out the evidence against them. And be a dear and at least summarize the evidence from the site that's essentially a propaganda site against them.
    I would also invite you to watch those videos. There two young girls who testify that Echols bragged about the murders, and Echols himself doesnt deny ever saying it. He said he might have been joking around. Who the hell jokes around about that? So right there is basically a confession from the ring leader himself.

    I dont know how anyone dismisses the Jessie Misskellie confession either. Listen to the kid talk. Does that really sound like a retard they make him out to be? Its nonsense. He gave the confession because he was trying to save his own ass because he knew he did something wrong and Echols dragged him into it. Its obvious as hell. Jessie eventually recanted his 5 confessions because he knew he was now in deep **** and wasnt going to be getting off easy like he thought he would if he told the truth.
    OS - Post and Roast 2.0

  6. #15
    Modstapo Lite Nate505's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Lakewood, CO
    Posts
    7,477
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Total Rep Points
    14872
    Rep Adjustment Power
    78
    I looked over this site.

    https://wm3truth.com/jessie-misskell...ths-and-facts/

    I'm not very impressed. For example, the author of the site admits there is a discrepancy between Misskelley's testimony about Echols raping the boys, yet there was no evidence of rape that occurred. Yet he writes it off as a "minor mystery." To me that's a massive discrepancy. If your star witness admits something so brutal occurred and it didn't occur (at least all the evidence shows it didn't occur) then that's a huge red flag to me.

    The best physical evidence they can come up with on the site is

    a) a possible ***** stain on one of the victim's pants. Yet there is no evidence of sexual assault on the bodies, and the stain didn't provide enough material to get a match or to even determine it was a stain (from the pro-guilty website)
    b) Three different types of knots used, therefore that points to three killers. While to me that explanation is spotty on its face, it's still no evidence that the three who tied the knots were the three convicted.
    c) Fibers on the victim's clothes matched fibers found at a couple of the accused residences. Though even the author admits the fibers are common materials that are found in many people's places of residence.
    d) Blood stains on the necklace of Echols matched both Echols and the type matched both a victim and one of the other defendants. Apparently the defense states they have proof that the co-defendent also wore the necklace at times. Regardless, this could be the best evidence they have, even though by itself it sucks since blood types are not all that defining. I can't find anything on what type of blood it was, but if it were say type B+ around 9% of the US has that type of blood.

    Even in that site the author states this:

    So it’s not true that there was “no physical evidence tying the defendants to the crime”. The physical evidence just wasn’t overwhelming. Just as importantly, there was no physical evidence tying any other suspects to the crime.

    IMO to say it's underwhelming is the understatement of the year. Certainly not remotely close to convicting someone of capital murder.
    In Lindsay We Trust

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About Us
We are a community of Utah JazzFanz that are passionate about our team. We celebrate the highs that come with last second heroics and (some of us) cry in defeat. Welcome to our community. Be respectful of others and join in to the conversation...
Join us