An Argument for the Conviction and Acquittal of the West Memphis Three - Assignment Example

An Argument for the Conviction of the West Memphis Three The strength of the arguments for the conviction of Jessie Misskelley, Damien Echols and Jason Baldwin somehow depended mostly on Jessie’s statement before he was pronounced guilty. There were other pieces of evidence but they stood out either because there was nothing to counter them or that they were indeed logical. The main reason why the West Memphis Three should be convicted is that Jessie Misskelley pointed out in his detailed statement that the three of them were the ones who brutally tortured and murdered the three young boys. Based on the recorded statement of Jessie Misskelley for the police, he saw Damien Echols hit Christopher Byers, and Jason Baldwin hit Stevie Branch, and that he was the one who captured Michael Moore while the latter was running ((Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills 41:43). The details of the interrogation are a proof that the interrogation and Misskelley’s answers to the questions could not have been merely set up by the police beforehand. Besides, the police would not have been that lazy as to set up three young men just to have the case closed early. The aforementioned statement of Misskelley was hardly nullified by any of the defense lawyers. Another strong evidence against the West Memphis Three, particularly against Jessie Misskelley is that he was able to identify the boys in the pictures shown by the police. Although he made a mistake with the identification of Christopher Byers, mistaking him for Michael Moore, still he was able to identify them by face. The mere fact that he could identify the victims is actually a strong proof that he had contact with them prior to the trial. One more problem to this is that Jessie did not even tell any of his lawyers or his family that he was forced by the police to make such a confession. It was merely the lawyers who said so. Arguments of the defense in favor of Jessie included his mental handicap (34:35). Nevertheless, based on the deputy’s statement, Jessie was not tortured, maligned or harmed in any way prior or during the confession (47:31). The deputy could not have been lying under oath, based on the tone of his voice, and based on the fact that Jessie did not vehemently or even secretly said that he was indeed harmed. Besides, Jessie’s reactions in court, like bowing his head, are that of a guilty man. Moreover, he has not in any way told his lawyers how innocent he was or how untrue his confession was. Another argument directed against Jessie is his sexual nature (36:20). As he was talking to his girlfriend on the phone, he recalls all the times that he has had sex with her. He may be young and still sexually active and he may only have said such things because he was talking to his girlfriend, and perhaps he was only saying so because he has been deprived of sex since he was arrested. Nevertheless, showing such sexual behavior and pretending in court that he has a mental handicap somehow simply fit the picture of a maniacal killer under the guise of an innocent lunatic. The point is that he may have had a mental handicap as what his lawyers pointed out but his highly sexual nature allowed him to be a sexual criminal at the same time. One other small detail against Jessie is the statement of his stepmother which somehow shows that she possibly believes that he has done it (21:30). She does not seem to show remorse or sympathy for him even while Jessie’s father and whole family do. For a close acquaintance or a family member who believes that it is possible for one to commit a crime is actually strong evidence against him. On the other hand, the evidence against Damien Echols, as proposed by the defense, may be rather fragmented but it remains a fact that if one puts the evidence together, it definitely makes a picture of a murderer. Damien, who looks more like a man who is capable of murder without remorse, has a pentagram in his book (1:11:00), is interested in Wicca (1:14:08), associates with Aleister Crowley and his teachings (1:40:47), and inscribes Crowley’s name in strange alphabets (1:42:47). This certainly shows a picture of a man who has either of these two qualities: a tendency to kill or being the murderer himself. Identifying oneself with Aleister Crowley does not just mean mere association but rather condoning the latter’s acts of murder and believing that somehow these acts are right and just. Besides, considering the fact that most people did not understand Damien and his convictions as well as his beliefs in Wicca, perhaps he just did not want to elaborate on his beliefs in front of an ignorant crowd and simply simplified his statements with lies. Actually, it is common for teenagers to just not explain things anymore in front of a parent or anyone who he believes is not on his side and who cannot understand him totally. Adolescence is a stage where someone hides a lot of things and reveals them only to very few people whom they can trust. Moreover, at the last part of the film, Damien wants to “strangle” Jason Baldwin’s lawyer for implying that Jason was suspected of a crime just because of his association with Damien (2:20:41). Although Damien may have – out of anger – simply made a statement like that against Jason’s lawyer, it is clear that he has the tendency not to control his actions when he is angry. This is certainly evidence against him. Lastly, on Jason Baldwin, the fact that he did not testify against the accusations was questionable. Perhaps, his lawyer had done so because he knew Jason was not as skilled as Damien when it came to telling lies. The greatest accusation against him was the statement of Jessie that