OurColony.net

The continuation...

Customer Rating:
Remember Mark Byers? He was that really weird stepfather in the first documentary, the one who acted really suspicious.

Well here's another documentary dedicated to his weirdness. This sequel has really nothing else to offer the viewer other than that, along with some more disturbing crime photos. Yeah, it does provide some updates. For instance, there was the question of whether or not a mark found on one of the boys was a bite mark and, if it was that, why doesn't it match any of the three "killers." That's about all this film offers, other than speculation on Byers' possible guilt.

I felt that the first documentary sufficed. It was enough to get people talking about the case. This one was just exploitative. If you're really interested in the updates, you'd be better off doing some research on the internet yourself. You might even get a more balanced view. This film was just embarassing to watch. You know, it was like, "Been there, done that. Got it the first time."

By the way, I agree with the others on here who said this one was a lot like a witch hunt. Only now Byers is the alleged witch.

Excellent follow up

Customer Rating:
High profile murder cases deserve follow up, and this was no exception. Though not as high profile as some have been, when a case like this brings out such emotion it is important to see what the players are doing through the years from the criminals to the victim's families.

There has been enough hype that has promoted this into popular thought. Internet groups have been sprung up to promote the innocence and hearsay that the three teenagers accused of murdering three boys in a demonic ritual were falsely accused. The teenagers are currently serving life sentences without parole. We see them in a different light than before. They are older, more mature, and hardened by prison. They are more accepting of their situation, saying that they wish they had not done or said the things they had said because they didn't understand before. Granted, but that is not enough to release them from their guilt.

We are supposed to cast doubt on their guilt by further investigation of the victim's stepfather. They are all poor white trash in Arkansas, he is no exception. He's had several brushes with the law, and his wife (the mother of one of the victims) died under mysterious circumstances in 96. He also had his teeth removed and wears dentures (which he takes out and displays many times in this documentary), casting doubt upon whether or not the bite marks on the victims could match his teeth. He is flamboyant and loves the spotlight, but the other victims' families choose to bow out, wanting to be left in peace with their grief. This is not enough evidence to convince me that he might have done it.

The fact remains that these teenage boys, now young adult men, will get the electric chair someday because they deserve it. There is too much evidence that they did it. Check the special features section in this and the first documentary to see the things that ended up on the cutting room floor. They didn't give you an accurate picture of them as teenagers, nor as young adults. There are several red herrings in evidence, the police did not do the best job they could have done (do they ever in these cases?), and too much has come forward from others to determine their guilt rather than defend their innocence.

The 20th Century Witch hunt continues...

Customer Rating:
This sequel to Paradise Lost is not as good as the original and is less focused on the trial and is more attentive to the West Memphis 3 support group who developed after meeting on the internet to free the West Memphis 3. They hold internet chat room conferences, interview those involved in the case, get money together for professionals to reexamine the forensic evidence and believe that they have discovered bite marks on the victims that were not covered by the original trial.

Unfortunately due to problems with the original documentary and the impact it had, the film makers where prevented from covering actual trial footage during subsequent appeal hearings. Many family members and lawyers who appeared in the original documentary refused to be filmed for this sequel.

The father of one of the victims who received attention in the first documentary after handing the film makers a knife which had bloodstains becomes the target of inquiry by the film makers. He agrees to undergo a polygraph. There is a surprise result given the direction these documentaries have been going.

This is worth following especially given the attention this case has received on CNN's Larry King Live. It does highlight failing in judicial system but doesn't vindicate the West Memphis 3.

Too many unanswered questions

Customer Rating:
After watching the first film, there were some questions regarding the trial I had that I was hoping the sequel would answer. It didn't. If anything, the sequel just created more questions. I will list them:

1.) Alibis- In the first film, all 3 defendants claimed to have alibis for the night of the murder, but we learned very little about them. I thought to myself, "why didn't the defense play this card in court?" The testimony of the alibis themselves should have been enough to exonerate the defendants. I was hoping that "Paradise Lost 2" would address the issue, but it didn't. So I looked into the matter, and found out that Damien and Jessie's lawyers tried, but the alibis fell apart in court. Damian tried to claim that he was visiting a relative for the night of the murder, but under cross-examination, it turned out to be a different night. Jessie's alibi tried to say that he was at a wrestling tournament that night, but the receipt for the tournament was for a different night. Jason didn't even try. All of this makes an impact on how one views the case, doesn't it? Now lack of alibis does not in itself establish guilt, but the filmmakers' failure to include this part of the trial in the first movie or to discuss the issue in the second, casts doubt on the "miscarriage of justice" angle.

2.) Damien Echols- I didn't think that the previous film was complete in exploring Damien's psychological history. For instance, is there any evidence of psychological disorders or sociopathic tendencies. These are the kinds of questions that need to be explored in a documentary about someone accused of murder, and I was hoping the sequel would address the issue. It didn't, and in fact further confused it. For example, in one scene Damian is on a conference call with his mother and supporters, via collect. Towards the end of the call, his mother was getting emotional and started crying. Damien said several times, "stop crying." And the tone of voice did not indicate, "stop crying, because everything's going to be OK" but "stop crying, because you embarrass me." Now this to me seems a callous way to treat one's mother. That does not necessarily indicate a psychological disorder, but does it not at the least raise a red flag? Furthermore, Damien expresses certitude that Mark Byers is the killer. He says "he doesn't deserve my contempt" and "he killed three kids." Really? Why is he so certain of this?

3.) Mark Byers- And this brings me to the third problem I have with the sequel; it makes a completely unnecessary focus on Mark Byers. Despite a total lack of evidence linking him to the crime, the fact that he passed a polygraph test, and his express willingness to cooperate with any police (not filmmaker) investigation, many of the WM3 (West Memphis 3) supporters in the film believe, or at least suspect, that Byers committed the crimes. Why?

Further, according to the WM3 website, a strand of hair was found on victim Johnnie Branch's shoe- it belonged to his stepfather, Terry Hobbs. Hobbs was then brought in for questioning, and we read on the website: "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." So the WM3 supporters claim that the 3 accused were wrongly convicted, yet they will willingly implicate other people on the flimsiest evidence (a knife found with Mark Byers' blood on it, a strand of hair of Terry Hobbs, and the claims of Hobbs' ex-wife).

We need a new, objective documentary on the Robin Hood Hills murder. One that will examine both the evidence (or lack thereof) tying the accused to the murders, and the cottage industry and cult of personality that has also unfortunately arisen around the accused.

This is Quite excellent..

Customer Rating:
..[ASIN:0595357016 Almost Home: My Life Story Vol 1]] alMost home indeed!It appears quite evident that the young boys were killed elsewhere and their bodies were dumpeD into the (the film shows that Mark Byers is strange..But does it show MORE? That's the main questiOn..)stream..The WM3 supporters shown in this film are fearless in large (the Arkansas prEss in favor of the three stand alone in a sea of ignorance..)numberS..It is not enough to use forced confession to convict someone but it was donE..The WM3 suppOrters are tireless