Michael Perry or Jason Burkett

For the past few months I have been listening to a lot of theories on what happened in October of 2001 and the more I hear, the stranger it becomes. So who do we believe? Do we listen to Michael Perry or Jason Burkett? I personally have a huge problem with the story Jason comes up with about "the shootout that never happened". I also have a problem with Michael Perry claiming he was nowhere near the murder scene of James Adam Stotler and Arnold Jeremy Richardson. It occurs to me that both of these men are lying to try and make themselves look that much more innocent. Now having said that let me ask a few questions of my own and feel free to answer and clear up any misstatements I may make.

Question 1: If Jason Burkett didn't kill anyone in this case as he has claimed, then why were his fingerprints the only ones found on the shotgun believed to be the murder weapon? I can't find any other explanation except he was the one who brutally murdered three people. We can assume that Michael Perry didn't kill anyone for the fact that his prints were not found on the gun or can we. What are the odds that Michael Perry killed three people then wiped the shotgun clean of his prints and then handed the shotgun to Jason Burkett? Not very likely I would submit.

Question 2: Why did Jason Burkett grab the shotgun when he was being shot at by police if all he had was a warrant for some petty crime? He claims he took the gun because he was "fond" of it. Does anyone besides me find that to be complete and total bullshit? Maybe I'm just a candy ass but my hands would be so far in the air and screaming for them not to shoot that it would be embarrassing to my family and friends. I would piss myself for good measure.

Question 2a: Why did Michael Perry run from the police that same day? He was in the same boat as Jason and was looking at minimal jail time if not probation so why run? Could he have had knowledge of something much worse than what he was wanted for? I believe that to be the case but I will reiterate, I don't think Michael killed anybody.

Question 3: Here is the $64,000 question. It is my firm belief that Michael Perry and Jason Burkett were involved in these killings and were convicted on perjured testimony, misplaced and fabricated evidence and the fact that these two boys were found in possession of one of the murder victim's vehicles. Should both of these men be given new trials and possibly set free because we all think it's the right thing to do or do they both belong behind bars for the rest of their lives? The answer for me is YES they both deserve new trials and let the chips fall where they may. As I've said before, I would rather see a hundred murderers go free before one innocent man goes to prison or to the death chamber. That's a no brainer.

A few follow up questions: To what degree is someone culpable if they had no prior knowledge of the crimes that were about to be committed? Is someone like Michael Perry just as guilty as Jason Burkett simply because he was there and couldn't stop it? Should both of them be put to death because one of them is a cold blooded killer and the other a follower?

A lot of you out there are going to think that my questions are one sided and frankly I don't care. I know Michael Perry personally and having that knowledge leads me to believe that he is not capable of committing murder and that he was just an observer. Michael Perry just does not have it in him to blow away three people and go on with life like nothing happened. I cannot say the same thing about Jason. He was a violent individual back then although I cannot say that's the way he is now. Jason and Michael are two completely different people than the ones that were involved with a triple homicide back in 2001. The one thing that struck me about a letter I got from Jason is he claimed up and down that he was innocent but at the very end of the letter he makes a point to tell me that he is not the same person he was back then. I wonder what he meant by that? Maybe because he has changed then the murders that took place seven years ago shouldn't count? To quote a friend, it speaks volumes.