Judge rejects West Memphis Three member’s request for new DNA testing

This January, Echols’ attorneys filed the petition for new DNA testing, saying it “might serve to identify the killer(s)” and bring justice to the case. Echols’ petition asked the judge to approve testing with an M-Vac wet vacuum system. Such testing was not available previous times the evidence was tested.

“No one knows, of course, whether additional testing of the ligatures (shoelaces) with the new M-Vac DNA collection technology will lead to the recovery of new DNA samples for testing or not,” the petition says. “But one thing for certain is that such evidence will definitely not be found if testing with this new technology is not done.”

Keith Chrestman, the prosecuting attorney for the 2nd Judicial District of Arkansas, argued in a court document that finding someone else’s DNA on the evidence would not prove Echols innocent given other evidence shown in trial.

Chrestman also argued the new technology, “rather than preserving physical evidence — (it) is a one-shot deal that forever alters it.”

Baldwin and Misskelley are not party to the petition.

“If (Echols’) request is granted and the physical evidence is tested, the remaining defendants could be prejudiced,” the prosecutor argued. “If the testing reveals nothing worthwhile, the physical evidence would still be forever altered. And — with neither notice nor an opportunity to be heard — the remaining defendants would be denied future Act 1780 habeas corpus relief.”

The decision was not posted on the court docket Thursday. But in a statement to CNN, Echols’ defense team said the judge ruled with the prosecution that only those who are incarcerated request a DNA test of the evidence.

“We are extremely disappointed in the Judge’s decision which was based upon a narrow interpretation of the law and one that failed to allow justice to be served,” said Lonnie Soury, a member of Echols’ defense team. “All we asked is for the right to seek to identify the DNA of the real killer(s).”

Soury said they plan to appeal.

No prior DNA links to the suspects

The material included hair from a ligature used to bind Moore and a hair recovered from a tree stump near where the bodies were found, court documents said.

The hair found in the ligature was consistent with Branch’s stepfather, Terry Hobbs, while the hair found on the tree stump was consistent with the DNA of a friend of Hobbs’, according to the documents.

Police have never considered Hobbs a suspect and he maintains that he had nothing to do with the murders.

Three witnesses who resided next to one of the victims filed affidavits in October 2009 with the Arkansas Supreme Court saying they saw the second-graders with Terry Hobbs the night before the bodies were found by police.

The statement from the witnesses contradicted Hobbs’ statements to police and in court that he never saw his stepson, Steve, on the day of the murder.

Prosecutors said at trial punctures and cut marks on the victims showed the crimes were part of a sadistic ritual. After the three were convicted, some forensic examiners argued those marks were from animal bites.

The prosecution relied on the confession of Misskelley, a 17-year-old with learning disabilities and an IQ of 70. He confessed after an untaped, three-hour interrogation by police without his parents or an attorney present. Misskelley, who was tried separately, later recanted his confession.

Echols and Baldwin said that at the time, they were targeted for being different from the rest of their peers in the small town where they lived. They read different books, wore different clothes and had different haircuts.

Critics of the case against the men argued that no direct evidence tied them to the killings, and that a knife recovered from a lake near the home of one of the men could not have caused the boys’ wounds.