The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hill, Reaction Paper Example

The HBO documentary film “Paradise Lost: the Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills” examines the murder cases involving Damien Echols, Jessie Misskelley Jr., and Jason Baldwin, who collectively came to be known as “The West Memphis Three”. The documentary offers an in-depth look at the entire history of the case, from the arrests of the Three for the murders of Steve Branch, Michael Moore, and Christopher Byers in 1993. All three victims were eight years old at the time, and the town of West Memphis was eager to see someone charged with the crime. When The Three are arrested, prosecutors allege that the boys were involved in so-called Satan worship, and that the murders were part of some sacrificial ritual. Prosecutors clearly play on the strong religious base in the region, stirring up emotional responses that are often played out in front of cameras, both of filmmakers and of journalists. This combination of emotional manipulation and playing to the cameras worked to the favor of the prosecutors, who were able to convince jurors of the guilt of all three defendants in two separate trials. It would not be until new evidence came to light that the case presented by prosecutors would begin to fall apart.

What makes this film so powerful is that it captures the ongoing emotional response and reactions of the families on both sides of the murders. Parents and relatives of the victims are seen on film being angry and sad, while the families of the accused are seen passionately defending each of the boys. My emotional responses to the film changed and evolved as the story played out, but I was initially struck by the strong religious views of the people from West Memphis. Most of them claimed to be Christians, but very few of them seemed interested in offering any Christian forgiveness to the accused killers. While I understood their pain and anger, I also found it disturbing to see how easily the prosecution was able to whip the town into a religious frenzy, which basically convinced nearly everyone that the boys were guilty long before the trial began.

In the trial of Jessie Misskelly Jr., the recordings of the police interrogations often appeared to show that the interrogating officers were leading Misskelley to give the answers they wanted to hear. The defense attorney for Misskelley noted several instances where the officers provided Misskelley with details that were not part of his original story, only to have him adopt them and begin to add them to his own confession. I found this quite jarring, and would have had some serious misgivings about that if I had been on the jury. Just as the details about the crimes that were given to the media related to Satanic rituals seemed to convince many people of the guilt of the boys, the jury seemed willing to accept that Misskelley was guilty based more on emotional responses than on hard evidence. The media was turning coverage of the trials into entertainment on the evening news, as they discussed Satanism, black magic, and the mutilation of the young victims.

Before viewing this film, I was only somewhat aware of this case, having heard media reports about the West Memphis Three as their appeals for release gained widespread attention. This film showed the actual trials, and I was better able to consider the guilt of the boys for myself. It is difficult to know how the editing of the film colored my perceptions of their potential guilt, but I found that I had some serious doubts, and would likely have not voted for guilt had I been on the jury. One of the most striking elements of the trial of Jason Baldwin and Damien Echols, in my estimation, was not something that happened, but something that did not happen: even though it would likely have meant a significant reduction in his sentence, Misskelley did not testify against the other two defendants. It seems that someone in his position would have been likely to accept such a sentencing deal for his testimony if he was in fact guilty of the crimes.

The emotional response of many people in the town of West Memphis was described as “Satanic Panic” (Stidham, Fitzgerald and Baldwin 1061), and it is clear that the prosecutors effectively used the cultural differences between an individual like Damien Echols and the majority of the heavily-religious townspeople to their advantage. This case was tailor-made for a television audience, and it is hardly surprising that in captured so much attention from the media, both during the trial and for years afterward. One article about the case published in 2013 compared it to a play or a movie, noting that the case had all the drama of a work of fiction (“West of Memphis” 34). It was only fairly recently that the West Memphis Three were released from jail in a complicated agreement that did not undo the convictions of any of the three men. New DNA evidence failed to link the men to the crime scene, making the slim evidence of the original trials even less reliable. This case clearly demonstrates, however, that slim evidence can still be effective in the hands of a prosecutor skilled in using the media to play to the emotions of the viewing audience and the jury pool.

Works Cited

”West of Memphis” *** ”West Memphis Three still seeking justice.” South Florida Sun-Sentinel [Fort Lauderdale] 22 Feb. 2013: 34. Print.

Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills. Dir. B. Sinofsky, and J. Berlinger. 1996. Film.

Stidham, D, H. Fitzgerald, and J. Baldwin. “Satanic Panic and Defending the West Memphis Three: How Cultural Differences Can Play a Major Role in Criminal Cases.” The University of Memphis Law Review 42.4 (2012): 1061-1104. Web.