Merged Jeffrey MacDonald did it. He really did.

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Bruce Fowler alibi is about as farcical as Mitchell saying he might have been staying with his parents that night, or Dwight Smith saying he could not recall where he was the night before, and Helena saying she could not remember where she was for several hours that night to Ivory, or even Mazerolle saying he was in jail during the MacDonald murders. Don't the Army CID and FBI know how to check out an alibi?

The official line about the Fowler alibi, and it's a lie is: "Shelby Don Harris was with Diane Cazeres at her apartment while she was painting the bathroom until about 5:a.m. the next morning and Bruce Fowler was with Kathy Smith at her trailer until late in the morning of February 17 1970.

This is part of what Stoeckley said to Brisintine about the matter:

www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/html/stoeckley-poly-conclusion.html

u. That she went into hiding to evade police arrest subsequent to the homicides and considered fleeing from Fayetteville, North Carolina.

v.* That she knew the identity of the persons who killed Mrs. MacDONALD and her children.

w.* That if the Army would give her immunity from prosecution, she would furnish the identity of those offenders who committed the murder and explain the circumstances surrounding the homicides.

During the interview on 23 April 1971, Miss STOECKLEY repeatedly acknowledged knowing the identity of the persons who committed the murders in question. However; on 24 April 1971, Miss STOECKLEY related that she had been incorrect in her statements, had "talked too much", and that she only suspected some people of committing the homicides.

At this time Miss STOECKLEY stated suspected Don HARRIS, a caucasian male who told her after the homicide that he must leave Fayetteville, North Carolina as he could find an alibi for the time of the murder; Bruce FOWLER, the owner of the blue Mustang automobile in which she (Miss STOECKLEY) was a passenger or driver on the night of the homicide; Janett FOWLER, the wife of Bruce FOWLER and was employed as a "Go-Go" dancer in Fayetteville, North Carolina at the time of the homicides; Joe Kelly, a negro soldier who was assigned to a Medical Holding Detachment at Womack Ary Hospital, Fort Bragg, North Carolina at the time of the homicides; and a negro male she knew only as "Eddie", who introduced her (Miss STOECKLEY) to heroin.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
More from that Helena Stoeckley confession to Brisentine:

At one time during the pre-test interview on 24 April 1971, Miss STOECKLEY asserted that she had been lying when she admitted knowing who committed the homicides and stated that Cpt MacDONALD had killed his family. Further, that her rationale was based on the fact that four "hippies" could not have entered Cpt MacDONALD's home without being observed by neighbors or causing dogs to bark. The examiner pointed out that the homicide was alleged to have occurred at about 0330 hours in the morning and it supposedly raining. Miss STOECKLEY immediately exclaimed that it had been drizzling rain during the night but that it did not start to rain hard until after the homicide. When the examiner inquires as to how she acquired this information, Miss STOECKLEY exclaimed "I have already said too much". Later during the interview Miss Stoeckley repeated her previous statement by saying she suspected "hippie type" individuals of the crime.

Based on a polygraph examination conducted on 24 April 1971, it is concluded that Miss STOECKLEY is convinced in her mind that she knows the identity of those person(s) who killed Collette, [sic] Kimberly, [sic] and Christine [sic] MacDONALD. It is further concluded that Miss STOECKLEY

page 3

in her mind is convinced that she was physically present when the three members of the MacDONALD family were killed.
Click to expand...
 
She also said she had sex with macdonald and watched him murder his family. Literally the only confession apart from "I don't know where I was, I did too many drugs" that fits the evidence.

Interesting that you cherry-pick bits and pieces of her multiple confessions to support your man crush when the only evidence points to him.

Boring that you refuse to address the evidence and his consciousness of guilt statements.
 
There is an interesting five minute You Tube about the MacDonald case from Fox News with a defense lawyer and a former prosecutor speaking on camera. It is not exactly profound or detailed, but it might be of interest to the average Joe who knows very little about the case. You can't really accuse it of being biased, like Judge Dupree or Judge Fox.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jy4vnYxer7Q
 
Fantasy World

As I mentioned in a prior post, your word definitions (e.g., frank, candid, farcical) are your own. I have no issue with your decision to live in a fantasy world, but when you transport that world into real world cases, I'm going to call you out. Every time. For example...

You are the ONLY advocate of inmate to challenge Fowler's alibi, to challenge Mazzerolle's incarceration on 2/17/70, and to expect Smith to remember his exact movements 12 years after the fact. Your fantasy laden thought process creates ominous scenarios where none exist. You also ignore data that contradicts your fantasy narrative.

In Fowler's case, he was acquainted with Stoeckley, Mitchell, and Don Harris. In 1971, Dick Mahon and William Ivory interviewed Fowler, he denied any involvement in the murders, and he passed a CID-administered polygraph exam. The CID collected head hair and fingerprint exemplars from Fowler, and no match was found at the crime scene.

In addition, Fowler had an alibi for his whereabouts on February 17, 1970. Stoeckley's roommate, Kathy Smith, told the CID that she was with Fowler at his trailer on Highway 59 until 7:00 a.m. In 1981, the FBI questioned and cleared Fowler as a suspect.

In 1999, the defense made no request for a DNA sample to be collected from Bruce Fowler which indicates a lack of confidence in Fowler being a viable intruder candidate. The totality of this data diametrically opposes your conspiracy narrative involving the CID and FBI.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
JTF said:
As I mentioned in a prior post, your word definitions (e.g., frank, candid, farcical) are your own. I have no issue with your decision to live in a fantasy world, but when you transport that world into real world cases, I'm going to call you out. Every time. For example...

You are the ONLY advocate of inmate to challenge Fowler's alibi, to challenge Mazzerolle's incarceration on 2/17/70, and to expect Smith to remember his exact movements 12 years after the fact. Your fantasy laden thought process creates ominous scenarios where none exist. You also ignore data that contradicts your fantasy narrative.

In Fowler's case, he was acquainted with Stoeckley, Mitchell, and Don Harris. In 1971, Dick Mahon and William Ivory interviewed Fowler, he denied any involvement in the murders, and he passed a CID-administered polygraph exam. The CID collected head hair and fingerprint exemplars from Fowler, and no match was found at the crime scene.

In addition, Fowler had an alibi for his whereabouts on February 17, 1970. Stoeckley's roommate, Kathy Smith, told the CID that she was with Fowler at his trailer on Highway 59 until 7:00 a.m. In 1981, the FBI questioned and cleared Fowler as a suspect.

In 1999, the defense made no request for a DNA sample to be collected from Bruce Fowler which indicates a lack of confidence in Fowler being a viable intruder candidate. The totality of this data diametrically opposes your conspiracy narrative involving the CID and FBI.
Click to expand...

:thumbsup:
 
The MacDonald case needed an impartial and fair and just judge instead of the 'in bed with the prosecution' judges Fox and Dupree, and the 4th Circuit, and most of the Supreme Court judges. It's ridiculous for an innocent man to be in prison just based on opinions and bad police work.

I agree with what Sydney Carton posted on that Zeta MacDonald forum in 2014:

Here is the Judge Fox's opinion.
http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/downloads/2014-07-24-fox-order.pdf

There is a lot to said about it. Mostly negative.
As I pointed out previously (There is not enough absolutely new evidence to warrant a new trial, considering the conflict of evidence (2) but the 4th Circuit ordered Judge Fox to conduct an hearing on all the post-trial evidence which he refused to do first time around.(3) Now after more years delay he issues an opinion and rules that it is unappealable, therefore the defense can't take the case back to the 4th Circuit!

Of course they can appeal his decision! But the aptly named Fox seems to be pursuing the same policy adopted by Scott Peterson"s and Tommy Ziegler's prosecutors:Create so many legal obstacles that the new witnesses and ,with luck, the defendant will all be dead of old age before they can get a hearing.
Click to expand...
 
inmate had his fair trial AND THEN SOME. People with cognitive skills and the ability to read the facts and determine the right and wrong of things recognize that the original trial Judge - The Honorable Judge Dupree was a more than fair, upright, equitable, and distinguished jurist. A less responsible and honorable Judge would not have worked as hard as Judge Dupree did to counter the negative impact Bernie Segal was having on the jury. Bernie Segal would NOT have been good at teaching "how to win friends and influence people" because he was a condescending jerk who continually pissed people off to the detriment of his client. Judge Fox has taken up the reigns of the case and has made every effort to be honorable, fair, up-right, reasonable and impartial. The real issue for inmate is that he is guilty and the good jurists (and the great jurists) all see through his narcissistic sociopathic bastard that slaughtered his pregnant wife and children.
 
Reality Punching Fantasy In The Face

The following portion of a decision leveled by the 4th Circuit Court (e.g. 1992) speaks to the landlord's decade long attempt to rehabilitate debunked defense arguments.

MacDonald's counsel argues that government concealment of this evidence at trial prevented counsel from later discovering and then raising the evidence in the first habeas petition. While MacDonald may have an argument for cause at trial, the argument is inapposite here. Counsel's possession of the relevant documents prior to the first habeas petition negated any concealment claim. We find that MacDonald has made no credible showing of cause.

Having dispensed with the cause and prejudice exception, we now determine whether MacDonald has shown that dismissal of his petition would result in a fundamental miscarriage of justice. This is a difficult showing to make. Courts are instructed to grant review under this exception only in "extraordinary instances." McCleskey, 111 S.Ct. at 1470. We find that this case does not constitute such an instance. The evidence raised here, when considered with all the trial evidence, simply does not rise to a "colorable showing of factual innocence" necessary to show a fundamental miscarriage of justice.

It neither supports MacDonald's account of the murders nor discredits the government's theory. The most that can be said about the evidence is that it raises speculation concerning its origins. Furthermore, the origins of the hair and fiber evidence have several likely explanations other than intruders. The evidence simply does not escalate the unease one feels with this case into a reasonable doubt.

We have carefully reviewed the voluminous record of evidence in this case, beginning with the original military Article 32 proceedings through the present habeas petition, which contains over 4,000 pages. Yet we do not find anything to convince us that the evidence introduced here, considered with that previously amassed, probably would have raised reasonable doubts in the minds of the jurors.

http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_macdonald/court/1992/1992-06-02_COA_opinion.html
 
Last edited:
byn63 said:
Judge Fox has taken up the reigns of the case and has made every effort to be honorable, fair, up-right, reasonable and impartial. The real issue for inmate is that he is guilty and the good jurists (and the great jurists) all see through his narcissistic sociopathic bastard that slaughtered his pregnant wife and children.
Click to expand...

The judges and the criminal trial judge and the appeal judges in the MacDonald case were awful. MacDonald was convicted on guesswork and bias and false evidence and the appeals have been just the same. The real culprits have gone free. There is a good article on the internet about all this by Lynn Parramore:

As I read Morris’ meticulous examination the evidence, the picture in my mind became less clear. I began to see that Joe McGinniss’ creation of Picture #1 might be just that: a creation. Some of the “facts” I thought I knew began to look more like ideas conjured by eager prosecutors and a journalist who had dealt so disingenuously with Jeffrey MacDonald in writing Fatal Vision that he was sued after publication. McGinniss' publisher settled with MacDonald out of court, after the judge called the author a “conman.” *(This story, in its own right, became a famous book about journalistic ethics by Janet Malcolm.)
Click to expand...

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/201...-about-the-jeffrey-macdonald-murder-case.html
 
Last edited:
The Honorable Judge Dupree was a skilled, honest, up-right jurist who worked hard during trial to be sure that the damage Bernie Segal was doing to his client by his condescension was limited. He was fair and impartial and he came to the correct conclusion.

The Honorable Judge Fox has been just as fair and impartial, honest and up-right in his decision making. He is a good jurist who considers all the evidence and follows the letter of the law.

The REAL ISSUE here is that inmate is guilty. He slaughtered his family in a brutal, vicious, heinous manner and then showed the white feather with his cowardice by not admitting to what he has done. Just because you throw a temper tantrum, stamp your little feet, scream, cry, and roll around on the floor having a hissy fit DOES NOT MAKE THE OUTCOME DIFFERENT.

Just because the Judges have not let your man crush off does not mean they were unskilled or biased in any way. Sometimes the guilty get exactly what they deserve. In this case the guilty got CLOSE to what he deserves - sadly the DP was not an option, and under the prison would have been next best....3 consecutive life sentences is appropriate.
 
Pesky Documentation

Contrary to the fantasy narrative produced by Ms. Parramore, there is no record of Judge Rea referring to Joe McGinniss as a "conman." Ms. Parramore and the landlord have also studiously ignored the commentary leveled by Federal Magistrate James McMahon who stated that inmate's complaint made it "sound like MacDonald's a spurned lover and he wants to blacken McGinniss's reputation. This whole lawsuit smells like a grudge suit."

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
JTF said:
Contrary to the fantasy narrative produced by Ms. Parramore, there is no record of Judge Rea referring to Joe McGinniss as a "conman."
http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
Click to expand...

I can't find a reference to Judge Rea referring to Joe McGinniss as a conman. Perhaps he said it to a journalist, or in private, or the quote is being confused with Sarah Palin?

MacDonald's lawyer, Gary Bostwick, at that McGinniss trial in 1987 did say "You and I depend upon the writers and publishers of books to tell the truth, and we need the truth. And in this case, we didn't get the truth." Bostwick started his closing speech by saying it was truly outrageous.

With regard to an alibi, as in the MacDonald case, there was a case of some horrible murders in the UK in the 1980s with a pedophile gang headed by a fairground worker called Sidney Cooke, involving about 20 murdered young boys. The point is in the first murder he just told the police he was at a different fairground at the time of the murder which was meekly accepted by the police. I would have thought it was routine police work to verify an alibi, and that should have been done with the Stoeckley group in the MacDonald case.

There is background to that Cooke case at:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/570385.stm
 
Hilarious

In the landlord's world of circular logic, Ms. Parramore can essentially make false claims (e.g., Judge Rea calling McGinniss a "conman"), yet STILL produce a "good article." Wow. In terms of Bostwick's claim that McGinniss didn't tell the truth, he ended up with egg on his face for the civil jury was unable to find any significant errors in Fatal Vision. In regards to the presentation of the forensic evidence, there are NO errors to be found in Fatal Vision. The same cannot be said of Fatal Justice.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
JTF said:
In regards to the presentation of the forensic evidence, there are NO errors to be found in Fatal Vision. The same cannot be said of Fatal Justice.

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

Fred Bost and Potter wrote sense in Fatal Justice. This is what Caroline thought of the conman and drunken Irish son of a bitch Joe McGinniss and his Fatal Vision book in 2012:

I had to stop reading this halfway through, which is still an achievement since it is a 600 page behemoth of crap. I have no idea how this book gets such glowing reviews!

McGinniss is not only highly biased and fails to present a convincing case against Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald, a doctor accused (and later convicted) of killing his family in 1970. First, the book is poorly written and lacking in editing. It seems that McGinniss includes anything anyone ever said about anything related to this case at all. It's not exhaustive, it's exhausting. McGinniss' book is basically a character assassination rather than a forensic argument for guilt. MacDonald is an *******, but that doesn't mean he is a murderer. I am not so sure that McGinniss understands this.

My breaking point was when McGinniss begins over-analyzing the class notes Colette MacDonald took in her Child Psych class the night of her murder, as if her study notes were some kind of diary. Come on.

I have read neither Janet Malcolm nor Errol Morris' book about Fatal Vision, but I am eager to. Seems like we are on the same page (yuk yuk).
Click to expand...
 
Fatal Justice aka Fatal Joke is the worst reading experience I have ever had. The book is replete with errors (we've estimated at least 1 major error for every 5 pages of text). It is a joke, starting with the "B" movie Golden Dragon'd door entry to the Chinese restaurant at the end of a foggy alley way, right down to the nonsense about Helena's various confessions. FJ is full of misrepresentation, cut and paste presentation, and out right lies. It is a waste of an intelligent persons reading time. It is such an awful read that it took me months to get through it - and I AVERAGE reading 10 books per week.
 
JTF said:
This is my definition of a good article.

https://omgfacts.com/this-fbi-agent-was-one-of-the-first-conspiracy-theorists-a3a5917ea08c
Click to expand...

Gunderson was a retired senior FBI man when he was working for Jeffrey MacDonald. Ever since then the dishonest prosecutors in the MacDonald case have attempted to discredit Gunderson, and have him imprisoned when he was alive. There was a similar sort of case with the customs official Carman who was jailed after exposing drug smuggling in the San Diego area.

MacDonald can no longer afford to employ private investigators to go around asking questions and get information received. That's why the MacDonald Defense Fund is important, which I believe is tax deductible, and it can it be accessed at MacDonald's personal website.

The P.C. Plods in the California police just think people like Helena Stoeckley, and Nancy Krebs in the Jon Benet Ramsey case are fruitloops.

There is some interesting gossip about all this at this website. For some reason the author describes the MacDonald case as the MacDonald Douglas case, but some of what he reports can make your hair curl and it mentions Gunderson.

http://tradcatknight.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/globalist-are-paedophiles-creepy-biden.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom