Studying! It's amazing the distractions I can find. Now reading about the release of three boys in Memphis I watched a documentary a few years ago. They are now being freed 18 years later.
I am at least sitting at my desk. How awkward and weird I can feel I am when I go to OU lecture days and weekends. I try to head towards others I see sitting or standing on their own. I have to really muster up so much courage. I can then want so much to make them my friend if I like them but truly I don't usually follow up as actually it's merely a passing encounter. I hate how many people have passed through and gone forever yet can also see how amazing and fortunate it has been to have had these brief encounters. I still hang on to loss and the first time I felt so distraught. A friend when I was about 5 I think - I loved her. And then she went to Germany, her dad was in the army. I felt she had been taken from me. For a long time I was inconsolable. First time I remember the taste of not eating actually. Wow never had remembered that before.
Anyway all that from thinking about the many many people who have come and gone and how sensitive I am and get clingy at the thought of losing them. Yet it is part of being. So my learning today is just that and I don't need to be clingy simply enjoy encounters. Treasure my friends I trust and see what happens next. Nice
These thoughts were initiated when speaking with my friend M who is going to an event on her own today. She was saying yesterday how difficult she finds that. Me too. I have a judgement that I am a billy no mates. I am not sure where that originates from. I think maybe from young friends at junior school mocking one or two people who were then always friendless. It's difficult to know if they were friendless and that's why they got mocked or they were friendless because they got mocked and in selfishness everyone pulled away so as not to get mocked too. Kids are so cruel. I wonder f that saying is true. I don't think kids are cruel naturally. I am just not sure where this type of attitude and behaviour develops from.
When out walking last Sunday with M I noticed a reaction in me when she asked me what I would do if she put a slug down my neck. There was taunting int hat attitude that I found really horrible. And I could feel the child in me. I let the girls tie me up when I was ever so little, maybe 3 or 4. And they left me. I was so ashamed I hid behind the wall and tried to get out of the ropes without shouting for help. I was so upset by them, that people could be so unkind to me. I didn't understand it. Why would they be so nasty to me. It was a similar feeling with M. Why would she do that to me, I am her friend. She didn't of course. I wondered if it is the bullied within siblings becoming that way with others. Not having had siblings I didn't enter into anything like those kind of relationships until I met other kids in the cul de sac. Initially I had my little friend next door and we played. Sometimes it was a little fraught but when isn't any relationship. I don't think it was ever nasty. perhaps I was bossy actually as I was 2 years older and at 4 that is quite a lot. She followed me about until I went to school and then she made new friends in the cul de sac. I felt very left out. Her mum made friends with people mum would not befriend so K met knew and different people. It was these girls that stole my dolls clothes and tied me up. So perhaps there was a reason they behaved this way that my mum saw in the parents? Who knows?
I believe that babies are born with anger but as a motivation to get survive their vulnerability. Maybe anger is the wrong word for those people that associate anger with "bad" stuff. But for me anger is valid, important and not bad. The way people behave in anger can be unpleasant and can escalate into the unacceptable even violence or murder. It is this uncontained anger that grows into rage and this is not healthy. I have learnt so much within my job observing and seeing how by containing people can learn. I have experienced the changes myself. The rage was being cultivated through trauma as a child and the anger that usually ensures that vulnerability is taken care of turned into a coping mechanism of my own. Survival is the name of the species game. We use every resource available. And if the nurturing is ruptured in any way - well there we go the anger gets taken outside.
It's all theory of course but I do see the patterns. I would like to work in an clinical environment where I could research this and continue working directly with clients on the therapeutic side. Clinical psychology and I simply do not have the funding. Or the degree yet. Blimey
Anyway the Memphis 3. Their story grabbed me when I watched the documentary, Paradise Lost. I only saw it about 4 years ago when JB told me about it. I was horrified at the way these young boys were treated in their court case. Yes an horrific murder. 3 little boys murdered in an awful manner. It looked ritualistic. This took place in Robin Hood Hills.