Jason hit Stevie Branch. Another statement against him, and perhaps the strongest, was that of Jason’s mate at the detention center who said that Jason himself told him that he dismembered the child and did all sorts of bad stuffs to him (1:24:55). Although Jason’s lawyer speculated on a possible set up, this was not proven. An Argument for the Acquittal of the West Memphis Three The arguments for the acquittal of the West Memphis Three were weak because they were merely counterevidence or somehow only qualitative like a mental handicap that was not medically confirmed. The arguments in favor of the West Memphis Three were weak but still they have substance. These arguments actually do not prove much nor do they prove the innocence of the three but they only somehow weaken the arguments against them. One of such arguments is the inconsistent statement of Jessie Misskelley concerning the time that the crime happened (50:02). According to the defense lawyer, there was no sure way of determining when the crime happened because Jessie’s statement was that it happened at noontime but that it actually took place after school. The problem with this statement is that Jessie may indeed actually have a mental handicap at the time of the trial, and this mental handicap may have actually been the reason for his lapse of memory when it came to the time that the crime happened. Another piece of evidence in favor of Jessie is that there was no clear way of knowing what had transpired between him and the police prior and after the taped interrogation (53:35). Even in the 90’s, the police may have already started employing some techniques to make suspected criminals confess to crimes that they have not committed. Jessie himself looks very much vulnerable to this as he seems to be a guy who is rather edgy and uneasy. The argument of Jason’s lawyer about the fact that there was no blood in the scene where the bodies of the three victims were found was actually a strong proof that Jason was not one of the killers. It seems that the boys were killed somewhere else and just carried and placed near the river. This somehow means that perhaps Jason was not a part of the crime for he could not have possibly carried any of the boys to that part of the woods. That is, unless either he dragged the victims or he simply let the two other boys did the carrying. Nevertheless, the argument is weak. Moreover, the argument that someone removing the skin of the penis needs precision and sufficient light is actually also weak, but it is possible that it was a grown up man who did all these, and not the suspects at all or not just them. Perhaps, the strongest evidence in favor of the West Memphis Three was the possible involvement of Mark Byers in the crime. Mark Byers is the stepfather of Christopher Byers, one of the victims. Although Mark is often shown as someone who recites biblical passages, he sent a knife to the HBO management as a gift (1:50:01). There was actually no clear reason for him to do this except either he was trying to get rid of this piece of evidence against him, or that he was simply thinking that burying the knife or throwing it would further implicate him. Giving it as a gift would therefore be the best thing to do. Moreover, the fact that there was blood in it, which matched that of the Byers kid is another strong evidence against him. Actually, another argument against Mark and in favor of the West Memphis Three is that it is possible for Mark to carry the three children to the river from wherever he could have murdered them. He also had a brain tumor that perhaps could have impaired his logical thinking in some way (2:00:18). Most of all, his answers about the questions during the trial were highly inconsistent compared to his answers those during his previous interrogation with the police (1:59:00). Although Mark admitted forgetting many of the details of the previous interrogation, his clear inconsistency in his answers proves that he has a tendency either to tell lies or to simply forget everything that he has done, perhaps even forgetting his murder of the three kids. The arguments against Damien also had a weakness in them. Unless he is indeed a professional liar, Damien’s associations with Wicca, the pentagram and Aleister Crowley may only have been blown up by a community of strict Fundamental Christians who condemned paganism even in its most harmless form like an interest in the occult. It is true that being associated with such anti-Christian elements actually has nothing to do with the possibility that Damien indeed committed the crime. He may simply be a weird but innocent kid after all. Moreover, an argument in favor of Jason Baldwin is that it is possible that the boy who testified against him in court was simply fed with information about the crime beforehand, as what Jason’s lawyer mentioned in a closed door meeting with the defense. The only problem was that the credibility of this boy was not determined or questioned at all by the defense, nor have they produced any counterevidence from their part. There were indeed so many missing pieces of the puzzle and these missing parts clearly help weaken the evidence against the West Memphis Three. Nevertheless, the biggest problem with the defense was that they never established any strong evidence of their own which pointed out to the innocence of their clients. Instead, they merely counteracted the evidence of the prosecution. The Trial of the West Memphis Three as a Cultural Phenomenon The trial of the West Memphis Three was a cultural phenomenon for it was influenced not only by actual evidence of the crime but also by the beliefs and practices of the community where the crime took place. The way I see it, the boys’ trial was fair, because it was the jury who decided to make the verdict, and neither the emotional and highly fanatical community nor the media who did it. There was not much information regarding the credibility of the jury and so we all assume that they were fair and just in their verdicts for the three young suspects. The defense were not able to establish any strong evidence and their arguments were simply weak – a mental handicap, or the difficulty of removing the skin of the penis in the dark with so many mosquitoes around. Moreover, and perhaps this is the greatest mistake of the defense – they were not able to find the right people to establish the lack of credibility of the boy who testified against Jason Baldwin nor were they able to delve more into the inconsistent answers of Mark Byers during the trial. Such mistakes cost them big. The media was not helping either. They actually somehow aggravated the situation by making the trial public especially the statements of the suspects. One female media reporter even somehow showed her prejudice against Damien by saying that the latter was interested in Wicca and Aleister Crowley but implying that Damien was being inconsistent because he admitted that he was not a murderer. The age of the defendants and the victims somehow also play a role in the trial. The defendants were in their late teens and so the trial became ultimately controversial because the verdict will either give them the freedom of life or destroy their lives forever. Moreover, the age of the victims was another sensational element of the crime because this was an age of innocence, and anyone would think that the deaths of the victims deprived them of the fun of a life that they could have enjoyed for many, many years. Their deaths therefore seem extremely unjust. The alleged involvement of the suspects with Satanism and other acts of paganism like a belief in Wicca are actually subtle elements that may have influenced the jury in their conviction of the three. Satanism and paganism are often associated with whatever is spiritually unclean like sex, murder, homosexuality, occult or black fashion and many other evil or negative elements, and these are what the Fundamental Christian church of West Memphis was totally against. Therefore, although one may only show a simple interest in these things, he would naturally be accused of having a pact with the devil, simply because of associations with Satanism. The problem with the accusations against the West Memphis Three was the associations that Fundamental Christians would normally make between mere interest in the occult and certain involvement in the crime. The justice system also had its own share of strengths and weaknesses. Although the justice system showed some bias through the discussion of the occult and Satanism in the course of the trial, they nevertheless had the trial conducted in a fair way and with all the rights of the defendants respected, I believe. Both the defense and the prosecutors were given equal chances to come up with evidence and to present it in court. The problem was with the defense. I believe they talked more than they did what they had to do. The presence of the filmmakers makes me think that the film is really a controversial one. However, I believe that the filming of the case somehow added to the emotional outburst of the people who probably believed that the case is such a big one that it even caught the attention of HBO. People would normally act differently when they are being filmed, either they pretend to be someone else or they exaggerate their emotions and convictions. Moreover, the community of West Memphis may even be thinking that the fact that HBO filmed the case means that this case is basically as significant as a war between good and evil. The condemnation therefore went on and even became much stronger, knowing that people around the world would be watching. Misery loves company and people would naturally have the habit of sharing their miseries with the whole world, perhaps either because they seek approval for their convictions or they simply want to be heard. Either way, they seek vindication, and HBO was instrumental in this. Grieving is another essential element in the film. Grieving took place as the parents of the victims found out about the deaths of their children, and such grief became a quest for revenge and in fact it was grief that fueled their desire to have the West Memphis Three convicted. Grief was then useful in furthering their motives of revenge in the name of justice. Grief also struck the parents of those accused because they thought the accusations were unjust. This grief reached its peak during and after the reading of the verdict. It is the kind of grief that produced tears of helplessness. Whether it was just or unjust to have the West Memphis Three convicted, the grief was real and perhaps this is the same grief that causes someone to lose their faith in the law or in the justice that society is supposed to uphold. Lastly, the trial and the film opened the readers to the idea that regardless of who is involved in the trial or in a criminal case, it is somehow not important for people to know the truth but rather only to have their convictions proven and their desire for revenge and justice met. The trial did not focus much on the details of the murder of the three children. Instead, it focused on the nature of the identity and credibility of the suspects. This somehow shows that what is more important in life is not the actual thing that happened but what kind of person is on trial. This may be unfair but perhaps this is how society operates. Top of Form Bottom of Form Works Cited Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills. 2013. YouTube. 16 Apr 2013. Web. Read More