RE: THE WEST MEMPHIS THREE

As some of you may know, the West Memphis 3 – Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley – are out of jail. For those of you who aren’t familiar with the original case – and why it’s controversial enough for Henry Rollins, Eddie Vedder and Steve Earle to step in – you can get up to speed here.

I’ve been following the case for awhile now, and based on what I know about it, I tend to side with the WM3, not least because most of the evidence of their guilt comprised (1) a flawed (and allegedly forced) confession from one of the defendants who later recanted, and (2) the WM3 wore black t-shirts, listened to a lot of heavy metal, read a lot of Stephen King and were practitioners of Wicca.

That second bit is a detail that should be highlighted a lot more prominently than it has been in the post-freedom coverage, because it’s a direct reflection of where Satanic panic and fear of music can ultimately lead.

I’m biased, of course, since I’m certainly guilty of listening to music that routinely gets blamed for everything from mass murder to teenage masturbation. And it’s worth mentioning I grew up in the South, where every evangelical preacher in town (and there were many) warning of the evils of rock music and backwards masking and The Devil’s hand in all this, and ultimately Tipper Gore’s porn rock hearings in the US Senate.

Also, I once dated a Wiccan. And if I learned anything from that, it’s that Wicca has about as much to do with Satanism as repairing toasters.

So when I hear about cases where three teenage kids get life in jail and/or the death penalty primarily because they were into Wicca and the prosecution not only believes all the bullshit the PMRC used to say about heavy metal, but also considers it sufficient evidence to convict someone in the absence of all other evidence – I tend to see this in a negative light, yes.

Which is why I can't say I’m too happy with the deal that freed the WM3.

In essence, the case was looking at an all-new trial after new DNA evidence failed to place any of the suspects at the scene of the crime. But rather than take that chance – particularly with Echols on Death Row – they copped to what’s known as an Alford plea, in which the defendant pleas guilty without admitting guilt. If that doesn’t make any sense, think of it as saying, “I swear I didn’t do it, but I can’t refute the facts that the prosecution has against me and if I go to trial I’m bound to lose, so I’ll plead guilty, but only to get a lower sentence, not because I’m admitting I did it.”

If that still doesn’t make any sense, welcome to the US legal system.

Anyway, what that means for the WM3 is that they’ve still pled guilty, but can also legally say they never admitted to the murders. But as far as the rest of the world is concerned, they’re still convicted child murderers, so they’re not getting a clean slate out of this. And they can’t even sue the state for wrongful imprisonment.

What’s worse is that as far as the state of Arkansas is concerned, the case is closed. Which means that the real killer(s) are still out there, getting away with it.  

So all up, the WM3 ordeal ends with injustice for all. Three kids get their lives ruined, a brutal killer goes free, and the state of Arkansas gets to use your record collection and non-Christian religious beliefs as enough proof to convict you of whatever. All because some dumb hick lawyers and a gullible media were a-feared of the Satans and the Heavy Metals.

Not that I think the WM3 shouldn’t have taken the deal. That’s their call, and at least they've vowed to find the real killer and clear their names. But you can’t call it justice by a long shot.

Wrong and important,

This is dF

BONUS TRACK: For the record, I first learned about the WM3 via a friend who sent me a few songs off of a compilation called Free The West Memphis Three, the proceeds for which went to their legal defense fund. I bought the CD – it’s in the CD rack in front of me. I recommend it for the music alone.

There’s also this comp of Black Flag covers for the same cause, though I don’t have a copy of that.

KUNG FU, PANDAS AND MICHAEL BAY’S EGO

Catching up on the movie reviews. Because God knows there’s not enough of them on the Internet.

Wu Xia (a.k.a. Dragon) 

A film from local director Peter Chan about Liu Jingxi, a paper mill worker in a small village in 1917 China who stops a robbery and kills the two bandits – one of whom turns out to be Yan Dongsheng, one of the most wanted criminals in China. That raises the suspicions of constable Xu Baijiu, who starts investigating Liu’s past because Yan was also a skilled martial artist who couldn’t possibly be defeated by a lucky paper-mill worker.

The set-up will sound familiar to anyone who has read or seen A History Of Violence, and the rest of Wu Xia will seem familiar to anyone who has seen The One Armed Swordsman. In which case the storyline won’t tell you anything you haven’t already heard.

Wu Xia looks great and has lots of whiz-bang kung fu, as well as quite a bit of OTT forensic imagery lifted from CSI. But the most interesting angle of the film – Xu trying to work out just who Liu really is whilst being forced to question his own sense of justice – only takes up the first half of the story. Once Liu’s identity is revealed, the second half devolves into fairly standard (if impeccably choreographed and photographed) kung fu territory. A little disappointing, but it’s a fairly good film overall.

Kung Fu Panda 2

It's a sequel, yes, in which Po (the Kung Fu Panda in question) is living it up as the Dragon Warrior, but finds himself suddenly confronted with the question of his origins, which was a running gag in the first film (Po’s father being a goose). The answer lies with the main villain, Lord Shen, a peacock who has developed a cannon that will help him to destroy kung fu and conquer China.

Like the first film, there’s lots of Chinese imagery, fat jokes and kung fu action scenes so fast that you can barely follow the action. And, like the first film, a lot of it’s pretty funny. But it’s also pretty predictable and ultimately disposable. Fun while it lasts, but not something I’d watch again (at least not until it’s on TV).

Transformers: Dark Of The Moon

Why? Because I was bored and in town with a few hours to kill, all the coffee shops were full and it was either this or The Smurfs. Also, I heard Chicago gets destroyed in it, and who wouldn’t want to see that? And I’ll confess, when I saw the trailer for it – where it implies the real mission of Apollo 11 was to investigate a crashed alien ship – I didn’t know what movie it was, and I thought, “This looks like it could be good.” Then it started showing Transformer robots and I thought, “Oh, f***socks.”

Anyway, you may hate Michael Bay (I know I do), but you can’t say he doesn’t deliver what yr promised: namely, giant robots kicking the shit out of each other for 2.5 hours. Who cares if most of what happens makes no sense whatsoever, to include pretty much everything the main character does? (I don’t have a problem with Shia LaBeouf as an actor, but Sam Witwicky has to be the single most annoying character in recent movie history.)

So, yes, it’s horseshit – but it’s well-assembled professional horseshit. Besides, the Transformers cartoon was always just a gimmick to sell Hasbro toys. Who better than Bay to represent that artistic integrity?

You get what you pay for,

This is dF