Merged Jeffrey MacDonald did it. He really did.

[byn63]

roflmao! it seems to me that henri wants to have his cake and eat it too! have you noticed that tendency? When someone points out that inmate first agreed to and then refused to take a polygraph at the CID April 4 interview henri says "they are far from accurate" but then he mentions Helena's less than stellar performance on a polygraph as it was some major "truth" that has been ignored. Then someone mentions inmate failing the defense paid for polygraph and he ignores that as if it was never mentioned but thinks that the "alleged intruders" passing polygraphs is of no great importance.

roflmao! how funny!

 

[BStrong]

roflmao! it seems to me that henri wants to have his cake and eat it too! have you noticed that tendency? When someone points out that inmate first agreed to and then refused to take a polygraph at the CID April 4 interview henri says "they are far from accurate" but then he mentions Helena's less than stellar performance on a polygraph as it was some major "truth" that has been ignored. Then someone mentions inmate failing the defense paid for polygraph and he ignores that as if it was never mentioned but thinks that the "alleged intruders" passing polygraphs is of no great importance.

roflmao! how funny!

He has the the worst case of confirmation bias since George Armstrong Custer.

 

[Henri McPhee]

Richard Jewell in the 1996 Atlanta Olympic bombing case may not have been convicted, but he was nearly falsely prosecuted on an inaccurate FBI polygraph until the real culprit was caught. Richard Jewell then rightly attempted to sue the America media for their inaccurate reports, until he died suddenly.

Dr. Silverman and Dr. Brussel were biased psychiatrists, like the biased trial judge, and Judge Fox. They both worked for the Cocaine Importation Agency. There were several psychiatrists who supported Dr. Sadoff, but the jury were never informed. Judge Dupree didn't want a battle of the experts! The matter is explained by somebody called Xiuan on the internet:

The defendant was required to submit to this examination in order to be allowed to present any psychological evidence at trial, and then after the new one was completed it was the only one submitted to the jury. Another thing that stood out to me was the manner in which this last evaluation was conducted and presented. Dr. Hirsch Lazaar Silverman spent over two hours with Dr. MacDonald completing standardized psychological testing, all of which was pretty standard for that time period. He was there ostensibly to give the tests and report on the responses. Superstar "profiler" Dr. James Brussel was supposed to be doing the interviewing and compose the official findings of the examination for the Court. Dr. Brussel spent less than half an hour total with Dr. MacDonald and didn't write notes, but kept Dr. Silverman in the interview and occasionally directed him to write down statements made by the defendant. The report, in fact, was written by Dr. Silverman who asked exactly none of the interview questions and was not sent to the defense prior to the trial even though the judge and prosecution each received a copy. If the highly irregular circumstances surrounding the conduct of the examination weren't enough on their own, it also turns out that Dr. Brussel the great "psychic" profiler had been on record for 8 years by then claiming MacDonald guilty. The entire time, he'd been working with Army CID as they pushed for a civilian prosecution, declaiming MacDonald a homicidal psychopath for 8 full years before they were ever in a room together. I have no way to confirm, but I believe that Dr. Brussel profiled the crime scene as was his expertise and then assigned his profile of the killer(s) to the person he believed to be guilty. On a side note, this was also done in his work on the Boston Strangler case. And so we begin.

 

[byn63]

Dr. Silverman and Dr. Brussel were biased psychiatrists, like the biased trial judge, and Judge Fox. They both worked for the Cocaine Importation Agency. There were several psychiatrists who supported Dr. Sadoff, but the jury were never informed. Judge Dupree didn't want a battle of the experts!

