rigorousintuition.ca

UK's biggest child porn case called into question

By John Oates → More by this author

Published Monday 21st August 2006 15:42 GMT

Names are being collected for a class action case against the police involved in Operation Ore.

Operation Ore, the UK's largest investigation into online child pornography, was the result of US authorities handing over credit card details on over 7,000 individuals whose details they had found on a child porn website.

Over 30 of those named have since killed themselves.

The class action case is being organised via a website and has been handled by a group of volunteers but they are now briefing solicitors. The group says it has new evidence which it has brought over from the US.

The organiser of the website, which you can find here, told the Reg: "We are asking the people who've been broken and smashed by this great injustice to come forward."

He said most of those named were either the victim of credit card fraud or had been looking at adult porn.

The group believes its position is reinforced by a recent European Court of Human Rights verdict on Gerard Keegan who sued the UK police after they raided his house in Liverpool looking for someone else. The court ruled the police had not done enough to ensure the man they were looking for was at the address.

But British police in Operation Ore went to magistrates to ask for search warrants using no more than the details provided by US authorities - which the group believes puts police at odds with the latest ECHR verdict.

The group is collecting names to start legal action - it won't actually be a class action case because that does not exist under UK law. The group's lawyers are considering the best way to pursue a legal case.

As part of Operation Ore UK police investigated 6,500 people which led to 1,200 prosecutions and 655 convictions.®

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08/21 ... ss_action/

Google erases Operation Ore campaign site

Silence over Inquisition 21

By Lucy Sherriff → More by this author
Published Thursday 21st September 2006 11:20 GMT


Google has delisted www.inquisition21.com, the website campaigning against many of the Operation Ore child pornography convictions. The last time the search giant's crawlers checked the site out was on 10 September.

Operation Ore, the UK's largest investigation into online child pornography, was the result of US authorities handing over credit card details on over 7,000 individuals whose details they had found on a porn portal that contained links to child pornography.

Inquisition21 says the database contained a large number of fake credit card numbers, and many card numbers that were being used fraudulently. This, it argues, casts doubt on the safety of some of the convictions in the UK. It is gathering support to mount a legal challenge to the convictions.

Brian Rothery, Inquisition 21's editor, says the delisting followed an attack on the site on 8 September. He says the attack, during which "quite a large amount of undesirable material was placed on the site with numerous links to it from other sites", came as the site was about to make potentially damaging disclosures about the handling of the investigation.

We asked Google why it had taken the site off its database, and on which grounds it has appointed itself censor, but it refused to comment on the action.

Instead it issued a statement: "We cannot tolerate websites trying to manipulate search results as we aim to provide users with the relevant and objective search results.

"Google may temporarily or permanently ban any site or site authors that engage in tactics designed to distort their rankings or mislead users in order to preserve the accuracy and quality of our search results."

At the time of going to press, the company had not confirmed that the Inquisition21 site had actually breached any of these guidelines. ®


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/21 ... sts_inq21/

This web site evolved out of the idea that ideology was inherent to society, and that it both captivated populations and was used by demagogues to enslave them. Because most of the population makes it meanings, or evaluations, at the limited level of doctrines and dogmas, the rulers and opportunists use ideology to both control the population, in a way they appear to want to be controlled, and strengthen their own positions of power and privilege. There appears to be a constant move towards an ideology of repression, although there are also cycles of a striving for freedom followed by the reaction of repression. We appear to be in the grips of a repressive downturn following the 1960s, and moving into a dangerous phase.

As we noted above, an inquisition requires a crimen exceptum, the crime so bad that normal due process must be suspended and special or draconian measures used against the accused. To be guilty of a crimen exceptum you do not necessarily require to be tried and convicted, although either plea bargaining or a trial is normal. Simply to be accused is enough to be considered guilty, so that a trial is largely a formality.

