On the eve of the Baldwin and Echols trial, Mr. Lax and I went to visit
Misskelley. The prosecutors and the Craighead County Sheriff as well as the Clay
County Sheriff were still approaching Misskelley at the time. We went to Pine
Bluff, the diagnostic center. As a result of that interview, I concluded that
Misskelley’s position was that he had nothing to do with the crimes and saw none
ABSTRACT 141
of the other people there. (BMHR 1691-1692).
Reviewing the sequence of Misskelley’s various statements again, he would
provide varying information, and at least twice, including once after the trial,
referenced the brown ropes as being the ligatures, though he explained at one point
that he had said that to throw them off. (BMHR 1693-94). I do view this back and
forth on the ligatures as an example of his suggestibility.
Even after the trial when there was a discussion of having him be a witness
against the other two, it was my opinion, after going over the crime scene map with
him in early February, 1994, that he was unable to describe the crime scene
correctly, and that he was wrong about it in several significant ways. (BMHR
1696-97). He also was incorrect about where the bodies were thrown. He was
inconsistent in describing sodomy by Echols, the mutilation by Baldwin. In the
statement after the trial he talked about an older man who told Damien to do it,
which was the first time that issue surfaced. (BMHR 1698). He was also
inconsistent in the description of what Baldwin and Echols were supposed to have
been wearing, and after the trial told the prosecutor he did not remember what they
were wearing. (BMHR 1699-1700).
To explain the conversation in which Misskelley got angry with me, I recall
getting a call that Misskelley was at a prosecuting attorney’s office and about to
ABSTRACT 142
give a statement to the prosecutor. I was stunned. I had no idea that Misskelley
was there. When I got there, Misskelley would not talk to me. The tape indicates
that he did talk to Mr. Crow. Apparently Misskelley had been told that I was not a
good lawyer and that I had only handled a DWI case and was not capable of
representing him. He needed to listen to them if he ever wanted to get out of
prison. That is why he did not talk to me. (BMHR 1707).
[The April 3, 2009 proceedings concluded until August 10, 2009. BMHR
1709.
