MovieChat Forums > West of Memphis (2012) Discussion > A new book that's not drinking the Kool-...

A new book that's not drinking the Kool-Aid.

posted 10 years ago by recklesscow
6 replies | jump to latest

I think as time passes, the omissions and deception in these documentaries will wear away at anyone who isn't unwilling to search out more of the story or get swept in by the propaganda.

There was already one book out that took the stance the Three were guilty, and now there is another that, while not committing to a final answer, at least sheds doubt on their innocence--and finally brings to light things supporters never seem to answer, or glaze over. Granted, a lot of this information has always been available, but it's nice to finally see some of it start turning up in print so that progress towards a balanced perspective can finally begin to be made instead of the propaganda the current books and documentaries take part in.

Here are some excerpts from the book, obviously sourced from different pages and not in any order:

"One retired officer commented: 'It was the statements Damien told us that we were able to prove during our investigation to be lies that kept our focus on him. He had no alibi whatsoever for the night the boys came up missing. He lied about the phone call with Holly George, a credible eyewitness placed Damien in the neighborhood on the afternoon of the killings and on top of all that he failed the lie detector test. But the media did not want to report any of this information because it would turn the case into a legitimate murder case and that does not sell papers.'"

"According to Damien's OWN application for Social Security disability benefits, he was suffering from homicidal, sociopathic and suicidal ideations, manic depression and schizophrenia."

"Eighteen months prior to the murders he felt the natural evolution of his violence was going to be against humans. Damien was told at the hospital that he could be the next Ted Bundy. He replied 'I always knew.'"

"Jason's uncle Hubert Bartoush said in a statement that Jason was at his home alone on the May the 5th. And the time frame that Jason was at his uncle's house does not tie into the time frame that Damien stated. Jason was at the home of Hubert Bartoush from about 4:30PM to about 6:30PM. Damien later states that he was at the home of Susan Sanders from about 3 to 5PM. He also stated that after leaving the home of Susan Sanders, he went home."

"On 5-5-93, Jason Baldwin, my grand nephew, came to my house about 4:30PM and mowed my yard. He was alone when he was at my house. He left my house at about 6:30PM and said he was going to Wal-Mart to play video games. I remember the times cause Jeopardy was coming on when he got here and Wheel of Fortune was coming on when he left."

"He stated that he was their residence from about 3:00 to 5:00 that day and after he left that residence he went home where he stated he got on the phone with a Holly George who he states lives in Bartlett, Tennessee. He stated that he got off the telephone with Holly after talking for a long time at about 11:30PM that night."

"Holly George was interviewed on September 10 and Damien's statement conflicted with the statement Holly made regarding the time and length of the phone call. Damien stated that he called Holly after he got home (after 5PM) and was on the phone with her a long time and got off the phone about 11:30PM. Here is the partial transcript from the interview with Holly George:

RIDGE: Okay so you tried to call Jason that day but he couldn't answer and that was shortly after you talked to Damien about 5:30 and you were only on the phone with Damien about five minutes that day, is that correct?

HOLLY: Yes.

RIDGE: When's the last time after the phone call that you talked to Damien again?

HOLLY: Late that Friday night."

How do supporters account for this stuff? And more importantly, why do these documentaries insist on flat out omitting anything that can be construed as guilt on behalf of the Three? It makes me sick. This type of "journalism" is unethical.

[–] ldphillips0104 10 years ago

I just started down this rabbit hole, and it's absolutely haunting me. I feel like I would have been able to move on with my life by now if these guys didn't have so much support. I can't wrap my mind around it. In the short week I've been obsessed, I've been hoping someone would come out on the other side of this case and defend the victims, but it seems like the bandwagon is in motion and can't be stopped. I am glad this is a thing, but it might be wishful thinking that a new publication will sway any supporters' minds. From what I gather, the hard-core supporters seem to have all of the information that paints an awfully clear picture of their guilt, but they are absurdly just choosing to ignore it.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ldphillips0104 10 years ago

And that's exactly why it bothers me so much. They are using the idea of false accusations to propagate the EXACT. SAME. THING. How the irony is lost on so many is beyond me.

I am sure Damian thinks he's so clever. And you know, he's probably right. He killed three children, and it's literally paying off.

[–] recklesscow 10 years ago

Very true.

The book also touches on the issue with the media choosing to present the crime to the public as occult murders when that aspect was not so focused on by law enforcement. The quote from the former WMPD officer about the media not wanting to report regular facts of the investigation is backed up by former reporters who have recently been interviewed about the coverage of the case at the time of the arrests and trials. Even these reporters said they were explicitly forbidden by their publishers to write anything that presented the case as a normal murder investigation simply because the occult angle was sensational and sold more papers. But the people involved in the investigation insist that, while obvious mistakes were committed, their sights continued to be on the Three for multiple reasons. This was not a case of "Those boys wear black and listen to heavy metal. They obviously did this", it was more a case of "This one keeps lying to us and several people contradict his story and multiple people saw him in the area of the crimes on the day they occurred."

The Devil's Knot book and the numerous documentaries have all done a fantastic job selling the witch hunt angle, when in reality the whole thing is a deflection that distracts you from the fact these boys had a lot of circumstantial evidence pointing directly to them. Some say the evidence itself was not enough and I won't comment on that, but they were not arrested without cause and picked on for being different in a small town. Unfortunately this false story of injustice against eccentric teenagers is the only one people tend to focus on.

It would be interesting to see a supporter seriously address these discrepancies and lies, particularly the Holly George thing, since clearly one of them is lying. Is Herbert Bartoush also lying when he claims Damien was not at his house when Jason was mowing the lawn and that the time Damien said he was there does not match? I would love to see a supporter address these issues and explain why, when being faced with a capital crime, any of them would not find it in their best interest to tell the truth. Why lie? Were they doing something so embarrassing at the time that they felt lying and risking prison was a better alternative to being cooperative and telling the truth? Were they mistaken? But how? I mean there's a big difference between a 5 minute phone call and one that lasts several hours. Why did Damien lie?

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] thirtyfor30 10 years ago

What's the book called?