When were the boys' clothes removed?

[Holly]

In fairness to Mr. Hale, who is a licensed Funeral Director and Embalmer and well respected in his community, the call to the coroner was not made until 3:20.  In fairness to the WM3, Mr. Hale's skills as a coroner were not up to the task of a trained forensic examiner required in this instance.  I do not think Mr. Hale would argue the point.

I just want to add something from my practical experience about this. Never once. Never, never, have I seen a local law enforcement team wait two hours to call in a coroner (who will call in a forensic specialist) when a body is discovered - especially when a homicide is suspected. I am on call 24-7. THE FIRST thing you do when a body is discovered is make the phone call. Now, I realize that the WMPD officers were probably in shock about what they were dealing with, but all the more reason to make the phone call. It's the FIRST thing that should have entered their minds... These guys were worthless.

[Paid]

These guys were worthless.

  
   Hale might have been well-respected as a coroner, a mortician and a funeral director just as Fogleman was well-respected as a prosecutor.

   Well-respected doesn't equal honest and capable.

  
 I agree, Holly.   They were both worthless in the capacity that they were trusted in this case.
   The least Hale should have done was call in someone with more experience.  If I can't pull a tooth...I call in a surgeon.  I don't just do a half-assed job and fill out a sheet of paper.

  Edit to add:

    I don't want to leave anybody out.  The entire WMPD, Davis, Burnett, Peretti and the ASS Court are all worthless.  The original defense attorneys were almost worth what they were paid.

   Having said that...I'm sure I still left somebody out.

[The Wolf]

   Having said that...I'm sure I still left somebody out.

I'm not trying to add to your list, but did you intend to omit the U.S. Supreme Court, the AG, the Governor and the jurors.  You know my feelings about how helpful it is to call the people who control the decision in a case worthless dumbasses, but that obviously did not figure into the list since you included the ASSC.

[Paid]

did you intend to omit the U.S. Supreme Court, the AG, the Governor and the jurors.

    The AG, the Governor (all three....I think there's been three), and the jurors (especially Arnold) should have made the list...thanks (along with Driver, Jones, and Sturner [he signed the autopsy report]).

   But, I wouldn't include the U.S. Supreme Court yet.   The State Supreme Court still has a chance to show some worth, but I trust Damien's judgment that so far they've been worthless, if not corrupt (not all, but the majority).


   I would also like to separate "worthless and dumbasses".  Stidham, for example was worthless, but I don't consider him a dumbass.  He's also a very respectable and honest man.

   I would consider myself worthless as a brain surgeon or a trial lawyer.....not a dumbass.....just worthless.  

[The Wolf]

So you are giving the U.S. Supreme Court a pass for now even though they refused to review the convictions after the initial appeals.  Interesting.  I think allowing a 17-year old with an IQ of 72 to voluntarily waive his right to counsel should have caught the Court's attention.  I also think the Court should have looked at the Echols/Baldwin case where the trial judge stated on the record that everyone in the courtroom, including the jury, knew a statement was made that constitutionally the jury could not consider.  But then I am a fan of William O. Douglas while the law-and-order crowd thought he was a "pink-o," i.e. a communist, leftist-liberal with no regard for the status quo.  The current court just has too many members who think actual innocence doesn't matter and due process is reserved for those who can afford it.

[whitegoddess]

I've personally enjoyed the term "numbnuts" 

[Paid]

So you are giving the U.S. Supreme Court a pass for now.....

   I'm trying to be politically correct and not ruin Damien's chances in Federal court.  You never know who reads here.   

[dee771]

 the main moral reasons why corpse interference should be illegal, are: (1) general taboos to do with death; and (2) the feelings of surviving relatives.

But, after just having killed someone, should what you do with the corpse compound the seriousness of the homicide itself? Is the murder itself a worse murder? (And assume, for simplicity, that the accused knows the victim is dead.)

Legally speaking, the answer has tended to be "yes", and three main justifications have been offered: that the acts immediately following death are part of the same incident (said to be a matter of common and moral sense); that they indicate depravity of mind (and therefore bear on, for instance, the safety of the public -- an American argument); and that they indicate absence of remorse.

[whitegoddess]

Here's a question.....

I wasn't aware or had forgotten, that the shirt attributed to belong to Stevie (E-2, States Exhibit 44) was inside out. I know i had focused on pants being inside out and pockets being outturned and no tears being on their clothing but....

I noticed in my perusing various documents, that L.S. states when she got them to test for trace, it was inside out and she didn't document even where she had found the red rayon fibre (inside or the outside for example) 

[copper50]

Just another error White Goddess.......bet these people never dreamed that this case would be all over the yet to catch on internet!
I wonder how many previous cases have that same shoddy work?