Damien Echols, Jessie Misskelleymonth were freed. Johnny Depp apparently was involved in the ongoing campaign to get their release. If the documentary was accurate there were so many falsities. They were set up it seemed. And there were pointers that the camera crew gave to the police and yet these things were ignored. The documentary, although probably was with the intention of helping their original case, seemed in the end detrimental. I watched it in horror. The unfolding story just screamed to me of the way the police wanted to have someone to blame. These kids were blamed because of their music tastes and the way they dressed. Well particularly Damien who in fact if I remember correctly was slightly older than the other two. And I also thought I found one of them not so bright. They were forced into making a confession. When the case was brought for appeal the documentary crew were not able to get close at all.
So they have been freed ....
I found this report dated 19th August BBC News Canada & USA
The three maintain their innocence though they pleaded guilty to win their freedom
Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley were convicted in 1994, but new DNA evidence raised doubts.
The so-called West Memphis Three were backed by celebrities who had raised money for their case.
They were freed from prison on Friday in a deal allowing them to claim innocence while agreeing prosecutors had enough evidence to convict them.
Speaking to reporters after they were freed, Baldwin said he had been reluctant to plead guilty to crimes he did not commit, but said he had wanted to spare Echols the death penalty.
'Satanic rite'
Echols said the release was "overwhelming".
"It's not perfect by any means," he said of the deal. "But it at least brings closure to some areas and some aspects."
Although families of two of the victims had come to believe the trio were innocent, an onlooker shouted "baby killers" as the men walked free from court.
The men were teenagers when they were convicted for the brutal May 1993 murder and mutilation of three eight-year-old boys who were found nude and bound in a ditch in West Memphis in the US state of Arkansas.
John Mark Byers, father of victim Christopher Byers, proclaimed the trio's innocence outside court
Steve Branch and Michael Moore drowned in about two feet (0.6m) of water, and Christopher Byers bled to death, his genitals mutilated and partially removed.
They were arrested after police received a tip that Echols had been seen covered in mud the night the boys disappeared, and Misskelley, 17, gave a surprise confession.
He later recanted and defence lawyers said he inaccurately described many of the details in the case.
In addition, two girls aged 12 and 15 said they had overheard Echols confess to the murders, while divers found a knife in a lake behind Baldwin's parents' house.
Prosecutors introduced a theory that the killings were some sort of satanic rite, and gave evidence they said indicated the three teenagers were part of a cult.
Echols, 18 at the time, was sentenced to death. Baldwin, 16, and Misskelley were sentenced to life in prison.
Decades of litigation ensued, and the trio, who became known as the West Memphis Three, gained celebrity supporters, including Pearl Jam frontman Eddie Vedder, who helped raise money for their legal defence.
They were also the subject of a 1996 HBO television documentary.
The actor Johnny Depp and Natalie Maines, lead singer of the Dixie Chicks, also embraced the trio's cause.
DNA testing conducted between 2005 and 2007 found no evidence linking the three men to the murder, but pointed to the possible presence of others at the scene of the crime.
Defence lawyers also alleged a juror had improperly heard Misskelley's confession.
Meanwhile, the mother of a witness who had testified she heard Echols confess to the murders cast doubt on the truthfulness of that testimony.
'Alford plea'
In the most recent round of appeals, the Arkansas Supreme Court last year ordered an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the DNA evidence should result in a new trial.
On Friday, prosecutor Scott Ellington said a new trial would have been difficult to carry out so long after the crime.
In the move that led to their release from prison, the men pleaded guilty under a so-called Alford plea that allows them to maintain their innocence while acknowledging prosecutors have enough evidence to convict them.
They were given credit for the time they had already served in prison, but remain on parole and could be imprisoned again for up to 21 years if they re-offend.
"Today's proceeding allows the defendants the freedom of speech to say they are innocent, but the fact is, they just pled guilty," Mr Ellington said.
"I strongly believe that the interests of justice have been served today."
Oh it seems that only Damien Echols was on death row! And after this week a man being put to death still proclaiming his innocence it feels me with horror what we humans will do to humans. One of the big debates. A life for a life? But what if it is a mistake? Is it worth killing with the risk of doubt? I think not. I think killing, even when it's in the name of convicting a murderer, is barbaric. I am not sure what the answer is. The more I study about neurology and psychology the less I think there is evil people but I think evil can be cultivated. We all have a responsibility every time someone murders. So convict us all - ha! No way - everyone needs to blame someone else so that the majority don't have to do anything about it.
Mmm I know it's probably too idealistic. I am not sure. Sounds gloomy to me.
I am certain that the father of one of the murdered boys was implicated. Well again if the documentary I watched held truths. John Mark Myers, father of Christopher Myers. I can't remember the exact details but there was knife that would match the wounds on one of the boys whose testicles had been cut off and he had been left to bleed to death. This knife was John Mark's. He agreed it was. And it was fond with blood on. But when the reporters mentioned this to the police they ignored this completely.
Well I trust in the Universal energy and the flow. I don't suppose I understand how it is possible for people to think it is OK to kill others but in the name of law or religion even (wars). But it is how it is. I would stand by my thoughts in any debate unless convinced otherwise. I pray for more wisdom and for humans to keep walking towards becoming humane. Funny how the civilisation feels so uncivilised to me at times. There is an ambiguity I find difficult to deal with. Going with the flow yet there are things I instinctively dislike. I do not campaign loudly. It doesn't mean to me that because I wish to learn how to go with the flow that I need to agree with everything that happens. I would like to speak with a Buddhist monk to ask what they think about this ambiguity. I think I will call the monastery and see if there is a time I can get to sit and talk these queries through and see how they deal with them. There is simplicity for certain. Every time (ha ha that makes it sound like I discuss things with "them" regularly) I have spoken with a monk they have kept things so very very simple. Not avoiding, just simple. They have shared how they have worked through their own suffering and reached a point of contentment. This for me is the same as being aware of emotional responses and behaviours that might be contrasting and evoking difficulty within me and by discussing and thinking and writing and reading gradually I work towards acceptance that initially comes and goes and eventually seem to be more settling. Of course life is so diverse that acceptance can be stirred up once again and there is more to consider and contemplate and perhaps a new acceptance will arrive. What a never ending journey of passion, adventure, awakening and peace. Walking towards the end of the path is a marvel to behold. I feel so at peace and blissful when I can realise this. It comes more often.
Bliss
xx
I am at least sitting at my desk. How awkward and weird I can feel I am when I go to OU lecture days and weekends. I try to head towards others I see sitting or standing on their own. I have to really muster up so much courage. I can then want so much to make them my friend if I like them but truly I don't usually follow up as actually it's merely a passing encounter. I hate how many people have passed through and gone forever yet can also see how amazing and fortunate it has been to have had these brief encounters. I still hang on to loss and the first time I felt so distraught. A friend when I was about 5 I think - I loved her. And then she went to Germany, her dad was in the army. I felt she had been taken from me. For a long time I was inconsolable. First time I remember the taste of not eating actually. Wow never had remembered that before.
Anyway all that from thinking about the many many people who have come and gone and how sensitive I am and get clingy at the thought of losing them. Yet it is part of being. So my learning today is just that and I don't need to be clingy simply enjoy encounters. Treasure my friends I trust and see what happens next. Nice
These thoughts were initiated when speaking with my friend M who is going to an event on her own today. She was saying yesterday how difficult she finds that. Me too. I have a judgement that I am a billy no mates. I am not sure where that originates from. I think maybe from young friends at junior school mocking one or two people who were then always friendless. It's difficult to know if they were friendless and that's why they got mocked or they were friendless because they got mocked and in selfishness everyone pulled away so as not to get mocked too. Kids are so cruel. I wonder f that saying is true. I don't think kids are cruel naturally. I am just not sure where this type of attitude and behaviour develops from.
When out walking last Sunday with M I noticed a reaction in me when she asked me what I would do if she put a slug down my neck. There was taunting int hat attitude that I found really horrible. And I could feel the child in me. I let the girls tie me up when I was ever so little, maybe 3 or 4. And they left me. I was so ashamed I hid behind the wall and tried to get out of the ropes without shouting for help. I was so upset by them, that people could be so unkind to me. I didn't understand it. Why would they be so nasty to me. It was a similar feeling with M. Why would she do that to me, I am her friend. She didn't of course. I wondered if it is the bullied within siblings becoming that way with others. Not having had siblings I didn't enter into anything like those kind of relationships until I met other kids in the cul de sac. Initially I had my little friend next door and we played. Sometimes it was a little fraught but when isn't any relationship. I don't think it was ever nasty. perhaps I was bossy actually as I was 2 years older and at 4 that is quite a lot. She followed me about until I went to school and then she made new friends in the cul de sac. I felt very left out. Her mum made friends with people mum would not befriend so K met knew and different people. It was these girls that stole my dolls clothes and tied me up. So perhaps there was a reason they behaved this way that my mum saw in the parents? Who knows?
I believe that babies are born with anger but as a motivation to get survive their vulnerability. Maybe anger is the wrong word for those people that associate anger with "bad" stuff. But for me anger is valid, important and not bad. The way people behave in anger can be unpleasant and can escalate into the unacceptable even violence or murder. It is this uncontained anger that grows into rage and this is not healthy. I have learnt so much within my job observing and seeing how by containing people can learn. I have experienced the changes myself. The rage was being cultivated through trauma as a child and the anger that usually ensures that vulnerability is taken care of turned into a coping mechanism of my own. Survival is the name of the species game. We use every resource available. And if the nurturing is ruptured in any way - well there we go the anger gets taken outside.
It's all theory of course but I do see the patterns. I would like to work in an clinical environment where I could research this and continue working directly with clients on the therapeutic side. Clinical psychology and I simply do not have the funding. Or the degree yet. Blimey
Anyway the Memphis 3. Their story grabbed me when I watched the documentary, Paradise Lost. I only saw it about 4 years ago when JB told me about it. I was horrified at the way these young boys were treated in their court case. Yes an horrific murder. 3 little boys murdered in an awful manner. It looked ritualistic. This took place in Robin Hood Hills.
Damien Echols, Jessie Misskelleymonth were freed. Johnny Depp apparently was involved in the ongoing campaign to get their release. If the documentary was accurate there were so many falsities. They were set up it seemed. And there were pointers that the camera crew gave to the police and yet these things were ignored. The documentary, although probably was with the intention of helping their original case, seemed in the end detrimental. I watched it in horror. The unfolding story just screamed to me of the way the police wanted to have someone to blame. These kids were blamed because of their music tastes and the way they dressed. Well particularly Damien who in fact if I remember correctly was slightly older than the other two. And I also thought I found one of them not so bright. They were forced into making a confession. When the case was brought for appeal the documentary crew were not able to get close at all.
So they have been freed ....
I found this report dated 19th August BBC News Canada & USA
'West Memphis Three' freed after 18 years in prison
The three maintain their innocence though they pleaded guilty to win their freedom Three US men who say they were falsely convicted of murdering three boys have been freed after 18 years in prison.
Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley were convicted in 1994, but new DNA evidence raised doubts.
The so-called West Memphis Three were backed by celebrities who had raised money for their case.
They were freed from prison on Friday in a deal allowing them to claim innocence while agreeing prosecutors had enough evidence to convict them.
Speaking to reporters after they were freed, Baldwin said he had been reluctant to plead guilty to crimes he did not commit, but said he had wanted to spare Echols the death penalty.
'Satanic rite'
Echols said the release was "overwhelming".
"It's not perfect by any means," he said of the deal. "But it at least brings closure to some areas and some aspects."
Although families of two of the victims had come to believe the trio were innocent, an onlooker shouted "baby killers" as the men walked free from court.
The men were teenagers when they were convicted for the brutal May 1993 murder and mutilation of three eight-year-old boys who were found nude and bound in a ditch in West Memphis in the US state of Arkansas.
John Mark Byers, father of victim Christopher Byers, proclaimed the trio's innocence outside court Steve Branch and Michael Moore drowned in about two feet (0.6m) of water, and Christopher Byers bled to death, his genitals mutilated and partially removed.
They were arrested after police received a tip that Echols had been seen covered in mud the night the boys disappeared, and Misskelley, 17, gave a surprise confession.
He later recanted and defence lawyers said he inaccurately described many of the details in the case.
In addition, two girls aged 12 and 15 said they had overheard Echols confess to the murders, while divers found a knife in a lake behind Baldwin's parents' house.
Prosecutors introduced a theory that the killings were some sort of satanic rite, and gave evidence they said indicated the three teenagers were part of a cult.
Echols, 18 at the time, was sentenced to death. Baldwin, 16, and Misskelley were sentenced to life in prison.
Decades of litigation ensued, and the trio, who became known as the West Memphis Three, gained celebrity supporters, including Pearl Jam frontman Eddie Vedder, who helped raise money for their legal defence.
They were also the subject of a 1996 HBO television documentary.
The actor Johnny Depp and Natalie Maines, lead singer of the Dixie Chicks, also embraced the trio's cause.
DNA testing conducted between 2005 and 2007 found no evidence linking the three men to the murder, but pointed to the possible presence of others at the scene of the crime.
Defence lawyers also alleged a juror had improperly heard Misskelley's confession.
Meanwhile, the mother of a witness who had testified she heard Echols confess to the murders cast doubt on the truthfulness of that testimony.
'Alford plea'
In the most recent round of appeals, the Arkansas Supreme Court last year ordered an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the DNA evidence should result in a new trial.
On Friday, prosecutor Scott Ellington said a new trial would have been difficult to carry out so long after the crime.
In the move that led to their release from prison, the men pleaded guilty under a so-called Alford plea that allows them to maintain their innocence while acknowledging prosecutors have enough evidence to convict them.
They were given credit for the time they had already served in prison, but remain on parole and could be imprisoned again for up to 21 years if they re-offend.
"Today's proceeding allows the defendants the freedom of speech to say they are innocent, but the fact is, they just pled guilty," Mr Ellington said.
"I strongly believe that the interests of justice have been served today."
Oh it seems that only Damien Echols was on death row! And after this week a man being put to death still proclaiming his innocence it feels me with horror what we humans will do to humans. One of the big debates. A life for a life? But what if it is a mistake? Is it worth killing with the risk of doubt? I think not. I think killing, even when it's in the name of convicting a murderer, is barbaric. I am not sure what the answer is. The more I study about neurology and psychology the less I think there is evil people but I think evil can be cultivated. We all have a responsibility every time someone murders. So convict us all - ha! No way - everyone needs to blame someone else so that the majority don't have to do anything about it.
Mmm I know it's probably too idealistic. I am not sure. Sounds gloomy to me.
I am certain that the father of one of the murdered boys was implicated. Well again if the documentary I watched held truths. John Mark Myers, father of Christopher Myers. I can't remember the exact details but there was knife that would match the wounds on one of the boys whose testicles had been cut off and he had been left to bleed to death. This knife was John Mark's. He agreed it was. And it was fond with blood on. But when the reporters mentioned this to the police they ignored this completely.
Well I trust in the Universal energy and the flow. I don't suppose I understand how it is possible for people to think it is OK to kill others but in the name of law or religion even (wars). But it is how it is. I would stand by my thoughts in any debate unless convinced otherwise. I pray for more wisdom and for humans to keep walking towards becoming humane. Funny how the civilisation feels so uncivilised to me at times. There is an ambiguity I find difficult to deal with. Going with the flow yet there are things I instinctively dislike. I do not campaign loudly. It doesn't mean to me that because I wish to learn how to go with the flow that I need to agree with everything that happens. I would like to speak with a Buddhist monk to ask what they think about this ambiguity. I think I will call the monastery and see if there is a time I can get to sit and talk these queries through and see how they deal with them. There is simplicity for certain. Every time (ha ha that makes it sound like I discuss things with "them" regularly) I have spoken with a monk they have kept things so very very simple. Not avoiding, just simple. They have shared how they have worked through their own suffering and reached a point of contentment. This for me is the same as being aware of emotional responses and behaviours that might be contrasting and evoking difficulty within me and by discussing and thinking and writing and reading gradually I work towards acceptance that initially comes and goes and eventually seem to be more settling. Of course life is so diverse that acceptance can be stirred up once again and there is more to consider and contemplate and perhaps a new acceptance will arrive. What a never ending journey of passion, adventure, awakening and peace. Walking towards the end of the path is a marvel to behold. I feel so at peace and blissful when I can realise this. It comes more often.
Bliss
xx
No comments:
Post a Comment