Crime

West Memphis Three Convicted of Brutally Slaying Cub Scouts Go Free

West Memphis Three Convicted of Slaying Cub Scouts Go FreeJONESBORO, Ark. (The Blaze/AP) — Three men convicted in the nightmarish slayings of three Cub Scouts went free Friday, nearly two decades after they were sent to prison in a case so gruesome it raised suspicions the children had been sacrificed in a Satanic ritual.

Doubts about the evidence against the trio had persisted for years and threatened to force prosecutors to put on a second trial in 2012.

Instead, the so-called West Memphis Three were permitted to plead guilty to murder in exchange for time served, ending a long-running legal battle that had raised questions about DNA and key witnesses – and attracted support from celebrities such as Eddie Vedder.

The men entered the pleas under a legal provision that allowed them to maintain their innocence while acknowledging that prosecutors had enough evidence to convict them.

“Although I am innocent, this plea is in my best interest,” Jessie Misskelley said.

Damien Echols had been on Arkansas’ death row and in 1994 came within three weeks of execution. He remained defiant, accusing prosecutors of using innuendo and faulty evidence to convict them.

In the event of a new trial, “they knew there would be more people watching, more attention on the case, so they wouldn’t be able to pull the same tricks,” Echols said.

Prosecutor Scott Ellington said it would be “practically impossible” to put on a proper trial after 18 years. The mother of a witness who testified about Echols‘ confession has publicly questioned her daughter’s truthfulness. And a crime lab employee who collected fiber evidence at two of the defendants’ homes has died.

“I believe this case is closed, and there are no other individuals involved,” Ellington said.

Since the original convictions, two of the victims’ families have joined forces with the defense, declaring that the men are innocent, he added.

The victims’ families were notified about the pact ahead of time but were not asked to approve it.

Echols said he and the others would keep working to fully clear their names. The men, who were teenagers when they were convicted, have spent half their lives in prison.

Asked by reporters about his plans, Jason Baldwin replied, “Live my life the best I can and enjoy every moment of it.”


Baldwin told reporters he had been reluctant to plead guilty to crimes he didn’t commit, but he agreed to ensure Echols was spared from death row.

Echols thanked Baldwin and called his release “overwhelming.”

“It’s not perfect by any means,” he said of the arrangement. “But it at least brings closure to some areas and some aspects.”

The prosecutor said he never considered any plea bargain that would throw out the verdicts of two juries.

“Today’s proceeding allows the defendants the freedom of speech to say they are innocent, but the fact is, they just pled guilty,” Ellington said.

By entering guilty pleas, the three have lost any right to file a lawsuit against the state.

“I can‘t say that wasn’t part of my thinking in resolving this case,” Ellington said.

Shortly after the men entered their new pleas, the father of one of the victims spoke out in court.

“Your honor, if you go through with this, you‘re going to open Pandora’s box,” Steve Branch protested before deputies led him away. “You’re wrong, your honor. You can stop this right now before you do it.”

All three men were placed on 10 years’ unsupervised probation. If they get in trouble again, they could be sent back to prison for 21 years, Ellington said.

Circuit Judge David Laser acknowledged the case was complex and that families on both sides had suffered. He said Friday’s deal would serve justice “the best we can.”

“I don’t think it will make the pain go away,” Laser said.

One person yelled “Baby killers” as the three left the courtroom.

The killings were particularly ghastly. The boys – Steve Branch, Christopher Byers and Michael Moore – were found naked and hogtied, and rumors of Satanism roiled the community in the weeks following their deaths.

Branch and Moore drowned in about 2 feet of water; Byers bled to death, and his genitals were mutilated and partially removed.

Police had few leads until receiving a tip that Echols had been seen covered in mud on the night of the boys’ disappearance. The big break came when Misskelley unexpectedly confessed and implicated Baldwin and Echols.

“Then they tied them up, tied their hands up,” Misskelley told police in a statement, parts of which were tape-recorded.

After describing sodomy and other violence, he went on: “And I saw it and turned around and looked, and then I took off running. I went home. Then they called me and asked me, `How come I didn’t stay? I told them, I just couldn’t.’”

Misskelley, then 17, later recanted, and defense lawyers said he got several parts of the story incorrect. An autopsy found there was no definite evidence of sexual assault. Miskelley had said the older boys abducted the Scouts in the morning, when they had actually been in school all day.

Misskelley was tried separately, convicted and sentenced to life in prison plus 40 years. He refused to testify against the others, and his confession was not used as evidence.

Defense lawyers for Echols and Baldwin alleged juror misconduct, saying jurors heard about Misskelley’s confession anyway. Attorneys also said there wasn’t enough physical evidence linking the three to the crime scene.

The Arkansas Supreme Court upheld Echols’ conviction and death sentence in 1996, saying there was still enough other evidence to sustain it.

A 1996 HBO documentary titled “Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills” drew the attention of celebrities including Vedder and Natalie Maines, lead singer of the Dixie Chicks. Joined by other celebrities, they helped fund a legal team that sought a new trial.

“Why are they innocent?” Vedder said in an interview with The Associated Press last year. “Because there‘s nothing that says they’re guilty.”

On Friday, Echols’ wife, Lorri, sat in the front row of a crowded courtroom, next to the Pearl Jam frontman. Vedder put his arm around her during the proceedings.

Last fall, the Arkansas Supreme Court ordered a new hearing for the three and asked a judge to consider allegations of juror misconduct and whether new DNA science could aid the men or uphold the convictions.

In upholding Echols’ conviction in 1996, the state Supreme Court noted some examples of the strongest evidence: two people testified that Echols bragged about the killings; an eyewitness put Echols at the scene; fibers similar to the boys‘ clothing were found in Echols’ home; a knife was found in a pond behind Baldwin’s home; Echols had an interest in the occult and told police that he understood the boys had been mutilated before officers had released such details.

Comments (43)

  • LKYPRL
    Posted on August 22, 2011 at 12:36am

    I have been following this case for many, many years. All of you who think these guys are guilty and have now beat the system need to read the book “Devil’s Knot”. These 3 young men were completely railroaded and had the unfortunate bad luck to be at that age were they had more “attitude” than brains. Their public defense attorneys were shoddy at best and the prosecutor was much more interested in getting rid of this horrific case than actually finding the person who really did it. There are 2 sides to every story.

    Report Post » LKYPRL  
  • Grannie4news
    Posted on August 21, 2011 at 4:25am

    I have read the book about this case and am happy to hear that they have been freed. I think it was a shame to make them make an admission of guilt to be freed though. Probable a CYA action in case of being sued for keeping innocent people in prisone for these many years. I think that one of the boy’s stepfather did it. It was certainly a horrific crime, but I have always believed these men who were only teenagers at the time were innocent.

    Report Post » Grannie4news  
  • peaches1
    Posted on August 20, 2011 at 5:44pm

    If these young men are innocent; drop the charges and let them go free as truly free men.

    Report Post »  
    • DarkFire
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 6:32pm

      they can’t just let them go free. they made them plede guility so the state would not be sued in exchange. there is alot more to this case that they are not realeasing to the public.

      Report Post »  
    • Uranium Wedge
      Posted on August 21, 2011 at 2:33am

      They look like pedophile MO-FO’s to me

      Report Post » Uranium Wedge  
  • scoobydoo1234
    Posted on August 20, 2011 at 11:56am

    well with a tainted jury pool, witnesses now dead, and 18 years gone by its no wonder Ellington didn’t want to retry the case.

    Report Post »  
    • chazman
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 1:03pm

      … what a gawd awful mess this turned out to be …

      Report Post »  
    • LibertyGoddess
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 2:16pm

      There is enough evidence to prove them guilty, but our legal system is what is getting in the way. Let them walk, but they will face another judgment day.

      Report Post » LibertyGoddess  
    • HisNameWasRobertPaulson
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 2:27pm

      Actually Liberty, there isn’t enough evidence to prove them guilty in the way you are insinuating. You should understand our legal system. It doesn’t allow for proof of innocence or guilty, it allows for proof of innocence or guilt of having committed the crime. You assume that if one if found guilty, or even pleads guilty, that they did it. That is an incorrect assumption.

      You should study more.

      Report Post »  
    • avenger
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 4:45pm

      Fair targets if you lost a kid..

      Report Post »  
    • Eblaze44
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 5:16pm

      This is what we call Justice in the United States.

      Report Post » Eblaze44  
  • JackDamaris
    Posted on August 20, 2011 at 11:55am

    @ TYR: Your statement that “the system requires irrefutable “proof”.”. This is NOT true. All the system requires is “no reasonable doubt”, it is far from what you have said. According to the story, the confession with the man’s knowledge of details not known except by the police, should be enough to convict them of the crime. Many people are letting TV shows like CSI confuse them on how the system is supposed to work. You do not need irrefutable DNA evidence for every conviction.

