On May 5, 1993 in West Memphis Arkansas, three eight-year-old boys were reported missing. Several search teams and police officers searched the areas around the boys' homes, and anywhere else they might be. Around 1:45 pm the next day, the bodies of Stevie Branch, Christopher Byers, and Michael Moore, were discovered in a drainage canal in Robin Hood Hills, where the boys were last seen. All three of the young boys were naked and hogtied with their own shoelaces. Their clothing was turned inside out and was tied around sticks, which were stuck in a small creek within the Robin Hood Hills canal. Two pairs of the boys' underwear were never recovered. The boys had cuts and scrapes on various parts of their bodies, and Christopher Byers suffered a mutilation and complete removal of his genitals.                                                                                                                            

    The initial reaction of the town was to find out who was responsible, and to do so as quickly as possible. Due to the violent and sexual nature of the crime, police officers James Sudbury and Steve Jones of the West Memphis Police Department (WMPD) felt that the crime had cult overtones and was probably part of a satanic ritual. The predominantly Baptist town of West Memphis was very familiar with such rituals due to several decades of rumors surrounding local cults. The attention of law enforcement then turned to the three most likely culprits. Eighteen-year-old Damien Echols was well known around town for being the “weird Goth kid” who wore dark clothing. Although his criminal history only involved shoplifting and vandalism, his previous obsession with cults and his love of Metallica music made him the perfect person to fit into the satanic cult mold the media had created. Echols' sixteen-year-old best friend Jason Baldwin, who shared his criminal history, was also picked up as a suspect. The third suspect was seventeen-year-old Jessie Misskelley, who had a history of aggressive behavior. Although he was not a close friend of Echols and Baldwin, he was associated with them through school. Both Echols and Misskelley dropped out of high school, but Baldwin received good grades and planned on attending college.                                                                                                                                     

    All three of the suspects had previous run-ins with the law, which made them the perfect targets for questioning. Jessie Misskelley was first interrogated by the WMPD on June 3rd, and was questioned for several hours without any breaks. Because Misskelley was under the age of eighteen, his parents needed to consent on his behalf, as well as receive a written wavier of his Miranda rights. This never happened. The WMPD promised Jessie a reward for any information on the murders, and began to interrogate him for hours. It was later reported that Jessie was so tired of the questioning, he just started admitted to whatever it was they were accusing, in order to make them stop. This led to a confession that was fed almost completely by the information the police provided. Within his confession, Misskelley only stated things that had already been made accessible to the public. Also, the times in which the boys had arrived at the scene of the crime and actually committed the murders changed several times throughout the confession. At one point, Jessie changed the time again because he remembered he had been out of town for a wrestling match during the initial time frame he had given. Whenever Jessie stumbled or mixed up the events of the crime, the police simply finished his sentences for him.                                                                                                                                         

    Misskelley was tried first because his confession was not admissible against Echols or Baldwin. During his trial, his defense attorney was able to receive testimonies from Dr. Richard Ofshe and Warren Homes, who are both experts in the field of false confessions. Both professionals concluded that there were too many flaws and false statements in Misskelley's confession for it to be true. They officially concluded that the WMPD had forcibly received the confession and twisted Misskelley's little knowledge of the crime into a full-blown admission of guilt.                                                                   

    Shortly before Jessie's trial, a young boy named Aaron Hutcheson, claimed to be an eyewitness to the murders. He stated that he had seen all three of the suspect’s rape, mutilate, and then kill the young boys. At the end of his statement to police, Hutcheson was asked to identify the suspects in a photo lineup, which he could not do. It was also later discovered that Misskelley used to baby-sit Hutcheson, which caused him to come up with his story after recognizing him on the local news. His eye-witness account was never used in court, but the damage was already done. The media reported early on that the police had a witness to the crimes, and this severely prejudiced the case. Although there was little to go on aside from the confession, Jessie was found guilty, and was sentenced to life plus forty years in prison.                                                                                                                                                        

    At the later time of Echols and Baldwin's trial, forensic evidence could not determine many blank pieces of the puzzle. Although there was little to no hard evidence tying them to the murders, society desperately wanted to believe they were guilty. The evidence they did have, was stretched just far enough to become believable. For example, the small boys were found with cuts and scrapes all over their bodies. A team of divers was sent to investigate a pond outside of Echols' house for any clues or weapons that might have been used in the crime. The divers found a hunting knife that had previously belonged to Echols, and claimed during the trials that it must have been the weapon used to cut the victims. However, post-trial forensic technology proved that the cuts were actually caused by post-mortem animal predation, a scientific term for the way animals claw at, and sometimes feed on dead bodies.                                                                                                                                         

    Early in the case, hysteria built up around the town that the murder was part of a cult crime. Dr. Dale Griffis, a self-proclaimed Cult-Cop, was called to the stand during Echols and Baldwin's trial to give his “professional” opinion on the matter. He stated that the crime scene definitely had traces of a satanic ritual, and was most likely performed by someone who had knowledge of such rituals. Because Echols had once read a book on cults, the prosecution was convinced that he had the means to commit such an act. Echols, Baldwin and Misskelley served as the perfect scapegoats in the cult-fearing town of West Memphis. Everyone believed that if they were locked away, the town could finally gain a sense of peace and order. This phenomenon is often referred to as ideal culture, where unrealistic values and standards of behavior are held.                                                                                                        

    Unknown during the time of the trial, Lloyd Warford, a prominent Arkansas attorney and state official, told his close friend Kent Arnold about Misskelley's confession. Arnold was on the jury, and was already convinced that the suspects were guilty. While discussing the details of Echols and Baldwin's case with fellow jurors, Arnold illegally provided them with information about Misskelley's confession. His biased opinion swayed the other jurors to develop a prejudiced opinion toward the suspects. The jurors opinions, mixed with Griffis' statements, ultimately provided just enough push to find the suspects guilty. Jason Baldwin was sentenced to life in prison, and Echols was sentenced to death by lethal injection.                                                                                                                       

    Examining this case through a symbolic interactionist lens, it can be seen that the socially-constructed views attached to Damien's gothic lifestyle led police to believe that he was most likely involved in some kind of cult. This fit perfectly into the town's idea that a satanic ritual was the cause of this heinous crime; therefore, the suspect had to be someone who is capable of murdering the children in such a way. Echols' fit the profile, and unfortunately his friends were guilty by association. The negative views on these boys ultimately let to their conviction, and from a micro analysis, it's easy to see that the only thing these boys were guilty of, was not fitting in, in the wrong town, at the wrong time.                                                                                                                                                              

    An opposing view might study this case on a macro level using the Conflict Theory. Conflict Theorists believe that deviance is shaped by social class, where upper classes of people tend to get away with their deviance, while the lower classes do not. This can make for a very corrupt and unfair judicial system. This particular case is the perfect example of Conflict Theorists' claims. All three of the suspects came from poor households, and because of this they were not able to afford the type of defense attorneys they needed for their innocence to be proven. Conflict Theorists also believe that lower classes of people will engage in more deviant behaviors than those in a higher class. This is very true for the suspects in this case. If they had not been previously involved in such deviant behaviors, they might not had been questioned by police in the first place; gothic attire or not.                                                                                                                                                                  

    The most notable aspect of this case will always be the negative socially-constructed view toward these suspects, and the unfair trial that followed. The media portrayed them as devil-worshiping murderers from the beginning, therefore society believed it to be true. Not one news station ever claimed, nor suggested, that the suspects might be innocent. This biased reporting, along with the false confession pried out of Misskelley by the WMPD, sealed the guilt of these three teenagers. After seven failed requests for a new trial, Echols, Baldwin, and Misskelley were finally granted a hearing in which new DNA evidence was brought forward. It was enough to convince the judge to grant them a new trial. Unfortunately though, this trial wouldn't have been held for years, if at all. Because of this, the suspects agreed to submit to a rarely used Alford plea. This meant that the suspects still plead guilty to murder, but all while maintaining their innocence. In non-legal terms, an Alford plea is a way to let out prisoners who are deemed innocent, without having to pay them compensation for their time wrongfully spent in prison. All three suspects were released from prison on August 19, 2011; eighteen years after their conviction. As of now, no new evidence has been submitted to find the real culprit(s) of this crime.                                                                                                                                                  

    Although the suspects were finally able to gain their freedom, they are still seen as guilty in the eyes of the law, meaning their justice is far from served. Like the West Memphis Three, thousands of people worldwide are wrongly convicted of crimes each year. These wrongful convictions are often caused by either a lack of a good defense, a biased media perception, or by a corrupt judicial system. Sometimes, like this particular case, it's a combination of all three. Unfair trials can go both ways, though. While some people are found guilty of crimes they didn't commit, others are found innocent of things they did commit.  An example of this is a white collar crime, which are nonviolent crimes usually motivated by monetary gain. Culprits of these crimes are rarely punished to the full extent of the law, due to the prestige attached to their social statues. Luckily, some programs such as the Fair Trial Initiative, are trying to bring the issues of unfair trials to light. Unfortunately, it's more difficult than simply educating a few people on the Internet. Major changes need to be made to the judicial system. Here in America, the right to a fair trial is stated right in the Sixth Amendment. If we are stripped of this basic human right, what will we be stripped of next?

 

References

Brantley, Max. “Juror Misconduct Argued in West Memphis Three Case”. Arkansas Times. 2011              < http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archives/2011/05/02/juror-misconduct-argued-in-west-memphis-three-case>                 
 

Exonerate the WM3 Official Blog. 2012.                                                                      
<http://www.wm3.org>
 

Fair Trial Initiative. 2012.                                                                                           
<http://www.fairtrial.org/>
 

Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills. 1996 Home Box Office (HBO).
 

Paradise Lost 2: Revelations. 2000 Home Box Office (HBO).
 

Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory. 2011 Home Box Office (HBO).
 

Steel, Fiona. “The West Memphis Three”. Crime Library. 2012 Turner Entertainment Networks, Inc.       <http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/famous/memphis/evidence_11.html>