During an inquisition, virtually all of the expert witnesses and lawyers work for the state, that is, for the prosecution. The few lawyers, who may want to work for the defence, risk not getting any more lucrative state work. As the inquisition and its crimen exceptum are based on an established and accepted ideology, which the public accepts often with a hatred for those accused, the media support the accusers, and, as in the earlier inquisitions, so called ‘wise men’, such as university professors, psychologists and social workers, work only for the state, usually as expert witnesses. Under these circumstances, it is virtually impossible not to be damaged or destroyed by a single accusation of being guilty of a crimen exceptum.

The medieval crimen exceptum was either heresy or the practice of witchcraft. Crimen exceptums since have included being a Jew or a gypsy in Nazi Germany and a communist in the America of McCarthy. To-day’s crimen exceptum is sex abuse, and in particular child sex abuse, and, perhaps in its most deadly form, child pornography. This is already broadening into adult pornography, from where it will move on towards what might be described as ‘inappropriate behaviour’, which is another name for heresy or non-conformism within an accepted ideology. Free speech becomes a casualty in this process.

If the above is understood, it may make it easier for those accused and those who long for commonsense or justice to understand why the media or the state fail to come to the defence of innocent people who are falsely accused or to the defence of those unfairly or unjustly accused, for example those whose natural or human acts caused them to be accused. It is in the interest of the media, the police and the state to support any current popular moral ideology. In times of inquisition also, the media and the state are infected to the highest levels by current popular moral ideologies, such as today’s political correctness and the moral panics of sex abuse.

Above all, however, inquisitions arise in times when there is a prosecutorial state in which the state’s legal resources go mainly or only towards prosecution. In such a state, moral laws proliferate and disingenuous activist groups and lawyers form alliances with the police to bring about prosecutions. The most dangerous stage is that when dissent or criticism of either the laws or the moral ideology itself become a criminal activity, as with the laws that forbid the analysis of so-called child pornography in any attempt to discuss and present it rationally. In the US, a defence lawyer and expert witness for defence in child pornography cases has been arrested, because of his zeal and success in defending those accused of this crimen exceptum. This is the stage where the questioning of the current ideology has become a crime. The next step may be that all intellectual questioning becomes criminal.

This web site has, however, moved somewhat from the idea that the fight against totalitarianism should express itself through assaults on the idea of the crimen exceptum - that is by trying to point to the fallacies supporting the ideas of such crimes, such as there being no sexual activity natural to childhood, or how the so-called crimes are mainly used for disingenuous reasons, not to protect children.

That idea is now changing to one based on the notion that the crimen exceptum is less important than the nature of the cabal using it. The cabal uses the mechanisms of totalitarianism to seize and maintain power and when they near the point of attaining it they must crush dissent and free speech. When the stage of there being no defence is reached, it becomes pointless to attack the crimen exceptum. The Nazis did not need child porn when they had Jews and Gypsies to exterminate. In such a situation the real problems are no longer caused by bad lawyers and public complacency, as there is no longer any real justice or due process, except that manufactured in the show trials of wealthy celebrities, which give an illusion of justice.

So this web site is moving from the platform of trying to debunk the crimen exceptum, or the ‘designated perversion’ to accepting that these are just an excuse for totalitarianism. Look at the US and UK where the ‘designated perversion’ is moving on to the threat against the state, and Sweden where it is already ‘inappropriate behaviour’.

From the American Humanist Association.


A New Bill of Sexual Rights and Responsibilities


1. The boundaries of human sexuality need to be expanded.

Many cultures have tended to restrict sexuality to procreation. Any other purposes of sexuality were regarded as derivative, were looked at askance, or were sternly disapproved. But the need to limit population growth, the widespread use of effective contraceptives, and the developments in reproductive technology have made the procreative aspects of sex less significant today. Responsible sexuality should now be viewed as an expression of intimacy for women as well as for men, a source of enjoyment and enrichment, in addition to being a way of releasing tension, even when there is no likelihood of procreation.

This integration of sexuality with other aspects of experience will occur only as one achieves an essentially balanced life. When this happens, sexuality will take its place among other natural functions.

2. Developing a sense of equity between the sexes is an essential feature of a sensible morality.

All legal, occupational, economic, and political discrimination against women should be removed and all traces of sexism erased. Until women have equal opportunities, they will be vulnerable to sexual exploitation by men. In particular, men must recognize the right of women to control their own bodies and determine the nature of their own sexual expression. All individuals —female or male—are entitled to equal consideration as persons.

3. Repressive taboos should be replaced by a more balanced and objective view of sexuality based upon a sensitive awareness of human behavior and needs.

Archaic taboos limit our thinking in many ways. The human person, especially the female, has been held in bondage by restrictions that prescribed when, where, with whom, and with what parts of the body the sexual impulse could be satisfied. As these taboos are dispelled and an objective reappraisal ensues, numerous sexual expressions will be seen in a different light. Many that now seem unacceptable will very likely become valid in certain circumstances. Extramarital sexual relationships with the consent of one's partner is being accepted by some. Premarital sexual relationships, already accepted in some parts of the world, will become even more widely so. This will very likely also be true of homosexual and bisexual relationships. The use of genital associations to express feelings of genuine intimacy, rather than as connections for physical pleasure or procreation alone, may then transcend barriers of age, race, or gender.

Taboos have prevented adequate examination of certain topics, especially with respect to female sexuality, thus blocking the discovery of answers to important sexual questions. Abortion is a case in point. By focusing only on the destruction of the fetus, many have avoided facing the other issues that are fundamental. They do not, for example, openly discuss ways of providing a comprehensive sex-education program for both children and adults. There has been a long struggle over the issue of providing adequate information about available contraceptive procedures for those who wish them. Likewise, taboos that cause people to feel that viewing the genitals is an obscenity or that any verbal or visual expression of the sex act is pornographic undermine objectivity and lead to demands for censorship. The over-sacramentalization of sex also inhibits open discussion by not allowing people to treat sex as a natural experience.

4. Each person has both an obligation and a right to be informed about the various civic and community aspects of human sexuality.

We wish to affirm and support the statement of a committee of the United Nations World Health Organization on human sexuality: "Every person has the right to receive sexual information and to consider accepting sexuality for pleasure as well as for procreation."

This need to be fully informed about sexuality is obvious in the individual's private life, but it is rarely thought to extend to one's social-civic life as well. Sexual attitudes are intimately related to many problems of public import, but, again, taboos inhibit free discussion. Too rapid a population growth cannot be dealt with except as individual attitudes towards sexual expression and contraception are recognized. Clearly, the social status of women is also involved here. In the rehabilitation of incarcerated criminals, establishing meaningful ties with others is important. It is inhumane and self-defeating to cut these persons off from the possibility of sexual relationships. We should extend this concern to all persons who are confined in institutions—for example those in senior citizens' homes. The right of the physically and mentally handicapped to be fully informed about sexuality and to have sexual outlets available should be another concern. The commercialization of sex needs careful scrutiny. Patterns in childrearing that may result in dysfunctional sexual expressions, such as child abuse and emotional deprivation, must be studied. Sexual attitudes and life-styles continually need to be adjusted to new technological and medical developments and to changing cultural patterns.

5. Potential parents have both the right and the responsibility to plan the number and time of the birth of their children, taking into account both social needs and their own desires.

If family size is to be so regulated and the birth of unwanted children is to be prevented, then birth control information and methods must be freely available to both married and unmarried couples. There must be a continuing reassessment in light of the world population situation. Involved in the right to birth control is the right to voluntary sterilization and abortion. We should especially point out that birth control should be the appropriate responsibility of men as well as women. Male contraception should be the object of further research. Contraception should not be considered the sole responsibility of females.

6. Sexual morality should come from a sense of caring and respect for others; it cannot be legislated.

Laws can and do protect the young from exploitation and people of any age from abuse. Beyond that, forms of sexual expression should not be a matter of legal regulation. Mature individuals should be able choose their partners and the kinds of sexual expression suited to them. Certain forms of sexual expression are limiting and confining—for example, prostitution, sadomasochism, or fetishism. However, any changes in such patterns, if they are made, should come through education and counseling, not by legal prohibition. Our overriding objective should be to help individuals live balanced and self-actualized lives. The punishing and ostracizing of those who voluntarily engage in socially disapproved forms of sexual conduct only exacerbate the problem. Sexual morality should be viewed as an inseparable part of general morality—not as a special set of rules. Sexual values and sex acts, like other human values and acts, should be evaluated by whether they frustrate or enhance human fulfillment.

7. Physical pleasure has worth as a moral value.

Traditional religious and social views have often condemned pleasures of the body as "sinful" or "wicked." These attitudes are inhumane. They are destructive of human relationships. The findings of the behavioral sciences demonstrate that deprivation of physical pleasure, particularly during the formative periods of development, often results in family breakdown, child abuse, adolescent runaways, crime, violence, alcoholism, and other forms of dehumanizing behavior. We assert that physical pleasure within the context of meaningful human relationships is essential—both as a moral value and for its contribution to wholesome social relationships.

8. Individuals are able to respond positively and affirmatively to sexuality throughout life; this must be acknowledged and accepted.

Childhood sexuality is expressed through genital awareness and exploration. This involves self-touching, caressing parts of the body, including the sexual organs. These are learning experiences that help the individual understand his or her body and incorporate sexuality as an integral part of his or her personality. Masturbation is a viable mode of satisfaction for many individuals, young and old, and should be fully accepted. Just as repressive attitudes have prevented us from recognizing the value of childhood sexual response, so have they prevented us from seeing the value of sexuality in the middle and later years of life. We need to appreciate the fact that older persons also have sexual needs. The joy of touching, of giving and receiving affection, and the satisfaction of intimate body responsiveness is the right of everyone throughout life.

9. In all sexual encounters, commitment to humane and humanistic values should be present.

No person's sexual behavior should hurt or disadvantage another. This principal applies to all sexual encounters —both to the brief and casual experience and to those that are deeper and more prolonged. In any sexual encounter or relationship, freely given consent is fundamental—even in the marital relationship, where consent is often denied or taken for granted.

http://rigorousintuition.ca/board/viewtopic.php?t=15476

theeKultleeder wrote:NOTE: Dream's End posted about the Inquisiton21 website on Rigint here. However, I think he is an illustration of the problem. If you actually read what he wrote, there are implied misdeeds and all sorts of dark hints, but there is nothing really there. At least at the time (2005?) he admitted this much: "My idea is that these guys are part of the same network...but who knows....."

Stephen Morgan wrote:

theeKultleeder wrote:NOTE: Dream's End posted about the Inquisiton21 website on Rigint here. However, I think he is an illustration of the problem. If you actually read what he wrote, there are implied misdeeds and all sorts of dark hints, but there is nothing really there. At least at the time (2005?) he admitted this much: "My idea is that these guys are part of the same network...but who knows....."

No, right. There's no network, it just so happens that the ruling elites of various countries happen to all be pederasts. The magic powers they get from their sodomy allows them to gain power over their fellow man, which is why so many paedos are in power, certainly there's no massive cult conspiracy of evil kiddie-fiddlers.

I can't remember if I'm joking or not.

blanc wrote:from my pov, you won't be surprised to read, the scales are weighted so heavily in favour of the defendent that the organised abuse of children is going on virtually unchecked. I despair of this changing in the forseeable future.

don't know if this adds anything to your thoughts on this kultie.

antiaristo wrote:
First, the sex-with-kids thing serves the same purposes as did man sex with man, until 1967.
(Lesbianism has never been illegal in England)

theeKultleeder wrote:Basically, pedophilia has become the #1 thought crime that not even the most independent thinker dare question (some exceptions are around ).

et in Arcadia ego wrote:

theeKultleeder wrote:Basically, pedophilia has become the #1 thought crime that not even the most independent thinker dare question (some exceptions are around ).

You've tip-toed around this a couple times here..

A simple question with a yes or no answer, please:

Do you think pedophilia should be permitted?

Y/N?

A City Possessed is a strong, compelling and shocking story about one of New Zealand's most high-profile criminal cases - a story of child abuse allegations, gender politics and the law. In detailing the events and debates leading up to and surrounding the Christchurch Civic Creche case, Lynley Hood shows how such a case could happen, and why. Her penetrating analysis of the social and legal processes by which the conviction of Peter Ellis was obtained, and has been repeatedly upheld, has far-reaching implications - not only for our justice system, but for the way in which we see ourselves. A City Possessed won the prestigious 2002 Montana Medal for non-fiction, and the Readers' Choice Award in the 2002 Montana New Zealand Book Awards. Lynley Hood was awarded a New Zealand Skeptics 2002 Bravo award for A City Possessed

'Ms Hood is clearly interested in the truth, and in careful research, rather than holding a view and sticking with it through thick and thin.'
Dr Alison Jones, Director of the Institute for Research on Gender, University of Auckland.

'A book that will elicit strong responses; outrage and bewilderment among them.'
Brian Turner, poet and publishing consultant.

'This is a work of scholarship of the highest academic standard.'
Professor Mark Henaghan, Dean of Law, University of Otago.

http://www.lynleyhood.org/page2/page6/page6.html

Book Review

A City Possessed: the Christchurch Civic Creche Case
by Lynley Hood.
(Published 2001, Longacre Press, Dunedin.)

Reviewed by Peter Hawes.

Peter HawesLynley Hood's deconstruction of the Ellis case has been reviewed plenteously and fairly enough - I have yet to read a critique that disagrees with her findings. But none have captured the outrage that the book has engendered in many breasts.

My own humble view is that it was a witch hunt of Ellis and I ask: how would those who wittingly or unwittingly took part in this witch hunt feel if they were confronted with the same basis of evidence as was used against Ellis? I'm confident your opinion will reflect mine once you have read this governmentally non-existent book. To illustrate, here's some quotes from a page or two.

(To protect the children's identities, families are named after trees - Ms Magnolia, Ms Dogwood, Ms Hickory, Ms Lacebark, Ms Cypress, Ms Laurel.
'S' is Sue Sidey, one of three DSW interviewers, trained by the eponymous Dr Karen Zelas.)

"S: You told Mum that someone had touched your bottom and your vagina.
T(ess): Did I?
S: Yeah, with their fingers.
T: Who was it? Did I say?"

"'He killed all the people with axes,' said Ryan. 'He killed all the boys not me cos I, I'm too fast for him... I'm really just joking,' he said, 'I'm really just telling things. He pulled off my tummy button...with pliers. ...He pulled um he put some cellotape on my penis and he took it off and blood came out of it... I'm just joking at the moment...Actually there was so much blood...it was all gone and I wasn't alive.'

First, Cathy Crawford, in consultation with her supervisor Dr Karen Zelas, accepted that Ryan had made a genuine disclosure of sexual abuse. Next, Detective Colin Eade accepted that Ryan had provided evidence of an offence. Then, Crown prosecutor Chris Lange accepted that the charge of indecent assault laid by Eade was reliable enough to go to court."

"Next day, she (mother) asked Bart if Peter had ever touched his bottom or penis. 'Peter wouldn't do that to me,' Bart said. 'He's my friend.' This response left Ms Dogwood with 'a gut feeling that there was something more to come out', and she raised the subject with her son repeatedly over the coming weeks."

