LG Hollingsworth

The evidence against LG is extensive. There are numerous red flags and suspicious/conflicting statements from all of his interviews.

LG Hollingsworth lived with his parents, LG and Linda, on McCauley Circle in West Memphis during the time of the murders.

In his first available interview (he was apparently interviewed earlier but there seems to be no record of it) LG tells police that on May 5th he was at his friend Richard Simpson’s house from 5:30-9:30 the night of the murders. He claimed that he went home directly after this and spoke on the phone with Domini and then his mother arrived at 10:00 pm.

In his following interview, his story changes.

On May 5th, the day of the murders, LG was driven around by his Aunt Narlene trying to find a job. After getting a job at Big Star he claimed that he had his aunt take him home. Apparently, no one was there so he and Narlene went to his mother’s work to get the key to the house. Now, this is important. According to LG’s statements, in order to get into his house he needed to have a key. On the way to his mother’s work they got into a wreck which means LG never got the key to the house. LG claimed that he went to Narlene’s home (in Lakeshore) after the wreck but then quickly backtracks and claims that he instead went to his mother’s work, got the key and went home. He then claims that after he went home, he stayed there till his mother showed up at either 7:30 or 8:30 at night. (But, he does not say where he went after his mother returned home). However, as he continues the interview, his story changes again and he ends up putting himself back in Lakeshore with his aunt until 5:00 pm. In Narlene’s interview with police, she and LG went to Lakeshore after the wreck and then she claimed that she took LG home sometime around 5 pm.

However, again LG’s story changes. He claims that he saw Damien around 1:00 and then changes the time and says he saw Damien and Domini arguing around 4:30. He then claimed that after he saw them arguing he was going to walk home, but even that statement is conflicting.

L.G.- “YES. I WAS, I SAID I WAS GOING TO GO AHEAD AND WALK HOME. SO I WAS GOING OVER TO MY OLD AUNT'S TO SEE IF SHE WAS GOING TO GIVE ME A RIDE.”

Here he says he is going to walk home but in the very same statement claims he was going to his old aunt’s to get a ride home. The old aunt he is referring to is Pam, not

Narlene, which leads me to believe that Narlene was done giving him rides for the day. Which certainly makes sense. Narlene had four children and it was 5pm on a school night. It was also right around dinnertime. I find it hard to believe that after everything Narlene did that day for LG she would take him to Lakeshore and then get in her car AGAIN to take him home. LG was certainly capable to walk himself home, which was not that far of a walk at all for a 17 year old boy. Even LG claimed that he had asked his aunt for a ride home and she said no.

L.G.- ANYWAY, THEN MY AUNT SAID THAT SHE COULDN'T GIVE ME A RIDE, SO I WALKED OUTSIDE. AND I SEEN DAMION STANDING AT THE CORNER, AND I ASKED HIM WHERE HE FIXIN TO GO, AND HE SAID MY MOM'S COMING TO GET ME. AND THIS WAS AT 5 MINUTES TIL 5:00.

So, here we have LG putting himself at Lakeshore right around 5:00 pm. LG’s very next statement, however, after saying his aunt would NOT give him a ride home, is that his aunt gave him a ride home. There are numerous problems with the claim that Narlene gave LG a ride at this time, besides the statement from LG himself where he says that his aunt refused to give him a ride. For one, according to LG, he did not have a key. He got in a wreck with Narlene on his way to get the key and never happened to try and get it again. From his earlier statements we can gather that someone needed to be home in order to let LG in. But we know that his mother was not home when LG was apparently dropped off because in statements made by both Richard Simspon’s roommate and LG’s aunt Dixie, LG’s mother was looking for him the night of the 5th.

ON THE NIGHT BEFORE THAT CONVERSATION. HE STATED THAT HE ONCE (WORD MARKED OUT) ANSWERED THE PHONE AND IT WAS L.G.’S MOTHER.

This is a portion from the notes made by detective Bryn Ridge about his interview with Richard Simpson’s roommate, Laslo Benyo. The “conversation” he is referring to is a conversation about the murders of the boys that took place on Thursday, May 6th. We therefore know that LG’s mother called Richard’s house the night of the murders and from another statement from Benyo, he claimed she was looking for LG and asked that he call her back. However, LG was not at Richard’s home on the night of the 5th, this was confirmed by both Richard and his roommate. Additionally, we have Dixie, LG’s aunt, saying that LG’s mother was trying to figure out where LG was the night of the 5th.

