I have not formed a concrete opinion regarding either the guilt or innocence of Damien, Jason or Jessie. However, I do object strongly to revisionist history and/or using only the facts which support a particular point of view. To suggest that the police did not have a reason to arrest the three and that the prosecutor would knowingly send them to prison on trumped up charges is an insult. I certainly know that police and prosecutors make mistakes and can sometimes be overzealous when they believe strongly in their case. However, it is also true that most guilty people & their defense attorneys will claim innocence and attempt to introduce bogus evidence to get an acquittal. Like Cathy Miller above, I have not seen anything that convinces me that they are innocent even though I agree that there are definite questions concerning their guilt. I think it boils down to the fact that many criminal cases provide room for second guessing. This one is no exception. However, until we have more than a possible hair from a parent or his friend, various experts who cannot agree on what is or isn't a bite mark & all the other questionable evidence in this case, we have to respect the jury's verdict ... unless a higher court really does find a reason to rule otherwise.
By Chris Davis, Susan Ellis, Toby Sells, and Maya Smith
download this issue
click here to see more »