Johnny Depp, Eddie Vedder Support West Memphis 3 with Benefit Concert

By: Caroline Black
Topics: Daily Blotter

Singer Eddie Vedder, left, and Actor Johnny Depp, right (AP Photo/Brian Chilson)

WEST MEMPHIS, Ark. (CBS/WREG) Actor Johnny Depp has fervently thrown his support behind the West Memphis 3, hosting a benefit concert in hopes of calling attention to the three young men he believes have been wrongfully convicted of heinous crimes.

Over the weekend, The "Pirates of the Caribbean" star along with Eddie Vedder of Pearl Jam and Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks packed Little Rock's Robinson Center Music Hall with roughly 2,500 people, reports CBS affiliate WREG.

The date of the concert falls is just one month before Damien Echols, the one of the West Memphis 3 on death row, appeals for a new trial.

However, these celebs are not the only ones seeking justice for the trio.

Jessie Misskelley, Sr., whose son Jessie, Jr. is one of the accused, is very grateful to know that he is not alone in the fight for his son's freedom.

"It makes me feel good. I know people that didn't him like Johnny Depp. He don't know him from Adam and they all getting up there saying he's not guilty. Makes me feel good," Misskelley, Sr. told WREG.

Pearl Jam frontman Eddie Vedder, left, and Actor Johnny Depp, right (AP Photo/Brian Chilson)

The goal of the concert was raise awareness, as well as raise money to help pay legal fees for the men convicted as teenagers in the 1993 murders of three 8-year-old boys from West Memphis, Ark.

Jessie Misskelley, Jr., Jason Baldwin, and Damien Echols have been in prison for 17 years after they were convicted of murdering Steve Branch, Christopher Byers, and Michael Moore whose bodies were found bound and mutilated in a creek.

Misskelley and Baldwin are serving life sentences.

Each of them maintains their innocence and wants prosecution to consider new DNA and forensic evidence which will corroborate their story, says WREG.

"I don't believe this is just a random tragic thing. I have to hold on to the faith, the belief that this is for a reason and that something good will come out of this somehow," Echols said in an interview with 48 Hours | Mystery in February.

On Sept. 30, the Arkansas Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Echols' appeal for a new trial.

More on the West Memphis 3 on Crimesider.

10 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment


by pyrotech211 January 23, 2011 6:22 AM EST: Really? You guys are idiots. This was a modern day witch trail and you all believed it. There is absolutley no evidence supporting the fact that these 3 guys did this. In fact there is the only evidence that the stepfather did this by DNA evidence. This is really sad that you believe what is in the news and not what is proven. And by that I mean what is proven. There was nothing proven in this trail that these guys did this. Not one shred of evidence. Imagine if you kid happened to like death metal and was into the occult? Doesnt mean he is a killer right? These guys were not even into this like they made them out to be. The sad thing is the real sicko has gotten away with it. Sickos like this are cunning ,smart, and creative, ask any profilier. This is everything the west memphis 3 is not. Shame on you for not reading the truth about this. Shame on this country for allowing this. Read,Read, Read.........thats all I have to say to these idotic comments.; Reply to this comment


by truthabtthe3 November 4, 2010 10:48 AM EDT: NEW NEWS - ARK. Supreme Cour Decision

despite the ranting of a certain know nothing poster on this site, their appeals have NOT been exhausted - read the news below

Damien Echols gets new hearing in West Memphis 3 case
Posted by Max Brantley on Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 9:06 AM
The state Supreme Court has ordered a new circuit court evidentiary hearing on Damien Echols' appeal of his conviction and death sentence in the West Memphis Three case. It issued similar orders for co-defendants Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley

The court said Circuit Judge David Burnett had erred in dismissing requests to consider DNA evidence and other exculpatory evidence without a hearing. The ruling is a key interpretation of the state's relatively new DNA statute and a broad one. The court said the circuit judge must consider not only the DNA evidence the defendants want to submit, but any other exculpatory evidence, including evidence not presented in the original trials.

The court said Burnett had too narrowly interpreted a state law passed since Echols' conviction that allows use of DNA evidence to establish ground for reversal of convictions. DNA testing found no trace of Echols' or two co-defendants' DNA in evidence submitted in the case. Some DNA of others was found, however. This isn't absolute proof of innocence, but that isn't the standard intended by the law, the Supreme Court ruled.

In a footnote, the Supreme Court also opened the door for Echols to raise his argument about juror misconduct in his case. A juror has told a lawyer that he told other jurors about a co-defendant's supposed confession that was inadmissible in Echols' trial. The order means the defendants will be able to raise, in conjunction with the absence of DNA, all exculpatory evidence that jurors should have been able to hear in their convictions in the 1993 slaying of three West Memphis children. Baldwin also was granted his request for further scientific testing of hair samples.

Here's the Echols opinion. Here's the Misskelley ruling. Here's the Baldwin ruling. The court was unanimous, with Justices Ronald Sheffield and Robert Brown and Chief Justice Jim Hannah writing the Echols, Misskelley and Baldwin opinions, respectively.

The further good news for all defendants is that Burnett, consistenty pro-prosecution in the case, will no longer be judge. He's been elected to the state Senate. He is no longer able to adjudicate the case, the Supreme Court said, and directed the senior judge of the circuit to reassign the case according to the district's assignment plan. Judge Ralph Wilson's phone is busy at the moment.; Reply to this comment


by musicloverhoney September 8, 2010 9:03 PM EDT: These rantings are ludicrous. Jason Baldwin never "confessed" to a friend. A guy that was in jail at the same time as Baldwin got out in exchange for being a "snitch" and told a disgusting story that added up to what the prosecution wanted to make everyone believe had happened. What too many people are forgetting is that 7 of some of the finest pathologists (including HBO Autopsy's Dr. Michael Baden) and doctors all came to the same conclusion in independent examinations. The damage done to the bodies of the three young boys was done by post-mortem animal predation.