[copper50]

Just thought of this as I hit the post button....if this case does get proven that it erred and it was because of the errors created by everyone that had their fingers in it, wouldn't that mean a whole lot of older convictions appealing due to case errors by those involved?

[The Wolf]

Just thought of this as I hit the post button....if this case does get proven that it erred and it was because of the errors created by everyone that had their fingers in it, wouldn't that mean a whole lot of older convictions appealing due to case errors by those involved?

Courts are reluctant to open a Pandora's Box that would flood the courts with other prisoners' petitions for relief.  Fortunately, Echols' DNA appeal is a simple statutory construction case that  poses little threat to opening the door to others, and can be fix by the Legislature if the Court goes too far.  On the other hand, the federal habeas proceeding could open the door to claims in a number of broad, ill-defined areas.  For example, how long does a prisoner have to challenge the validity of a jurors' verdict?  Is there a long term systemic problem at the state lab or medical examiner's office bringing into question a large number of cases?  Those type issues are not favored by most jurists because of the implications to the "already over-burdened system."

[whitegoddess]

Just another error White Goddess.......bet these people never dreamed that this case would be all over the yet to catch on internet!
I wonder how many previous cases have that same shoddy work?

Hmmm...and i also noticed when perusing, that apparently during a bench conference, it was stated that L.S explained that the reason there was no documentation regarding the alleged "blue candle wax" on E-2 States Exhibit 44, was due to her suposidly only writing things in a Report if she'd found a match. That explanation to me doesn't even make sense...

Bench Conference Damien and Jasons trial:  http://callahan.8k.com/wm3/ebtrial/fbibench.html   

<snip>
DAVIDSON: Your Honor, I thought this was an open file policy. We thought we had everything, there's some new stuff that we just got yesterday. You'll notice this is a fax from the FBI and it starts on, this is page nine. And we'd like the first nine pages, too. We may want to call this guy as a witness. And, and, we just don't know. We would like to see the first nine pages of the fax, know what those are, and uh, we may ask for a continuance at that point.

THE COURT: Do you have the other nine pages?

FOGLEMAN: Your Honor, I don't know.

(MUMBLING IN BACKGROUND)

DAVIDSON: Your Honor, we'd also request a copy of the report of Lisa Sakevicius -- if there is one -- regarding any candle wax.

FOGLEMAN: I don't know if there is one. She said that what she puts in her report is when there are matches. She claimed that didn't match anything.

THE COURT: Is it in the report that you have?

PRICE: No sir.

DAVIDSON: No, we've never heard that until it came out today.

THE COURT: No, I remember something about her testimony from uh, in Corning, where she started to say something about she found something else and it was interrupted and prevented from saying what it was, or didn't say, but I think she attempted to before.

PRICE: I think that was about the poster that was found in Mr. Baldwin's --

THE COURT: Is that what it was?

PRICE: Yes sir. I went through her transcript.





"I don't know if there is one. She said that what she puts in her report is when there are matches. She claimed that didn't match anything." So say this shit during a bench conference without jurors to hear, and then, claim differently during trial! Freakin amazing. 

[Paid]

  Blue wax.........NOT a match

  Red fiber.........NOT a match

  Green fibers.....NOT a match

  Lake Knife.......NOT a match

  WM3 DNA........NOT a match

  Blood on the necklace...NOT even as good as the blue wax

  Jessie's confession....NOT a match

  Shoe prints at the scene...NOT a match to WM3, Could match Hobbs

  Hobbs' DNA.....a Match

  Jacoby's DNA..a Match

  Hobbs' sworn statements....NOT a match to the facts

[Paid]

THE COURT: No, I remember something about her testimony from uh, in Corning, where she started to say something about she found something else and it was interrupted and prevented from saying what it was, or didn't say, but I think she attempted to before.

PRICE: I think that was about the poster that was found in Mr. Baldwin's --

THE COURT: Is that what it was?

PRICE: Yes sir. I went through her transcript.



   Burnett actually tried to condone the prosecution's use of false evidence.  Since Sakevicius attempted to mention the blue wax in Jessie's trial.....it's okay to mention it in the E/B trial even though it doesn't connect the defendants to the crime.

    Burnett's strategy:  Allow the prosecution to mention inadmissible evidence (blue wax and Jessie's confession)....then don't tell the jury.

[Tags:]

WM3 Blackboard > WM3 > The West Memphis Three > Topic: When were the boys' clothes removed?