Merged Jeffrey MacDonald did it. He really did.

[Bunny]

Careful, Henri: I also have copies of old posts; in fact, I have several hundred pages of them from many forums.

You -- oops, sorry, I meant "Wudge" -- didn't fare too well on that old Websleuths board, and I don't think anyone was swayed by the silly claims of Mac's "innocence." I, JTF, Rashomon, sharpar and quite a few others (including even the moderator) had to correct the Wudge-record repeatedly, but of course trolls aren't too interested in the documented facts, are they?

"sharpar" summed up the Wudge-nonsense pretty well. Here's a direct copy from on of those posts:

"Still you are stating opinion as fact. Your opinions have been shown to be
incorrect on numerous points yet you dont apologize, dont conceed an error
in your thinking and ignore things for which the only answer is because he
did it. Now there is a grand conspiracy of LE , Judical and media .

"You say alot but little is verifiable fact . You are like most of his supporters in that respect. They also feel the need to make known they have brilliant analytical minds and the rest of us are deluded peasants whose intellect and reading comprehension is questionable..."

Even the moderator chimed in at the end, before that old board was finally closed, telling you -- a.k.a. Wudge, imo -- point-blank that while it's true that there are cases of wrongly-convicted persons, this isn't one of them. That still stands as true today as it was back then.

 

[JTF]

Gotcha

Kudos to Bunny for providing definitive proof of Henriboy's motivations for posting on true crime discussion boards. This is a game to him and he is enjoying every minute of it.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[byn63]

Only an idiot would DISBELIEVE CERTIFIED DOCUMENTATION rather than the FACTS. The documentation including the warrant for arrest of Allen P Mazzerole dated January 28, 1970, the jail records showing he remained incarcerated in Fayetteville through March 10, 1970, AND the documented BOND records that showed he finally was able to raise the bail money and get bonded out of jail on 3/10/1970. THESE ARE FACTS henri. astute, thinking, rational people have reviewed and certified and rechecked and certified, and again verified that Allen M was in jail on 2/16/70 and could not possibly have participated in the slaughter of Colette, Kimmie, Kristy, and the baby boy. your hero did that.....and it has been proven beyond all doubt.

there is no exculpatory evidence? there is plenty of exculpatory evidence.....there is not a single piece of evidence that has ever been deemed inculpatory. Do you have any idea how ridiculous you make inmate by continuing to argue such a thoroughly and completed disproven and ridiculous claim? I bet he'd be sickened if he knew.....that the few "supporters" he can muster present such a nonsensical platform.

 

[ScottPletcher]

Mazzerole clearly was in jail during the relevant time period.

However, if he somehow weren't -- and we know he was -- there's zero evidence Maz was inside 544 Castle Drive on the morning of Feb 17, 1970. And MacD needs [near] "proof of innocence", vastly beyond the "reasonable doubt" [about his guilt] required to convict him. And Maz obviously can't put him within light years of that standard.

 

[Henri McPhee]

Even the moderator chimed in at the end, before that old board was finally closed, telling you -- a.k.a. Wudge, imo -- point-blank that while it's true that there are cases of wrongly-convicted persons, this isn't one of them. That still stands as true today as it was back then.

Wudge was still around on the forums in 2014. He seems to have posted on many forums, on many murder cases, for many years. I don't know enough about the details of the other cases he mentions to be able to pontificate on them, but on the MacDonald case Wudge had right judgment.

Judge Fox is a silly old fool, and a big soft thing, who is a brick wall for MacDonald. Judge Dupree was a biased trial judge who was in bed with the prosecution. The foreman of the jury was overheard by three different witnesses saying he was going to convict the hell out of MacDonald before the trial even started. That's an irregularity which should have caused a reversal, and a mistrial. Wudge thinks there should be professional jurors, but I don't know about that.

Nobody on this forum has ever explained why Mazerolle never appeared in court on February 17th 1970 when there is hard documentary evidence that he should have done. The only credible explanation is that he jumped bail, or he escaped custody with false documentation. Mazerolle was a person of interest in the MacDonald case. It's only because Detective Beasley and Stoeckley were never believed that he has never been caught, or interrogated. The judicial system in North Carolina is a shambles.

 

[byn63]

Why should Mazzerole have showed up in court on 2/17/70? What evidence exists showing that he should have been in court on that date? SHOW ME! Put up or shut up! IF he had an existing court date for 2/17/70 then he'd have been taken to court OR the court would have been notified that he was in custody.

1. SHOW US THE EVIDENCE THAT SAYS AM WAS DUE IN COURT ON 2/17/70.

2. PROVE that the documentation that shows that AM was arrested in January, in custody on 2/17/70, and bonded out on 3/10/70 is fraudulent. PROOF not some unknown untraceable bs comments but PROOF.

3. PROVE that the investigations into AM and his statement(s) to FBI did not happen/are faked. PROOF henri not more of your bs....

 

[BStrong]

Wudge was still around on the forums in 2014. He seems to have posted on many forums, on many murder cases, for many years. I don't know enough about the details of the other any cases he mentions to be able to pontificate on them, but I never let it stop me. on the MacDonald case Wudge had right judgment.


Judge Fox is a silly old fool, and a big soft thing, who is a brick wall for MacDonald. Judge Dupree was a biased trial judge who was in bed with the prosecution. The foreman of the jury was overheard by three different witnesses saying he was going to convict the hell out of MacDonald before the trial even started. That's an irregularity which should have caused a reversal, and a mistrial. Wudge thinks there should be professional jurors, but I don't know about that.

Nobody on this forum has ever explained why Mazerolle never appeared in court on February 17th 1970 when there is hard documentary evidence that he should have done. The only credible explanation is that he jumped bail, or he escaped custody with false documentation. Mazerolle was a person of interest in the MacDonald case. It's only because Detective Beasley and Stoeckley were never believed that he has never been caught, or interrogated. The judicial system in North Carolina is a shambles.

FIFY and who cares what you think? you have no credibility.

 

[Henri McPhee]

Why should Mazzerole have showed up in court on 2/17/70? What evidence exists showing that he should have been in court on that date? SHOW ME! Put up or shut up! IF he had an existing court date for 2/17/70 then he'd have been taken to court OR the court would have been notified that he was in custody.

1. SHOW US THE EVIDENCE THAT SAYS AM WAS DUE IN COURT ON 2/17/70.

2. PROVE that the documentation that shows that AM was arrested in January, in custody on 2/17/70, and bonded out on 3/10/70 is fraudulent. PROOF not some unknown untraceable bs comments but PROOF.

3. PROVE that the investigations into AM and his statement(s) to FBI did not happen/are faked. PROOF henri not more of your bs....

I think I'm going to have to agree to disagree with Byn about this Mazerolle matter. It's all very well Byn saying I'm in the inarticulate classes. It's just there is something not quite right in the way Mazerolle escaped custody in Georgia in 1979, and Myrtle Beach South Carolina in 1970, and I believe at Fort Bragg at the time of the MacDonald murders. I believe that what Detective Beasley and Helena said about Mazerolle was true, and that he escaped being interrogated about the MacDonald murders by cunning and trickery, and fraud. It's like this plausible deniability of bugging by the NSA and GCHQ and the FBI to Congress and that they supposedly do not violate the rule of law.

The hard documentary evidence Byn demands can be found at:

www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/html/beasley3-court-date_1970-02-10.html

www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/html/4-1970-02-11-jd-court-date.html

Nobody has ever explained why Mazerolle never turned up in court on February 17 1970 and then he agreed to plead guilty and sentenced about a year later when the heat had died down.

This is some waffle about the Mazerolle matter I posted on the internet in 2010:

Detective Beasley always maintained that Allen Patrick Mazerolle was out of jail even after Gunderson and Shedlick might have been confused by the so-called documentation into thinking Mazerolle was in jail at the time of the MacDonald murders. Mazerolle’s pal Rizzo was out on bail.

Why would Mazerolle be any different? Shortage of money by drug dealers? Beasley said Mazerolle was on the run and must have jumped bail until he was caught about a year later.

Byn makes these wild statements that there is masses of documentation about all this Mazerolle business. Some of that documentation might be forged to give Mazerolle an alibi for the MacDonald murders.

I don’t know about America but in the European province of Britain there is a preliminary hearing in a courtroom in which a prisoner gives details of his name and address and how he pleads to those charges. You don’t languish in jail for about a year without appearing in court, as Byn implies happened to Mazerolle in 1970.

All I’m asking is for Byn to provide me with the court records, or some kind of newspaper report, that Mazerolle appeared in court for his drug offenses around the time of the MacDonald murders and details of those court records. Is that too much to ask? Beasley said Mazerolle was supposed to have appeared in court at that time but he never did.

 

[byn63]

I think I'm going to have to agree to disagree with Byn about this Mazerolle matter.

I call BS in all capital letters henri. you STATED that Allen Mazzerole was due in court on 2/17/70 and he did not attend. I TOLD YOU that you needed to PROVE this to be true. The FACT IS THAT YOU CANNOT. THE FACT IS THAT ALLEN MAZZEROLE WAS IN CUSTODY IN FAYETTEVILLE ON 2/17/70. ALSO, FAYETTEVILLE IS WHERE FT. BRAGG IS LOCATED.

It's all very well Byn saying I'm in the inarticulate classes.

I didn't say you were inarticulate. I alluded to the FACT that you apparently have difficulty with READING COMPREHENSION. Once again, you have proven this to be FACT as well. Once again, PROVE that AM was due in Court on 2/17/70 and for WHAT CHARGES was he due in Court? Here in the USA, if some has a court date and he is in custody they either take the prisoner to Court (handcuffed and escorted by the Sheriff in many cases) OR they notify the court that the person is in custody. The Court then decides to proceed with the hearing or postpone (many times the lawyers can handle this process).

It's just there is something not quite right in the way Mazerolle escaped custody in Georgia in 1979,

what possible relevance is this? the murders occurred on February 17, 1970 on Ft. Bragg which is located in Fayetteville, NC. The ONLY relevant point is that AM WAS IN JAIL FROM JANUARY 28, 1970 THROUGH MARCH 10, 1970 IN FAYETTEVILLE, NC. FACT henri.

and Myrtle Beach South Carolina in 1970,

IF he was in custody in Myrtle Beach and escaped it has absolutely no relevance to these discussions. he was not in custody in Myrtle Beach on 2/17/70 he was in custody in Fayetteville, NC the location of Ft. Bragg where the murders occurred and he could not possibly have participated because he was in jail in Fayetteville from January 28, 1970 through March 10, 1970.

and I believe at Fort Bragg at the time of the MacDonald murders.

you finally said something of relevance.....yes AM WAS IN JAIL IN FAYETTEVILLE, NC FROM JANUARY 28, 1970 THROUGH MARCH 10, 1970. Thereby making it impossible for him to have been involved in the slaughter of Colette, Kimberley, Kristen, and unborn baby boy.

I believe that what Detective Beasley and Helena said about Mazerolle was true, and that he escaped being interrogated about the MacDonald murders by cunning and trickery, and fraud.

the words of a man with inorganic brain disorder who confabulated is useless and doesn't constitute proof. the words of Helena a drug addled pathetic being is even less credible. you have been told before that what they "said" doesn't constitute proof. Allen M did not use cunning or trickery or fraud to avoid being interrogated about the murders. He was talked to by the FBI and he provided documented certified FACTUAL documentation showing that he was in jail from January 28, 1970 to March 10, 1970. What part of that do you fail to understand?

It's like this plausible deniability of bugging by the NSA and GCHQ and the FBI to Congress and that they supposedly do not violate the rule of law.

what does this have to do with anything? as usual NOTHING. you have no credibility.

The hard documentary evidence Byn demands can be found at:

www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/html/beasley3-court-date_1970-02-10.html

this is a summons for PEB to appear on the matter of Allen M. that DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT AM was required to appear. Your reading comprehension is really poor!

www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/html/4-1970-02-11-jd-court-date.html

this is a summons for Mr. DeCarter to appear on the matter of Allen M. that DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN that AM was required to appear. Also, since he was in custody, the chances are that he had a court appointed attorney at the hearing and he was left in his cell.

Nobody has ever explained why Mazerolle never turned up in court on February 17 1970

I have explained this to you over and over and over and over and over again. One last time henri - Allen Mazzerole WAS IN JAIL ON 2/17/70. Therefore, the only 2 options would have been the Sheriff or other LEO would have taken him to court in cuffs OR the Court would have been notified that he was in custody. It is that simple.

and then he agreed to plead guilty and sentenced about a year later

relevance? NONE

This is some waffle about the Mazerolle matter I posted on the internet in 2010:

perfect word you posted waffle in 2010 and you posted waffle now.....

 

[Henri McPhee]

this is a summons for PEB to appear on the matter of Allen M. that DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT AM was required to appear. Your reading comprehension is really poor!

this is a summons for Mr. DeCarter to appear on the matter of Allen M. that DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN that AM was required to appear. Also, since he was in custody, the chances are that he had a court appointed attorney at the hearing and he was left in his cell.

I have explained this to you over and over and over and over and over again. One last time henri - Allen Mazzerole WAS IN JAIL ON 2/17/70. Therefore, the only 2 options would have been the Sheriff or other LEO would have taken him to court in cuffs OR the Court would have been notified that he was in custody. It is that simple.

A likely story!

I agree with what Wudge said about the MacDonald case in 2006:

North Carolina protects (and promotes) prosecutors who withhold evidence. It is a way of life there.

Wudge seems to think the MacDonald prosecutors should be in prison, and not MacDonald, with which I agree.

This is part of what I posted on the internet in 2012:

As far as I can judge, I seem to be about the only pro-MacDonald poster left. A&E forum had several pro-MacDonald posters at one time. That forum is now defunct. All the postings have gone there. I don't know if posters like Caphill and Wudge and OmegaMan, and perhaps Plexus, are still going on some obscure MacDonald forum. I think Websleuths had a MacDonald forum until about 2007, but I think that is now defunct.

 

[byn63]

A likely story!

once again you prove that you have no reading comprehension, IT IS NOT A STORY HENRI, IF YOU GO TO THE LINK YOU PROVIDED, IT IS A SUMMONS FOR PRINCE EDWARD BEASLEY TO APPEAR.

Wudge seems to think the MacDonald prosecutors should be in prison, and not INMATE, with which I agree

I don't care what Wudge thinks (thought) - the FACTS are PLAIN, INMATE SLAUGHTERED COLETTE, KIMBERLEY, KRISTEN, AND HIS UNBORN SON. He deserves to be under the prison. He is a base coward who continues to whine because he got caught and was proven to be way less intelligent than he hoped. EVERY SINGLE SOURCED piece of evidence shows inmate slaughtered his family. inmate looks ever more ridiculous when people such as you (Wudge, Albie, Artie, etal) come on to boards such as this and repeatedly make outlandish and ridiculous claims. IF he knew how idiotic you make him look these days he'd beg you to stop!

 

[JTF]

King Troll

Henriboy's responses to being exposed are comical AND sad. He's copying and pasting posts that he constructed under different poster names on several MacDonald Case discussion boards. Caphill, I mean, Wudge, I mean, Henriboy, is simply rinsing and repeating the SAME talking points he made in 2003.

Again, this is a game to him and he loves the attention that comes with being the lone contrarian. He doesn't care that he has been exposed as a fraud on multiple true crime discussion boards, so I no longer care to play his game. As BStrong consistenly points out, Henriboy/Caphill/Wudge has no credibility, so why take a second of my time to respond to his fantasy narratives?

I've done it for 14 years, so I'm due for retirement. LOL. Considering this is the most litigated murder case in history, there are plenty of issues to discuss without setting foot on troll island. We're still awaiting the 4th Circuit's decision on whether inmate's conviction stands. Nothing shocks me anymore, but I would be surprised if the 4th Circuit accepts inmate's dubious arguments and grants him a new trial.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[BStrong]

I think I'm going to have to agree to disagree with Byn about this Mazerolle matter. It's all very well Byn saying I'm in the inarticulate classes. It's just there is something not quite right in the way Mazerolle escaped custody in Georgia in 1979, and Myrtle Beach South Carolina in 1970, and I believe at Fort Bragg at the time of the MacDonald murders. I believe that what Detective Beasley and Helena said about Mazerolle was true, and that he escaped being interrogated about the MacDonald murders by cunning and trickery, and fraud.

inconsequential babble snipped

No one cares what you believe or think about JM's case, most likely including JM. Have you written him any fan mail? Requested an autographed pic or some other memento of your man crush?

 

[byn63]

Henriboy's responses to being exposed are comical AND sad. He's copying and pasting posts that he constructed under different poster names on several MacDonald Case discussion boards. Caphill, I mean, Wudge, I mean, Henriboy, is simply rinsing and repeating the SAME talking points he made in 2003.

don't forget Albert Webb and Arthur Thorpe among other names he has employed....

Again, this is a game to him and he loves the attention that comes with being the lone contrarian. He doesn't care that he has been exposed as a fraud on multiple true crime discussion boards, so I no longer care to play his game. As BStrong consistenly points out, Henriboy/Caphill/Wudge has no credibility, so why take a second of my time to respond to his fantasy narratives?

I try and try to ignore his posts....however, when he posts a link claiming it shows AM was due in court and then one reads it and finds it is a summons for PEB to appear in the AM matter and you point it out....you'd expect better than the comment "a likely story". For real? Henri posted the link and then argues about what it says and I just cannot let him get away with it. Some new person to the boards may see his comment and lack of reply and believe he has a point. THAT CANNOT BE ALLOWED!

 

[Henri McPhee]

This is an interesting opinion by Wudge in July 2009 which I think applies to the MacDonald case, and with which I agree:

Based on what we know there is a lack of sufficient evidence to prove the necessary elements that must, by law, be proven.

Moreover, your premises are based on what you think, not evidence. Your assuming what you wish to prove. That's known as begging the question which is fallacious logic.

 

[byn63]

a quote taken out of context (even one by you as Wudge in the old days) is of no value. there is not sufficient data upon which to give comment other than "this quote is worthless there is no data to argue/comment upon".

In this case there is over 1,100 pieces of evidence that were used at trial along with the remaining 40% of the evidence that was not used at trial AND the DNA results which are the final nails in the coffin in which inmate will be buried.

 

[JTF]

Documented Record

Speaking in the 3rd person is no substitute for the professional analysis of witness statements and lab reports. Stoeckley's claims are not corroborated by the physical evidence collected at the crime scene nor by individuals she mentioned in multiple confessions. There is no evidence of her presence at the crime scene and most of the individuals she linked to this crime have stated that she is unstable.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[Henri McPhee]

The real culprits would say Helena Stoeckley was very unstable wouldn't they? It's true that she was never a novice in a nunnery, or belonged to the local Rotary club or that she sometimes told lies. That's not an excuse to say she was not credible. Her information should have been investigated and verified.

This is what former MacDonald lawyer Harvey Silverglate once said about the matter. Judge Murnaghan could see the problem with Helena, but he lacked a strong personality to tell the biased trial judge that he was wrong:

On direct appeal, Circuit Judge Murnaghan concurred with a Fourth Circuit panel’s ruling upholding MacDonald’s conviction, “albeit not without substantial misgiving,” but lamented the “withholding of collateral testimony consistent with and basic to the defendant’s principal exculpatory contention.” Little did Judge Murnaghan or MacDonald’s trial lawyers know at the time that the withholding of this testimony from the jury was enabled by defense counsel’s ignorance of the existence of corroborating forensic evidence of Stoeckley’s many confessions.

 

[Border Reiver]

The real culprits would say Helena Stoeckley was very unstable wouldn't they? It's true that she was never a novice in a nunnery, or belonged to the local Rotary club or that she sometimes told lies. That's not an excuse to say she was not credible. Her information should have been investigated and verified.

If you lie, your information is at best suspect and your own testimony given less weight.

When you lie, AND the physical evidence supports a different narrative, your testimony is worthless.

Ms. Stoeckley's testimony is worthless.

 

[byn63]

The real culprit(s) would say Helena Stoeckley was very unstable wouldn't they? It's true that she was never a novice in a nunnery, or belonged to the local Rotary club or that she sometimes told lies. That's not an excuse to say she was not credible. Her information should have been investigated and verified.

the real culprit will and has said all sorts of things INCLUDING THAT HE DID NOT RECOGNIZE HELENA WHEN SHOWN A CONTEMPORARY PHOTO OF HER JUST 2 MONTHS AFTER HE SLAUGHTERED HIS FAMILY.

AMONG OTHER STATEMENTS HE SAID 'SHE HAS A DISTINCTIVE NOSE, I'D HAVE REMEMBERED THAT NOSE'.....THE REAL CULPRIT (singular) IS IN PRISON WHERE HE BELONGS.