Also, if the boys had been killed in the way that the police got Jessie to "confess" that they were killed, there would have been a blood bath in those woods. There was barely traces of blood found in luminol testing. The locations of the small traces could be consistent with where the ridiculous excuses for officers of the law let those poor bodies sit on the dirt for about an hour or so before the medical examiner arrived on the scene (even as a teenager at the time of the first documentary, I knew you don't disturb the crime scene until it is processed) or with the bodies being sat on the ground as they were brought from the murder location to be dumped.

Finally, the experts who have examined the bodies agree that the ligatures were tied on the wrists and ankles of the bodies while they were either already expired or unconscious due to the lack of markings that would occur in a struggle by a person who is awake. What other reason would you have to "hogtie" a small, unconscious body than to carry it to a dump site. When you put all this information together, you begin to see that the story that Jessie was walked into stating was more far-fetched than it sounded. If you want to use Jessie's confession as a reason these men are guilty, I suggest you listen to it first. There is no way you can listen to that tape (and know how much he started off stating wrong) and not be able to hear the detective walk him into the "right" information. Beyond this, I and those six families live in America. Last time I checked, the constitution is meant to be upheld in the courts. When a jury brings inadmissible "evidence" into a jury room to get a conviction, you are violating the constitution.

Also, as a side note, for those of you that want to site Steve Branch's disgust with the celebs and supporters, why don't you ask him why he left Stevie's life long before he passed away and has had little to do with any aspect of his life before or after it was over.

I have all of the sympathy in the world for the families of the lost boys and I know that this has to be hard on them. But this didn't have to happen in the first place if the right person had been convicted. To punish three innocent men for the comfort of the grieving and in the shadow of doubt is one of the most wrong things I have ever heard of. You might as well take out a gun and take their lives by your own hand if some "microscopically similar fibers" is all you need to put a man to death. Justice for Six and Freedom for the WM3!; Reply to this comment

by Mr_Pryor September 3, 2010 1:15 PM EDT

To all,

Let's not worry about cbsman. He sounds more like FOXnewsman. Those of us who walk upright and breathe through our noses know the truth. Free the WM3. By the way, cbs, besides the fact that wrongful convictions have long been a part of our legal system, why would Mark Byers (stepfather to one of the victims) elect to get false teeth after new bite make evidence was submitted for court review? His wife died mysteriously and recently. And, other than heresay, there is NO physical evidence linking any of the convicted to the crime or even the crime "scene". Byers killed them and dumped them in the creek. There you go, cbs, you can quote me now, so it must be what actually happened. If I told you that you owe my $100, would you just belive me. I mean, jesus, of course an appeal is denied when the SAME judge hears the appeal who head the original case. You're a dangerous type of stupid.

Reply to this comment


by ukrainelover September 6, 2010 11:24 PM EDT: To Mr. Pryor - You are obviously another brainwashed acolyte of Damien Echols. You are wasting your time, that child killer is going to rot in his cell and is lucky that he hasn't gotten the big needle that he so richly deserves for a crime that his modus operandi written all over it. Oh I forgot,somebody just impersonated him ....LOL


by kidfishman September 2, 2010 3:35 AM EDT: I don't know about the DNA evidence or anything, but I did read an insightful and comical take on Johnny Depp's interesting in this case.

http://amaribfishman.blogspot.com/2010/09/west-memphis-three-johnny-depp-ask-for_02.html; Reply to this comment

by readplease September 1, 2010 12:53 PM EDT

This case currently has a motion before the Arkansas supreme court - not sure why anyone would think it's over - o trust the former jurors from this trial who now say they think the 3 are innocent as do the parents of the murdered boys and numerous ex prosecutors from ark. Who say the 3 were railroaded far more than pure gossip and misinformation posted by random people on the Internet

Reply to this comment


by ukrainelover September 6, 2010 11:27 PM EDT: Damien Echols is not about to fool the Arkansas Supreme court like he has the poor woman who married this pervert. This crime so defined Damien that he might as well have left his signature at the crime scene! You belong with the cockroaches Damien!!


by readplease September 1, 2010 10:18 AM EDT: I see a post that mentions the coerced confession from the trial of a mentally handicapped defendant but nothing from the trial of Damien Echols or the co defendant, why ? Because they never confessed and the confession from the third guy was recanted an inadmissible as he said he told the cops whatever they told him to say because they told him he could go home if he did.

The step father is guilty - even the other victims parents say so.; Reply to this comment


by readplease August 31, 2010 10:46 PM EDT: Only one of them gave a confession and he was tried seperately after he recanted his confession and refused to testify against the other two. none of them were found in muddy clothes nor were they found anywhere near the crime scene - and no evidence of fibers was found on any of the accused clothes or in their homes and evidence of any of the above mentioned was NEVER presented at trial.

The step fathers hair was found in the ropes that bound the boys, not on their clothes, he filed a defamation lawsuit against singer natalie maines when she publicly suggested he had been seen with the boys shortly before the murders and he lost, 3 women saw him chasing them.

The reason they were convicted is that the coerced confession was leaked to the Jury foreman who told the jury - the confession of the 3rd boy, who had already recanted as he was retarded and said he was tricked when the police told him he could go home if he told them they did it, was bared from trial against the other two so it was NOT presented at trial and shouldn't have been used at all.

even Jurors from the trial have now said they made a mistake and the 3 should go free - as do two of the parents of the victims; Reply to this comment