Merged Jeffrey MacDonald did it. He really did.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Chief amongst the "lets pretend we don't know" is the fact that the Article 32 was BEFORE the majority of the evidence was analyzed thus it has been OBE (over taken by events) such as the Re-Investigation, the Grand Jury, AND the TRIAL at which the government presented over 1,100 pieces of physical evidence via 28 witnesses both lay and expert. The jury convicted inmate. He is guilty, anyone with even the most basic critical thinking skills KNOWS he is guilty, and he will remain in prison where he belongs.

The Stombaugh re-investigation was fabricated out of whole cloth. That so-called evidence was never presented in an excellent court. There was never any public criticism of the close connection between the popular media, and corruption in the Army CID and CIA and FBI. Opinions are not facts or evidence.
 
The Stombaugh re-investigation was fabricated out of whole cloth. That so-called evidence was never presented in an excellent court. There was never any public criticism of the close connection between the popular media, and corruption in the Army CID and CIA and FBI. Opinions are not facts or evidence.


Point of Fact: Opinions are all you're using for facts and evidence. YOUR opinion that the "Stombaugh re-investigation" was bogus, YOUR opinion that the trial was not conducted in "an excellent court", YOUR opinion (quite wrong) that there was never any public criticism (Freddy Kassab was quite public in his criticism of the Army during the Article 32 hearing and in both 1970 & 1979 the press was all "this poor dude is being prosecuted" - and falling for Segal-staged events such as the hair exemplar retrieval - and you have brought up the allegations and problem of the FBI labs, quite the public scandal).
 
roflmao it is also henri's OPINION that it was Stombaugh's reinvestigation. Stombaugh was one of the experts used DURING the reinvestigation and at trial but the US ARMY CID did a complete and thorough review of ALL the original investigation, as well as, follow-up on even the most outlandish and improbable lead.

desi - did you notice he still hasn't provided a salient, comprehensive, and/or logical reason why he doesn't accept a certain hippy girls confession that she WATCHED inmate slaughter his family (the only confession that comes close to matching the evidence)?
 
desi - did you notice he still hasn't provided a salient, comprehensive, and/or logical reason why he doesn't accept a certain hippy girls confession that she WATCHED inmate slaughter his family (the only confession that comes close to matching the evidence)?

You don't seem to fully appreciate that criminals sometimes tell lies, or no comment and categorically deny, when they are being interviewed by the police. Fleet White in the JonBenet Ramsey case always had a bad attack of amnesia, and he couldn't recall or remember anything during his depositions. Dwight Smith in the MacDonald case could not remember anything about where he was the night before. It was clearly erroneous for Judge Dupree and Judge Fox to reject and ignore the numerous confessions out of court of Stoeckley and Mitchell.

Logan on that Google groups MacDonald forum had the right idea in 1998:

Fatal Vision, Fatal Vision, Fatal Vision, that is your problem you keep Fatal Vision as a source. Fatal Vision is a fiction book. Joe McGinness was on the stand for 4 or 5 days embarrassing himself. He was caught in so many lies.

He admitted he didn't even believe his own diet pill theory. He is a known liar.

Quit using Fatal Vision as a source of information on the case.

Give me physical evidence that MacDonald did this. The weapons are not
evidence of anything. If MacDonald is guilty then he threw the weapons out
back. If MacDonald is innocent then the killers dropped the weapons on the
way out. So give me evidence that he is guilty.

The only weapon that has proven to come from his house was the club. The governments theory is that It was in the master bedroom where Jeff picked it up.

What is weird about that is that the club was weatherworn and it matched with the other wood that was found out back. The governments theory is also that Colette picked up a knife just laying around in the master bedroom, why would they have a knife laying around with a 2 and 5 year old in the house? *Why don't you try with the two things the jury said they came to convict MacDonald on. "No blood on the hallway steps" and "No evidence of outside assailants".
Logan
 
You don't seem to fully appreciate that criminals sometimes tell lies, or no comment and categorically deny, when they are being interviewed by the police.
<snip of non-topic drivel>
Dwight Smith in the MacDonald case could not remember anything about where he was the night before. It was clearly erroneous for Judge Dupree and Judge Fox to reject and ignore the numerous confessions out of court of Stoeckley and Mitchell.

Logan on that Google groups MacDonald forum had the right idea in 1998:

WE (yes, I am speaking for others) do fully appreciate that criminals tell lies, etc. YOU are the lone voice saying "accept the story that supports Macdonald's BS story and ignore everything that doesn't".

Dwight Smith's reason for not remembering that night is probably the one Helena gave in her first statement: Took too many drugs, don't know where I was. And since nothing supported his presence in the quarters the night of the murder, he was logically eliminated.

Nobody ignored the confessions. If you go downtown and confess to a crime and your version of what you did does not match the evidence nor is there any evidence to back your presence at the crime scene, the cops won't charge you either and the judge won't let the defense bring up your 'confession'. It's not dishonesty of the judge, it's common sense (and the MA prevents the rest of that sentence).

As to Logan, it's obvious he didn't grow up in the late 60s. Nobody 'child-proofed' back then (except to lock a screen door if you lived near a busy street). So, having knives in drawers that weren't secured was normal at that time.
 
Ignoring Documented Fact

The landlord has religiously ignored the fact that Dwight Smith was first interviewed about this case in 1982. That interview was conducted by the FBI and no rational human being would expect Smith or anyone else to remember their exact movements on a night which took place 12 years earlier. The FBI took print exemplars from Smith and none of his prints were sourced to the crime scene. Joseph Lee from the New York Four was the other African-American suspect in this case and none of his prints were sourced to the crime scene. Lee was interviewed by the CID and, like Smith, he denied any involvement in this crime.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
Here is some night time reading material for the Landlord of MacFantasy Island.

http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_macdonald/affidavits/1984-07-12_EDNC_fbi_aff03_madden.html

The MacDonald case is a gross miscarriage of justice. There is no supporting evidence. From that website JTF mentions:

6. He could not recall specifically where he was during the evening of February 16 or the early morning hours of February 17, 1970. He does remember that during the early or mid-morning hours of February 17, 1970, that Ray Davis and Cuyler Windham, SBI Agents, came to his residence and spoke with him and Pat Reese regarding the MacDonald murders. They were seeking information from Smith and Reese as to possible suspects as the SBI had a description of a group of individuals which may have participated in the MacDonald murders. To the best of Smith's recollection, he was unaware of the MacDonald murders until informed about same by Windham and Davis.
 
inmate got his fair trail and then some. everyone but the landlord of MacFantasy Island seems to understand that FACT.

Desi - the other child proofing that was done in the 1960-1970 timeframe was putting a loop of rope over the top of the gate to keep the little ones in the backyard!
 
Grade For Reading Comprehension: F

The landlord is the gift that keeps on giving. Considering your penchant for skipping over posts and your lack of reading comprehension...

"The landlord has religiously ignored the fact that Dwight Smith was first interviewed about this case in 1982. That interview was conducted by the FBI and no rational human being would expect Smith or anyone else to remember their exact movements on a night which took place 12 years earlier."

Despite this prodigious time gap, Smith's recall of that time frame was pretty darn good. If you add in the FACT that there is not a shred of evidence linking Smith to the crime scene, one has to agree with Fred Bost's assertion that Smith was not a viable suspect.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Dwight Smith was half-suspected of the MacDonald murders the day after the murders by the SBI. or the North Carolina Bureau of Investigation as I say. He told them that he couldn't recall or remember where he was the night before. It wasn't until 1982 that the FBI questioned him. Like Wall Street bankers he seems to be unregulated and above the law. The FBI never kept a close watch on him. There were other suspects, as mentioned by Logan on that Google groups forum in 1998:

> * *Do you happen to know *the names of some of *the people, especially men,
> who were considered to be part of the Stoeckley crowd, *besides Greg Mitchell,
> Stoeckley's boyfriend at the time?
Don Harris , Ray Cazeras, Cathy Perry, Pam Kriwanek, Robert Wallack, Larry
Cook, Diane Cazeras, Thomas Vincent Brown, Bruce Fowler, and Kathy Smith is
all I can think of right now.
 
Dwight Smith was half-suspected of the MacDonald murders the day after the murders by the SBI. or the North Carolina Bureau of Investigation as I say.

The SBI or North Carolina Bureau of Investigation was not in any way involved in the investigation into the murders - the Army CIL and CID were involved and the FBI were involved. Prince Beasley CLAIMED to have suspected certain people but as WE are all aware he was not in his right mind by the time he made these claims. No evidence of his involvement exists......

He told them that he couldn't recall or remember where he was the night before. It wasn't until 1982 that the FBI questioned him.

Dwight Smith was NOT questioned until 1982 - twelve years AFTER the night of the murders. There is no evidence at all that the man was in any way involved - no fingerprints, no hairs or fibers, and no blood placing him at the scene. HE is NOT and WAS NEVER a VIABLE suspect.
 
Dwight Smith was half-suspected of the MacDonald murders the day after the murders by the SBI. or the North Carolina Bureau of Investigation as I say. He told them that he couldn't recall or remember where he was the night before. It wasn't until 1982 that the FBI questioned him. Like Wall Street bankers he seems to be unregulated and above the law. The FBI never kept a close watch on him. There were other suspects, as mentioned by Logan on that Google groups forum in 1998:

For someone supposedly a citizen of the UK, you seem to have a serious hard-on for using glittering generalities against any law agencies in the USA who disagree with you or suspects who were not investigated to your satisfaction (translated: found guilty of doing what your man crush hasn't the balls to admit he did).
 
KISS

DWIGHT SMITH: MacDonald Case Red Herring

From 1970-1997, the MacDonald defense team considered Smith to be the prime African-American intruder suspect. Smith lived in the same apartment complex as Pat Reese, he was questioned by the FBI in 1982, and subsequently cleared as a suspect. In 1983, Smith was interviewed by Steve Huettel and Pat Reese, and he denied any involvement in the murders.

Smith called Helena Stoeckley's confessions the "craziest thing I've ever heard," and "totally insane." In 1997, author Fred Bost admitted that it was unlikely that Smith was a viable suspect. Bost based this on the fact that Smith does not match the physical descriptions of the unidentified black male intruder provided by MacDonald in 1970 and 1979.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
There is an old BBC documentary about the MacDonald case which lasts about one and a half hours called False Witness. It is a fair and just account of the MacDonald murders and it starts off by saying it provides evidence that the jury never heard. The 4th Circuit judges should watch it. For some reason the website sometimes says it can't be accessed in your country. Perhaps it has been censored? There are interesting interviews with Stoeckley and Bruce Fowler and Mica and Dr. Bronstein and Detective Beasley and Posey and Malley.
 
Last edited:
A Total Disaster

False Witness is not merely bad, it is incredibly boring. The only interesting aspects of this documentary are as follows...

- An interview with Paul Stombaugh that focuses on his own personal murder timeline

- A brief audio excerpt from the CID's 4/6/70 interview with inmate

- Several video snippets of inmate's 1979 hypnosis session(s)

A prime example of this film's inherent awfulness is its selective presentation of Bruce Fowler's role in this case. The film makes no reference to the fact that Fowler was a suspect in this case and that Stoeckley was the reason for Fowler being a person of interest. Stoeckley claimed that Fowler drove her and several other individuals to the crime scene in his own personal vehicle. Despite these documented facts, the film simply presents Fowler as a friend of Stoeckley. Incredible.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
I agree that False Witness is not exactly a bundle of laughs, or light entertainment. It also might not be real proof of anything. As far as I'm concerned it gives good background information to the drugs scene at Fayetteville at the time and interviews people with practical experience. It is not a work of fiction like all that Joe McGinniss Fatal Vision stuff and TV movie.

Bruce Fowler was accused of being a driver in the MacDonald murders. He was never accused of being actually involved in the murders. I suppose legally he was an accessory after the fact. During the reinvestigation in 1971 Mahon of the Army CID interviewed Fowler at the Department of Corrections, or prison, in Alabama where as usual like all the other suspects he was not open, candid. or frank with his answers. I have always thought that if he was given immunity from prosecution Fowler could spill the beans after all these years.

This is what Fowler told Mahon then:

http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_macdonald/cid/1971-05-11_stmt_fowler_bruce.html
 
Focus, Landlordson

Leave it to the landlord to laud this piece of crap as a "fair and just account" of this case and then backtrack on his praise after the film's many flaws are put out there for public consumption. In terms of Fowler, the landlord's definition of candid and/or frank is different from any other human being on this planet. Bruce Fowler agreed to take a polygraph exam, he passed it with flying colors, and his alibi was corroborated by Stoeckley roommate Kathy Smith. Apart from Allen Mazzerolle, Fowler had the best alibi of the remaining members of the Stoeckley Seven.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom