West Memphis 3 Argumentative Paper - 1916 Words

West Memphis 3: Wrongfully Accused? On May 5th, 1993 three eight year old boys were reported missing in West Memphis, Arkansas. The boys were found the next day, hog tied in a wooded area called â€Å"Robin Hood Hills†. After the case had been â€Å"thoroughly† investigated, the West Memphis Police announced on the news that they had found the murderers, pointing fingers at Damien Echols, Jessie Misskelley and Jason Baldwin, three teenagers who were different from the norm in West Memphis, making it easy for them to be accused. I believe the boys were wrongfully accused of this crime because there is a lack of evidence in the case pointing to the boys, and the crime just seems to convenient for these three to actually pull off. During the†¦show more content†¦The strange thing about the thirty-ish minute recorded â€Å"confession†, Jessie made many mistakes about the facts in the case, stating that they boys were tied together with rope instead of shoe laces. He also messed up some facts, saying it happened during the day , but was quickly corrected by the police.(Paradise Lost) After being questioned for 12 hours and finally giving a confession, the police, instead of letting Jessie go home as promised, arrested Miskelley which is when he revoked his whole statement but it was no longer on record. Echols and Baldwin were arrested. Misskelley’s trial was sepereate from Echols and Bladwins, but all three were found guilty of capital murder charges. Throughout this case, many pieces of evidence came up â€Å"missing† and many other people who should have been suspects went without being questioned at all. For example, a problem arose at a local Bojangles, the same night of the murders. The manager working at the time called the police, reporting that a black man had stumbled into the restaurant. He was bleeding and mumbling the manger said, and instead of a report being filed, the working officer found it would be much more convenient for her if she justShow MoreRelatedLogical Reasoning189930 Words   |  760 Pagesany way that suggests that the book Logical Reasoning or its author endorse you or your use of the work). (2) Noncommercial You may not use this work for commercial purposes (for example, by inserting passages into a book that is sold to students). (3) No Derivative Works You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. An earlier version of the book was published by Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont, California USA in 1993 with ISBN number 0-534-17688-7. When Wadsworth decided no longer