Sunday, November 27, 2011

New West Memphis 3 article is a waste.


  The Democrat Gazette ran a new article on the West Memphis Three case that covered the reflections of two state crime lab workers. The article can be found here.  The only comment on the article, as of the time of this blogpost, pretty much nails my opinion of it. We know for sure that at least one of the men, Mr. Peretti, thinks the West Memphis Three are guilty. We also know that both men from the crime lab feel like their work was unjustly attacked. These attacks were by the defense trying to claim that the causes of the wounds on the victims weren't what the crime lab claimed.

  I'll agree that knowing what caused the wounds is an important element of this case, but this article never once explains why Mr. Peretti is so certain the three men who were convicted of the crime are the culprits. This man handled the physical evidence, the one part of the case that both sides agree is very weak as far as linking the WM3 to the crime. What did he see in his work that convinced him. He's free to talk about it now. Why didn't the reporter get more information?

    Not to be cynical, but I wonder if the purpose of this article is to further the subtle bias the Dem-Gaz has always had against those questioning the convictions from this case. Otherwise, all we are left with is a story that basically says "Two AR crime lab scientists were very sad from the West Memphis killings and think that their work was unjustly attacked." Wow, who would ever be surprised by that?

 Oh yes, and one more thing, the quote by Mr. Peretti, also mentioned by the commentor on the story, is absurd: “They are being worshipped as child killers".  That is what Mr. Peretti thinks of the WM3. I don't care if he thinks the supporters of the Three are wrong, but you'd think he'd be classy or intelligent enough to acknowledge that those who are supporters don't think the three men committed the crime.


  1. Supporters can and will believe whatever appeases their own agendas. Nothing changes the fact that the killers did plead guilty to murdering three small boys.

    Btw, it's Dr. Peretti, not Mr. Peretti.

  2. Correct. I should have said Dr. the first time and just said Peretti afterwards.

    One could also argue that those who maintain the guilt of the three will believe whatever appeases their agendas too. My only request is that all sides explain why they believe in the three's guilt or innocence. Peretti never said what convinced him.

    I'd like to know since, to my knowledge, the only thing the evidence he worked with proved was cause of death, not culprit. If he thinks that the rest of the evidence collected by the West Memphis PD proved their guilt then I would have liked to see more on that in the article.