We get letters: the facts…ie…DNA!

Damien Echols (The facts are what I tell you they are. The blue glasses compel you.)

Damien Echols (The facts are what I tell you they are. The blue glasses compel you.)

I received the following e-mail in regards to my many posts on the West Memphis 3…

i do hope your point is just that…to ‘poke society in the eye w/ a stick’ and that you don’t believe that rhetoric!? that would make some kind of sense. i have followed the WM3 from day 1! it has nothing to do with ‘the movies’ as opposed to the facts…ie…DNA! i do hope that i am correct, in that, you are just playing ‘devil’s advocate’. i am giving you the benefit of the doubt!

Nope, you are not correct. I believe every word that I say about them. All three of them were rightfully convicted and only because prosecutors flinched in the face of Hollywood are they now free.

And again DNA is not the smoking gun that the West Memphis 3 movement would have you think it is. Try looking up the phrase secondary transfer sometime.

One of my blogging gurus once told me ‘be controversial but be true to yourself’. I state the things that too many on the internet are too afraid to say and one of those things is I believe that the West Memphis 3 are guilty 100%.

Appreciate my work? Please take a second to support me on Patreon!

12 Comments

  1. David Perry Davis

    I’m simply astounded that there are still people out there who believe the WM3 are guilty.

    They cite Jessie’s statements.  Take the time and READ THEM.  They are ridiculous at best – http://www.dpdlaw.com/jmstatements.htm .  Only someone with an IQ lower than Jessie’s could possibly cite these as a basis to believe in guilt.  They’re internally inconsistent and don’t align with ANY of the physical evidence – not one piece.

    They cite Damien’s psych issues, as if this substituted for evidence.  There was not a single hair, fingerprint, footprint, drop of blood, or strand of DNA that linked back to the WM3.  In spite of Damien having shoulder length black hair and always wearing Army boots, which leave a somewhat distinctive print.

    Asserting that the WM3 are guilty does nothing more than make you look foolish.

    Even the victims’ families (with the exception of the Moores, who refused to meet with the investigators in 2007) have seen the truth.  The WM3 aren’t guilty.  Hobbs most probably is.

    Reply
    1. Trench Reynolds

      And before Hobbs it was Byers. Who will it be when the next film comes out?

      Reply
    2. LLcoolSA

      I’m simply astounded that thousands of people have been fooled into believing the WM3 are innocent….the masses I guess.

      Reply
  2. Your_Pal_Nancy

    Dear God, he’s astounded. Simply astounded.

    Reply
    1. Trench Reynolds

      And yet they still don’t realize the irony of engaging in the same type of zealotry they accuse the ‘nons’ of doing. 

      Reply
      1. Your_Pal_Nancy

        The term “nons” that they use is so creepy and very cult-y. This is the fault of the asshole celebrities that became so involved. If it weren’t for them, the three murdering dirt bag kids from arkansas would be as forgotten as apparently their victims are today.

        Reply
  3. Jadecrowe

    those glasses still make him look like a tool.  someone needs to smack them off his face.

    Reply
    1. vick

      Imagine if he were wearing those glasses AND a Metallica T-shirt? I’d definitely have to believe he was guilty then.

      Reply
      1. Trench Reynolds

        The glasses don’t make him look guilty. His convictions that were upheld multiple times say that he is guilty. His glasses just make him look like a douche.

        Reply
  4. Johns Gurl10

    Let me be the first supporter to admit that she spent months upon months reading the case documents on the Callahan site. I will also admit that I live about an hour from West Memphis and gave this no more attention than, ‘they got the guys’. I was a teen then and internet was whatever speed before the 56k modem -that didn’t exist in my parent’s home (which is probably why my folk’s Windows 3.1 for workgroups worked perfectly to the day they finally got rid of it around 5 years ago, but I digress). However, about 3 years ago, I did watch Paradise Lost. *gasp!* It left me curious about the case, so I hopped online and got sucked into an obsession for discerning the truth. It is, solely by my time spent, that my opinion of their innocence, exists. I’m not out there flaming anybody and everybody. If you take the time to research and formulate your own opinions, then I respect that. Much more so than anyone who’s out there spouting off at the mouth with ‘facts’ that are what someone told them. Even for anyone that I’ve discussed this case with, I encourage them to read the documents for myself. Therefore, while we don’t agree on their conviction, I will respect your opinion. I will say that I really didn’t care for the condescending ‘nail polish’ retort, but I totally agree on the grammar. 🙂

    Reply
    1. Johns Gurl10

      *read the documents for themselves. Here I was agreeing about grammar and while I chose, ‘post as guest’, it used my grammatically incorrect email. My apologies for the contradiction.

      Reply
    2. Christine Chrissy Fougere

      I’ve read everything at Callahan’s and still believe they are guilty as charged. So sad.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: