WM3 hearings update from Jonesboro, Arkansas

August 13, 2009

Hearings are underway before Judge David Burnett in Craighead County court seeking a new trial for Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley based upon ineffective counsel, known as Rule 37 in Arkansas. Burnett was the judge who presided during the original trial and who ruled against these young men in their post conviction efforts seeking a new trial. Several of the country’s leading forensic pathologists have testified in Jonesboro, Arkansas, ground zero today in the efforts to free the West Memphis 3. The testimonies of Dr. Werner Spitz, Dr. Michael Baden, and Dr. Richard Souviron have been unequivocal in that there were absolutely no knife wounds found on the bodies of the three young victims, and that those wounds that appeared to have been inflicted by a knife were all post motem animal bites and scratches. After reviewing thousands of pieces of evidence, all three pathologists (Souviron is a odontologist) agree that the prosecution’s case against Damien , Jason and Jessie, based upon the belief that a knife was used in this crime, is false. Dr. Janice Ophoven, a pediatric forensic pathologist is scheduled to testify today.

According to Lisa Fancher of WM3.org., and Holly Ballard of Arkansas Take Action, both of whom are monitoring the hearings, the pathologists testified that the wounds on the bodies (except for the blows to the head which contributed to their deaths) were caused by animals, not knives. That the state pathologist’s autopsy was not competent and that his opinions and testimony at the original trial were incorrect, and the case the state presented was false, as no knives were used to create the injuries on the bodies. They are not the cause of death. Blunt force trauma and drowning caused their deaths and animals damaged their bodies.

This is very powerful testimony that in itself should be enough for any unbiased judge to grant a new trial for Jason and Jessie. Generally, the standard for a new trial consists of whether new evidence presented at the time of trial would have resulted in a different decision by the jury. If the standard for granting a new trial in this hearing is that their original trial attorneys failed to utilize expert pathologists and therefore the jury was not exposed to crucial testimony that the cause of death and the wounds found on these youngsters was wholly inconsistent with the prosecution’s case, then Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley should have their convictions overturned and be granted a new trial. The Arkansas Supreme Court should then follow suit and grant Damien Echols a new trial.

Lonnie Soury