Dixie Chick Urges Donations to Defense Fund for Convicted Murderers

[howela]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,314605,00.html

The Dixie Chicks have a new controversy on their hands. Lead singer Natalie Maines is urging people to contribute money to a defense fund for three Arkansas men that were convicted of killing three children in 1993.

Oh, she's at it again. I guess they still believe any press is good press.

[Isaac-Saxxon]

The chicks need to shut their pie hole and fade away with out anymore disgrace to their name. NOT ! Fools should have taken the money and gone to the house but oh no they think because they can sing a few songs that their politics trump's the day ! NEXT Please !

[joepole]

Good, I want murderers to have the best defense possible. Especially if they're guilty.

But if they're not guilty, and you believe that they're not guilty, wouldn't doing something to help be a good thing?

[rhertz]

Overturning convictions is more common these days, thanks to more sophisticated forensics. There are obviously now dozens of stories about murder convictions that have been overturned thanks to DNA testing

What, they can't afford DNA testing to get them off? That might cost a few thousand dollars. However drumming up millions for top lawyers like OJ did to try to debunk clear forensics is another matter.

[AnimeSpirit]

I loved their music, but I'm with Isaac. They might as well fade away now, because not even the radio stations will play their music. They haven't had a concert in so long because no one will buy their tickets. Jeez! I'm surprised they don't execute those murderers today just because one of the Chicks supports them.

[joepole]

>What, they can't afford DNA testing to get them off? That might cost a few thousand dollars. However drumming up millions for top lawyers like OJ did to try to debunk clear forensics is another matter.

I know almost nothing of the specifics of this case. Is it the type of case where "DNA testing" will "get them off?" Most murders aren't.

What "clear forensics" are they trying to debunk? I am not aware whether or not they were convicted based on any forensic evidence. Again, most cases aren't.

Also, is "debunk" the right word? Debunking is a good thing, it eliminates falsehoods.

[joepole]

They might as well fade away now, because not even the radio stations will play their music. They haven't had a concert in so long because no one will buy their tickets.

Aren't they as popular as ever? I don't like modern pop music, but I thought they won a ton of Grammys last year and sold millions of albums.

[Isaac-Saxxon]

They sure do not need big hands to cover up

The market will dictate what it will BEAR ! I wonder how they feel about their foolish comments now

[rhertz]

Originally Posted by joepole

I know almost nothing of the specifics of this case. Is it the type of case where "DNA testing" will "get them off?" Most murders aren't.

I don't know the specifics either. I would expand "DNA Testing" to include all modern forensics testing. I just don't think it is very easy to fool the "Dr. Baden's" of this world like maybe it once was a decade or two ago.

Originally Posted by joepole

What "clear forensics" are they trying to debunk? I am not aware whether or not they were convicted based on any forensic evidence. Again, most cases aren't.

I would think that most cases have supporting forensic evidence, even if the case was not purely "based on" it.

Originally Posted by joepole

Also, is "debunk" the right word? Debunking is a good thing, it eliminates falsehoods.

Probably not a good word... "twist" might be a better choice, again thinking back on the lawyers in the OJ case....

[Pocahontas]

Their first couple of cds were good with quite a few catchy songs.
They did indeed win several Grammys last time but they were virtually snubbed or shut out by their own genre of music which is country. I think that is due to the fact that the Grammys are a more liberal voting group whereas the Country folks are more conservative.

[howela]

Google" West Memphis three and you will find tons to read about this case. There is little forensic evidence here. Some fiber evidence that points to the convicted but experts agree it is not conclusive evidence. The victims were left naked and in water and bound with their own shoe laces.
Two of the three suspects confessed.
The question seems to be raised because a hair of the stepfather of one of the victims was found in the knot of the shoe lace he was bound with and and the victims mother says her now ex-husband is violent.

[rhertz]

Originally Posted by howela

Two of the three suspects confessed.
The question seems to be raised because a hair of the stepfather of one of the victims was found in the knot of the shoe lace he was bound with and and the victims mother says her now ex-husband is violent.

Confession is pretty strong evidence. I know my comb and my socks and probably my shoelaces have pug hair, wife hair, and all sorts of crap stuck in them. Assuming the stepfather lived in the same house, isn't that pretty normal?

[Pocahontas]

Every time I use the blow dryer I leave quite a bunch of hair behind on the floor so there's no doubt it ends up in mine and Mr. P's shoes and clothing.

[howela]

Originally Posted by rhertz

Confession is pretty strong evidence. I know my comb and my socks and probably my shoelaces have pug hair, wife hair, and all sorts of crap stuck in them. Assuming the stepfather lived in the same house, isn't that pretty normal?

I thought it was normal and logic tells me that the police thought it was normal because they had this hair at the time of the crime but only now it seems to have become an issue because the step-father and mother of one of the victims have divorced. The hair was not on their child but one of the others. However the stepdad said the children all played at each others home on a regular basis.