Just saw this and don't understand how

Considering how the prosecution got the additional confessions from Miskelley, that should have been worth exactly fvck-all at any retrial.

I don't have a problem thinking Echols may have participated in the murders. Miskelley, no freaking idea since the cops practically led him around by the nose to get a spectacularly inconsistent confession, not to mention taping only the part of the interrogation that helped their case.

What I have not seen is any reasonable idea of why Baldwin would have done this. Other than half-assed speculation that he just did whatever Echols said.

And, honestly, people are giving Echols entirely too much credit making him out to be some junior Jim Jones.

Let’s say hypothetically that they did commit these crimes.

The problem is is that there was not enough concrete evidence to return the verdict of guilt (including one with an attached death sentence) so it shows that the jury was not cooperating with fair and legal jury instructions. They were radically biased and it was obvious - caught up in the image of Satanists, etc. That’s the truest miscarriage of justice. I appreciate the jury system and I think it’s the best of any court. But it often does not work right.

There’s no possible way that any rational jury working under the legal system instructions would have been able to avoid reasonable doubt since the entire case presented was FULL OF DOUBT. So you do have to question the legitimacy of their trial and if they truly had a fair one. I personally think they did not.

Let’s say hypothetically that they did commit these crimes.

The problem is is that there was not enough concrete evidence to return the verdict of guilt (including one with an attached death sentence) so it shows that the jury was not cooperating with fair and legal jury instructions. They were radically biased and it was obvious - caught up in the image of Satanists, etc. That’s the truest miscarriage of justice. I appreciate the jury system and I think it’s the best of any court. But it often does not work right.

There’s no possible way that any rational jury working under the legal system instructions would have been able to avoid reasonable doubt since the entire case presented was FULL OF DOUBT. So you do have to question the legitimacy of their trial and if they truly had a fair one. I personally think they did not. When you also consider the evidence that the jury DID have and that MOST of it was tainted, coerced or flat made up... it's a horrible, horrible miscarriage of justice.

Let’s say hypothetically that they did commit these crimes.

The problem is is that there was not enough concrete evidence to return the verdict of guilt (including one with an attached death sentence) so it shows that the jury was not cooperating with fair and legal jury instructions. They were radically biased and it was obvious - caught up in the image of Satanists, etc. That’s the truest miscarriage of justice. I appreciate the jury system and I think it’s the best of any court. But it often does not work right.

There’s no possible way that any rational jury working under the legal system instructions would have been able to avoid reasonable doubt since the entire case presented was FULL OF DOUBT. So you do have to question the legitimacy of their trial and if they truly had a fair one. I personally think they did not. When you also consider the evidence that the jury DID have and that MOST of it was tainted, coerced or flat made up... it's a horrible, horrible miscarriage of justice.

With that being said, it's easy to see how the jury returned that verdict. They were forced to listen to descriptions of the autopsies (by a hack, no less) and were constantly bombarded with GRUESOME AND TERRIFYING images of the boys mangled bodies and these were LITTLE BOYS. It's deeply upsetting. And all you have is a prosecution team running Satanism, Satanism, Occult in their faces. I'm sure it looked pretty clear to them.

BUT THAT'S THE PROBLEM. THEY WERE BASING IT ON BOOKS, MOVIES, APPEARANCE and not the actual facts.

Let’s say hypothetically that they did commit these crimes.

The problem is is that there was not enough concrete evidence to return the verdict of guilt (including one with an attached death sentence) so it shows that the jury was not cooperating with fair and legal jury instructions. They were radically biased and it was obvious - caught up in the image of Satanists, etc. That’s the truest miscarriage of justice. I appreciate the jury system and I think it’s the best of any court. But it often does not work right.

There’s no possible way that any rational jury working under the legal system instructions would have been able to avoid reasonable doubt since the entire case presented was FULL OF DOUBT. So you do have to question the legitimacy of their trial and if they truly had a fair one. I personally think they did not. When you also consider the evidence that the jury DID have and that MOST of it was tainted, coerced or flat made up... it's a horrible, horrible miscarriage of justice.

With that being said, it's easy to see how the jury returned that verdict. They were forced to listen to descriptions of the autopsies (by a hack, no less) and were constantly bombarded with GRUESOME AND TERRIFYING images of the boys mangled bodies and these were LITTLE BOYS. It's deeply upsetting. And all you have is a prosecution team running Satanism, Satanism, Occult in their faces. I'm sure it looked pretty clear to them.

BUT THAT'S THE PROBLEM. THEY WERE BASING IT ON BOOKS, MOVIES, APPEARANCE (in addition to FALSE TESTIMONIES of people saying that Jason confessed to drinking penis blood and that a chick was taken to a Satanic orgy, both claim now were COMPLETELY FABRICATED!) and not the actual facts.

Let’s say hypothetically that they did commit these crimes.

The problem is is that there was not enough concrete evidence to return the verdict of guilt (including one with an attached death sentence) so it shows that the jury was not cooperating with fair and legal jury instructions. They were radically biased and it was obvious - caught up in the image of Satanists, etc. That’s the truest miscarriage of justice. I appreciate the jury system and I think it’s the best of any court. But it often does not work right.

There’s no possible way that any rational jury working under the legal system instructions would have been able to avoid reasonable doubt since the entire case presented was FULL OF DOUBT. So you do have to question the legitimacy of their trial and if they truly had a fair one. I personally think they did not. When you also consider the evidence that the jury DID have and that MOST of it was tainted, coerced or flat made up... it's a horrible, horrible miscarriage of justice. Think about some of the jury members in the Casey Anthony trial. They admit that they could consider that she did murder her baby but they did not have enough real evidence to convict her. There was too much doubt. That verdict of NOT GUILTY sucked, sucked super hard. But it was a jury actually doing their LEGAL DUTY. And they returned the right verdict.

With that being said, it's easy to see how the jury returned that verdict. They were forced to listen to descriptions of the autopsies (by a hack, no less) and were constantly bombarded with GRUESOME AND TERRIFYING images of the boys mangled bodies and these were LITTLE BOYS. It's deeply upsetting. And all you have is a prosecution team running Satanism, Satanism, Occult in their faces. I'm sure it looked pretty clear to them.

BUT THAT'S THE PROBLEM. THEY WERE BASING IT ON BOOKS, MOVIES, APPEARANCE (in addition to FALSE TESTIMONIES of people saying that Jason confessed to drinking penis blood and that a chick was taken to a Satanic orgy, both claim now were COMPLETELY FABRICATED!) and not the actual facts.

Let’s say hypothetically that they did commit these crimes.

The problem is is that there was not enough concrete evidence to return the verdict of guilt (including one with an attached death sentence) so it shows that the jury was not cooperating with fair and legal jury instructions. They were radically biased and it was obvious - caught up in the image of Satanists, etc. That’s the truest miscarriage of justice. I appreciate the jury system and I think it’s the best of any court. But it often does not work right.

There’s no possible way that any rational jury working under the legal system instructions would have been able to avoid reasonable doubt since the entire case presented was FULL OF DOUBT. So you do have to question the legitimacy of their trial and if they truly had a fair one. I personally think they did not. When you also consider the evidence that the jury DID have and that MOST of it was tainted, coerced or flat made up... it's a horrible, horrible miscarriage of justice. Think about some of the jury members in the Casey Anthony trial. They admit that they could consider that she did murder her baby but they did not have enough real evidence to convict her. There was too much doubt. That verdict of NOT GUILTY sucked, sucked super hard. But it was a jury actually doing their LEGAL DUTY. And they returned the right verdict. The Echols/Baldwin jury did not play fair. They did not turn off their emotions and their verdicts show that.You can argue (all day) that they had enough to go on, but what???

With that being said, it's easy to see how the jury returned that verdict. They were forced to listen to descriptions of the autopsies (by a hack, no less) and were constantly bombarded with GRUESOME AND TERRIFYING images of the boys mangled bodies and these were LITTLE BOYS. It's deeply upsetting. And all you have is a prosecution team running Satanism, Satanism, Occult in their faces. I'm sure it looked pretty clear to them.

BUT THAT'S THE PROBLEM. THEY WERE BASING IT ON BOOKS, MOVIES, APPEARANCE (in addition to FALSE TESTIMONIES of people saying that Jason confessed to drinking penis blood and that a chick was taken to a Satanic orgy, both claim now were COMPLETELY FABRICATED!) and not the actual facts.

This has to be the most bizarre murder case of all time. First everyone believes the WM3 are guilty beyond all doubt, and they are put in prison. Then people begin to question their guilt, and suddenly the world is fighting for them to be freed. They are then freed, and people go back to thinking they are guilty after all.

We don't need these happy endings.