Dixie came to work later and Linda Hollingsworth came in asking about where L.G. had been during the evening on 5-5-93.

Furthermore, when LG was spotted later on that evening around 9pm at night, he was seen wearing a shirt and tie. The very outfit he would have been wearing for job interviews. If LG had gone home at all that night, wouldn’t he have changed his shirt? What is also odd is that if LG had walked home from Lakeshore, as he claimed he was going to do, he would have passed by Richard’s on the way. Richard’s home was on Balfour Street, which was in between Lakeshore and West Memphis and Richard was a very close friend of LG’s. I find it difficult to believe that even if LG had walked home instead of being dropped off by Narlene, that he wouldn’t have stopped at Richard’s house on his way. But he never went to Richard’s house that night and there are two polygraphs and a statement from Richard’s roommate to prove it. In fact, Richard eventually told police that LG had asked him to lie to police and say that LG was with him that night.

What that leads me to believe is that not only was LG in Lakeshore around 5 pm the night of the murders but we have no idea of his whereabouts from 5:00 pm to 9:00 pm at night. What is also suspicious is that Terry Hobbs was unaccounted for from 5:00 pm to 9:00 pm the night of the 5th as well.

Going back to LG’s second documented interview, we see more evidence that he is lying. Here, he says that when he got home his mother was home. This opposes his earlier interview when he claimed his mother got home at 7:30 or 8:30. LG then said that his mother and “a friend” (name unknown) left to go to another friend’s house. (which apparently was never corroborated). It’s interesting how there is NO documentation whatsoever that LG’s mother was ever interviewed. After she left, LG claims that he went to Richard’s house. Again, we know this is a lie. It never happened.

After this statement, LG said that Richard then dropped him off at home. He contradicts himself again by saying that he drove Richard’s car to the Laundromat to get his cousin Domini’s number. What is bizarre about that is that Domini lived within walking distance of Richard’s home and the Laundromat was approx. a 10 minutes drive away from both Richard’s and Domini’s home. I also can’t help but wonder why LG would drive to the Laundromat at 9pm at night to get a phone number that he could have just as easily called someone/anyone to get.

The Laundromat incident is very puzzling. LG is adamant that he drove Richard’s car to the Laundromat (in other instances, Richard dropped him off). He refuses, absolutely refuses to tell anyone, the police or Fogelman (the prosecutor) who really dropped him off at the Laundromat that night. We know for a fact it wasn’t Richard. For one, LG never went to Richard’s that night. There is ample evidence to support that as a fact. For two, Dixie, LG’s aunt, knew what Richard’s car looked like (which happened to be the unique color yellow) and she was also adamant that this car was not Richard’s. So, that begs the question: who dropped LG off at the Laundromat on the night of the murders and why won’t LG tell who this person is?

Let’s go over the description of the vehicle that dropped LG off. Dixie said that it was a

small, light colored car.

FOGLEMAN- OKAY. ALRIGHT, NOW THE AUNT SAYS THAT YOU CAME TO THE LAUNDRYMAT THAT NIGHT IN A SMALL CAR.

L.G.- THAT'S NOT TRUE.

FOGLEMAN- THAT'S NOT TRUE.

L.G.- NO SIR.

I find it strange that LG immediately denies that the car is small. Why deny that the car that dropped you off is small?

Now, this is interesting. And perhaps it’s simply a coincidence, but perhaps it’s not. When workers at the Blue Beacon Truck Wash were later interviewed about the night of the murders, they claimed that two young men showed up at approx. 10:00 pm at night looking for their son. Now, we know this couldn’t have been Todd Moore, so it had to either be Mark Byers or Terry Hobbs. This is how the employees of the BB Truck Wash described the car:

Mark drove an Izuzu at this time not a Toyota and his statements seem to reveal that he was on the other side of the pipe looking for the boys at 10:00 pm at night. I don’t think it’s possible that the men who worked at a truck wash could confuse an Izuzu for a small, Toyota. This means that the two men the BB wash employees were referring to were Terry Hobbs and most likely David Jacoby. We know that both men have said that they were looking through the BB woods for most of the night together, so their statements support this idea. Furthermore, this gives us a good idea what car Terry Hobbs was driving at the time. When Pam was interviewed in 2007 and asked what kind of car she and Terry drove back in ’93, she told investigators that they drove a white 1990 Oldsmobile. However, after comparing a 1990 Oldsmobile with a 1990 Toyota, the two cars are very similar. I am more apt to believe the employees at the truck wash who were interviewed the day after the

murders. They said the car was a small Toyota and I believe that a couple of men who work at a truck wash probably know the make and models of different cars quite well. It’s very possible that Pam got confused about the make of the car since she was relaying this information 14 years later. This leads me to believe that Pam and Terry drove a 1990 white Toyota back in 1993. Here is a photo of a white Oldsmobile and a Toyota of the same year.

What is quite suspicious is that when Dixie Hufford described the car that she had seen drop LG off that night, it was right in line with the car that BB Wash employees described in conjunction with what Pam Hobbs later told police she and Terry drove in 1993. Dixie described the car as small (just as the BB employees had) and light colored. (taken from notes on Dixie’s interview)

And:

Here again is a photo of a white, 1990 Toyota, the most likely car that Terry and Pam drove at the time:

To sum this up, we know that LG was unaccounted for the night of the murders from approx. 5:00 pm -9:00 pm at night. He didn’t go to his friend Richard’s house, even though he repeatedly told investigators that he did. He very likely never went home since he was still wearing a shirt and tie from his job hunting from that morning (8:00 am) and his mother called Richard’s house looking for him, as well as asking Dixie if she knew where LG had been the night of the 5th. We know that he was dropped off at the Laundromat at approx 9:00 pm at night in what was described as a “small, light colored car ” and he adamantly refused to tell authorities whose car dropped him off; even when he was caught in a very obvious lie. We know also know that Pam and Terry drove a small, white car at this time, that they lived just a minute or minutes away from the Laundromat and that when BB Wash employees also saw Terry’s car, they too described it as “small”.

Although it’s quite coincidental that the car Terry drove at the time fits the description Dixie made, it’s certainly not proof that Terry dropped LG off. However, the more I have thought about it the more I have wondered who else could have given LG a ride that night. It was likely not a teenage friend. The reason for this is because LG and the people around him were all poverty stricken; having a car seemed like a luxury, especially if you were a teenager in the area. None of LG’s young, teenage friends had a car. Damien, Jason, LG, Domini, Jessie.. not one of them owned a car. In fact, if you listen to LG’s interviews, you realize that there were two

ways LG got around: he either got a ride from Narlene or a ride from his friend Richard, who was approx. 50 years old. Even Narlene’s sister Dixie who was 50 didn’t have a car. So, who is giving LG a ride at approx. 9pm at night? Stranger still is that Terry popped up out of nowhere, right around 9 pm, very close to the Laundromat. Imagine for a minute that Terry committed the crime. The very first place that one would think Terry would go to gather information, create an alibi and not raise suspicion, would have been the Moore’s home. The first place that Pam wanted to check for Stevie before she left for work was Michael’s house. I believe that Terry would have known how suspicious it would be if he didn’t look for Stevie at Michael’s house. Additionally, I think Terry would have wanted to know what the other parents were doing/ saying before he called police and made a missing children’s report. What this leads me to believe is that the very first chance Terry got, if he did commit the crime, he would have driven to the Moores. And I believe that’s exactly what he did.

When going over Mark Byers statements from ’93 as well as Officer Meeks’ timeline that night we can gather that Terry did show up at the Moore’s/ Byers sometime between 8:45 and 9:00. Officer Meeks was dispatched at 9:42 to Bonjangles restaurant but she had left the Byers sometime around five or ten minutes before that, to drive around searching. Mark left his home around the time Meeks left and began going door to door asking neighbors if they’d seen the boys. We can make an approximation that Mark left his house sometime around 8:35. After his door to door to search, he arrived back home to find Terry Hobbs walking up to his house. If Mark left around 8:35, walked up the street, talked to neighbors and then walked back down to his house again, you’d imagine that would take at least ten minutes, most likely more. That means that Terry showed up no earlier than 8:45, and likely closer to 9 pm.

So, here we have Terry making a public appearance right around the same time LG did. We know that Terry lived within a minute’s drive from the Laundromat and that he drove a small, white car; a very close description to the car that Dixie described dropped off LG. The only question one might have is why Terry dropped LG off at the Laundromat. If you look at a map of the area at the time, I think you can possibly understand why this happened.

Terry lived on South McAuley in between 14th street and Ingram Blvd. The Laundromat was right on Ingram. The Moores and the Byers lived on the corner of 14th and Barton, across the street from each other. LG lived in the small cul de sac to the right of 14th, directly north of E. Barton. What you begin to realize by looking at the map is that Terry would have needed to drive fairly close to the Moores and the Byers in order to drop LG off at his home. I think it would have been risky for Terry to do. Especially if Terry asked LG where he lived and LG told him to take him down East Barton. That would have been when Terry might have told him he needed to be dropped off somewhere else. Since the Laundromat was so close to where Terry lived maybe that seemed like the best place for LG to go. Or perhaps LG went there to launder clothing from the crime. Perhaps he knew he’d be safe to do so since his aunt worked there, and he ultimately felt she would protect him. All Terry would have had to do is drive down the street he lived on till he got to Ingram, drop LG off, head north and then taken a left on Barton till he got the Moores/Byers. All of which would have taken him probably a total of 5 or 6 minutes to do. And, in the process, he avoided running into the Moores and Byers with LG in his car, as well as avoiding the possibility that police (near the Moore/Byers homes) could have also spotted Terry driving with LG. What he didn’t bank on was Dixie Hufford seeing his car and describing it to police.

There is more evidence, however, that points to LG’s guilt besides having no alibi and strange and suspicious behavior and statements. I think the most significant piece of evidence against LG came from his own cousin, 8 year old Sarah Hollingsworth. Sarah’s father is LG’s father’s brother. The weekend after the murders was Mother’s Day and Sarah and her family traveled to West Memphis to visit with their relatives for the weekend. Sarah returned to school the following Tuesday and immediately spoke to her teacher about what she had heard over the weekend. Sarah told her teacher that her cousin, LG had:

~come home the night of the murders with blood on his clothes. ~he was planning on running away to Georgia

~that his mother said she would lie for him and give him an alibi~ that he had children’s clothes with him when he went to the Laundromat~that he had already spoken to police ~that he had something concealed in a box and he threatened to kill her if she went near it

First, let’s discuss the source. Sarah’s teacher said that this child was normally a well-behaved, quiet child who would not lie to her. Furthermore, this child told her teacher she was afraid that her father would find out she told. In fact, when Sarah was interviewed in the presence of her mother in June of ’93, she denied saying anything. If you think about reasons why a child would lie about something like this it would most likely be for attention. If this girl was afraid her parents would find out, it seems unlikely she would say this for attention. What’s more telling, however, is that Sarah’s other aunts, Dixie and Narlene both confirmed to police that Sarah was telling the truth; the statements they made were very similar. However, Narlene and Dixie left out the more damning evidence against LG, perhaps to protect him. I believe a child like Sarah, without a desire to hide the truth and protect family members would be more honest about all the details of the conversations she overheard. The most significant thing that Sarah said (that was seemingly absent from Narlene and Dixie’s statements) was that LG came home with blood on his clothes. In twenty years of suspects, rumors, and theories there have only been two people that had family members say that they had blood on them after the murders: LG Hollingsworth and Buddy Lucas. This statement, to me, is so huge because whoever killed those boys got blood somewhere on their clothes. And, people talk. You would imagine that, unless no one was around to see the murderer (s) after the crime, someone would have seen blood on someone’s clothes. The fact that LG was one of only 2 people is a pretty big red flag.

Besides Sarah, LG’s two aunts, as well an anonymous caller and a man named Boone, all spoke to police and made similar incriminating statements about LG.

The first documented call to police in regards to LG came from his aunt Narlene on May 9th, just three days after the murders and two days before Sarah spoke to her teacher. Narlene told police that her nephew, LG said on Thursday the day after the murders that he knew what happened before anyone else. In one of Narlene’s interviews, Narlene says that she picked up LG in the early morning on Thursday and gave him a ride to work. On the way to drop him off they passed by the gathering of people and police near the crime scene. In her interview she makes a point to say that LG was in the car with her at this time but seemed to stop herself from saying more. It’s possible that LG made the comment to her at this time that he knew what had happened, or something along those lines. The point is LG and Narlene were together on the day after the murders and passed by the crime scene before the bodies were even discovered. Three days later, Narlene calls police and claims that on Thursday, May 6th, her nephew said he knew what happened before anyone else. The timeline seems to fit her story. In this same phone call Narlene also appears to ramble about seemingly pointless details and repeatedly brings up LG

and Damien. She points out that LG was at the Laundromat at 9:30, that Damien is “evil”, that LG has 666 on his shoes, etc. At first glance it’s easy to write off Narlene’s statements but I happen to believe there is something deeper going on than Narlene wants to let on. It seems that Narlene is trying to steer police in the right direction without saying anything too incriminating. You have to ask yourself why Narlene wanted the police to turn their attention to LG and Damien.

The next call about LG came in on the 10th of May. This time, the call was from an anonymous caller. This anonymous caller was described as an older, white female. Of course, there is no way to know, but I happen to believe that this call came from Narlene. I believe she was frightened to reveal everything she knew or heard when she called police on the 9th, so she proceeded to make another call but this time remained anonymous. In this statement, the caller claimed that she had heard that Damien and Domini had murdered the boys and that LG had taken their clothes to the Laundromat to be washed. She then continued to say that Damien had children’s body parts in a box and that LG’s mother was going to lie for him.

Obviously we know that some of these statements are false, but rumors sometime begin from nuggets of truth. The key is trying to find the nugget of truth. What’s interesting is that another call came in to police with a statement that was consistent to the “anonymous” caller from May 9th. This caller’s name was Boone.

-Boone- called stated the woman that works at the Laundromat on Ingram. Her name is Dixie, Dixie told someone? that 2 boys and a girl came into that laundromat about 10:00P.M.-10:30P.M. on Wednesday to clean up. They had mud and blood on their clothes. Dixie is suppose to be related to one of them, only name Boone new was Hollingsworth.

Again, I believe that this “someone” is Narlene, embellishing the truth that she probably never knew fully to begin with. Not only did Damien and Domini both have alibis for this time, but if Domini or Damien had come into the Laundromat covered in blood, I can’t imagine that Dixie wouldn’t have told police about it. (At the very least about Damien.) However, LG did go to the Laundromat the night of the murders and according to his cousin, he had blood on his clothes when he arrived home. What this means, in my opinion, is that LG was the one who showed up at the Laundromat with mud and/or blood on his clothes; maybe not a lot of blood, maybe just enough for Dixie to notice. With Dixie being picked up by Narlene shortly after, it’s possible that Dixie relayed to Narlene what she had just seen. And from there, the rumor mill began.

When LG got home, he again was spotted with blood on his clothes, this time by one or both of his parents. When the children were found murdered the next day and LG’s mother could not pin down where her son had been the night before, LG was probably confronted to the point that he had to tell his mother something. This is

when I believe Damien was brought into the mix. It’s not difficult to ascertain why LG was mentioned to police by various family members; there was actual evidence against him in the form of suspicious behavior and bloody clothes. The big question mark, however, is why were Damien and Domini mentioned. If you look carefully at the different statements about LG, especially the interview with Narlene, it’s pretty clear that LG had told his family members that Damien was involved in the murders. It’s my opinion, that when LG was confronted he did not want to tell the actual story; being the dishonest person he was and wanting to lesson his own involvement. I think it was easier for him just to say Damien killed the boys and he had only helped him in some way; ie: he took Damien’s clothes to the Laundromat. From there, I believe Narlene and/or Dixie began to interrogate their sister (LG’s mother), knowing from what Dixie’s had seen, that LG was involved. It was then that LG’s mother may have said that LG had told her that Damien murdered the boys and that LG was there but didn’t do it, or he only helped Damien get rid of the evidence etc. And that is how the rumors began and the story changed. Suddenly, there are boys’ body parts in boxes, Domini is involved (merely because LG had asked for her number at the Laundromat) and she and Damien also showed up at the laundromat with mud and blood on their clothes.

It’s easy to say this is speculation, but if you actual inspect Narlene’s words and actions, this seems to be a bit more than just an assumption. First of all, Narlene went to police of her own free will and accused Damien and Domini of being near the crime scene on the night of the murders, even though there is no chance that really happened because they both had alibis during this time period. Even worse, she made two of her children get on the stand and lie about this alleged sighting. Now, why in the world would a mother make her children lie on the stand unless she had a really good reason to do so? The only reason I can think of, in Narlene’s case, is that she believed that Damien was truly involved. And the only way she would know that Damien was truly involved is if she had some real evidence that proved it. The only conclusion that I can come to is that the evidence she had was that her nephew LG was involved and he had said that Damien did it. If there is another reason why she would put herself and her children in jeopardy, I can’t seem to think what that reason is. I think Narlene thought she was doing the right thing and that she and her children weren’t really lying because Damien truly was guilty. This portion of Narlene’s interview to police is quite revealing, in my opinion:

NARLENE: Well, I talked to my sister in law after that and she went over to their house to L. G.’s house and she said that they were whispering and shaking their heads, I said, Debra, I got a funny feeling about that field and she said , I do too.

HESTER: When was this that she was over there?

NARLENE: I don’t know, I think it was last night, she said that they were there whispering around and acting all funny.

HESTER: Alright, when she said they, who does she mean?

NARLENE: She meant the mommy, the daddy and the son, she said I don’t know what’s going on over there and she said, they are making me nervous, she’s a christian girl, she said and I got out of there, I said yeah, I get bad feelings around them too. And, I’ll tell you something, I would take up for my kids when I’ve known that they have done something, cause ain’t no telling what they would do. I don’t know what L. G. is capable of, and I am not saying that he would do it, and I am not saying that he wouldn’t, but I know Damian. Everybody said that Damian, I know that he’s suppose to have 666 on his shoes.

Debra is Sarah’s mother and this interview was taken on May 10th. So, we have Sarah’s mother getting a bad feeling from the family’s suspicious behavior and thinking something is going on and then Narlene out of nowhere says, “I don’t know what LG is capable of and I’m not saying that he would do it and I’m not saying he wouldn’t but I know Damien, he’s suppose to have 666 on his shoes.”

To me, that statement shows that Narlene is holding back information. Information that is extremely pertinent to the case. What were the mother, father and son whispering about? Why do they get a bad feeling about the “field”? Why does she wonder if LG is capable of this horrific murder? What in the world made her believe Damien was involved? At the same time, however, you can almost feel that she wants to tell police what she knows because she is dropping some pretty big bombshells. Her statements obviously insinuate that LG is somehow involved in the murders and that LG’s parents are aware of it. Also, the mention of a “field” is suspicious to me, since I believe the four parked in the field beside the woods where the crime happened. Furthermore, Narlene’s interview, which was taken on the 10th, corroborated what Sarah had told her teacher the very next day at school. If Sarah’s own mother had suspicions and bad feelings about LG and his parents just two days before Sarah went to school and told her teacher that her cousin had come home with blood on his clothes, I think that is pretty solid evidence that Sarah was being honest about what she had heard at her aunt and uncle’s home. Which means that we should really pay attention to the things that Sarah said.

The consistent statements from Sarah, Narlene, Dixie, the anonymous caller and “Boone” are as follows:

~LG had blood on him the night of the murders~LG’s mother is going to lie for him

Two more significant statements that came from Dixie and Sarah’s statements were 1. LG had children’s clothing when he went to the Laundromat. What is so suspicious about that is that no one knew the children had missing clothes, not even police until much, much later. Maybe even months later. It certainly was not public knowledge at the time. And, 2. In Dixie’s notes there is a line that reads: blade car. According to Sarah and Narlene, LG had something in a box in his friend, Richard’s car the day after the murders and was extremely aggressive about no one touching this box. Of course the rumor was that the box had children’s body parts in it but seeing the statement: blade car. I am wondering if the truth is that LG had a knife in that box, and not just any knife, the actual murder weapon. Did Terry have LG dispose of the evidence that night because he knew that he had no time to do it himself?