No Dr. Silverman and Dr. Brussel were not biased. The testing that was done on inmate is impartial. In fact, the defense had the same testing done with basically the same results. Drs Silverman and Brussel DID NOT TESTIFY in court henri. Judge Dupree was certainly within his authority to deny psychiatric testimony because he didn't want a battle of the experts. It is true that the defense could have lined up a number of psychiatrists who would claim inmate "couldn't have" done these crimes and the government could and WOULD have produced evidence and doctors that said he could. Since inmate DID NOT use an affirmative defense (temporary insanity or mental illness/defect) he WAS NOT guaranteed psychiatric testimony. I believe it is fairly common for judges to deny psych testimony in cases where an affirmative defense is not entered.

the jury did not require "being informed" because they didn't hear psychiatric testimony AT ALL. inmate got his feelings hurt by the Summary of his psych evaluation, OH WELL too bad so sad! It doesn't make the analysis any less valid or valuable.

 

[BStrong]

Richard Jewell in the 1996 Atlanta Olympic bombing case may not have been convicted, but he was nearly falsely prosecuted on an inaccurate FBI polygraph until the real culprit was caught. Richard Jewell then rightly attempted to sue the America media for their inaccurate reports, until he died suddenly.

blather snipped...

Only seven hours ago you had him tried and convicted.

So is this an admission of incompetence on your part as an "investigator?" You demonstrate no hesitance in labeling anyone else an incompetent, crooked, biased, investigator.

What category of your own classification system do you fit into?

 

[JTF]

Still Waiting

HENRIBOY: Still waiting on your responses to Challenges 2 and 3. It took you two months to sheepishly admit that you couldn't come up with the goods for my initial challenge, so should I expect to wait another 6 months for two challenges?

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[JTF]

Polygraphs

I'm curious as to whether inmate ever told Malley that he refused to take a polygraph for famed attorney Vincent Bugliosi? I'm also wondering whether Bost vomited his breakfast after discovering that DNA tests revealed that the source of the "mystery hair" was none other than Jeffrey MacDonald.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[ScottPletcher]

No Dr. Silverman and Dr. Brussel were not biased. The testing that was done on inmate is impartial. ... It is true that the defense could have lined up a number of psychiatrists who would claim inmate "couldn't have" done these crimes and the government could and WOULD have produced evidence and doctors that said he could. ...
the jury did not require "being informed" because they didn't hear psychiatric testimony AT ALL.

[Emphasis/bolding added by me.]
Yes, that's true (the bolded part). But, as the prosecutors stated at trial, if they prove inmate actually did it, they don't have to prove "he's the type of person that could have done it." And they proved it, ergo, the rest is irrelevant.

 

[Whip]

Swing, and a miss.

Richard Jewell was never even charged, let alone convicted.

You truly are a creature of habit. Your casual relationship with the truth seems to be congenital.

not the average swing and miss either. more like:

 

[BStrong]

not the average swing and miss either. more like:


[qimg]https://nesncom.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/elvis-andrus.gif?w=600&h=348[/qimg]

Exactly so, but I doubt there was any safety gear involved on Henri's part.

A severe beaning could be the source of the problem.

 

[BStrong]

The last few pages provide a great example of the partisan internet "investigator."

Henri believes he/she is not only entitled to his/her own facts, he/she believes that whatever flat out ******** they post in conjunction with those assertions is somehow OK too - end justifies the means? I have no idea, but it takes a special sort of disregard for reality and objective facts to continually and without hesitation post absolute ******** - not just at JREF/ISF either. There's been a wide trail left by Henri here and there. It also takes obliviousness to a whole new level -the great defender of JM - a poster that can't be bothered to even fact check their own posts or actually contradicts themselves in a single post.

I'm just glad I don't have His/Her nerve in my tooth.

 

[Henri McPhee]

No Dr. Silverman and Dr. Brussel were not biased. The testing that was done on inmate is impartial.

the jury did not require "being informed" because they didn't hear psychiatric testimony AT ALL. inmate got his feelings hurt by the Summary of his psych evaluation, OH WELL too bad so sad! It doesn't make the analysis any less valid or valuable.

The point is that the psychiatric testimony was EXCULPATORY evidence which would have prevented MacDonald from being wrongfully convicted, with an incorrect verdict. The 'tricky Dick' biased trial judge. perhaps in collaboration with the prosecution lawyers, cunningly planned for the jury and the 4th Circuit judges and Supreme Court to be ill-informed of that exculpatory psychiatric evidence by saying he didn't want a battle of the experts. It was just the same with the black wool fibers with no known source withheld from the jury, and the FBI lab tampering with the hair in the hand with the wooden splinter for the DNA testing, and substituting a MacDonald hair.

The matter is explained by Xiuan on the internet:

Dr. Bruce Bailey, Dr. Morgan, and Dr. Edwards were all retained through Walter Reed Hospital by the attorney for the government (prosecutor) and interviewed Dr. MacDonald on the 18th, 19th, and 20th of August in 1970 (the Article 32 hearing had begun on July 5). These three psychiatrists arrived at the same conclusions as Dr. Sadoff. In spite of the government attorney, JAG Officer Somers, treating his own psychiatric witnesses as though they were under cross-examination, they did not waiver in their certainty that MacDonald was a grieving husband and father with severe survivor's guilt and no psychopathy. Additional evaluations were also compiled at this time by Dr. Donald Morgan of Walter Reed from August through September 1970 and Dr. James L. Mack for the defense. Both were called to testify during Grand Jury testimony in December of 1974 and their findings were in accord with each other as well as the previously introduced evaluations. Dr. Seymour Halleck conducted several hours of interviews with Dr. MacDonald on 11, 12, and 16 July 1979; and these further substantiated all of the previous reports. I will get into the last psych eval, the only one presented to the jury in criminal court, in the next post.
xiulan
Judge, Jury and Executioner
*****

xiulan Avatar

sarcasm: nature's defense against drama, bs, and stupidity...

Posts: 462

Feb 14, 2015 at 2:29am albion, dengas, and 2 more like this QuotePost Options Post by xiulan on Feb 14, 2015 at 2:29am
Enter Dr. James Brussel and Dr. Hirsch Lazaar Silverman: Dr. Brussel was hand-picked by the trial judge and the defense was hamstrung into consenting to the evaluation as a means to get the judge to admit evidence affirmative to the defense. This never happened. None of the defense evidence was admitted and the only psychological evaluation the jury ever saw was this one, conducted on August 13, 1979. "Dr. MacDonald musters a strangely foundational repression, even an unconscious denial, of the murders of his wife and children; seemingly, in fact, the impact of the tragedy is blunted, if not blotted out..." After 9 years? No kidding. I know that it is glamorous to expect people to be in a constant state of active grief for the rest of their lives, but that is simply not reality and any psychiatrist worth the paper his degree is written on would know that. The report claims a "delusion of persecution," which is concluded solely based on his strong feelings now that Army CID is out to get him. Considering that they reopened the investigation into him, not the case in general, in early 1971 and didn't stop until they got a civilian court to convene a Grand Jury in 1975, and then fully participated in the construction of the case for the prosecution's trial through 1979...yeah, I guess he was feeling persecuted and was likely pretty angry.

 

[byn63]

The point is that the psychiatric testimony was EXCULPATORY evidence which would have prevented inmate from being wrongfully convicted, with an incorrect verdict.

No henri, the psychiatric testimony of Dr. Sadoff was not exculpatory nor was inculpatory. it was IRRELEVANT. try and grasp this:

inmate DID NOT FILE an AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (ie he did not claim temporary insanity nor did he claim he suffered from mental disease or defect) therefore psychiatric testimony was not required. in this case, since both sides could have lined up Drs. to say whatever supported their case it was deemed worthless to have battling "experts". the lack of Dr. Sadoff's testimony did not convict inmate. what convicting inmate were his own statements and demeanor on the stand AND the over 1,100 pieces of evidence that was presented at trial.

The 'tricky Dick' biased trial judge.