    Report Post » JackDamaris  
    • Tyr
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 12:13pm

      Webster says,
      ir·ref·u·ta·ble/Adjective: Impossible to deny or disprove. If you can deny or disprove it in any way it then encompasses the area of “reasonable doubt”. In this case we are talking about fabricated evidence, a coerced confession and predjudicial treatment of the suspects based on their physical appearance, social status and age. Face it, the prosecution screwed up. The stae of Arkansas doesn’t want to pay these guys millions of dollars for illegally locking them up for 18 years. No judge or prosecutor in the country is going to go for a deal like this unless they are hiding something or don’t want to face charges that my land them in prison.

      Report Post » Tyr  
    • HisNameWasRobertPaulson
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 2:33pm

      @Jackdamaris – your assertion that the confession had details that only the police would know is so way off the base that I am amazed that you know anything of this case.

      The “confession” was coerced out of a minor, who had no legal representation, and was allowed no phone call, a minor who had an IQ under 80, a minor who underwent unrelenting hours of constant pressure to confess, a minor who for all those hours was not allowed access by his parent, a minor who had NO PORTION of his ordeal with the police recorded except for the “confession”, which had about 15 percent of truth and 85 percent of misinformation, was a false confession. Wow, this paragraph was really bad. Sorry about the grammar mistakes.

      The confession had massive amounts of falsehoods in it, most of them based on information the police had incorrect. Did you catch that part? The police forced an incorrect confession out of this kid. They fed him with information that later turned out to be incorrect. Did you catch that? That means he confessed to things that never actually happened.

      Are you sure you know what you are talking about?

      Report Post »  
  • No Owebama
    Posted on August 20, 2011 at 11:33am

    Always hated that big fat dixie chick, totally anti-american, cant understand why she has made a country music comeback. But, Eddie Veder, thought that guy had more sense, but he is from liberal Seattle.

    Report Post » No Owebama  
  • tranymike
    Posted on August 20, 2011 at 10:42am

    there no way in hell i would plead guity if i new i didn’t do it they would have sent me to that court in the sky

    Report Post » tranymike  
  • ktbolger
    Posted on August 20, 2011 at 10:36am

    TYR…..BINGO! Brilliant observation and right on the mark!

    Report Post » ktbolger  
  • TheCenturion
    Posted on August 20, 2011 at 10:21am

    Vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord. WHOEVER, it was WILL be held accountable.

    Report Post »  
  • twofoot_trucker
    Posted on August 20, 2011 at 9:27am

    The clincher for me was hearing the prosocuting attorney yesterday on local radio outright admitting that if this went to trial again, these three would be aquitted. There is so much wrong with this situation. You have three men that, if given another trial would be aquitted, yet you make them plead guilty to get OUT of jail. This is what to many lawyers bring us. Instead of saying, “Wow, the original prosocutiong team dropped the ball and allowed a murderer to go free twenty years ago and destroyed three additional lives,” we’re left with political maneuvering from the state to save face and save a buck.

    These men have just been released from prison after 20 years. They have no skills, they have no training, and they are STILL faced with being recognized as felons. Where can they go and what kind of job can they get after this?

    If this is going to be the new tactic for states of releasing the wrongly imprisioned without admitting responsibility then it’s a pretty disgusting tactic. The ‘law’ may have been served yesterday, but justice wasn’t.

    Report Post »  
    • Tyr
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 9:48am

      Well said twofoot_, The comments below mine only show that the people that wrote them either did not examine what happened here or they honestly believe that our corrupt justice system cannot ever make “mistakes”. This was, however, not a mistake. These three men were convicted (as teenagers) because they were long haired, Goth, unemployed poor white trash….oh, and rather stupid too. Damien Echols said in an interview from prison that his smart alec attitude in the court room during his trial was because he thought the whole thing was a sham then. He was openly laughing at the prosecution because he knew he had not commited the murders and he “knew” there was no way they could prove he did. How wrong he was. His flipant attitude was misinterpeted as being an evil disrespectful killer with no conscience.

      Report Post » Tyr  
  • Tyr
    Posted on August 20, 2011 at 9:06am

    Do you people understand what happened here? DNA evidence surfaced, due to improved methods, that calls into question whether or not these three had anything to do with this crime. The prosecution knew that it could not possibly win a repeat trial and that if these three defendants won at re-trial, the state of Arkansas would have paid these men millions of dollars for false imprisonment. The Arkansas state attorneys cut a deal with the defense attorneys to allow these three to get out of prison if they pled guilty to the murders that were now again in question. This act alone shows how big a sham the U.S. justice system is. The whole thing is rotten to the core and anyone that can’t see through it is ignorant of the case and the law. These guys were shafted worse than Hurricane Carter was, the prosecutors knew it and were probably under the gun by the Governor to make this go away without costing the state millions of dollars in restitution.

    Report Post » Tyr  
    • SCHEXbp
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 10:51am

      Except Hurricane Carter was GUILTY.
      Just because Bob Dylan wrote a song about it & the killer had notoriety, doesn‘t mean he wasn’t guilty.

      Report Post »  
    • Tyr
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 11:26am

      Yes, Carter may have been guilty as hell, but the trial was a sham, the evidence was proven to be fabricated and coerced. O.J. was likely guilty, as was Casey Anthony. But the point is, the system requires irrefutable “proof”. When a justice system is as corrupt as the one in the U.S. is today the rule of law cannot stand. It reminds me of the kangaroo courts of the 40′s, 50‘s and 60’s. when if you happened to get arrested for something, you were guilty…period. I think alot of people that rant about justice being served are those that stay just barely inside the law and have never faced a crooked judge, prosecutor or had an attorney that they were paying, throw them to the dogs. When you go to court and the Judge, the prosecutor AND your attorney call each other by their first names, it is not going to turn out well for you at all.

      Report Post » Tyr  
    • rose-ellen
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 2:50pm

      The prosecution could not win in a new trial because the media and publicity around the case favored the defendants. Simply saying the dna was mishandled does not make it true-and it is an easy thing to say when the person who handled the dna is deceased.Typical strategy to get someone on death row-or anyone’s conviction overturned.. Any one can say anything especially.And saying no dna was found at the scene is not the same as saying no dna connecting the victims and defendants was not found elsewwhere [clothes, body, home,objects etc].

      Report Post »  
    • Bible Quotin' Science Fearin' Conservative American
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 7:02pm

      The man who collected the DNA is not the one that it mentions being dead. That was the guy who collected the fibers from the homes. Fibers that, it turns out, are not unique and are sold in multiple places in west memphis and are likely present in many homes there. And the knife that it mentions being found behind Baldwin’s house was just a knife, not linked to the crimes in any way. The victims were not stabbed.

      Report Post » Bible Quotin' Science Fearin' Conservative American  
    • Rice Water
      Posted on August 22, 2011 at 8:29am

      Yeah, OJ probably did it, but I can‘t really blame the jury’s decision, given the testimony of N-word enthusiast/Fox News correspondent Mark Fuhrman.

      Report Post » Rice Water  
  • jacobstroubles
    Posted on August 20, 2011 at 8:39am

    something about this feels horribly wrong, it’s as if they just released 3 murdering pieces of garbage back into the community, where they’ll likley kill again.

    Report Post »  
  • Charles
    Posted on August 20, 2011 at 8:17am

    The dirty little secret is that people can and do get away with murder. Regularly. IF these guys did it 20 years is a slap on the wrist. And it seems quite likely they did not do it. People must protect themselves and their children. The police are not responsible for protecting us. The “serve and protect” nonsense on police cars is just that. Nonsense. The police cant be everywhere all the time. They show up after the crime and bring suspects in for trial.

    Report Post »  
  • ashestoashes
    Posted on August 20, 2011 at 8:11am

    If memory serves me correctly, there was a transient in the area at the time of the murders. He had gone into a service station bathroom and washed off an enormous amount of blood. That lead was never followed. And we all know how police interrogations work…they are trained to totally break people down until they will say anything that their interrogators want to hear.. Remember..these were just teenage boys. Their whole lives from then until this point were spent in prison with hardened criminals…So you could say, that there were six lives lost..So very sad… and you can see what the reasoning was of the prosecution in keeping them behind bars…..they made them take the deal to avoid any lawsuits…Sounds fair to me…not

    Report Post »  
    • rose-ellen
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 9:18am

      They say the guy who confessed has a low iq-that therefore he was manipulated to confess. Having a low iq tells me that he is LESS likely to concoct a story and stategise about how to answer in order to be released by the police interrogators. Yet the anti-death penalty people involved in freeing these murderers point to his having a low iq as an explanation for his “false” confession. They‘re turning common sense and logic and basic psycology around on its’ head-as they always do when defending these cold blooked murderers!.

      Report Post »  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 10:32am

      Rose Ellen, they once took a mentally retarded youth who just happened to be riding on his bicycle by the scene of a crime where a very sophisticated firestarter device was used. They took this kid down to the precinct and kept him there for hours torturing him with questions and badgering him and telling him that the only way to go home would be to tell them what they wanted to hear. He didn’t come up with the scenario, he was given the scenario. You need to pray for wisdom, because only God can help you.

      Report Post »  
    • rose-ellen
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 2:42pm

      If the facts are that this low iq guy was told the only way they would stop questioning him and let him go was if he said XYZ-and they laid out the scenario-then of course you are right. But neither this guy or any of the defense team have made that claim. And neither has the media -though they allude to it -what they actually say is simply that he has a low iq and therefore can be manipulated and was bamboozled during questioning.Unless and unti someone actually says that the interrogators actually told him what story in concrete terms they needed to hear to cease questioning him or release him-this is just conjecture and inuendo.And why can’t you “trick” someone into answering a question?As long as no harsh treatment is used -i don‘t get why it’s wrong?What’s important is that the answer given-comes solely and uncoerced by the defendant-not that he was fooled into saying something. Of course you can‘t tell him that certain ramifications will follow if they legally won’ and you can’t threaten him . I think we the public- due to collusion by the media and defense -have been bamboozled in this whole case and in the way this latest miscarriage of justice is being presented.

      Report Post »  
  • TulsaYeeHaw
    Posted on August 20, 2011 at 7:42am

    I think they were innocent.

    Report Post »  
    • one years food ration like glenn says
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 7:54am

      All three men were placed on 10 years’ unsupervised probation. If they get in trouble again, they could be sent back to prison for 21 years, Ellington said.<<<<< Unless of course it's, you know, another murder.. Then they could potentially get another slap on the wrist.. ppffft !!!

      Report Post » one years food ration like glenn says  
    • one years food ration like glenn says
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 8:01am

      “Why are they innocent?” Vedder said in an interview with The Associated Press last year. “Because there‘s nothing that says they’re guilty.”
      Excellent philosophy, Genius …

      Report Post » one years food ration like glenn says  
    • Rice Water
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 8:34am

      You’re considered innocent until proven guilty under the American justice system. Vedder’s comment is actually quite insightful in this case.

      Report Post » Rice Water  
  • CHICAGOTHUGBUCKET
    Posted on August 20, 2011 at 7:15am

    Creepy kids! Now creepy adults free?

    Report Post » CHICAGOTHUGBUCKET  
  • starznbarz
    Posted on August 20, 2011 at 6:14am

    If any of my kin were murdered I believe I would ask the judge to drop charges and release the persons responsible to the free open air as soon as possible. Justice takes many forms. http://www.starznbarz.com

    Report Post » starznbarz  
    • rose-ellen
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 8:56am

      We’re becoming a nation where might makes right, survival of the fittest, only the strong survive,-is the ethos.It’s open season on the most defenseless -children. Soon only crimes against the state ["terrorism"] will be grounds for retribution. That they snuck this “provision” in the legal system where the convicted murderer can admit there is evidence to convict yet insist on being innocent -with out this being open for public scrutiny is a hijacking of the judicial system. This means that convicted murderers never have to go before a parole board and express remorse, ,guilt or humility and their pride remains intact.Instead the prosecution is impuned.That the media is unanimously lauding one of these murderers for being charismatic, intelligent, articulate etc. as if that is relevant to his guilt or innocence just shows shear gullibility.I look at their faces i know they’re guilty as sin!This is more machinations on the part of anti-death penalty advocates attempting to convince us that an innocent man was almost executed. A true miscarriage of justice as the case is now closed. How nice -everyone walks away happy and free after this horrific crime against children! “All’s well that ends well” these anti-death penalty and these child murderers must be beaming .The state was up against powerful media and anti-death penalty elitres and caved rather then standing for those children! Appalling.Soon this will be the norm to save face and not humiliate the murdere

      Report Post »  

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love