High court W. Memphis verdicts

The Arkansas Supreme Court refused Monday to overturn the capital murder convictions of Damien Echols and Charles Jason Baldwin for the 1993 slayings of three West Memphis boys.

The court's unanimous decision was meticulously set out in a 93-page opinion written by Associate Justice Robert Dudley after considering the 44-point appeal.

"We affirm in full the judgments of conviction," Dudley wrote.

The high court had previously affirmed the murder convictions of Jessie Lloyd Misskelley Jr. in the same case by unanimous vote.

Michael Moore, Christopher Byers and Steven Branch, all 8, disappeared May 5, 1993. Their nude bodies were discovered the next day submerged in a creek at West Memphis. Their hands and feet were tied and they had been severely beaten.

At the time of the murders, Echols was 19, Baldwin, 16, and Misskelley was 17. Echols was sentenced to death. Baldwin was sentenced to life in prison without parole.

Misskelley, tried separately, was sentenced life in prison for the first-degree murder of Michael and to 40 years for the second-degree murders of Steven and Christopher.

In his appeal, Echols questioned the sufficiency of the evidence. At trial, two witnesses testified that they overheard Echols state at a West Memphis softball field that he killed the three boys. That confession was backed up by "substantial evidence," including testimony that Echols was observed near the scene in dirty clothes at a time close to the murders.

Fibers found on the victims' clothes were microscopically similar to clothes found in Echols' home. Echols was seen carrying a knife similar to one found in a lake behind Baldwin's home and one consistent with wounds found on the boys.

The state claimed the killings were done as part of a satanic ritual. According to the opinion, Echols admitted he "delved deeply" into the occult and was familiar with its practices.

Echols told police he understood that one victim had been cut up more than the others, a fact that had not been made public at that time.

At trial, "his testimony contained additional evidence of guilt," Dudley wrote, when Echols said he learned that one victim was mutilated more than the others from newspaper accounts.

On cross-examination, Echols admitted that the articles did not mention that fact and that he did not read it in a newspaper.

Baldwin did not contend there was insufficient evidence of his guilt.

Instead, Baldwin argued that he and Echols should have been tried separately, saying their strategy conflicted on how to deal with the evidence of the occult activities.

Echols says he would have openly admitted all evidence of satanic worship to show its absurdity. Baldwin says he wanted to exclude all of the evidence.

The high court opinion noted that the only argument of consequence raised in the appeal was that defense attorneys for Echols and Baldwin had conflicting strategies.

However, the court wrote that the differences did not prevent the jury from considering either defense.

Monday's ruling came as a relief to local authorities who had worked on the investigation and the trials.

"Obviously, it's a relief to have it, at least this part of it, over with," Circuit Judge John Fogleman, who was deputy prosecutor during the case, told The Associated Press. "There will be more (appeals), but at least it's where it's not on your mind all the time."