Merged Jeffrey MacDonald did it. He really did.

Status
Not open for further replies.
No Comparison

LANE: Jeffrey MacDonald brutally murdered his pregnant wife and two daughters. MacDonald's minor injuries were not the result of a brutal assault. They were the result of his pregnant wife defending herself. The pathologist's report concluded that prior to the stab wounds to her chest and neck, Colette would have survived her severe blunt trauma injuries, but conceded that she would have been "cosmetically disfigured."

Her husband's vital signs were normal, he didn't require a single suture to close his wounds, and his lone severe stab wound was self-inflicted. To compare Jeffrey MacDonald's physical condition to Dr. Petit's condition is absurd. MacDonald is a coward, a serial liar, and a mass murderer.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
JTF is fixated on Dr. MacDonald as the murderer of his wife and daughters and nothing will probably ever make JTF change his mind about that.

The thing is there have been other murder cases in the UK, and probably in America as well, where parents have had their child murdered. In this quite recent Madeleine McCann case there are still people and even journalists who blame the parents for that when to my mind it's quite obviously done by an intruder or intruders. I find that quite outrageous. There must be supporting evidence and not just emotion.

The Portuguese police investigation into that case has been declared "rubbishy" in the UK which reminds me of the MacDonald case and the Ramsey case and even the Darlie Routier case.

I agree these murders are horrible murders, but an average juror must decide on the evidence, and not on emotion, as many of the posters on this forum seem to approach the problem. Jurors seem to become completely uinrelaible at the first mention of blood, or unconsciousness.

There is a sensible opinion about all this on the internet from 1999:

"Mildred Kassab when she still liked Jeffrey testified there was no
icepick she had ever seen in the house. When she discovered years later
that she had hated him all along, especially since he had not remained
attendant on her and her cancer but had actually abandoned her for a
job elsewhere, her repressed memory of the icepick recovered. The
babysitter had a similar memory recovery after a lengthy discussion with
Brian Murtagh.

BTW the ugly ass scissors must have gone down the crapper with the
scalpel, gloves, packaging, candles or whatever is needed to fit your
scenario."
 
Convicted In Less Than 7 Hours

HENRI: Stating that I will never change my mind about inmate's guilt is probably the only factual representation you've made about this case in over a decade of posting. Ironically, none of the jurors who decided inmate's fate have had 2nd thoughts about their decision to convict his sorry ass. Earlier this year, juror Fred Thornhill told Washington Post reporter Gene Weingarten that the main reason for making a quick decision on inmate's guilt was due to the mass of physical evidence presented by the prosecution.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
This is an interesting opinion about the MacDonald case trial jury and Fred Thornhill from a 1999 opinion on the internet:

>Who has said anything about a "reluctant jury"?
The jurors.

"During a 1988 interview, Fred Thornhill confided that if the holdouts
had continued to resist, he, not totally convinced himself, might have
swung the other way..." He blamed his vote on a "lack of defense."

"Arnold Clary, another of the jurors interviewed in 1988, said that
throughout the trial he wanted to acquit MacDonald."

Neither of these two were the final holdouts. The last of two holdouts
was Eddie Parker who recalled, "A few us didn't believe he was
guilty." Later Parker said, "I still don't think Doctor MacDonald's
guilty. I try to put it out of my mind. I don't feel like he's
guilty, and I'll tell anybody I don't feel like he's guilty."

All the quotes above are taken from "Fatal Justice," pp. 246-247.


>I have a friend who personally
>knows one of the jurors, and this woman on the jury said the jury found it
>obvious he was guilty and they found his whole demeanor to be one of a guilty
>man.
Think it might have had anything whatever to do with the prosecution
hammering MacDonald with the lack of blood where Dr. MacDonald said he
was stabbed and bludgeoned into unconsciousness? The prosecution knew
that blood had been found there. The jurors agreed that was a key
point.

>Someone must be lying.

Yes indeed. It has been proven over and over the prosecution lied."
 
If you were ever put on trial as an innocent person don't you think you would want an extremely competent judge, and an impartial jury which is honest, fair-minded, able to concentrate sufficiently to listen to the evidence, and capable of making up its mind at the finish?

I don't like all this media frenzy in some of these high profile cases, with biased journalists trying to make money from the cases. It can affect a fair trial. In the UK there have been one or two jurors in the past who have been jailed for researching the character and previous convictions of the prisoner on trial in question, on the internet, which I have always considered a bit harsh but there must be a good reason in law in order to avoid bias.

All serious criminal charges are tried with a jury, with the result that innocent men are sometimes convicted. How often this occurs no one can say, for Judges, knowing what juries are, usually strain every possible point against the prosecution, and thus many guilty men are acquitted. The position would be farcical were it not for the tragedy often involved.
 
Last edited:
Dubious Source Material

HENRI: Fatal Justice is not a credible source for accurate information on this case. As you well know, I communicated with co-author Fred Bost, and fact checked the entire book back in 2006. On average, the book contains a distortion, assumption, half-truth, or flat-out falsehood every 3rd page. The book is 429 pages long, so do the math.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Henri McPhee said:
...The last of two holdouts was Eddie Parker who...said..."I still don't think Doctor MacDonald's guilty...I don't feel like he's guilty, and I'll tell anybody I don't feel like he's guilty."

All the quotes above are taken from "Fatal Justice," pp. 246-247...
Click to expand...

Does the book provide any explanation for why he voted guilty if -even at the time of the vote, rather than this being an opinion he came to later- he believed Dr. MacDonald was not responsible for the murders?
.
.
 
Sour Grapes

LANE: The first vote by the 1979 jury was 10-2 in favor of MacDonald's guilt. Bost and Potter claim that the two jurors were intimated by the remaining jurors, especially the jury foreman. This is typical MacDonald camp nonsense. Classic hyperbole, sour grapes, and a refusal to address the mass of physical evidence which led to the jury convicting MacDonald in less than 7 hours.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
lane99 said:
Does the book provide any explanation for why he voted guilty if -even at the time of the vote, rather than this being an opinion he came to later- he believed Dr. MacDonald was not responsible for the murders?
.
.
Click to expand...

What goes on in a jury room tends to be secret in the UK, but I have noticed that jurors in other cases in America are sometimes interviewed on TV by TV reporters about why they came to a verdict.

There are stories in the MacDonald case about how a black lady juror burst into tears at the verdict in 1979. There used to a quote on the internet by a female juror after the trial that the jury were not fully informed about "that woman" by which she meant Helena Stoeckley.

I don't think there is much doubt that the foreman of the MacDonald case jury was biased before the trial, and also during the trial. Dr. MacDonald never had an impartial jury or an impartial judge. That was an irregularity that should have been put right by the Fourth Circuit, and by the Supreme Court.

There is some background information to all this in the Affidavits section of Christina's MacDonald case website, I think in 1988 with declarations by Klein and Bowden.

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com
 
Last edited:
Inmate Received A Fair Trial

Henri studiously ignores the FACT that neither Bernie Segal nor Wade Smith argued that their client did not receive a fair trial. The appellate courts concurred, so the issues put forth by MacDonald's rotating band of lawyers have revolved around unsourced household debris and confessions from unreliable witnesses.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
I don't think that's quite right in JTF saying that Segal and Wade Smith ever conceded the lack of a fair trial theory. Segal was quoted in the past as saying that the prosecution case was an extraordinary series of inventions. Wade Smith has always seemed to adopt the attitude that the MacDonald case was just another case and some you win and some you lose because it's a lottery.

I think there was too much of a 'will to win' by the prosecution and they were willing to use cunning and trickery and dishonesty to achieve that.

Dr. MacDonald was convicted because according to the FBI lab there were supposed to be two pajama-like fibers on the wooden club, or they may be two black wool fibers from an unknown source never tested or seen by the defense. It's ludicrously unsatisfactory evidence.

This is what I have previously written about the matter:

Stombaugh did not impress me. I question his integrity and his credentials and it's probably a good thing from my point of view that he is now deceased.

Stombaugh's theory in the MacDonald case that bodies were supposed to be carried in a bedsheet were largely disproven by the Macdonald defense, apart from possible cuff impressions which could have been caused by anything. Stombaugh's wild and wonderful pajama folding theory was contrived and impossible by a little hair and fiber man whose hair and fiber evidence in the MacDonald case is open to question, and reasonable doubt, as well.

Stombaugh was a con artist who was basically an insurance salesman. Then he became a jumped up so-called forensic scientist with no scientific qualifications. Would that be allowed at NASA, or at your local hospital?

This is part of what Noguchi thought about the MacDonald case, and it's reasonable doubt:

This is part of that report about multiple intruders in the MacDonald murders case:

"Thomas Noguchi, MD was the pathologist hired to do an Independent Review of the reports of the victims, he writes the following report.

"Based on my review of the autopsy reports, photographs, and investigative reports and at scene and the reviews of others, the following is my opinions and medicolegal interpretation of the wounds and injury patterns.

Colette MacDonald:

(1) Three types of weapons were involved in the attack on Colette

(A) A blunt object with a square contact area
(B) A knife
(C) An ice pick

(2) The wounds were inflicted while she was alive.

(3) The three types of wounds were inflicted within a short interval of time.

(4) The blunt force injuries are on the right side of the face indicating that the assailant
was left handed.

(Regarding the above, it is interesting that Jeffrey was right handed. However, Greg Mitchell was left handed.)

Kimberley MacDonald:

(1) Two types of weapons were involved in the attack on Kimberley:

(A) A blunt object with flat surfaces.
(B) A knife

(2) The wounds were inflicted while she was still alive.

(3) Most of the injuries are found on the right side of the body.

(4) The blunt injury to the right side of the face was inflicted first.

(5) The blunt force injury was delivered by a left handed person.

(6) The wounds were inflicted within a short interval of time.

Kristen MacDonald:

(1) Two types of weapons were involved in the attack on Kristen:

(A) A knife
(B) An ice pick like piercing object.

(2) The injuries were sustained with she was still alive.

(3) The ice pick type wounds were inflicted first followed by the stab wounds on the chest.

(4) The stab wounds in the back were inflicted after the injuries to the front of the body.

Additional ice pick type wounds were inflicted on the chest as she was dying.

(5) There are linear wounds on the neck which appear to have been caused by a constrictive force delivered by a ligature, such as a thin rope or a heavy string.

Based on the sequence of injuries and the types of injuries on the three deceased, my opinion is that there were multiple assailants, at least one of them whom are left handed, and carrying a blunt object, a knife and an ice pick type object are involved. The activities appeared to be well coordinated."

This was signed by Thomas Noguchi, MD



University of Virginia law Professor Brandon L. Garrett has written in his recent book, Convicting the Innocent, the one claim no convict can easily bring is a claim that he is innocent and should be freed for that reason alone.
At the 1985 MacDonald appeal it was suggested by the defense lawyers that Judge Dupree should have recused himself because his former son-in-law lawyer Proctor, who joined the CIA, was instrumental in getting Dr. MacDonald prosecuted in the first place.

The jury was biased, rather like Christina's MacDonald case forum, where Mike in Japan has just been banned for questioning the MacMurderer line. The MacDonald case needs some professional criminal investigators.
 
Last edited:
Is this the same Thomas Noguchi who just looked at some crime scene photos and declared that no human could ever use more than one weapon? That it was not possible for a person to put down a club and pick up an ice pick?
 
Noguchi's Analysis Was Worthless

MacDonald had been in the joint for 4 years (e.g., 1982-1986) when his advocates attempted to have Noguchi be another in a long line of hired guns for the Defense. Noguchi didn't do much in the way of forensic analysis and simply piggy-backed prior Defense claims that were debunked at the 1984 evidentiary hearings.

Despite Henriboy's assertions to the contrary, Noguchi admitted that Paul Stombaugh's forensic analysis was impressive and that his 1979 trial testimony helped to convict MacDonald on three counts of murder.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
I agree with JTF that Stombaugh's "only said it could be" forensic analysis he dreamed up helped to sway the biased jury.

Noguchi came in for unfair criticism for his outspoken views in the controversial high profile death of Natalie Wood in California. I notice that particular case was re-opened in 2012, but it seems to have come to nothing.

The 1984 MacDonald case evidentiary hearing was when Judge Dupree made the stupid remark that Greg Mitchell and Helena Stoeckley were probably courting on a bridge somewhere on the night of the MacDonald murders! The blonde synthetic hair-like fibers have never been properly explained or Frier's discovery of black non-pajama fibers on the wooden club murder weapon.

According to FBI statistics most domestic murders only use one murder weapon, not a collection of knives and scissors as in the MacDonald case. It was perfectly logical for Noguchi to say there were multiple assailants.
 
Henri McPhee said:
Noguchi came in for unfair criticism for his outspoken views in the controversial high profile death of Natalie Wood in California. I notice that particular case was re-opened in 2012, but it seems to have come to nothing.
Click to expand...

Hmmm,

Following his investigation, Los Angeles County coroner Thomas Noguchi ruled her death an accident by drowning and hypothermia.[47] According to the coroner, Natalie Wood had been drinking and may have slipped while trying to re-board the dinghy.[45]

The case was reopened in November 2011 after the captain of the boat, Dennis Davern, told NBC News that he lied to police during the initial investigation and that a fight between Wood and Wagner had led to her death.[45] After nine months of further investigation, Los Angeles County Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Lakshmanan Sathyavagiswaran amended Wood's death certificate and changed the cause of her death from accidental drowning to "drowning and other undetermined factors".[48]
Click to expand...

Seems like he had damn little to do with the reopening.

The 1984 MacDonald case evidentiary hearing was when Judge Dupree made the stupid remark that Greg Mitchell and Helena Stoeckley were probably courting on a bridge somewhere on the night of the MacDonald murders! The blonde synthetic hair-like fibers have never been properly explained or Frier's discovery of black non-pajama fibers on the wooden club murder weapon.
Click to expand...

Even if they aren't I'd still be laughing at the idea that a group of hippies managed to perform such brutal murders without leaving any evidence, incapacitate a Green Beret with minimal effort, and leave a relatively tidy crime scene.

According to FBI statistics most domestic murders only use one murder weapon, not a collection of knives and scissors as in the MacDonald case. It was perfectly logical for Noguchi to say there were multiple assailants
Click to expand...

If the domestic murderer wasn't trying to stage a fake crime scene I'd say this is relevant. As it stands it isn't.
 
Henri Is Predictable And Hopeless

Gotta luv how Henri can fit several falsehoods in a short post. The Government has put forth salient explanations for the unsourced household debris found at the crime scene. The source of the saran fibers was most likely dolls owned by the MacDonald children. The source of the dark woolen fibers was most likely dark sweaters and caps owned by the MacDonald family.

The problem with producing a concrete source for these fibers is that MacDonald discarded most of the family clothing items and the children's doll collections shortly after the conclusion of the Article 32 hearings. Fortunately, there was a definitive source (e.g., Jeffrey MacDonald's torn pajama top) for the over 100 fibers found under bodies, bedcovers, Kristen's fingernail, and adhering to the club in Colette's blood.

All of the sourced evidence in this case point to a lone perp. That includes DNA, hairs, fibers, bloody fabric and non-fabric impressions, bloody footprints, and fabric damage evidence. The name of the perp is Jeffrey MacDonald.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
JTF said:
...Fortunately, there was a definitive source (e.g., Jeffrey MacDonald's torn pajama top) for the over 100 fibers found under bodies, bedcovers, Kristen's fingernail, and adhering to the club in Colette's blood.

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

What kind of pajamas leave fibers all over the place? Were the pajamas flannel? And is the idea that MacDonald dragged his pajamas across places where the fibers were found? If MacDonald's pajamas were so prone to dropping fibers behind how is it possible to rule out the possibility that a lot of these fibers weren't there before the murders began?

As an aside, I wasn't enthused about the personal sniping in this thread when the thread started. Now I just wish it would stop. I come here hoping to see a discussion of evidence in this case and I'm annoyed when I am notified that there has been new thread activity only to find that a lot of that activity is sniping. Please strive for awhile, at least, to address the argument and not the arguer.
 
Ballgame Over

DAVE: MacDonald claims that he was attacked in the living room by three armed hippie home invaders and that during the struggle, his pajama top was torn. The top was torn down the left front seam and left sleeve down to the cuff. The two tears combined to measure 72 inches in length.

MacDonald claims he awoke on the hallway floor and that his pajama top was wrapped around his wrists. There were no pajama fibers from that torn garment found in the living room and only two fibers were found where he claims he regained consciousness.

He then claims he walked down the hallway and "found" his wife dead on the master bedroom carpet. He then claims he removed the torn pajama top from his wrists and dropped it on the carpet. Later in his story, he claims he picked up the pajama top off the carpet and placed it over his wife's chest to treat her for shock.

As soon as MacDonald told CID investigators that he took off his pajama top after "finding" Colette on the master bedroom carpet, the ballgame was over. Why? Let me count the ways.

1) Twenty Four pajama fibers were found under Colette's body.

2) One of those fibers was found directly under her head and was protruding from the carpet in pigtail fashion.

3) Twenty Two pajama fibers were found on top of the master bed.

4) Six pajama fibers were found on the master bed pillow.

5) A pajama fiber was found by the headboard of the master bed. The word PIG was written on the headboard in Colette's blood.

6) A bloody pajama fiber was found entwined with a bloody head hair from Colette on a multi-colored bedspread. This bedspread was found bundled with a blue bedsheet near the closet in the master bedroom.

7) A finger section of a surgeon's glove was found in this bundled bedding and it was stained with Colette's blood.

8) Multiple pajama fibers were found on the blue bedsheet.

9) Three bloody pajama cuff impressions sourced to MacDonald's pajama top were found on the blue bedsheet.

10) Two bloody pajama cuff impressions sourced to Colette's pajama top were found on the blue bedsheet.

11) Fourteen pajama fibers were found under Kimmie's blankets.

12) A 20.5 inch warp yarn sourced to MacDonald's pajama top was found on top of Kimmie's pillow.

13) A pajama fiber was found under Kimmie's pillow.

14) Two pajama fibers were found under Kristen's blankets.

15) Two pajama fibers were found stuck to the murder club in Colette's blood.

16) A bloody pajama fiber was found under Kristen's fingernail.

17) Four Type A blood stains that continued across a tear on MacDonald's pajama top demonstrated that Colette bled on that pajama top before it was torn.

18) Six Type A blood stains found on the face of the pocket of MacDonald's torn pajama top demonstrated that Colette bled on that pocket before it was torn from the garment.

19) The torn pajama top was found on Colette's chest and subsequent analysis determined that the stab wound pattern in Colette's chest matched the pattern of puncture holes in the pajama top. The only viable conclusion that could be drawn from this analysis is that the ice pick pierced the pajama top as it lay on Colette's chest.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
I am not sure my questions were answered:
1. What kind of pajamas were* these that were shedding so many fibers?
2. Why if the pajamas dropped fibers so readily would it be surprising to find fibers all over the house from these fibers.

It sounds like the biggest issue is that there weren't fibers where they should have been if his stories about interactions with the intruders was correct, but when fibers from his pajamas were found in his house why is this incriminating? Which of the found fibers in your list are the ones that you believe are incriminating? Presumably not the ones found in his bed?

An interesting (to me) English grammatical point that I had not noticed before: Even when I intended pajamas to be singular my sense of it is the appropriate verb and pronoun to use with it is the plural form of the verb and pronoun. Apparently in English verb agreement and pronoun agreement follows the form of the subject and not whether the subject is singular or plural. Unless "What kind of pajamas was this..." would have been correct in which case I am just wrong. Or perhaps either is acceptable?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom