An Argument for the Conviction of the West Memphis Three Essay

An Argument for the Conviction of the West Memphis Three - Essay Example 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 n ullified 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 ba sed 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