by Greg Day
Byers: No, sir, I don’t recall giving him that exact answer. I’m sure his question wouldn’t have been asked exactly like your question was.
Price was trying to get Mark to testify that he had contradicted himself during the interview with Gitchell and Ridge, but that interview was almost a month in the past. Mark was also heavily medicated during the trials—as were other family members, friends, and witnesses (notably Vicki Hutcheson)—which further affected his memory, as well as his ability to articulate his thoughts. Getting him to commit to an answer was next to impossible, and Price’s frustration was mounting.
Price: Okay. Alright, do you remember Gitchell asking you, “Ryan did not cut himself with the Kershaw?” And do you remember answering that question, “Correct, no one’s been cut with the Kershaw”? Do you recall giving that response to Inspector Gitchell?
Byers: Seems like my response would have been, no one had been cut with it—you know, that I would have known about—and he was referring to my two sons or my wife, I guess.
Price: I asked you a few moments ago if you ever used the knife, and you said on one occasion you trimmed some veni—you attempted to trim some venison with it. You remember giving that response?
Byers: Yes, sir.
Price: Okay, do you remember being asked by Gitchell—this is on page 4—“Did you use the knife?” and giving the answer, “I never used it—I would have; hopefully I was going to use it for deer hunting; that’s all I do, deer hunt—but I never had an opportunity to use it on a deer”? Do you remember giving . . . being asked that question by Gitchell and giving that response?
Byers: I don’t remember if Inspector Gitchell ever asked me in a conversation, did I ever hunt with it or did I ever use it for any other purpose like you asked me.
Mark testified that he had taken the context of Gitchell’s question to be hunting, which was not exactly what Gitchell was after. Mark’s answer to Price as to why he told Gitchell that he had never used the knife was this: “I never had an opportunity to use it on a deer ’cause I never hunted with it. It didn’t mean that at some time I didn’t have some venison in my home and try to use it to cut the venison, and he wasn’t asking me that.” He said he cut venison with the knife and cut himself with the knife, and Price couldn’t prove otherwise, despite pages and pages of direct examination.72 He couldn’t establish a clear contradiction in any of Mark’s statements to Gitchell and Ridge. If there were some inconsistencies in some of Mark’s answers, they probably fell on deaf ears in the jury box. The argument itself was almost silly: why would someone try to get rid of a murder weapon by giving it to someone who was filming a documentary about the crime? Why not simply toss it in the Mississippi River?
Price abandoned this line of questioning and began to probe the issue of Mark’s search of Robin Hood Hills on the night of the murders, insinuating that there were problems with his timeline. For example, he repeatedly asked Mark whether or not he left his house at 8:30 p.m., right after Officer Regina Meek left to begin her search for the boys (he did). Price also questioned Mark about the presence of mosquitoes that night in the area around Ten Mile Bayou. Price asked, “And at the time you left at 8:30, were the mosquitoes getting real bad at that point?” Mark answered, “Not that I remember.”
This was significant because Meek had testified that she had attempted to mount a search of Robin Hood Hills very close to the time that Mark Byers was doing the same. It was, she said, “well on its way to dark,” and she found the area to be so infested with mosquitoes that she was unable to continue. Meek testified, “The mosquitoes were tremendous. I was breathing in mosquitoes it was so bad. And I decided at that time that three eight-year-old boys would not be staying in the woods with mosquitoes that bad.”73 Although Val Price and others since then have tried to impeach Mark’s testimony based on Meek’s statement, no other searcher who entered the woods that night made any mention of mosquito infestation.74
Price shifted gears by attempting to put Mark’s timeline into question, though he couldn’t have been happy with the results. The failure of this line of questioning to yield any incriminating information was so complete that the prosecution didn’t even cross-examine him. Perhaps it was Price’s lack of skill in questioning witnesses, but his attempt to unnerve Mark was not having much affect.
Price: Alright, my question is, when you left at 8:30, did you go to the area of the bayou?
Byers: The area of the bayou—where are you referring to?
Price: Wait, let me back up. At the time you left, about 8:30, had it gotten dark?
Byers: It was getting dark.
Price: Alright, do you recall, read the top line on page 4, where it says, “It’s now probably 8:30.”
Byers: [reading] “It was probably 8:30; it had got dark.”
Price: “It was probably 8:30; it had got dark.” Alright. At the time you left there at 8:30, it was, it already got dark. Did you take a flashlight with you at that point?
Byers: No, sir.
Price: Okay. Did you go back to the house later to get a flashlight?
Byers: I went back to look for one.
Price: Okay, about what time did you go back to the house looking for a flashlight?
Byers: [sigh] I don’t remember exactly what time it was because we worked our way down to the street; we worked our way down 14th looking for [Christopher], Ryan and I.
Price: Alright, when you went out looking at 8:30, were you looking in the area of the bayou?
Byers: We had been told that they were seen down by where the concrete is pushed in the ditch.
Price: Alright. Now, answer my question. When you left at 8:30, were you looking in the area of the bayou?
Byers: We went down and looked down on this end. I don’t know what you’re referring to, you know, what you would consider the area of the bayou. The bayou’s ten miles long.
Price: Alright, so you’re saying that you were looking in the area of the bayou at 8:30?
Byers: I don’t understand your question, counselor.
If Price thought that asking the same question over and over would shake Mark Byers up, he was mistaken. Furthermore, his lack of knowledge about the various locations surrounding the crime scene made his questions impossible to answer. Finally, Price questioned Mark about the “whipping” he had given Christopher on the afternoon he disappeared. This subject, like so many others in the case, was blown so far out of proportion to its relevance that it continues to spark debate today. Devil’s Knot author Mara Leveritt and Paradise Lost 2: Revelations “star” Brent Turvey, a forensic scientist, were among the more vocal proponents of a link between the spanking and Christopher’s death. Price continued his direct examination along these lines.
Price: Alright. Earlier that afternoon, had you given Chris a whipping?
Byers: Approximately around 5:30.
Price: Okay, this was around 5:30, and was this with a belt?
Byers: Yes, sir.
Price: Okay, and approximately how many times did you hit him with a belt?
Byers: I spanked him two or three times.
Price: And what part of the body did you spank him?
Byers: It would have been just on his behind.
Price: Okay. Was his . . . was he wearing his pants, or did you have him pull his pants down?
Byers: No, he had on blue jeans.
In evoking the preceding testimony, Price was weakly attempting to establish that Mark Byers had a motive for the crime (the whipping), something that his client Damien Echols seemingly lacked. In his closing argument to the jury on March 17, Price suggested that Mark was trying to obfuscate a timeline that would have allowed him the opportunity to commit the murders and that the knife gave him the means. “First of all, we have . . . we brought forth the existence of other suspects,” Price began. He continued,
And the reason we did that is because the existence of other suspects could be reasonable doubt. One of the things we brought forth is testimony
concerning John Mark Byers. This is not an attempt on behalf of the defense to go after anybody without any basis. But we brought forth evidence that this particular knife here, defendant’s E-6—we had testimony from Dr. Peretti that some of the injuries on Christopher Byers were consistent with this type of knife.
We also had the testimony that there was blood, which later tested to be DNA, and that was consistent with Chris Byers and also John Mark Byers. Now where was that blood; where was that DNA? Was it on the blade part that could have been easily wiped off? No. The blood was back . . . the testimony was, back in the hinge. And it was real hard to get to. We also had the testimony . . . was that the only evidence about this knife? No. There was the testimony where Dr. Peretti said he saw a red fiber in this knife. Was that red fiber ever tested by the crime lab? No. In addition, we have the testimony of Dr. Peretti that some—from this witness stand up here—some of the injuries on Chris Byers were consistent with a knife of this type. That was the testimony of Dr. Peretti. We also asked John Mark Byers about statements that he’d given the police. When he testified on the stand, he testified that he injured his thumb while making beef jerky back at Thanksgiving. Okay, and then we asked him about the previous statements he gave the police on two different occasions. There’s times [that] the police interviewed him back in May, right after the bodies were found. Officer Ridge said, “We have evidence that you’re involved; we think you’re a suspect,” and they asked him about it. In addition, all the way—January, middle part of January—they again asked him about this specific knife. And what did Mr. Byers say at that time? Mr. Byers said, “There’s no way my blood could be on that knife. There’s no way Christopher’s blood could be on that knife. I have no idea how any blood could be on that knife.”
Price then tried to establish opportunity:
In addition, we have the testimony of Mr. Byers’s whereabouts that evening. He testified he left about . . . that at one time he left to try to find Christopher, came back, and then he left about 8:30. Of course, he testified it was dark at 8:30. So what’s he do when he leaves the house at 8:30? He leaves, still wearing shorts, still wearing flip-flops, still without a flashlight. Course he leaves, and it’s dark, and then he says later on he went back. I think the questionable whereabouts of John Mark Byers is important.
Price stopped short of trying to convince the jury in his closing argument that the “whipping” Christopher had received was sufficient motive for Mark to kill and mutilate his son and the two other boys, despite having questioned Mark about it on direct examination. It left him with a void, however.75 Although neither the defense nor the prosecution is required to establish motive, it would be tremendously difficult to convince twelve jurors that a father would commit a crime such as this without at least suggesting a reason and more difficult still to convince them that the motive was related to a spanking given to his son earlier in the day. Price was hoping that the jury would infer motive during their deliberations.
On March 18, after only a day and a half of deliberation, the jury found Damien Echols and Jason Baldwin guilty of first-degree murder in the deaths of Christopher Byers, Steve Branch, and Michael Moore. It took a little over two hours for the sentences to be fixed at death for Echols and life without parole for Baldwin.
On March 22, 1994, the Byerses received a letter from prosecutor Brent Davis:
Dear Mark and Melissa,
I am writing to commend you on your cooperation and participation in the trials of Misskelley, Echols, and Baldwin. You and your family showed a phenomenal amount of strength and perseverance.
We realize that there is nothing that we could have done that would have made your pain subside, but we are extremely happy that justice has been served in this case. We most definitely could not have provided the proper legal assistance without your help and support.
If there is anything that we can do for you in the future, please let us know. We will never forget your son and hope that the judgment of the court will allow you to begin the process of healing and remembering him without the frustration of the murder trials. We wish you the best.
Sincerely,
Brent Davis
Prosecuting Attorney
2 Judicial District
Ironically, it was Brent Davis who five years later charged Mark with the crime that eventually sent him to prison.
The end of the trials brought little peace for Mark and Melissa Byers. On the contrary, the verdicts brought a wave of terror over the couple that forced them to abandon their West Memphis home for higher ground. The friends and families of the convicted killers were not content to let the verdicts stand on their own. They too needed a target to lash out at, and Mark and Melissa Byers provided a big bull’s-eye. Although Mark was relatively subdued after the verdicts were read, Melissa’s hostility and anger were ignited anew.
After the Misskelley verdict, a reporter said to her, “Melissa, it must be mixed emotions for you because you have the guilty verdict, but you still have the loss to deal with.”
“This doesn’t change anything,” Melissa began, her temper slowly rising. “Christopher’s dead, and he was tortured to death by three murdering bastards on a ditch bank. He was eight years old. Guilty is guilty, and I hope the little sucker, when he hits Cummins [prison], they get his ass right off the bat. ’Cause he deserves to be tortured and punished for the rest of his life for murdering three eight-year-old children. Prison’s not a safe place, Jessie, sweetie.” Pausing slightly, she added, “I’m gonna mail him a skirt.”
Melissa also had this to say: “If I had the chance to speak to Damien Echols, I would tell him that I hope he bust hell wide open. Period. And that if I could get my hands on him, I would eat the skin off of his face.” And this: “I hate them for it. I never hated anyone in my life, and I hate these three.” Furrowing her brow deeply and stabbing the table with her finger for emphasis, Melissa snarled, “And the mothers who bore them.” 76
Before the Echols/Baldwin trial, Mark was filmed for Paradise Lost making this claim: “They found my son’s testicles in a jar of alcohol in Damien Echols’s house, with his finger prints on the jar. Now how do you dispute that?”77 Comments such as these were what aroused the ire of the friends and families of the newly convicted killers, and it is safe to say that out of the three sets of grieving parents, the Byerses had been the most animated. The backlash was immediate. According to Mark, the months following the Echols and Baldwin convictions were hellacious; a dead cat was tossed into their swimming pool, a chicken “with its neck wrung” was left in the back of Mark’s pickup, and a dog was eviscerated and left at the couple’s front door. “I knew we had to get out of town before something bad happened to somebody”, Mark said. If it struck anyone as ironic that the family of one of the victims was being made a target of terrorism, no one said a word. After court one day, reporters asked Mark, “We heard you are moving. Why?” Mark answered, “Well, if this had happened to you, would you want to stay?” With few options open to them, Mark and Melissa packed up the house at 1400 East Barton, essentially letting the bank take it. They couldn’t afford to keep up the payments on the house, given that there was no income other than Mark’s disability payments. They looked for a place to escape to where the people wouldn’t associate them with the sensational murders in West Memphis. In this, they would be singularly unsuccessful.
Cherokee Village
Auntie Em: Help us out today and find yourself a place where you won’t get into any trouble.
Dorothy: A place where there isn’t any trouble . . . do you suppose there is such a place, Toto?
One hundred thirty miles to the northwest of West Memphis lies the planned community of Cherokee Village. Nestled in the foothills of the Ozark Mountains in rural Sharp County, it sits some twenty miles south of the Missouri border. A scenic, wooded locale, Cherokee Village boasts thirteen thousand acres of recreational opportunities, including two eighteen-hole golf courses, seven lakes, two major rivers—
the Spring and the South Fork—tennis courts, swimming pools, and not surprisingly, a gun club. The population is purported to include 4,468 “permanent” residents. It is also advertised as the home of “the happiest, friendliest, most worry-free people in all of Arkansas.” Mark and Melissa Byers would find that final claim implausible at best.
It was to this community that Mark and Melissa chose to relocate immediately following the Echols/Baldwin trial. On April 4, 1994, Mark, Melissa, and Ryan moved to Cherokee Village to escape the hostility they were experiencing in West Memphis and to get away from the place that they would forever associate with the nightmare of Christopher’s murder. They sold whatever belongings they could to raise the $3,500 down payment for the home in Cherokee Village, with the owner willing to hold the rest of the mortgage. They had two bedrooms, one bathroom, a living room, and a combination kitchen/dining area covering about 1,200 square feet. The house wasn’t much, and they were poor enough that they were constantly short on cash, but at least it was quiet. The tranquility wouldn’t last.
Trouble started almost immediately. Mark and Melissa had become friendly with their next-door neighbors, John and Donna Kingsbury, who lived right around the corner on 46 Choctaw Drive. Depending on whose version you believe, one day either Mark took Kingsbury or Kingsbury took Mark to a house located at 25 Osage Drive, a little over half a mile away.78 The house belonged to Brenda Atwood, who was living in Texas at the time. According to Kingsbury, he and Mark were looking the house over to see if they could earn some extra money cleaning up the house and yard. The house was not occupied and was filled with furnishings and such, some of which appeared to be valuable. Mark Byers remembers it differently. “It was Kingsbury that first showed me the Atwood house. I’d only been in Cherokee Village a short time. There was no front or rear door on the house, and most of the windows were busted out,” he said, despite Atwood’s later claims that the house was locked up tight. The two didn’t waste any time in helping themselves to some of the contents of the house. Mark sold several items, an antique Prussian miniature sled and a life-sized cigar store Indian among them, for a total of more than $1,200 at the Cotham Auction Barn in Mammoth Spring, Arkansas.
