Memphis Three

Kelly-Exoneration of The West Memphis Three

Tori Kelly

24 March 2012

CJ251 Criminalistics

Dr. Donald McCoy

KGA

CHAIN OF CUSTODY AND PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE

EXONERATION OF THE WEST MEMPHIS THREE

1


Abstract:

In 1993, authorities discovered three missing eight-year-oldboysmutilated in the woods of West

Memphis. The next day, three teenage youths were prime suspects, later to be convicted of the

murders. Seventeen years later the evidence that put these men behind bars wascontested,

resulting in their release from prison. So what went wrong? The system?The evidence?Or the

chain of custody and preservation of that evidence? Analysis of the case reveals the answer to

these questions creatingan even bigger question: Does our system really work?

2


Stevie Edward Branch, Christopher Byers, and Michael Moore were last seen together on 5

May 1993. On May 6, 1993, the town of West Memphis, Arkansas was horrified by the

discovery of the mutilated bodies of these three eight-year-old boys. The town put so much

pressure on law enforcement to solve the case those three teenage youths, Damien Echols, Jessie

Misskelley and Jason Baldwin were brought in for questioning the next day. This pacified the

citizens and alleviated the heavy burden put upon the police. In 1994, all three youths were tried

and convicted of these murders. Then, after seventeen years of incarceration, these young men

were finally able to prove their innocence. Analysis of this case reveals why they were unjustly

sentenced to prison to begin with, and what evidential factors aided in their release(West

Memphis Three , 2012).

The citizens of West Memphis were convinced this atrocity could have only been committed

by devil-worshipers. Unfortunately, Damien Echols who listened to then considered satanic

music and practiced the Wicca religion, fit the profile. Several weeks later, his friend Jessie

Misskelley confessed to the murders, implicating Jason Baldwin as well. Rumors of Satanic

rituals abounded this community and the press fed into their suspicions of these three

adolescents, with stories of satanic scandals occurring on a regular basis. Only circumstantial

evidence, rumors, and the coerced confession of a mentally challenged youth, interrogated to the

point of exhaustion, were all prosecutors had to charge these young men with

murder.Unfortunately then, that was all they needed(West Memphis Three , 2012).

During the trial, defense attorneys are denied attempts to dismiss evidence on grounds that

their admission was improper. Crime Lab Criminalist Lisa Skevicius testified that fiber samples

taken from the Baldwin and Echol homes would be of minimal evidentiary value because the

victims’ clothing were retrieved from the water, thus making a match inconclusive.

Furthermore, items of said clothing were described as having been hung to dry in offices of the

police department, thus leaving them vulnerable to tampering(West Memphis Three , 2012).
3


Three sticks found at the crime scene were admitted on grounds that they could have been

used to inflict injuries, though these were never forensically connected to the accused. A knife

found by an Arkansas State Police scuba diver in the lake behind Baldwin’s residence was

admitted, as well as testimony as to the manner in which it was found, despite the fact that it was

irrelevant because it could not be connected to Baldwin or the crimes(West Memphis Three ,

2012).

Testimony was admitted concerning the allegation or theory that sexual assault could have

involved, due to castration of one of the victims, despite the fact that stronger evidence indicated

this could have been a result of animal predation. It is known that wildlife will consume the

softest parts of the body firstbefore decomposition occurs. This factor was also attributed to the

slash marks found on the victims as possible claw marks by defense that prosecution linked to a

knife, based on Dr. Frank Peretti’s testimony that some of the knives shown to him could have

inflicted the wounds he viewed on all three bodies. He also indicated that he did not detect any

sperm consistent with sexual activity(West Memphis Three , 2012).

The evidence, though improperly processed, was enough to convince twelve West Memphis

citizens of the town’s suspicions concerning these three juveniles. Damien Echols spent

seventeen years on death row professing his innocence and repeatedly denied appeals. Jessie

Misskelley was denied attempts to have his confession suppressed and spent seventeen years of

his life sentence without parole professing his innocence. Jason Baldwin spent seventeen years

of a life sentence with parole after 40 years professing his innocence. Five years after all three

men’s outcries of injustice, thousands of Americans, including criminal justice professionals

begin to finally listen, and are convinced they were wrongfully tried and convicted(West

Memphis Three , 2012).

4


In 2001 (7 years later), Baldwin moved to preserve evidence and have access to it for

retesting. Ark. Code Ann. 116-112-201 entitles him to the issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus.

Echols motions for DNA testing in 2002. Misskelly files similar motions on his behalf. Being as

the State has had custody of this evidence and the testing sought here was not available as

evidence at the time of the trial, all three motions were granted in accordance with Ark. Code

Ann. 16-112-202(a)(1)(A) and because chain of custody could be established (Ark Code Ann.

16-112-202(b)(2)) in order to show that it has not been substituted, tampered with, replaced or

altered (b)(1)(West Memphis Three , 2012).

In 2009, the evidence was reevaluated in court. As it turns out, the knife acquired belonged to

John Mark Byers, stepfather of one of the victims Chris Byers, and he could not account for

blood found on it matching the victim. Dr. Duke Jennings testified rebuttal as to Dr. Peretti’s

reported time of death of the victims, which gives Jason Baldwin alibi as having been in school

during the killings. Trace Evidence Section Supervisor testified that the fiber analysis in 1993

was considered limited by today’s standards. Two hair fibers found at the scene matched DNA of

Terry Hobbs, stepfather of victim Stevie Branch and David Jacoby, who visited Hobbs about an

hour before the murders. In essence, none of the retested evidence had any DNA belonging to the

three young men who served time for a crime someone else had actually committed.

Though the scope of this analysis strongly emphasizes the misrepresentation of evidence, the

purpose is to demonstrate the critical significance of proper chain of custody and preservation of

that evidence. Had the items not followed the proper chain while in the State’s custody and

preserved for the amount of time these young men served in prison, they would still be there.

Worse yet, Damien Echols could have been unjustly executed, and the killers would never be

brought to justice.

5


While our justice system is not perfect, this case demonstrates that following a proper chain

of custody of evidence protocol is critical. While on the one hand the chain was breeched with

items of clothing in the original case and today would be inadmissible, it is because of that, that

it was questionable during retrial. Once the State had possession of the evidence, had it not

followed proper chain or been properly stored and preserved, none of it could have been

reintroduced for the purpose it served in this case.

Once evidence is collected at the scene, it is essential that with every change of possession, it

remains sealed and custody documented. Ideally a third impartial party should sign for it from

the evidence tech in order to establish lack of motive for tampering prior to delivery to the lab.

Once analyzed by the lab technician, it should then be resealed and signed over for properstorage

and preservation until trial. Once signed out of storage, the resealed evidence is to remain so and

resigned in to storage after trial.

Each change of custody should indicate who, what, where, when and why the evidence is

being handled. Evidence is not to be left unattended for any reason at any time, otherwise it

becomes inadmissible in court. The only authorized personnel allowed to handle evidence should

be limited to individuals not directly involved in the case. This alleviates any motive for

tampering. A third party should be designated to bring or remove evidence from the crime lab

for purposes of trial. In addition, in order to maintain the integrity of all evidence, a log is to be

kept with the required information and match that which is on the label as well.

The importance of following proper protocol regarding the handling of evidence is invaluable

in order to maintain justice. As in this case, future technology not yet foreseen could exonerate

many more falsely accused as well as properly convict those who are actually guilty; making our

justice system that much more successful.

6


References:

West Memphis Three . (2012). Retrieved Mar 17, 2012, from Baldwin Petition in Case Documents Forum:
http://westmemphisthreediscussion.yuku.com/topic/2147/Baldwin-Petition-habeas-amp-ev

Hearing set in West Memphis Three Case. (2011). Retrieved Mar 28, 2012, from Arkansas Blog:

http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archives/2011/03/17/hearing-set-in-west-memphis-
three-case

7

Memphis Three

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

More from torikelly

Memphis Three