Merged Jeffrey MacDonald did it. He really did.

Status
Not open for further replies.
History Repeats Itself

Considering that the landlord of MacFantasy Island has ignored several challenges to present a single piece of SOURCED evidence of hippie home invaders, his reference to the importance of evidence in this case is laughable.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
The point is that there is no evidence that Jeff MacDonald did it, and there is strong circumstantial evidence that Helena Stoeckley and Greg Mitchell and Mazerolle, and others were involved, but never properly or thoroughly investigated by the Army CID, or by the FBI. The matter was thoroughly investigated at the Article 32 proceedings in 1970 which came to a right judgment, and was profound and unbiased, and fair and just by Colonel Rock:

REASONING FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Rationale for Recommendation Number One

(General) The rationale for recommendation number one is based on two major lines of inquiry; first on analysis of the sworn testimony of the accused and evidence to support his version of the events on the night of 16-17 February and, secondly, an analysis of the government's evidence to refute his statements and testimony. A careful examination was made of the government's charges and its theory of how the crimes were committed as enunciated in the closing argument.

B. Analysis of the Accused's Case

In summary the accused states that four (or possibly more) unidentified assailants attacked him when he awoke on the couch in the living room of his apartment to the sounds of screaming by his wife (Colette) and cries for help from both Colette and the oldest daughter (Kimberly). During a short lived struggle with the assailants he received numerous blows, the most significant being a hit on the head and a hard punch (knife wound) to the chest. He fell into the hallway and apparently was unconscious for an unknown period of time. Upon regaining consciousness he attempted, on several occasions, to resuscitate the members of his family and telephoned for assistance.
Click to expand...
 
Henri McPhee said:
The point is that there is no evidence that Jeff MacDonald did it,
Click to expand...

NO henri, there is STRONG EVIDENCE THAT INMATE MURDERED HIS FAMILY. IN FACT, AS YOU HAVE BEEN TOLD TIME AND TIME AGAIN EVERY SINGLED SOURCED PIECE OF EVIDENCE POINTS DIRECTLY AT INMATE AS THE SOLE MURDERER. PERIOD. Just because you don't LIKE that fact doesn't make it any less true.

Henri McPhee said:
and there is strong circumstantial evidence that Helena Stoeckley and Greg Mitchell and Mazerolle, and others were involved,
Click to expand...

There is not a single piece of evidence that points to either Greg or Helena as being involved. IN FACT there is plenty of circumstantial and physical evidence to show that they WERE NOT INVOLVED.

There is no evidence of any kind that Allen M was involved BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN PROVEN BEYOND ALL DOUBT THAT HE WAS IN JAIL THE NIGHT OF THE MURDERS AND COULD NOT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED. PERIOD. Again, you have been told this, shown evidence of this, and your continued refusal to accept FACTS is beyond ignorant. SHOW US SOME SOURCED EVIDENCE FOR YOUR COMMENTS. Oh, that is right, you cannot because none exists!

Henri McPhee said:
but never properly or thoroughly investigated by the Army CID, or by the FBI.
Click to expand...

I call BS in a loud and resonating manner. The Army CID conducted a very thorough investigation and then an even longer REINVESTIGATION. Again just because you repeat an untruth does not make the FACTS change. The FBI investigated after the 2 year reinvestigation and and with all this the prosecution was able to present over 1,100 pieces of evidence via 28 witnesses at trial. Inmate was convicted and his conviction has stood through every single machination he and his lawyers have attempted. He is guilty.

Henri McPhee said:
The matter was thoroughly investigated at the Article 32 proceedings in 1970
Click to expand...

No, actually a HUGE portion of the evidence had yet to be analyzed by the time the Article 32 took place. The re-investigation by Army CID and then FBI took place after the Article 32. Due to the Provost Marshall rushing to arrest inmate the investigators didn't have sufficient time to fully complete the analysis.

Despite Bernie Segal using the Article 32 as if it were a trial, it was not/is not a trial. It was the UCMJ version of a Grand Jury hearing.

Henri McPhee said:
which came to a right judgment, and was profound and unbiased, and fair and just by Colonel Rock:
Click to expand...

Col Rock was not authorized to make a "judgement" and he was nothing more than an Infantry Officer, totally untrained in legal work and unaware of what he was doing. His "fair and just" decisions were not so fair or just but it is irrelevant because the base Commander was ultimately the one who had the decision role. The Commander found that there was INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE and dismissed the case BUT THAT IS NOT THE SAME THING AS FINDING INMATE NOT GUILTY. In fact, the Commander is the one who set the CID to re-investigate and he authorized inmate's discharge, in part imho so that the Army could be rid of him and the problem he had become.

The DEFINITIVE judicial hearings that determined his guilt are the Civilian Grand Jury, Civilian Trial, and all the hearings and pleadings since that time. Get over it henri, and accept the FACTS. EVERY SINGLE SOURCED PIECE OF EVIDENCE POINTS DIRECTLY AT INMATE AS THE SOLE MURDERER. PERIOD.
 
Didn't Take Long

It took a grand total of one post before the landlord of MacFantasy Island morphed back into his old self. A decade plus story consisting of conspiracy narratives, debunked claims, and a prodigious amount of true crime trolling.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Henri McPhee said:
You don't make it up and you assume nothing and you don't disregard leads and suspects and you don't jump to conclusions.
Click to expand...

roflmao! NO henri, WE don't make things up and we DO NOT assume anything. Investigators followed EVERY LEAD no matter how lame or ridiculous it appeared INCLUDING verifying that EVERY SINGLE SUSPECT had an alibi (i.e. Allen M who had the BEST ALIBI SINCE HE WAS IN JAIL AND THEREFORE COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED PERIOD.) In the case of Greg and Helena, they may not have had an iron clad alibi but since absolutely no trace of either of them was found at the crime scene (no fingerprints, no footprints, no hairs, no fibers, and NO DNA) they were eliminated as viable suspects.

Jumping to conclusions is YOUR territory. YOU do it every time you post some nonsensical rant or red herring up to and INCLUDING disproven claims. It is long past time that you ACCEPT the FACT that just because you don't like the FACTS DOES NOT REPEAT DOES NOT and once more for clarity DOES NOT make them any less true. Every single sourced piece of evidence points to inmate as the sole perp. He was tried and convicted. He is where he belongs (or as close as we can legally get him - I think he should be dead, but can't have everything) and he is not going any where.
 
Three Investigations

The landlord of MacFantasy Island has his own unique definition of the word "disregard." From 1970-1983, the CID/FBI completed three massive investigations with the CID reinvestigation going well beyond the pale in following every possible lead.

Despite the landlord of MacFantasy Island's decade plus case of sour grapes, the CID interviewed 699 people and followed leads in 32 states. This is simply a case of MacDonald advocates taking issue with the conclusions drawn by CID investigators without addressing the data collected in this 3 year investigation.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com/html/reinvestigation.html
 
JTF said:
The landlord of MacFantasy Island has his own unique definition of the word "disregard." From 1970-1983, the CID/FBI completed three massive investigations with the CID reinvestigation going well beyond the pale in following every possible lead.

Despite the landlord of MacFantasy Island's decade plus case of sour grapes, the CID interviewed 699 people and followed leads in 32 states. This is simply a case of MacDonald advocates taking issue with the conclusions drawn by CID investigators without addressing the data collected in this 3 year investigation.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com/html/reinvestigation.html
Click to expand...

There was never any new evidence discovered by the CID/FBI in the "massive investigations" between 1970-1983, apart from a lot of bollocks like a urine stain was retested after ninety weeks, which is scientifically impossible. I suppose you could mention the "conceptually unsound" FBI pajama folding experiment. The only new evidence, and withholding of evidence, was discovered by MacDonald lawyers, which biased judge Dupree then in his 'clearly erroneous' way said would not make any difference to a different jury at the 1992 appeal.

There is a difference between evidence and opinions which people on that biased yuku MacDonald forum don't seem to understand. A court must take into consideration nothing but the evidence in the case before it, and witnesses other than experts must not be allowed to give their opinions, but must speak only as to facts.
 
Henri McPhee said:
There was never any new evidence discovered by the CID/FBI in the "massive investigations" between 1970-1983,
Click to expand...

The reinvestigation was not to discover NEW evidence. HOWEVER, it did indeed give the CID and the FBI plenty of time to follow up on EVERY LEAD no matter HOW RIDICULOUS it may have been. Also, since the trial did not take place until AFTER the reinvestigations inmate was still a free "presumed innocent" man. Due to the fact that the Provost Marshall jumped the gun in arresting inmate the Govt was forced to proceed with the Article 32 without having had the opportunity to analyze all the evidence collected. During the reinvestigation the evidence that was untested at the time of the Article 32 was completed. THE FACT IS THAT EVERY SINGLE SOURCED PIECE OF EVIDENCE POINTS AT INMATE AS THE SOLE MURDERER. I know you don't like that FACT but it doesn't make it any less true.

Henri McPhee said:
apart from a lot of bollocks like a urine stain was retested after ninety weeks, which is scientifically impossible.
Click to expand...

First it is not bollocks, second lots of leads were followed, lots of interviews were conducted, lots of alibis were checked, lots of "suspects" were considered, and hundreds of pieces of evidence were analyzed.

THIRD, the urine stain was tested and although degraded they were able to get SOME blood type information. The information they did gather eliminates Kristy as the donor of the stain. IT IS MEDICALLY/SCIENTIFICALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR her to have made the urine stain.

Here is a simplified scientific FACT for you:

There are 4 basic human blood groups A, B, AB, and O. Each type has antigens and some also have antibodies. FACT:

Type A blood contains Antigen A and AntiB antibodies
Type B blood contains Antigen B and AntiA antibodies
Type AB blood contains Antigen A and Antigen B and no antibodies
Type O blood contains Antigen H and AntiA and AntiB antibodies.

The urine stain was tested and they found Antigen A. Thus ONLY COLETTE OR KIMMIE COULD HAVE MADE THE URINE STAIN. It was fresh. Colette's clothing/body showed no signs of her having urinated BUT Kimmie's panties and nightgown both showed that she had urinated. FACT henri not sour grapes that because you don't like something doesn't make it untrue.

Henri McPhee said:
I suppose you could mention the "conceptually unsound" FBI pajama folding experiment.
Click to expand...

The pj folding "experiment" was not "conceptually unsound". Another FACT for you henri IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO FORCE A PATTERN TO EXIST. A pattern either does exist or it does not exist. IN THE CASE OF INMATE'S PJ TOP IT DOES EXIST.

Talking about 'conceptually unsound' experiments means we should be discussing the "ham on a sled" fiasco produced by the defense. It was absolutely and utterly ridiculous.

Henri McPhee said:
The only new evidence, and withholding of evidence, was discovered by MacDonald lawyers,
Click to expand...

first of all why do you think only "new evidence" needed to be discovered. there were over a thousand pieces of evidence that had not yet been analyzed by the time of the Article 32. That evidence was analyzed and as more and more of it was reviewed inmate was becoming more and more of a suspect.

secondly OMG you are not SERIOUSLY bringing up the nonsensical and long ago disproven "withheld evidence" are you? IT HAS LONG SINCE BEEN PROVEN that NO EVIDENCE WAS WITHHELD. This FACT does not rest solely on the outstanding, thorough, unbiased, untainted, and highly respected Judge Dupree, but also every level of the US Court System. IF ALL THE COURTS SAY NO EVIDENCE WAS WITHHELD THAN THAT IS FACT. NO EVIDENCE WAS WITHHELD.

Henri McPhee said:
There is a difference between evidence and opinions which people on that biased yuku MacDonald forum don't seem to understand.
Click to expand...

roflmao! the people on the yuku forum and this forum (at least most of them) understand the difference between evidence and opinion. You are the one who doesn't seem to grasp the fact that all your premises are born of opinion and you always dismiss fact.

Henri McPhee said:
A court must take into consideration nothing but the evidence in the case before it, and witnesses other than experts must not be allowed to give their opinions, but must speak only as to facts.
Click to expand...

And that is EXACTLY what happened in this case. The prosecution presented over 1,100 pieces of evidence (FACTS) via 28 witnesses (both lay and expert). The jury convicted. FACT inmate is guilty, the Court System worked as it is supposed to do and a lying, cheating, sociopathic narcissistic murderer is in jail which is where he belongs since we are not allowed to put him under the jail and DP was not an option.
 
Henri McPhee said:
There was never any new evidence discovered by the CID/FBI in the "massive investigations" between 1970-1983, apart from a lot of bollocks like a urine stain was retested after ninety weeks, which is scientifically impossible. I suppose you could mention the "conceptually unsound" FBI pajama folding experiment. The only new evidence, and withholding of evidence, was discovered by MacDonald lawyers, which biased judge Dupree then in his 'clearly erroneous' way said would not make any difference to a different jury at the 1992 appeal.

There is a difference between evidence and opinions which people on that biased yuku MacDonald forum don't seem to understand. A court must take into consideration nothing but the evidence in the case before it, and witnesses other than experts must not be allowed to give their opinions, but must speak only as to facts.
Click to expand...

It has never stopped you. It must suck out loud that you're only a majority of one.
 
Judge Dupree and Judge Fox were in bed with the prosecution and the prosecutors were dishonest and the CID and FBI were idle and incompetent.
 
Henri McPhee said:
Judge Dupree and Judge Fox were in bed with the prosecution and the prosecutors were dishonest and the CID and FBI were idle and incompetent.
Click to expand...

Even if they were all of those things, (they weren't) it wouldn't preclude the fact that your man crush murdered his family.
 
Henri McPhee said:
You don't make it up and you assume nothing and you don't disregard leads and suspects and you don't jump to conclusions.
Click to expand...

We didn't make it up: Jeffrey Macdonald murdered Colette, Kim, Kris and the unborn son. All of the evidence points to him. You're just pissed because none of it points elsewhere.

YOU have ASSUMED Jeff is telling the truth when he says he didn't do it. You're wrong. Again. We looked at the facts, we made a decision on FACTS and EVIDENCE, not just "Jeffy says he didn't do it and he fed the pony so he's good guy." Which seems to be your criteria, because you've presented nothing else.

No one disregarded leads or suspects. There were no LEADS for any other SUSPECT other than (then) Captain Macdonald.

Again, you apply what YOU have done to us. We've jumped to no conclusions. Speaking for myself, Byn & JTF, we've read the transcripts (I'm saving them the trouble); it points to no one but your man crush.

I hate to tell you this, Henri, you're sweet on a bad guy. He can't even admit he did it and that there is no evidence against anyone save himself. Doesn't even qualify as a MAN in my books.

And all you can do is make libelous commentary about the people tasked with justice. REALLY SAD, HENRI. REALLY, REALLY SAD.
 
Last edited:
Wrong Again

The landlord of MacFantasy Island uses most of his limited cognitive resources to ignore the mass of inculpatory evidence that led to inmate's conviction. On occasion, he will simply make something up in the misguided hope that someone new to this case or a fellow true crime troll will agree with his latest concoction.

His most recent talking point is the ultimate in fantasy narratives. Despite his claims to the contrary, each successive investigation produced new data which helped to put inmate in his concrete bunker. This includes the FBI's 1971 forensic re-analysis, the mass of data collected by the CID in their reinvestigation, and the FBI's 1974 forensic re-analysis.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
We believe the facts so we're wrong?

I don't think you quite understand how justice works, Henri. It's not whether YOU believe the man is guilty, it's the ex-Green Beret (who was probably hoping the most that Mac wasn't guilty) and the other eleven jurors who decide it based upon the facts presented.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom