Merged Jeffrey MacDonald did it. He really did.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Logan is dumber than a box of rocks and less useful than same.

It's been nearly 20 years since that posting, Henrudge. The hair in Collette's hand was matched via DNA to Jeffrey Robert MacDonald. Half of the so-called facts he/she/you/it posted back then was wrong. One: the so-called bloody gloves in the kitchen were..(wait for it)....oven mitts, from the house (which is why they didn't match the surgical gloves elsewhere in the house). And those are only two facts I'm listing. There were no fresh candle wax findings in the house. That's three "Logan" statements wrong.....Geez, name two things he/she/you/it listed that were correct, Henrudge.
 
Last edited:
Old News Is Bad News

Piggybacking the post by Desmirelle...

- There were no eyewitness accounts of individuals entering 544 Castle Drive.

- There were no signed confessions from the "Stoeckley crowd."

- There were 5 unsourced dark woolen fibers found at the crime scene and 3 of the 5 fibers differed in chemical composition.

- None of the fibers were sourced to clothing worn by an intruder suspect.

- No bloody palmprint was found on the master bed footboard. Fred Bost conflated two lab notes with one note listing an unidentified palmprint found on the footboard and a separate note listing blood found in another area on the footboard.

- Three unsourced saran fibers were found in a hairbrush in the dining room, not the kitchen. The only wig hair found at the crime scene was sourced to a fall owned by Colette.

- A 7mm hair fragment was found in Kimmie's fingernail scrapings and a 5mm hair was found in Kristen's fingernail scrapings. Microscopic examinations of the 7mm hair determined that it was animal hair. Chain of custody documents proved that the 5mm hair was not collected at autopsy nor was present at the initial microscopic hair examinations at Fort Gordon.

- The burnt match was collected 4 days after the murders and was probably the result of a lab technician or an investigator smoking at the premises.

- The blue acrylic fiber was found on inmate's glasses, not in Colette's hand nor on the hallway steps.

- There is no proof that the substance viewed briefly under a microscope was human skin.

- No bloody syringe was collected at the crime scene.

The challenge put forth by Logan is laughable when considering the FACT that the prosecution presented over 1,000 evidentiary items at trial. This includes blood, hair, fiber, bloody footprints, bloody fabric and non-fabric impressions and fabric damage evidence.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
taking Desi and JTF posts and running with an FYI

there were no bloody palm prints or finger prints (except for the one on the leading edge of the Esquire magazine that for obvious reasons to thinking people could not be used to compare/identify a suspect) found at the scene. AND IF THEY HAD BEEN FOUND they would have been identified as PATENT vice LATENT prints.

Latent prints are those that can be examined using means such as powder (see any CSI type show and you will see someone using fingerprint powder and thus I need explain no further). These prints are made when a person touches something and leaves their print in only the natural oils of the skin.

NOW

Patent prints are those prints made in some other substance and can be examined (often without the use of other means to make it clear). The term PATENT PRINT would cover prints made in blood, paint, oil, juice, etc.

Seems like henrudge is really reaching to go back to ridiculously old and disproven nonsense from his multiple identities over the years once again I have the urge to add "lather, rinse, repeat" to the end of this post.....
 
Last edited:
JTF said:
The challenge put forth by Logan is laughable when considering the FACT that the prosecution presented over 1,000 evidentiary items at trial. This includes blood, hair, fiber, bloody footprints, bloody fabric and non-fabric impressions and fabric damage evidence.

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

None of the 1000 evidentiary items at trial are real proof of anything. Stombaugh of the FBI was not a blood man, and he was not qualified to testify about fabric impressions, and fabric damage, and neither was Shirley Green. Stombaugh of the FBI only said it could be and the same with the threads. That's quite ludicrously unsatisfactory evidence.

Logan was on the right lines in the Macdonald case, and so was Wudge. It's a pity that they are not still posting on the MacDonald forums.

There is a bit of background information to the FBI hair and fiber department in a New York Post article by Geoff Earle, July 23, 2014. Both Stombaugh and Malone were involved in the MacDonald case and they operated before the days of DNA. They just made it up to secure a conviction, or to mislead the Warren Commission over the death of President Kennedy. This is part of that article:

But in its third review of bungling at FBI labs, the Justice Department’s Inspector General found that Malone had been performing background check investigations for the FBI as an “active contract employee of the FBI” since 2002.

In fact, he was still indirectly on the FBI payroll two months ago, as the IG wrapped up its report on “scientifically unsupportable analysis and overstated testimony by FBI Lab examiners” in a long series of criminal prosecutions.
After the IG raised the issue with the FBI, the agency reported back that Malone’s “association with the FBI was terminated” as of June 17.

Justice Department and FBI officials didn’t answer questions from The Post about how many background checks Malone performed or why he was re-hired.
Although he was never disciplined and got to retire with a pension, Malone’s criminal forensics work has come under heavy scrutiny by investigators – including his involvement in a case that sent former DC resident Donald Gates to prison for 28 years for a murder he didn’t commit.

“Malone’s faulty analysis and scientifically unsupportable testimony contributed to the conviction of an innocent defendant” and at least five other convictions that were later reversed, the IG wrote in its report, released last week.
Malone testified at trial that one of Gates’ hairs scientifically matched one found on the body of Georgetown University student Catherine Schilling, 21. DNA evidence later proved him to be wrong
.
His testimony before a judicial inquiry of Florida federal Judge Alcee Hastings was also found to be off base. Malone testified that he conducted a “tensile” test on a piece of evidence – a purse strap. It was later revealed he didn’t do the test.

Independent scientists found 96 percent of Malone’s caseload to be “problematic” for reasons such as making statements that “had no scientific basis.” Contrary to normal standards, Malone produced lab notes that were “in pencil and not dated.”

The prior IG investigation found Malone testified “outside his expertise and inaccurately” and cited him for misconduct.
Malone denied any wrongdoing.
Click to expand...
 
Henri McPhee said:
None of the 1000 evidentiary items at trial are real proof of anything.
Click to expand...

henri, apparently you do not understand the concept/definition of evidence. For it to be EVIDENCE it has to PROVE something. The over 1,100 pieces of evidence were introduced via 28 witnesses both lay and expert. The over 1,100 pieces of evidence are proof that inmate slaughtered his family. Every single sourced piece of evidence points to inmate as the sole perpetrator of this horrific crime. inmate brutally slaughtered Colette, Kimberley, Kristen, and his unborn son.

EVIDENCE: noun - the data on which a conclusion or judgement may be based (law)the documentary or verbal statements and material objects admissible as testimony in a court of law.

Henri McPhee said:
Stombaugh of the FBI was not a blood man,
Click to expand...

Stombaugh did not testify on the blood evidence with the exception of where blood was found on the pj top PRIOR to its being torn.

Terry Laber was the blood expert who provided testimony on the blood stains, blood types, locations of such etc. Bernie Segal didn't even cross examine him. From my research/interviews with lawyers the common opinion is that Bernie did not cross examine because he hoped to create the impression that the blood testimony was not that important. It didn't work if that is true, the jury decided how important the blood testimony was in this case, which is proper. The blood testimony along with the physical evidence of the blood (ie Kristy's pj and Kimberley's nightgown, and lots more beside) was powerful proof that inmate had butchered his family. (Craig Chamberlain also testified on blood at trial).

Henri McPhee said:
and he was not qualified to testify about fabric impressions, and fabric damage, and neither was Shirley Green. Stombaugh of the FBI only said it could be and the same with the threads. That's quite ludicrously unsatisfactory evidence.
Click to expand...

henri you don't get to decide if Stombaugh was or was not qualified as an expert. In this case, Judge Dupree felt and accepted Stombaugh as an expert witness. You see that is how it works the Judge is provided with the Curriculae Vitae of the proposed experts and he or she decides. Same thing is true for Shirley Green - she was admitted as an expert witness by the Judge so she was qualified. stamping your feet and pouting about it does not make it any less true that Stombaugh and Green were qualified experts.

Not only that but the defense experts agreed with Stombaugh's testimony.

Oh, and as I have stated before henri - YOU CANNOT FORCE A PATTERN TO EXIST IT EITHER DOES OR IT DOES NOT. In this case the pattern existed on the pj top and it matched the pattern of wounds on Colette's chest. PERIOD!

Henri McPhee said:
Logan was on the right lines in the Macdonald case, and so was Wudge. It's a pity that they are not still posting on the MacDonald forums.
Click to expand...

you still post you just don't use those names anymore. but no matter which name you are posting under at any given time, you are not right about anything to do with this case nor were you right as Logan, Wudge, Caphill, Lbugbug, Albie, or Artie.....
 
Henri McPhee said:
None of the 1000 evidentiary items at trial are real proof of anything. Stombaugh of the FBI was not a blood man, and he was not qualified to testify about fabric impressions, and fabric damage, and neither was Shirley Green. Stombaugh of the FBI only said it could be and the same with the threads. That's quite ludicrously unsatisfactory evidence.

Logan was on the right lines in the Macdonald case, and so was Wudge. It's a pity that they are not still posting on the MacDonald forums.

There is a bit of background information to the FBI hair and fiber department in a New York Post article by Geoff Earle, July 23, 2014. Both Stombaugh and Malone were involved in the MacDonald case and they operated before the days of DNA. They just made it up to secure a conviction, or to mislead the Warren Commission over the death of President Kennedy. This is part of that article:
Click to expand...

To the contrary, the evidence was completely adequate to convict your man crush.

Why do you drag John F. Kennedy into your delusional vortex of ignorance? Didn't the poor man suffer enough?
 
I point out that the hair in Colette's hand was sourced by DNA MacDonald all Henrudge can say is that he thinks that Logan was on the right track......

To quote my late mother:
Ignorance means you haven't learned. Stupid means you can't or won't.
 
Whipping Boy

Since entering the case in 1990, Malone has been the MacDonald camp's favorite forensic whipping boy and the IG reports provided them with arguments that went beyond mere speculation. Despite this data, there was still no evidence that Malone acted inappropriately in the MacDonald case.

MacDonald advocates have studiously avoided the FACT that no mention of Malone's work in the MacDonald case is made in either IG report. Considering the IG's penchant for piling on when commenting on Malone's work, their absence of commentary on the MacDonald case speaks volumes.

The FBI is the only law enforcement agency to criticize Malone's work on the MacDonald case and that consisted of a singular statement he made in a lab note. Despite stating that microscopic hair comparisons cannot provide definitive links, he was docked by the FBI for concluding that a hair was "sourced" to inmate.

In this instance, the FBI clearly joined the Malone piling on party. If Malone had simply used the word "similar" instead of "sourced," his lab notes would have been squeaky clean. The irony of this Johnny Come Lately analysis is that prior to 2002, none of the FBI's hair/fiber examiners were told that the use of the word "sourced" was taboo.

The reality of Malone's work in the MacDonald case is that he never testified in a Court of Law and he made a grand total of ONE mistake in his analysis of hairs and fibers. In addition, Malone was not simply a hair/fiber examiner for the FBI, he was considered the FBI's top hair/fiber examiner for the better part of a decade.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
desmirelle said:
I point out that the hair in Colette's hand was sourced by DNA MacDonald all Henrudge can say is that he thinks that Logan was on the right track......

To quote my late mother:
Ignorance means you haven't learned. Stupid means you can't or won't.
Click to expand...

Malone was described by one criminal defense attorney in another murder trial as a total liar after it had been proved that he had presented false testimony in court. The hair in Colette's hand had been unidentified until the DNA testing in 2006, which was many years after the murders. Then magically it became a MacDonald hair after Murtagh and the FBI lab substituted it for a MacDonald hair, to be tested for DNA by the AFIP lab. That's dishonest. The MacDonald defense were never allowed to test that hair.

This is what the military corruption website thinks about the matter at:

www.militarycorruption.com

The sensational slayings, which have been the object of several best-selling books (see EDITOR'S NOTE at end of this article), resulted in MacDonald successfully suing now-dead muckraker Joe McGinnis in 1987, whose publisher had to pay the ex-Special Forces physician $325,000 in damages.

McGinnis, who was widely panned for writing "fiction" and unsourced material in his book flop about Sen. Ted Kennedy (THE LAST BROTHER), had portrayed himself to MacDonald's legal team as a "sympathetic observer" and was given direct access to the Green Beret. But, after four years embedded with the defense attorneys, when MacDonald was convicted, McGinnis allegedly switched sides for profit - writing about a "killer doc" would make more money - and scored big bucks with the best-selling book FATAL VISION (adapted into a made-for-TV movie).

We have covered this battle over the years, and our view hasn't changed. If MacDonald cold-bloodedly killed his wife and children, he should burn in hell. But the prosecution's suspicious and illegal behavior in withholding evidence from the defense team and fighting tooth-and-nail to prevent a new trial from taking place, leads us to believe that is just what is needed - a new trial, based on ALL of the evidence from both sides. What are they afraid of?
Click to expand...
 
No Mystery

At autopsy, a 5mm hair fragment was found adhering to Colette's left palm. A splinter from the club was also found in Colette's left hand which indicated that the wielder of the club was the source of the hair. From 1970-1999, the only way the CID and/or FBI could source that hair was via microscopic hair comparisons.

The only hairs that can be compared under a microscope are head and pubic hairs. Unfortunately, the 5mm hair fragment was a limb hair, so neither the CID nor FBI could source that hair and it remained unidentified until 2006. Nuclear DNA testing of that hair by the AFIP proved beyond all doubt that the source of the hair was Jeffrey MacDonald.

In 1995, Fred Bost and Jerry Allen Potter called this evidentiary item the "mystery hair" and theorized that the source of the hair was Greg Mitchell. MacDonald Camp lawyers and advocates ran with this narrative and sought DNA testing on 62 evidentiary items. DNA testing was subsequently conducted on 29 evidentiary exhibits.

In 1999, Fred Bost told me that the "mystery hair" was THE most important DNA exhibit and he was confident that the hair would be sourced to Mitchell. The big problem with this narrative is that Bost and Potter knew next to nothing about the science of microscopic hair comparisons.

For example, they argued that the hair did not come from inmate because comparisons with his limb hair exemplars did not result in a match. They clearly had no idea that limb hairs, body hairs and hair fragments cannot be compared under a microscope.

The only accurate assessment they made was that the wielder of the club was the source of the limb hair. Once the AFIP sourced that hair to inmate, the MacDonald Camp went into full spin mode and stated the location of the hair was the result of inmate giving his wife mouth to mouth.

The government has consistently called them out on the FACT that the hair was broken and bloody, indicating that it had been ripped from inmate's arm. This DNA test result was the final nail in Jeffrey MacDonald's forensic coffin.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
The fact remains that the hair in Colette's hand was unidentified at the Article 32 in 1970 and remained unidentified until 2006. That's a long time. The MacDonald defense lawyers were naturally interested in that hair as it could have provided crucial evidence of intruders. DNA analysis of hairs started to come in in the early 1990s, but biased Judge Fox refused to allow any DNA testing until he was forced to do so by the 4th Circuit judges in about 1996. The prosecution were very keen to cover up that hair, and in my opinion, they got rid of it, like Ivory 'losing' the skin under a fingernail.

There is some background to the MacDonald case evidence on the internet:

The army decided to investigate Jeff as a suspect
The first officer decided that Jeff was not guilty
The Colonel learned about cult member Helena Stoeckley, who stated that she was involved in previous murders
She admitted to wearing a floppy hat, blonde wig and boots, and was on drugs the night of the murder
She had no alibi for the night that the murders took place
She burned the attire she wore that night, in fear that she would be incriminated
The colonel still wanted her to be fully and further investigated
Drug trafficking played a big role in this case
The Murders
On a rainy Friday night police responded to a call from Jeff stating that he discovered three bodies murdered in his home. The bodies belonged to his wife Colette, and his two children, Kristen and Kimberly.
Jeff stated that he was asleep on the sofa and awoke to the screams of his wife and oldest daughter.
He remembers seeing 3 men a black man and 2 white men, one was holding a baseball bat, the other was holding a blade weapon. He also remembers seeing a blonde woman say "acid is groovy, kill the pigs" and was carrying a light candle.
He then later stated he was attacked by the assailants with a bat, which gave him a contusion.
Jeffrey MacDonald
Evidence that proved his innocence (Colette)
Human skin under Colette's left hand fingernails
Brown hair on her left hand
Unmatched black wool fibers, found on her mouth and shoulder
2 inch pubic hair found between her legs
Blue acrylic fiber found in Colette's right hand
Evidence contd.
Synthetic blonde wig
Bloody adult palm print found on foot board of master bed near Colette's body
Evidence (Daughters)
Brown hair with a root on Kimberly's fingernail
Bloody hair with root on Kristen's fingernails
The Crime
Evidence
Pictures
Jeffrey R. MacDonald case
Crime Scene
Colette
Autopsy (Kim)
Autopsy (Kristen)
Tampered evidence
Gloves and the syringe was lost
Hair on the brush from the wig matched hair from the wig but was never thoroughly investigated
Wax from candles that did not belong to MacDonald
Hairs from any other victim were not from MacDonald
It was claimed that MacDonald was a psychopath
He was given 3 life sentences in Federal prison in Maryland
It still remains as an open case today
Works Cited
"Jeffrey MacDonald." Bio. A&E Television Networks, 2014. Web. 24 Oct. 2014
"MacDonald Home Page." MacDonald Home Page. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Oct. 2014. <http://themacdonaldcase.org/
By: Ivanna Melchor & Diana Meza 6th pd.
Click to expand...
 
Henrudge, no one here can call you ignorant, that's for sure.

And the hair on Colette's hand was sourced to MacDonald, whether or not you like that fact.

Whomever put together that list you posted needs to learn English. All the pronouns and random references to military rank instead of a person are confusing to those sober who are trying to follow it. You've listed things without reference to evidence numbers and have included things that make absolutely no sense - as in implying Colette should have kept old candles around after they were little more than stumps (or birthday candles) - in the real world, we thrown them away.
 
Differences

The main difference between evidentiary lists constructed by MacDonald advocates and by those who have read the TOTALITY of the documented record is that the former lacks context. As evidenced by this most recent listing, the talking points lack detail/corroboration, which essentially places them in the category of sound bites and/or slogans.

Every item on that list has been discussed AND debunked 50 times over on this and every other MacDonald case discussion board. As has been explained to the author of this post, repeating debunked claims over and over again doesn't magically result in the claims having any merit. The appellate courts are of the same opinion.

In 1998, the 4th Circuit Court called these claims "specious" and in the past 19 years, the only additional/new claims were the DNA test results and the Britt affidavits. In 2014, Judge Fox concluded that neither issue met the high ceiling required to grant inmate a new trial.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
Yes henri you are correct the "mystery hair" was unidentified at the Article 32 hearing. there is no surprise to that, the Article 32 was the first in a long line of hearings and a great deal of the evidence had yet to be analyzed. This does not make the evidence useless, it just means it was not yet analyzed - period. The FACT REMAINS also, that only head and pubic hair can be compared microscopically. The best that can be done on other human hairs is to determine the region of the body from which they came ie chest, limb, underarm....

the mystery hair found "clutched" (defense word) in Colette's hand is the distal or tip portion of a limb hair. at DNA testing this hair (the one the defense always said HAD to be from the murderer) was matched 100% to Jeffrey Robert MacDonald. nuff said
 
re: post 2786 from "Military Corruption": They've either flat-out lied or failed to read the facts. In no REAL universe did MacMurderer receive any money for 'damages'. What he got was a settlement from an insurance company, most of which went to lawyer fees and his in-laws and was much less than he'd have received from the book WHEN THE JURY DEADLOCKED during the original trial.
 
In The End, Inmate Lost

Not only was the civil jury deadlocked, but they couldn't even reach an agreement on the first of many issues in that case. This was such a disaster that the Judge had to be called back from vacation in order to resolve this initial issue.

Ultimately, the Judge decided that the process had to be started all over again and Joe McGinniss wasn't about to lose potential income by spending another 7 weeks in a hotel room. Ergo, a settlement was reached to the tune of 325,000 dollars.

The MacDonald camp presents that figure as a major victory, yet studiously ignore the FACT that Mildred Kassab used the Son of Sam law to sue inmate. In the end, that 325,000 was split between Mildred and Perry MacDonald.

I never majored in math, but it appears that MacDonald actually LOST money in this legal circus. The settlement removed inmate from the original contract that provided him with a percentage of the profits from the book Fatal Vision.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
desmirelle said:
re: post 2786 from "Military Corruption": They've either flat-out lied or failed to read the facts. In no REAL universe did MacMurderer receive any money for 'damages'. What he got was a settlement from an insurance company, most of which went to lawyer fees and his in-laws and was much less than he'd have received from the book WHEN THE JURY DEADLOCKED during the original trial.
Click to expand...

Jeff MacDonald had a high opinion for his lawyer Gary Bostwick at that 1987 Joe McGinniss case, unlike some of the things he has said about Segal and Wade Smith in the past.. Joe McGinniss admitted in court that he didn't believe the Kassab theory of an amphetamine psychosis himself, which he included in Fatal Vision, and that he only wrote the book because he was in financial trouble and for the Bank of New England. The jury deadlocked because one juror disagreed unless something was done about animal rights.

This is part of what Jeff MacDonald has said about that 1987 Joe McGinniss case in the past

McG's lies were vividly exposed when his trial answers - under oath - were compared and contrasted to his previous answers - some also under oath - in thirty-foot high blowups, projected on the courtroom wall.

[For instance, one very dramatic trial moment - one of the "Top Ten", so to speak - was when we had McG on the stand. My attorney, Gary Bostwick ("G.B."), had McG assure the trial jury that he - McG - had only made up his mind as to my innocence or guilt three long years after trial, after a soul searching time of intense investigation. G.B. immediately then, played for the jury a tape recording of McG in 1984, on a Los Angeles talk show, glibly telling the listeners he had "made up his mind the same time the jury did", that is, way back in 1979, and not 3 years later, as he had just stated. Hung on his own words, as it were. It was a startling moment in the trial - who was the liar was suddenly very clear - Joe McGinniss.

To compound his problem, McG's answer, incredibly enough, almost too good for a movie, to hearing his own voice, was "I can't be sure that is my voice". Courtly, white-haired Judge Rea, who was gazing off into space smiling, jerked his head around, stared at McG, and said, "Surely you recognize your own voice!". A powerful moment, indeed, forever putting in the jury's mind, McG's lack of truthfulness.] Anyway...now I want to very briefly outline for you the course of the entire trial. That way, the psychiatric testimony can be viewed as having the affect it did have.McG's lies were vividly exposed when his trial answers - under oath - were compared and contrasted to his previous answers - some also under oath - in thirty-foot high blowups, projected on the courtroom wall
Click to expand...
 
Henri McPhee said:
and that he only wrote the book because he was in financial trouble and for the Bank of New England. The jury deadlocked because one juror disagreed unless something was done about animal rights.

sipped inconsequential ********.
Click to expand...

And the dog ate the homework. I'm thinking that bolded sentence could use some help, and the motivation for writing the book has -0- bearing om whether or not your man crush committed the crime - he did, he's just where he should be and your fixation on convict is unseemly and more than a little creepy..

If he was out of jail you'd probably be stalking the guy.
 
The jury instructions in the civil trial about Fatal Vision was wacked to say the least. the jury was instructed to not go past question 1 until they had a decision on that question, and then down the line. One juror held out and the jury deadlocked. Joe M also stated that the amphetamine psychosis was a theory and only a theory. HOWEVER even the mention of this theory has no ACTUAL impact on the case because that theory was published in an updated version of Fatal Vision which wasn't published until 10 years after the trial.

Joe M didn't lose the civil trial, the INSURANCE CARRIER for the PUBLISHING HOUSE chose to settle rather than go through the expense of another trial. there was no admission of wrong doing or any change in factual points in the book. there has never been any substantive errors found in the book Fatal Vision.

in the end, inmate got very little $$$ for the effort AND he removed himself from receiving the royalties that he'd still be getting today if he had not filed that lawsuit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom