August 24, 2011
Paradise Lost’s Joe Berlinger on the Roots of his West Memphis Three Films
From the upcoming Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory: (l to r) Bruce Sinofsky, Damien Echols and Joe Joe Berlinger. Photo credit: Bob Richman/HBO
Eighteen years ago filmmakers Joe Berlinger and Bruce Sinofsky were alerted to a murder case in West Memphis, Arkansas. Three youths – James Baldwin, Damien Echols, and Jessie Misskelly – were accused of raping, murdering and mutilating three 8-year-old boys. All three were convicted, and one, Echols, was sentenced to death. The film, Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills (1996), made a convincing case that the suspects known as the “West Memphis Three” were in fact innocent.
Berlinger and Sinofksy continued to document the West Memphis Three, releasing Paradise Lost: Revelations in 2000 and completing Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory just this summer, which is scheduled to air on HBO in January 2012. When the Memphis Three were released from prison last week, the Paradise Lost trilogy joined an honored genre of advocacy films that helped right injustices.
“When we set out to make Paradise Lost, I don’t think we ever envisioned an epic journey,” director Joe Berlinger said recently. “The goal was not to right a wrong, just the opposite.” He and Sinofsky were tipped off to the story by Sheila Nevins, president of HBO Documentary Films. The story “seemed like an open-and-shut case of guilty, Devil-worshipping teens who had done this rotten Satanic ritual killing of these three 8-year-old boys. We thought, ‘Let’s go make a film about rotten kids,’ kind of like a real-life River’s Edge,” a reference to the 1986 movie about a teen murder.
The case presented by the prosecution was flawed – lost confessions, debunked experts, no physical evidence linking the suspects to the crime – enough that Berlinger and Sinofsky were soon convinced of their innocence. But Berlinger also knew that they would be found guilty. “We experienced a real-life Salem witch trial,” he said.
Berlinger credits thousands of acts, small and large, for helping bring about the release of the West Memphis Three. Lawyers who worked for free, donations that paid for DNA tests and other legal costs, and the support of people like Peter Jackson, Eddie Vedder and Johnny Depp all contributed to the cause. But there’s no question that Paradise Lost played a significant role in bringing the case to the public.
Just as there’s no question that The Thin Blue Line, a 1988 film by Errol Morris, helped free Randall Adams from prison. Adams was convicted of murdering police officer Robert W. Wood, and sentenced to death. Morris, a former private investigator, reconstructed the case on film, in effect conducting his own investigation into the crime. Adams was exonerated the following year when, after twelve years on Death Row, prosecutors dropped charges against him.
“Interestingly, I was very much influenced by Errol’s The Thin Blue Line,” Berlinger said. “Not by the advocacy standpoint—it didn’t inspire in me the feeling that ‘I want to fight for social justice.’ It inspired me to become a filmmaker of a particular type of movie. It made me want to make non-fiction theatrical films for moviegoing audiences, because in the late 1980s you could point to very few documentaries that ever made it to movie theaters.”
The “theatricality” of The Thin Blue Line inspired Berlinger and Sinofsky to make their first documentary feature, Brother’s Keeper. And the success of that film drew the attention of Nevins at HBO.
Berlinger notes, “Stylistically Paradise Lost was very different from The Thin Blue Line – no recreations, pure cinema verite – but I think both films do something many filmmakers are afraid to do: treat the audience like jury members. Viewers are actively engaged, instead of being passively lectured to. You come to your own conclusions.”
Berlinger and Sinofsky came to the case through a particular set of circumstances. In a sense, the Memphis Three were lucky; how many other defendants have film crews following their cases?
“Every time the Paradise Lost movies air on TV, we get inundated with letters from either convicts or relatives declaring their innocence,” Berlinger said. “With the help of The Innocence Project and other organizations, there have been hundreds and hundreds of DNA exonerations, which points to the fact that a lot of innocent people are in prison.”
In September 2010, the Arkansas Supreme Court decided that the West Memphis Three deserved an evidentiary hearing that could have led to a new trial. Berlinger believes this is why Arkansas prosecutors suddenly offered the Three the opportunity to accept an “Alford plea.”
“This deal got hammered out in less than two weeks when it became politically and financially important to the state of Arkansas,” Berlinger complained. “Financially because the state worked out an agreement that it couldn’t be sued for wrongful conviction. Politically expedient because an evidentiary hearing scheduled for December was going to be embarrassing for a lot of people.”
The West Memphis Three will no longer be in prison, but in the eyes of the law they are still convicted child killers. “You know Jason Baldwin was very much against doing the Alford plea,” Berlinger said. “Unfortunately the state made it an all or nothing deal. Jason agreed to take it because he was basically saving Damien’s life. The idea of spending another two, three, four years on death row for Damien was untenable. His health had deteriorated, he hasn’t had sunlight on his body in ten years, his eyesight is damaged, he’s physically weak. It was time for him to accept a plea bargain.”
Berlinger understands the choices the West Memphis Three made. “God knows I couldn’t have survived death row under such brutal conditions. But I am extremely disappointed that the state of Arkansas didn’t have the courage to admit what we all know, there were major mistakes made in this case.”
Randall Adams’ exoneration and release from prison after the release of The Thin Blue Line was also bittersweet, as detailed in his New York Times obituary. In Texas, wrongly convicted prisoners receive a lump sum payment of $80,000 for each year of their confinement. But Adams was ineligible for any money, even the $200 traditionally handed out to prisoners who have served their sentences, because his case had been dismissed.
8 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
This case was a very interesting one. Misskelley confessed three separate times. Baldwin told someone else he committed the crimes. Echols was seen in muddy clothes near the crime scene. He bragged about the murder to two other teenagers, stating he killed the three boys. This was presented as evidence at the trial. Echols also had a history of psychiatric treatment. His reported actions included brutally killing a dog, starting fires at his school, threatening to kill his teachers and parents and stating he liked to drink blood.
Echols’ stated under cross-examination that he was interested in the occult. A funeral register found in his room with hand-drawn pentagrams and upside-down crosses. Echols’ journal contained morbid images and references to dead children. http://goo.gl/RGrih
Comment by West Memphis Three case evidence — August 25, 2011 @ 11:14 pm
When Arkansas officials declare their ongoing belief that WM3 are guilty, I wonder WHAT they are referring to as evidence of it. They seem stuck in 1994. Even then it was a stretch to believe the case against WM3, but now with so much additional information — such as the role of animals in the condition of the bodies — there is nothing to suggest a connection or a motive.
Comment by NE43 — August 26, 2011 @ 4:30 pm
Jessie REFUSED to Testify against Damien and Jason at trial, He could have cut himself a nice deal by doing so but he didn’t. None of his confessions were accurate. The first was gleefully encouraged and basically fed him by the WMPD, get a transcript and read it.
Jason Baldwin had a drug addict from the juvenile detention home say he confessed.
Meanwhile… Just about half of the witnesses left have all changed their stories. Don’t take people’s word for it. i’ve watched the movies, I did my own research. you will see that this does NOT make any sense.
Comment by Lisa — September 7, 2011 @ 5:36 pm
Misskelley describes the crimes in detail in front of his lawyer, implicating Echols and Baldwin.
The research shows the three probably committed the crime. They had no alibis. There are no other legit suspects.
Here are excerpts from Misskelley’s detailed third confession, that he made voluntarily in front of his lawyer, with his lawyer advising him not to confess.
“STIDHAM: You still want to give a statement despite my advise and counsel?
MISSKELLEY: Yes, cause I want something done about it.”
….DAVIS: Ok. And when they came over what happened?
MISSKELLEY: And then Ja, Damien jumped on’m. And them other two (2) started beating on Damien and me and Jason jumped on’m.
…DAVIS: Ok. Now when you grabbed one and Jason grabbed one what happened next?
MISSKELLEY: We started hitting’m.
DAVIS: With what ?
MISSKELLEY: Fist at first.
DAVIS: Ok. Where describe to me what Ja, what you saw Jason do?
MISSKELLEY: He first he cut one of’m on a face on his left side just a little bit like a scratch. Then ..ah.. he went to the other one and got on top of him, started hitting him and then pull one of’m pants down and get on top of’m and cut’m.
….DAVIS: What, what was Damien doing during this time?
MISSKELLEY: Well the one that got cut on his face, he stuck his finger on his cheek and slicked the blood off of it.
DAVIS: That’s what, saw Damien do. What else was he doing?
MISSKELLEY: He grabbed one of’m by the ear, I don’t know which one, he grabbed on of’m by the ear trying to pull his ear off or something. He grabbed’m pretty tight. It turned kind of red.
DAVIS: Did the, were the kids, the threee (3) little boys were they saying anything, doing anything during this ?
MISSKELLEY: They were saying Stop, Stop.
DAVIS: Ok. And what about the boy that you were hitting, was he saying that?
MISSKELLEY: Yea, he was telling me stop and then I stopped and Damien told me, no, no don’t stop. And I got on’m again.
….DAVIS: Ok. And did Jason have anything in his hands at that point.
MISSKELLEY: He had a knife.
DAVIS: Ok. Where was, was he actually hitting’m with the knife or with his fist ?
MISSKELLEY: blade was open.
DAVIS: Ok. Could you see where he, was he cutting the boy?
MISSKELLEY: No, he was like this swinging the knife at his legs.
DAVIS: Ok. Could you see, did you ever see one of the boys get cut with the knife?
MISSKELLEY: After he cut through with’m then I noticed what’d he done.
DAVIS: What did you see?
MISSKELLEY: I saw that boy you know missing
DAVIS: If you worried when you saw that, describe to me what you saw Jason do and what you saw happened?
MISSKELLEY: Well when he was doing that I seen blood fly.
DAVIS: Ok. Well did he, where’d the blood go?
MISSKELLEY: Grass, I mean not grass but weeds, like sling around.
DAVIS: What’d the boy do when that happened?
MISSKELLEY: He started hollering. And Jason put his shirt over his mouth.
….DAVIS: Ok, Jessie tole me that Jason came over to you and then went back to the boy that had been castrated and start hitting him in the face. What was Damien doing at this point?
MISSKELLEY: He was still holding that, still messing with them boys, that boys p_nis.
DAVIS: Ok. And you said that you had, that your b, the boy that you had was unconscious and then what happened next, what you remember happening next?
MISSKELLEY: I, I let him go, after that I let him go and Damien come and got him. So I kept on hanging on to’m and start hitting him some more.
DAVIS: The, were the other two (2) boys still conscious. You said the one you had was unconscious, were the other two (2) boys still conscious at that point?
MISSKELLEY: Well the one who got castrated he wasn’t moving that much no more. I figured you know he might be dead or whatever. I really didn’t know.
DAVIS: What happens next you said you, Damien’s still got the other one, Jason’s got one and you got one. What happens next?
MISSKELLEY: Damien was messing the one little boy’s p_nis.
….MISSKELLEY: We tied’m up.
DAVIS: Ok. Now you said before when the police asked you in their statement and asked you what they were tied up with. And you said they were tied up with rope. Ah..
MISSKELLEY: I made that up.
DAVIS: Why?
MISSKELLEY: Tied to get off, you know get’m off track.
DAVIS: Who tied’m up?
MISSKELLEY: Damien and Jason.
Comment by Misskelley’s Third Confession Transcript — September 14, 2011 @ 11:02 pm
Statement of: Joe Houston Bartoush, Jr.
Route 2 Box 767 Lakeshore
On 10-27-92 I was at Lakeshore Trailer Park with Damien Echols when he killed a Black Great Dane. The dog was already sick and he hit the dog in the back of the head. He pulled the intestines out of the dog and started stomping the dog until blood came out of his mouth. He was going to come back later with battery acid so that he could burn the hair and skin off of the dog’s head. He had two cat skulls, a dog skull and a rat skull that I already knew about. He kept these skulls in his bedroom at Jack Echols house in Lakeshore. He was trying to make the eyeballs of the dog he killed pop out when he was stomping. Damien had a camoflouge survival knife to cut the guts out of the dog with. This statement was written by Det. Ridge at my request.
This statement was completed at 2:07 PM on the 14 day of June 1993.
Witness: Det. B. Ridge
X Joe Bartoush(Signature of person giving voluntary statement)
Witness: Hubert B. Bartoush
Comment by Statement about Damien Echols stomping and killing a dog — September 15, 2011 @ 10:22 pm
If the above poster Hal Browder has harassed anyone else, would you please contact me at thea2696@hotmail.com. I am trying to get something done to stop this man. He has harassed numerous people, including my father. I would love to hear from anyone that can help me stop this man from hurting anyone.
Comment by Thea Bryan — November 28, 2011 @ 10:01 pm
Isn’t anyone monitoring these comments? It’s weird enough that somebody (with a lot of time on his/her hands) keeps posting the same nonsense (verbatim!) on numerous websites about this case (e.g. “Echols was seen in muddy clothes near the crime scene, etc. etc.”) That’s pathetic. But the Hal Browder post is sad and should be removed asap.
Comment by ste3021878 — January 11, 2012 @ 11:25 am
I agree, Browder’s comment has been removed. As to the other comments, I felt it was perhaps better to let other readers see how deluded some people can be over this story.
Comment by Daniel Eagan — January 11, 2012 @ 1:46 pm