"I really do believe these people would have gotten away with murdering me if it would not have been for what you guys did — for being there in the beginning and getting this whole thing on tape so the rest of the world sees what's happening." That's Damien Echols, talking to filmmakers Joe Berlinger and Bruce Sinofsky a couple of years ago when they visited him in prison for the most recent installment of "Paradise Lost," their HBO documentary series about the West Memphis Three that aired last year.
He's referring ("these people") to Arkansas law enforcement and the criminal justice system. In 1994, Echols and his friends Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley were convicted of the murders of three 8-year-old boys.
From the beginning they maintained their innocence. The "Paradise Lost" films (the first of which aired on HBO in 1996) took their claims seriously, analyzing the trial evidence (or lack thereof) and capturing the circus-like atmosphere of a small town desperate to find someone guilty for the grisly crimes.
Among those who saw the films were "Hobbit" director Peter Jackson and his partner Fran Walsh, who became involved with the case and supplied substantial funds and emotional support to Lorri Davis, who married Echols in 1999 (while he was in prison) and spent the better part of the last decade working to free him.
Based on evidence uncovered by their efforts, the state of Arkansas begrudgingly agreed to release the men (now in their 30s) last year after nearly two decades in prison. They have yet to be officially exonerated, however, though Echols and Davis continue to pursue the case.
"West of Memphis" is the new documentary from Jackson (made with Echols and Davis) that offers a comprehensive look at the case from start to finish. It opens in Chicago Friday and is a separate project from the "Paradise Lost" films, which is somewhat confusing for those of us who have followed the story through the HBO films. Why make another documentary — and why do it without the "Paradise Lost" filmmakers? That was the first question I asked Echols and Davis when they came through town recently to talk about the film. The following is an edited transcript:
Q: The most recent of the "Paradise Lost" documentaries tracking your case was released just last year. So why make another film?
Echols: We were at the point where, whenever we started coming up with new DNA evidence, new forensic experts, new witnesses, we would present it to the judge, and he would say, "I'm not going to hear it. It doesn't matter. This case is closed." So Peter (Jackson) said, if we can't get it heard in court, let's do the only thing we can do and get it out to the public. Let's let people see what the judge is trying to cover up. So that's when we started making the documentary. They hadn't even started on "Paradise Lost 3" yet.
Q: Why not work with the "Paradise Lost" filmmakers, though?
Echols: Because we weren't comfortable with them. What they do is like a really early version of reality TV where you set the camera up and watch the train wreck. We wanted the movie to be much more personal. We would never have been producers on one of their movies. They would have never given us that much say in our own story.
Davis: What we wanted was to film an investigation. Bruce and Joe have a different style; it's not investigative journalism, whereas Amy Berg (who directed "West of Memphis") had worked with CNN.
Q: I think that will surprise people, because the "Paradise Lost" films were so instrumental in publicizing your case and illustrating how likely it was that you were wrongly convicted. Do you dislike those films?
Echols: Never saw 'em. I saw 15 minutes of the first one, and it was one of those things that I can only compare to Vietnam vets having flashbacks. I understood why the movies had such an impact on people because when I was watching the first one it felt just like being in the courtroom again. For me, that wasn't a pleasant thing. So after about 15 minutes I said, "I'm ready to go back to my cell."
Davis: "Paradise Lost" is the reason I got involved in the case (and met Echols) and it's the reason a lot of people got involved. It's a really important part of this story and we want Bruce and Joe to get the credit that they deserved.
But by the time I was involved in the case, I wanted to see them come down and set up camp and start doing an investigation. and that wasn't their style. I think what they do is more sensational. They like to get the biggest impact from the crazy things that are going on.
Q: What was Peter Jackson's involvement?
Davis: He funded a great deal of the investigation and the work.
Q: All told, how much was spent on the case over the years?
Davis: Oh my goodness, I don't know. Millions. You don't get much pro bono work. And if you have to hire forensic pathologists and all these other experts, you have to pay for them. Who has that kind of money?
Q: How do support yourselves now?