"S: So um who lives with Peter?
K(ari): Oh he lives by himself.
S: Right, and does he have some friends?
K: Um of course he does yes, lots of friends, bad friends. His family don't like him though.
S: How do you know that?
K: Because Mummy telled me.
S: ...Oh and what were they doing there when you went there, his friends?
K: They were showing the penis and the gina.
In response to further questioning Kari said that a man named Joseph 'teased' her with his penis. But when Sidey invited her to demonstrate the 'teasing' using naked anatomically correct dolls, the pubic hair on the male doll threw her into confusion.
K: What is it?
S: Have you never seen that before on a -
K: No.
S: - near a penis.
K: No. What is it?
S: What do you think it is?
K: I don't know.

The police were unable to identify the location of the alleged 'teasing'. Nor could they establish the identity of the mysterious Joseph. But they laid a charge anyway. At the trial of Peter Ellis, Count 23 of the 28-count indictment read: 'that Peter Hugh McGregor Ellis between May 1989 and 30 July 1991 at Christchurch did indecently assault Kari Lacebark a girl under the age of 12 years in that he took the child to an unknown address where an unknown man put his penis in her vagina'. Ellis was found guilty on this charge."

"How did you get back to the crèche?
Daddy picked us up and took us back.
I don't think Daddy remembers this.
No, it was Marie. She picked us up and took us back to the crèche.
Since Marie Keys could not drive, this version of Kari's story was even more unlikely than her previous one."

"But for Ellis to have offended on the scale alleged...he (Crown Soliciter Brent Stanaway) needed co-offenders as well. ...To cope with this problem Brent Stanaway found a solution that was as understated as it was ingenious: he put Peter Ellis on trial with the Great Christchurch Paedolphile Ring as his phantom co-defendants.

...Since they were not identified or charged the Crown did not have to explain to the jury who Ellis's co-defendants were or what they were supposed to have done..."

Interview of Sue Sidey by Lynley Hood.

SS: ... People were beginning to fear for their safety... they thought they might be - their children or themselves might be silenced in some way. ..by attack or whatever...(by) People who were supporters of the alleged offenders. Or even the alleged offenders themselves.

"...What did you think prompted the Magnolias and other parents to make the complaints?' she asked. 'Malice? A sense of mischief? Voyeuristic pleasure?...'"

http://exmss.massey.ac.nz/Offcampus/Mar ... review.htm

It must have been particularly difficult for Lynley, as an investigative writer, trying to preserve as much as she could the spirit of independent enquiry, the open mind, the fairness to both sides, that at the very outset she has had to forewarn the reader that her research had led her to a particular conclusion, and this was that there had been a major miscarriage of justice in this case. I say this because there is no doubt that this admission, however honestly held, and however predicated by the overwhelming evidence that she has so clearly delineated, will put off some readers from the very start. Particularly readers who would say that there was no miscarriage of justice, readers who are rightly concerned about a relatively high incidence of sexual abuse of children in New Zealand and readers perhaps whose own experience of abuse as a child would make Lynley Hood's quite pointed criticism of many abuse counsellors, psychologists and psychiatrists, social workers and many abuse cases, rather hard to stomach. After all, there really is such a thing as sexual abuse of children, and some of the material presented fairly early in the book could, I think, be read as diminishing the importance of that fact. But Lynley was just being honest, and there can never be anything wrong about that, and she did quite clearly state also that she recognised that sexual abuse of children does occur. But I do wonder if Lynley had somewhat reversed some themes in her book, so that those who might have been put off reading further could have instead been led into the case, the time line, the development, the arguments, the personalities and the conclusion and than perhaps have wound the clock back to explain more exactly just how such a trial came to be held and the nature of the moral panic that preordained the outcome. Having said that the way the subject matter was ordered gave a very secure chronological and sociological underpinning to the story, and for myself, already sympathetic to the thesis, and not unduly surprised by the fundamentalist feminist nature of the sexual abuse movement of the times, this was a non-issue.

http://homepage.mac.com/j.monro/Miscarr ... essed.html

Comment peterellis.org.nz - There has always been a conflict between advocates for victims of sexual abuse, and advocates concerned about the possibility of the innocent being wrongfully convicted.

On the one hand, the "sexual abuse industry" appears to never consider the concerns of those accused; prejudicially refers to complainants as "victims"; and promotes law changes to make convictions easier.

On the other hand, people like Peter Ellis have been wrongfully convicted, and our law appears to have no safeguards either to have prevented that happening in the first place, or rectifying the mistake later.

This site recognises the need for justice, and welcomes the successful prosecution of those guilty of sexual abuse. The crime is serious and should be treated so. But this site also is strongly of the opinion that the seriousness of the crime should not be any justification for lowering standards of evidence:

It is better that 100 guilty men be free than one innocent person be wrongfully convicted - A crime that has been committed cannot be undone - but our justice system can endeavour to ensure that it is not responsible itself for perpetrating harm.

The West Memphis 3 are three men tried and convicted for the murders of three children in the Robin Hood Hills area of West Memphis, Arkansas, United States in 1993. Damien Echols - the alleged ringleader - was sentenced to death. Jessie Misskelley and Jason Baldwin were sentenced to life in prison. The case has received considerable attention. Many believe the arrests and convictions were a miscarriage of justice and that the defendants were wrongfully convicted during a period of intense media scrutiny and so-called "Satanic panic". The defendants remain imprisoned, but legal proceedings are ongoing, and as of July 2007, new forensic evidence is being presented in the case...

At about 1:45 pm, Juvenile Parole Officer Steve Jones (not a police officer) spotted a boy's black shoe floating in a muddy creek that led to a major drainage canal in the Robin Hood Hills.[5] A subsequent search of the creek found the boys' bodies. The boys were stripped naked and had been hog-tied with their own shoelaces: their right ankles tied to their right wrists behind their backs, the same with their left limbs. Their clothing was found in the creek, some of it twisted around sticks that had been thrust in the muddy creek bed. The clothing was mostly turned inside-out; two of the boys' underwear was never recovered.[6] All of the boys had been severely beaten about their heads and faces, and Byers further had a fractured skull. It was originally assumed that deep lacerations to Chris Byers and what appeared to be emasculation (his scrotum and injuries to the the head of his penis) were the result of knife wounds, however forensics conducted in 2007 indicated that the injuries may have been the result of animal predation.

The original autopsies were inconclusive as to time of death, but stated that Byers died of blood loss (from either stab wounds or a deep head wound), and the other boys drowned.[7] Later review of the case by a medical examiner for the defense attorneys determined the boys had been killed between 1:00 am and 5:00 am on May 6, 1993.[8]

The boys' anuses were all dilated, and police initially suspected the boys had been raped or sodomized. Later expert testimony confirmed anal dilation[9], but discovered none of the bruising, tearing or other damage that are typical of rape, suggesting that the boys were not raped.[10]

Christopher Byers was the only victim with drugs in his system; he had been prescribed Ritalin[11] in January 1993, as part of an attention-deficit disorder treatment (the initial autopsy report describes the drug as Carbamazepine[12]) The fact that the dosage was found to be at sub-therapeutic level [13] is consistent with John Mark Byers's statement that Christopher may not have taken his prescription on May 5, 1993...

Vicki Hutcheson recants

In October 2003, Vicki Hutcheson, who played a part in the arrests of Miskelley, Echols and Baldwin, gave an interview to the Arkansas Times in which she stated that every word she had given to the police was a fabrication. She further asserted that the police had insinuated if she did not cooperate with them they would take away her child. She noted that when she visited the police station they had photographs of Echols, Baldwin and Misskelly on the wall and were using them as dart targets. She also claims that an audio tape the police claimed was "unintelligible" (and eventually lost) was perfectly clear and contained no incriminating statements. However, Hutcheson did not testify at the Echols/Baldwin trial.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Memphis_3

October 29, 2007

Dear Friends & Supporters:

I have waited a long time to write you this note.

Just hours ago our attorneys filed a Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus proving that three innocent men were wrongfully convicted of murder in West Memphis, Arkansas, in 1993. Citing DNA testing and evidence from several witnesses and leading experts, the nearly 200-page writ asks the Court to order a new trial for my husband, Damien Echols, or release him.

In short, DNA testing has been conducted on dozens of pieces of evidence. The DNA results show no link whatsoever to Damien Echols, Jessie Misskelley or Jason Baldwin – and all of the experts agree that, under the prosecution theory of how the crime was committed, their DNA would be present at the crime scene if they were guilty. Instead, the DNA results match Terry Hobbs, the step-father of one of the victims. Our new filing also includes strong evidence from Pam Hobbs (the ex-wife of Terry Hobbs and the mother of one of the victims) implicating her former husband in the murders.

The writ includes scientific analysis from some of the nation’s leading forensics experts, stating that wounds on the victims’ bodies were caused by animals at the crime scene – not by knives used by the perpetrators, as the prosecution claimed. These wounds, and evidence about knives, were the centerpiece of the prosecution’s case.

Beyond writing to share this exciting news, I want to thank you for your support. Each person who spoke out about this case or donated money – each person who refused to let the world forget about three men locked away forever, one on death row, for a crime they so clearly did not commit – made this week’s filing possible. Without you, we could not have made it this far, and we cannot thank you enough.

I am not an expert on science or the law. But I know that the writ that we just filed in federal court completely undercuts every argument and piece of “evidence” that was used to convict Damien, Jessie and Jason. Our lawyers and other legal experts say that any one piece of evidence in our filing, by itself, would be enough to overturn these convictions – and that, combined, all of the evidence makes it clear that this was a grave injustice that the federal court must step in and correct.

That won’t happen easily.

In the weeks ahead, the court will review the writ we just filed, and the Arkansas Attorney General will file a response. We will then reply to that filing, and the court will rule. We hope and believe that the court will rule to overturn these convictions, but we still have a lot of work to do to get there. I am also writing to ask for your help – which we need now more than ever.

You and I know that Damien, Jessie and Jason would not have been convicted if they weren’t teenagers without more than a few dollars to their name, who were perceived to be “different” than other kids. They did not have the resources to fight a zealous prosecution in a poisonous atmosphere, and so they were convicted. The state still has millions of dollars at its disposal to defend these convictions. Despite all of the evidence we have uncovered and filed in court this week, the state is going to fight us in federal court. No matter what, they will have more money than we do. But with your help, we can follow up on this unprecedented court filing and secure justice.

We only have a few weeks to gear up for the next phase. Our experts, investigators and attorneys need to refute everything the state will throw at us, and we need to keep the court focused on the scientific truth in this case.

Please make checks payable to:
Damien Echols Defense Fund
PO Box 1216
Little Rock, AR 72203


http://www.wm3.org/splash.php

Hugh Manatee Wins wrote:Looking at the January 2008 edition of Vanity Fair Magazine for the yet-another 'paranoid kooks' hit piece on Theresa Duncan and Jeremy Blake, I noticed that Duncan's writing about Franklin Cover-up type paedophelia was omitted yet...
...the article just before the hit piece was about...paedophelia scandals on Pitcairn Island due to the descendents of the H.M.S. Bounty mutineers finding local norms for sexual activity being much younger than other places.

Now isn't that a coincidence? A paedophile article right before the Duncan-Blake article which has no mention of this topic.

theeKultleeder wrote:.....
I don't know. My honest opinion is that TD was not psychologically stable.

That happens a lot with us talented people.

Glad to see you back, Hugh. Missed you this weekend. Hiking or something?

Hugh Manatee Wins wrote:
This thread topic of how the accusation of paedophilia is being abused is important.
Slowing down the information superhighway's ability to empower the masses is definitely involved, not just ineffective efforts at policing.

What a chilling topic for people using the internet who wonder if they are thought criminals of some kind.

There will always be political prisoners and this method looks like it will be useful for quite some time even if it's just for psychological warfare.