Having followed this case since 1996 and read much of the publically available documentation on the WM3.org site, I can say that Mara Leveritt's book is meticulously researched - more so than most of the Pre-Mallett legal cases except perhaps Stidham's - and the fact that it is by a respected Arkansas journalist ought to help put to rest the notion that only "outsiders who don't understand" would support the WM3.
Leveritt does a commendable job on two counts - showing Arkansans that not only "outsiders" believe that the WM3 cases were travesties of justice, and showing the "outsiders" that not all Arkansans are as biased, incompetent, self-serving, and self-deluded as the officials in Crittenden County involved with the WM3 case seem to be.
It is preposterous that people continue to believe Misskelley's confessions after reading their transcripts and circumstances. You don't need to be an expert like Leo & Ofshe (whose papers can give much more detailed arguments as to why Misskelley's confession is bogus) to realize that the confession is coerced, and the specifics given in it are produced by Det. Ridge and fed to Misskelley. If you can read Chapter 7 in this book and still believe that this confession is valid, you've either not paid attention to the transcripts (feel free to ignore anything that you may consider Leveritt's "interpretations") or you have such preconceptions about the defendants' guilt (and/or the infallibility of Police and Prosecutors) that even scientific evidence would not convince you.
You can't get through this book without feeling that there are serious grounds for a retrial, and that there is more than a reasonable doubt as to the defendants' guilt. Leveritt brings to light serious issues which were left out of the 2 HBO documentaries, regarding Judge Burnett's handling of the case, stemming from documents and evidence which were revealed after the trial and even after the completion of both films. Even if the defendants are guilty (which I do not, based on all I've read, believe they are), they would still deserve a retrial based on the bias, irregular procedural decisions of Judge Burnett, and on evidence that later came up (which, among other things, cast serious doubts on the testimony of Carlson and Hutcheson, and introduce further scientific evidence based on the work of B. Turvey and Dr. T. David, despite the state's further questionable attempts to claim they already discounted this evidence). New DNA testing and other reanalysis techniques, granted by a new Arkansas State Law, may also finally bring this case out of the realm of the circumstantial and into the
evidential.
Regarding John Mark Byers, it is appalling that that man is still walking the streets and not in prison. Even if he did not kill his son (which, from what I've read and seen in the documentary films, I believe he did), his myriad of other crimes should have landed him behind bars a long time ago. You can not read about Byers, or see him on film, and think he's a safe person to walk the streets. Leveritt is not the first to propose Byers as the real killer, but she makes the notion more compelling through bringing up a slew of facts which were previously all put together into a coherent picture (as Fogelman himself has said of the case against the WM3, you need the full picture).
I find it depressing but not suprising that the parents of Michael Moore and Stevie Branch can continue to defend Byers and the Crittenden County officials after supposedly seeing the two documentaries and reading the book. I can only assume it is too painful for them to actually view or read the material, and they continue to simply reiterate the beliefs they came to when people they thought they could trust claimed that the killers of their boys had been found and convicted. To say they should want to see real justice done for their boys is easy for WM3 supporters, but they probably think it already has. However, as Leveritt mentions, if a parent can bear to do the research into the truth, even they can be convinced that justice is left undone - Chris Byers' biological father (R. Murray) has come out publically as saying that he believes that the WM3 are innocent.
If you care about the truth rather than emotional ties to the notion that the defendants "seem evil" (as quoted from the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette) and must therefore be guilty, you should read this book (which, according to its author, did not start out as an attempt to exonerate the defendants, but rather to find the truth that the state kept saying was evident if the "media" would just pay attention and stop listening to the WM3 supporters). It is not "Pro-WM3 Propaganda" from some "outsider who don't know the facts" but a serious, and disturbing, look at the case by a distinguished professional reporter from Arkansas who came to her conclusions by analyzing the (publically available) facts of the case from transcripts of interview, trials, appeals, etc. I can not recommend it highly enough for anyone who cares about this case, or who is interested in how American justice can go horribly wrong.
