GUILTY!!!

The WM3 were set free instead of serving their sentences ,that is not opinion that's fact.

This is incorrect, or at least (being charitable) incomplete. The WM3 agreed to a deal with prosecutors that they would be granted a new trial, in exchange for then pleading "no contest," and admitting that the State had sufficient evidence to convict them (although under this plea they would be allowed to maintain their innocence). They gave up all rights to sue for false imprisonment. In exchange they were sentenced to time served. They remain felons, considered guilty of the crimes that they were accused of, but are free because they have served their sentences.


Aparently as was pointed out in the origional case Jessie was mentally chanlenged and was coursed to that confession... you could say that is opinion but they were released so aparently that judge felt the same way.

Jessie Miskelley's confessions were introduced into evidence in the original trials, over the objections of the defense attorneys. The Arkansas Supreme Court determined on appeal that Misskelley's confessions were voluntary and that he did, in fact, understand the Miranda warning and its consequences. (The full opinion can be found here: courts.arkansas.gov/opinions/1996/cr94-848.html.)

As noted earlier, the judge did not free the WM3, but rather the WM3 made a deal with prosecutors (just like Jesse Friedman did) that resulted a finding of guilt and a limited sentence (again, the same as the Friedman case), which led to them being freed because of the time they had already served in prison.

Given your willingness to question a confession when it is coerced, not as a matter of individual opinion, but because a judge thinks so, you should be open to questioning the confession of Jesse Friedman (his guilty plea) as well. After all, a panel of Federal appellate judges had this to say about Jesse Friedman's case (caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circuit/1535102.html):

[T]he police, prosecutors, and the judge did everything they could to coerce a guilty plea and avoid a trial. Thus, with the number of counts in the indictments and Judge Boklan's threat to impose the highest conceivable sentence for each charge, petitioner faced a virtually certain life sentence if he was convicted at trial. And the likelihood that any jury pool would be tainted seemed to ensure that petitioner would be convicted if he went to trial, regardless of his guilt or innocence. Nor could he have reasonably expected to receive a fair trial from Judge Boklan, the former head of the Nassau County District Attorney's Sex Crime Unit, who admitted that she never had any doubt of the defendant's guilt even before she heard any of the evidence or the means by which it was obtained. Even if innocent, petitioner may well have pled guilty.