Judge Dupree was not a "tricky dick" nor was he biased. inmate is damned lucky he got such a thorough and conscientious jurist, because if Dupree had been less so, Bernie Segal's behavior could have been even more damaging to inmate.

perhaps in collaboration with the prosecution lawyers, cunningly planned for the jury and the 4th Circuit judges and Supreme Court to be ill-informed of that exculpatory psychiatric evidence by saying he didn't want a battle of the experts.

there was no conspiracy and the 4th Circuit and Supreme Court Justices are higher up the food chain than was Judge Dupree. The prosecution lawyers and Judge Dupree nor anyone else was involved in any sort of conspiracy. There was no "exculpatory" psychiatric testimony henri. NONE. REPEAT NONE. the testimony was irrelevant.

AND ONCE AGAIN I WILL TELL YOU THAT INMATE WAS NOT NOR HAS HE EVER BEEN OF SUCH IMPORTANCE FOR THE WORLD TO CONSPIRE AGAINST HIM. ALSO, AS I HAVE POINTED OUT TO YOU OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN - NO CONSPIRACY COULD HAVE LASTED THIS LONG. IT WOULD HAVE CRUMBLED LONG AGO - IN OTHER WORDS IF IT HAD EXISTED HE'D HAVE BEEN OUT BY NOW AND ALL THE CONSPIRATORS WOULD HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AND DEALT WITH.....

As Benjamin Franklin said (and I've pointed this out before too) three men may keep a Secret only after two of them are dead.

It was just the same with the black wool fibers with no known source withheld from the jury,.....

As I have pointed out to you previously on numerous occasions UNSOURCED IS FORENSICALLY USELESS. Plus, the black wool fibers (1) probably came from clothing or blankets in the house (2) inmate destroyed all the clothes and blankets or gave them away before they could be examined (3) the black wool fibers WERE NOT USED AGAINST HIM and (4) every crime scene is going to have unsourced fibers, hairs, or other debris - transfer theory of locard has been explained to you at least a hundred times.

and the FBI lab tampering with the hair in the hand with the wooden splinter for the DNA testing, and substituting an inmate hair.

roflmao! how exactly did the FBI and Prosecution manage to get a distal portion of inmate's limb hair (an exact size match to the bloody "mystery hair" found along with a bloody splinter from the murder club in Colette's hand), put Colette's blood on it, and get it into evidence without inmate knowing about it? Seriously, I want to know what magic was invoked so that inmate does not know and/or notice when someone walks up to him and grabs and pulls out a limb hair. that would mean he is so oblivious to his person and his surroundings that he would not notice someone pulling hairs from either his arms, legs, or armpits......it was not a head or pubic hair so it could not be microscopically compared, the only thing that a microscope could do was tell you the region of the body it was from so that we know it was either arm, leg, or arm pit, not chest, not head, not pubic......roflmao! seriously henri? even the defense doesn't try to claim someone "swapped" out the hair....they just ignore it now that it proves inmate's guilt even further than the rest of the evidence combined!

 

[BStrong]

Standard issue nonsense snipped..

The matter is explained by Xiuan on the internet:

You have -0- credibility. Why should anyone grant an anonymous internet poster credibility because you cite them?

I'm reminded of Joseph Welch asking Joe McCarthy "At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"

You've repeatedly (lets keep this polite) made flat out misrepresentations of fact concerning the evidence in hand, made statements and assertions that were 100% false, have continually asserted facts not in evidence and have continually labeled every single individual involved in the case (other than the actual bad actor that murdered their family) as incompetent, crooked, lying, biased etc. if they were in conflict with your delusional version of the criminal act.

This is the bottom line - Henri, you are the individual that your labels describe.

You're the incompetent . You're the biased. You're the liar. You are projecting onto others that which is in your own character.

 

[JTF]

Sourced Evidence

HENRIBOY: Still waiting on your responses to Challenges 2 and 3. It took you two months to sheepishly admit that you couldn't come up with the goods for my initial challenge, so should I expect to wait another 6 months for two challenges?

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[JTF]

Nuff Said

Over a period of 4 days, the CID collected over 125 fibers and 28 hairs at the crime scene. At autopsy, the CID collected a blue pajama seam thread that was found under Kristen's fingernail and 6 months after the murders, Janice Glisson found a 5mm hair fragment in Kristen's fingernail scrapings.

Microscopic comparisons of the hairs in 1970, 1974 and 1999 resulted in all but 4 of the hairs being sourced to a specific individual. DNA tests sourced one of the hairs to Jeffrey MacDonald and the other 3 hairs remain unsourced. None of the hairs or fibers were sourced to Helena Stoeckley or Greg Mitchell.

ALL of the sourced hair/fiber evidence that could be construed as being inculpatory was linked to one person. That person is Jeffrey MacDonald. Arguments to the contrary have no basis in science. Nuff said.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[Henri McPhee]

roflmao! how exactly did the FBI and Prosecution manage to get a distal portion of inmate's limb hair (an exact size match to the bloody "mystery hair" found along with a bloody splinter from the murder club in Colette's hand), put Colette's blood on it, and get it into evidence without inmate knowing about it? Seriously, I want to know what magic was invoked so that inmate does not know and/or notice when someone walks up to him and grabs and pulls out a limb hair. that would mean he is so oblivious to his person and his surroundings that he would not notice someone pulling hairs from either his arms, legs, or armpits......it was not a head or pubic hair so it could not be microscopically compared, the only thing that a microscope could do was tell you the region of the body it was from so that we know it was either arm, leg, or arm pit, not chest, not head, not pubic......roflmao! seriously henri? even the defense doesn't try to claim someone "swapped" out the hair....they just ignore it now that it proves inmate's guilt even further than the rest of the evidence combined!

If a pajama fiber was found under Kristen's fingernail it's not proof beyond reasonable doubt of anything. Jeff MacDonald was quite truthful in saying he carried Kristen to her bedroom after she wet the bed. It has been proved the old pajama top shed fibers easily. Little children can claw at a pajama top when they are sleepy and in a bad mood.

It's obviously unfair for the FBI lab to be able to tamper with forensic evidence while the defense is not allowed to test the hair and blood and fiber evidence, as in the MacDonald case. There has been most severe criticism of the FBI lab in the past and nothing has been done about it. Donald Trump should put his foot down about all this.

There are similar problems with forensic labs in the UK. This is a recent example by Nazia Parveen of the Guardian newspaper in February 2017:

Hundreds of drug tests may have been manipulated by staff at a forensics lab, with almost 500 police investigations under review.

Two employees of Randox Testing Services (RTS), which analyses blood, saliva and hair samples on behalf of police forces, have been arrested by Greater Manchester police.

RTS said the issue had come to light as a result of an internal investigation at its Manchester site.

The National Police Chiefs’ Council’s forensic science lead, Ch Const Debbie Simpson, confirmed a criminal inquiry had started into the “quality failure” and that 484 cases would need to be reviewed.

Forces around the country would now determine “if compromised data played a part in prosecution, and the CPS will then take appropriate action”, she said.

Advertisement

It raises the possibility that hundreds of people could have been the victims of miscarriages of justice because of convictions based on incorrect toxicology test results in their cases.

RTS said the manipulation was of quality control data supporting the test results, rather than the samples themselves. It said no alcohol samples were affected, and some tests could be “rerun to provide robust, uncompromised results”.

The government closed down the independent state-run Forensic Science Service in 2012 amid multimillion-pound annual losses. Forensic testing is now either done in-house by police forces or outsourced to private companies.

Last month the official regulator Dr Gillian Tully told the Guardian that further cuts to the forensic science budget would compromise quality and damage the British justice system.

RTS, based in Northern Ireland with offices in London and Manchester, says on its website that it is “a world leader in clinical diagnostic solutions with offices and distribution in over 145 countries”.

It is part of the Randox Laboratories group, which includes Randox Health, the sponsor of UK horse racing’s premier event, the Grand National.

RTS’s website adds that it is “entrusted by the majority of UK police forces to provide forensic toxicology testing”.

In a statement on the website, it said the investigation was limited to its Manchester site.

GMP said two men aged 47 and 31 had been arrested on suspicion of perverting the course of justice and bailed until next month.

A GMP spokeswoman confirmed it had been asked to investigate forensic results issued by Randox Testing Services.

She added: “Randox Testing Services have provided forensic services to police forces, including GMP, for the past two years. The organisation is being fully cooperative [with] the investigation.”

 

[byn63]

If a pajama fiber was found under Kristen's fingernail it's not proof beyond reasonable doubt of anything. inmate was quite truthful in saying he carried Kristen to her bedroom after she wet the bed. It has been proved the old pajama top shed fibers easily. Little children can claw at a pajama top when they are sleepy and in a bad mood.

now you have truly gone of the deep end. The blue pajama fiber was totally saturated in blood and was initially thought to be a blood clot. This is indeed proof beyond "all doubt" not just beyond a reasonable doubt that the wearer of those pjs was the knife wielder. Also, it is impossible for inmate to have carried Kristen from the master bedroom to her room "after having wet the bed" because Kristen DID NOT WET THE BED IN THE MASTER BEDROOM. The urine was tested with the results showing that it was either a person with Type A or a person with Type AB blood that urinated on the master bed. It is NOT SCIENTIFICALLY OR MEDICALLY POSSIBLE FOR IT TO HAVE BEEN KRISTEN. PERIOD.

ABO BLOOD TYPING:

Type A includes antigen A and anti-B antibodies
Type B includes antigen B and anti-A antibodies
Type AB includes antigen A and antigen B (no antibodies)
Type O includes antigen H and anti-A and anti-B antibodies

When tested the stain (although degraded) showed antigen A (no antibodies) which is conclusive that either a Type A or Type AB made the stain. The lack of antigen B is likely from the length of time before it was tested. But no matter the level of degradation the fact is that IF IT HAD BEEN KRISTEN THEY WOULD HAVE FOUND ANTIGEN H. no ifs and or buts henri. SIMPLE ABSOLUTE FACT.

It's obviously unfair for the FBI lab to be able to tamper with forensic evidence while the defense is not allowed to test the hair and blood and fiber evidence, ....

well, since the FBI lab did not tamper with the forensic evidence this comment is ridiculous. the defense had plenty of time to review the evidence prior to trial, and SHOULD have taken advantage of it. However, Bernie Segal spent a large portion of the time trying to get the evidence shipped across the country WHICH WOULD NEVER HAPPEN. The defense was given access to ALL the evidence and local lab space to do any testing they chose to do.....that they did not is on them.

As for the blood - all the blood (not part of physical evidence) was used up by the end of the autopsies. So, neither side got to do DNA testing, at trial however, the blood stains were Typed so we know who bled on what, where, and sadly we know HOW they started bleeding - inmate brutalized Colette, Kimmie, and Kristy.

ALL OF THE HAIR WAS DNA TESTED HENRI. UNSOURCED HAIRS ARE USELESS TO INMATE. HE NEEDED THE DNA OF EITHER HELENA OR GREG TO BE FOUND. HE NEEDED THE E-5 HAIR TO MATCH ONE OF THEM.

The fact the E-5 is a 100% DNA match to inmate proves what inmate and the defense has said from the beginning, the bloody hair found clutched in Colette's hand along with a bloody splinter from the murder club would come from the wielder of that club. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt. FACTS FACTS FACTS

 

[BStrong]

snipped wishful thinking, speculation and partisan assertion...

There are similar problems with forensic labs in the UK. This is a recent example by Nazia Parveen of the Guardian newspaper in February 2017:

Correlation does not imply causation, and what does or doesn't happen in labs in the UK in 2017 has -0- to do with the JM case.

Nothing to say about you projecting your behavior onto others? I guess the Welch quote as applied to this discussion is quite appropriate.

You're lack of decency does not improve your arguments. Your credibility is -0-.

 

[byn63]

Correlation does not imply causation, and what does or doesn't happen in labs in the UK in 2017 has -0- to do with the JM case.

Nothing to say about you projecting your behavior onto others? I guess the Welch quote as applied to this discussion is quite appropriate.

You're lack of decency does not improve your arguments. Your credibility is -0-.

I 100% agree!