• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Jeffrey MacDonald did it. He really did.

Status
Not open for further replies.
More from that legal document which fits the Byn and JTF theories without facts:

The evidence the Government adduced at trial to support this bizarre theory
was exclusively circumstantial evidence from the crime scene. It included
evidence such as in what rooms certain blood types were found, where the murder
weapons were found, where MacDonald’s pajama fibers were and were not found,
where a pajama pocket was found and on which side it was bloodied, and an
experiment involving the possible ways the holes were made in MacDonald’s
pajama top.

Much of the evidence was speculative. The Government presentation
was designed to attempt to disprove the version of events given by MacDonald as
to what happened on the night of the murders, thereby casting suspicion on him as
the murderer. This Government strategy was interwoven with its repeated theme
that, given MacDonald’s version of events, there should have been ample physical
8
evidence of intruders, and the lack of such evidence of intruders proved
MacDonald’s guilt.
Click to expand...
 
Henri McPhee said:
This is part of the testimony of military policeman Tevere on oath at the Article 32 proceedings in 1970 with regard to this unconscious matter. It's a fact:

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/html/1970-07-08-a32-tevere.html
Click to expand...

Weak stuff. "Appeared" to be semi-conscious = subjective opinion.

I know my head injuries and have had my own. Your man crush was play acting.

The rest of the family was slaughtered and he didn't even have enough injuries to require two days in the ICU. His story stinks on ice.
 
Fantasy Bubble

HENRIBOY: You certainly have the right to live in a fantasy bubble, but neither the documented record nor the challenge put forth to you is going to magically disappear. Again, the burden is on YOU to provide proof of inmate's innocence. This burden has NOTHING to do with inmate's play-acting for the military police (e.g., sorry fellas, that hairbrush packs a wallop) or the exact number of pajama fibers found in the hallway. For the past 15 years, you have failed in spectacular fashion to meet this burden, but the details of the challenge have not changed.

1) Produce a decision by a District Court Judge and/or Appellate Court Judge that concludes that a CID and/or FBI agent committed perjury in this case.

2) Produce a decision by a 4th Circuit Court Judge and/or United States Supreme Court Judge that concludes that Judge Dupree and/or Judge Fox did not provide inmate with a fair trial and/or evidentiary hearing.

3) Produce a lab document that concludes that a fiber was a microscopic match and/or matched the chemical composition of clothing worn by a known intruder suspect.

4) Produce a lab document that concludes that a hair was a microscopic match and/or matched the DNA profile of a known intruder suspect.

5) Produce a lab document that concludes that a fingerprint, palmprint, or footprint matched a print exemplar from a known intruder suspect.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
just because that is what inmate SAID happened does not make it true. IN FACT, IN THIS INSTANCE IT PROVES HE WAS LYING. IF he had been knocked out and "left for dead" as he claimed, he would not have been able to remember detailed descriptions of any alleged intruders nor the series of events leading up to his loss.....his story is medically impossible. ALSO, the lighting in the living room, him "coming awake", and thus not wearing his glasses proves he is lying because he'd have been unable to see anyone well enough to give hair, skin, eye color, or clothing description (partly because everyone but him would have been backlit and partly because he couldn't see without his glasses). Every time you post something that inmate "said" I hear the chimes saying "liar, liar pants on fire" and he IS a LIAR, a narcissistic sociopath, and a familial slaughterer, and I fail to see what you can find to support in this b@$t@rd. Every single sourced piece of evidence points to his guilt and his alone and the "unsourced" evidence is useless.
 
One of my neighbors had a recent serious fall down the stairs in their condo. Her husband rushed downstairs as soon as he heard the crash. She was unconscious. Fortunately, she's on her way to a complete recovery, but she has no memory of the fall and its aftermath. At.All.
 
One of my neighbors had a recent serious fall down the stairs in their condo. Her husband rushed downstairs as soon as he heard the crash. She was unconscious. Fortunately, she's on her way to a complete recovery, but she has no memory of the fall and its aftermath. At.All.
 
JTF said:
HENRIBOY:
1) Produce a decision by a District Court Judge and/or Appellate Court Judge that concludes that a CID and/or FBI agent committed perjury in this case.

2) Produce a decision by a 4th Circuit Court Judge and/or United States Supreme Court Judge that concludes that Judge Dupree and/or Judge Fox did not provide inmate with a fair trial and/or evidentiary hearing.

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

If CID agent Kearns had testified in any of the MacDonald court cases he would have said that a urine stain could be retested after ninety weeks! That is clearly erroneous and scientifically unreliable. CID agent Shaw testified at the Article 32 in 1970 that one pajama fiber was found where MacDonald fell unconscious, when the hard documentary evidence from FOIA states that a pile of pajama fibers were found there. That is clearly erroneous, and even perjury. The babysitter Kalin was cross-examined by Wade Smith at the trial and she was proved to have committed perjury about the ice pick and knives being there at the MacDonald apartment.

It was clearly erroneous for the biased Judge Dupree not to allow Helena Stoeckley's numerous out of court confessions to be heard at the trial. A first-class trial judge, or appeal court judge, would have put his, or her, foot down about all that.
 
Henri McPhee said:
If CID agent Kearns had testified in any of the MacDonald court cases he would have said that a urine stain could be retested after ninety weeks! That is clearly erroneous and scientifically unreliable. CID agent Shaw testified at the Article 32 in 1970 that one pajama fiber was found where MacDonald fell unconscious, when the hard documentary evidence from FOIA states that a pile of pajama fibers were found there. That is clearly erroneous, and even perjury. The babysitter Kalin was cross-examined by Wade Smith at the trial and she was proved to have committed perjury about the ice pick and knives being there at the MacDonald apartment.

It was clearly erroneous for the biased Judge Dupree not to allow Helena Stoeckley's numerous out of court confessions to be heard at the trial. A first-class trial judge, or appeal court judge, would have put his, or her, foot down about all that.
Click to expand...

Point of Fact: Nobody in any court would have asked Kearns about the urine stain testing, not his area.

Point of Medical Fact: There is no evidence Macdonald was every unconscious, in fact, his own words prove he was not unconscious. (Maybe, wuss that he is, he just fainted?)

Point of Fact: Babysitter Kalin has never been impeached or convicted with regard to her testimony vis a vis ice picks or knives.

Question for the landlord: The only confession Helena made that fits the evidence is that she was having an affair with Macdonald and watched him kill his family, is that what you wanted introduced?

The judge would have to admit ALL of her confessions, which contradicted themselves (and included the one above), and this would not have helped your man crush at all, they've have viewed her as a complete kook. (Really close to the truth.) It would have been a complete waste of time for the jury and justice.
 
Henri McPhee said:
snipped

It was clearly erroneous for the biased Judge Dupree not to allow Helena Stoeckley's numerous out of court confessions to be heard at the trial. A first-class trial judge, or appeal court judge, would have put his, or her, foot down about all that.
Click to expand...

Stoeckley's confessions and her denials, or just her confessions?

She made plenty of both, and that's why she was useless as any type of witness.
 
Personally, I think some people are definitely bad, and they should be executed. The trouble is Jeff MacDonald is not definitely bad. The MacDonald case was a gross miscarriage of justice.
 
BStrong said:
Stoeckley's confessions and her denials, or just her confessions?

She made plenty of both, and that's why she was useless as any type of witness.
Click to expand...

Greg Mitchell confessed as well. There were numerous out of court confessions by Helena which should never have been rejected and ignored by an astute detective. I have posted about this matter previously on this forum:

Judge Dupree was clearly erroneous on a point of law in describing Helena as untrustworthy when it came out after the trial that Helena was used as an informant by the Army CID and by the Nashville police. Detective Beasley had described her as his most reliable informant.

Perhaps Helena's most reliable statement was to her lawyer, Leonard, at the time of the trial. She was assured that she was protected by lawyer and client confidentiality, which happened while she was still alive, a bit like a priest's confessional box confessions are supposed to be confidential. Leonard later said the prosecution never proved its case to which Murtagh typically accused him of being an alcoholic among other things.

There is a bit about this matter in a MacDonald case document:

Quote:
What Stoeckley told Leonard in 1979, while the MacDonald trial was in progress, has this ambit of trustworthiness. The importance of her statement to Leonard that she was in the house when the murders occurred
can hardly be overstated. In the words of the government’s own witnesses, Joe. McGinniss, it would have been the “holy grail” for the defense. (Htp. 987) It would be eyewitness evidence, a firsthand account, of intruders. If the jury had heard those three words, the circumstantial evidence of intruders that was existing at trial, even before that circumstantial evidence was augmented by other evidence that has been amassed in the intervening years that is within the ambit of the “evidence as a whole.”
Click to expand...
 
Keep Running

HENRIBOY: Gross miscarriage of justice, eh? Again, the burden is on YOU to provide proof of this claim. For the past 15 years, your self-imposed exile from meeting this burden doesn't change the nature of the challenge.

1) Produce a decision by a District Court Judge and/or Appellate Court Judge that concludes that a CID and/or FBI agent committed perjury in this case.

2) Produce a decision by a 4th Circuit Court Judge and/or United States Supreme Court Judge that concludes that Judge Dupree and/or Judge Fox did not provide inmate with a fair trial and/or evidentiary hearing.

3) Produce a lab document that concludes that a fiber was a microscopic match and/or matched the chemical composition of clothing worn by a known intruder suspect.

4) Produce a lab document that concludes that a hair was a microscopic match and/or matched the DNA profile of a known intruder suspect.

5) Produce a lab document that concludes that a fingerprint, palmprint, or footprint matched a print exemplar from a known intruder suspect.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
byn63 said:
welcome to the discussion AnimalFriendly! I agree and you are correct there were people who would have and deserved to have the "he is guilty" point of view presented.....for example Bob Stevenson (Colette's brother)....
Click to expand...

A belated thanks for your welcome, byn63! Yes, even if Bob Stevenson didn't want to be interviewed for this show - and I sure don't recall the narrator stating he was ASKED to participate and refused - there should have been plenty of others (his wife, children, their friends, etc., etc.) who would wanted to be interviewed.

I've actually always liked Wade Smith for his work on some other cases, such as the Duke Lacrosse players'. I'm not sure if he's even involved with JM any more but, regardless, I'll never be convinced he believes anyone other than his (former?) client killed that family.
 
Henri McPhee said:
Greg Mitchell confessed as well. There were numerous out of court confessions by Helena which should never have been rejected and ignored by an astute detective. snipped
Click to expand...

There are two words in the above that don't work together. If you remove "never" you can keep "astute," but you can't use ""astute" in that sentence with the word "never."


Might want to bone up on why naked confession without corroborating fact doesn't hold up for the purposes of prosecution. Might want to study the definition of the words "credible" and "credibility."
 
It is a good thing that what you "think" is irrelevant henri. As usual, you choose to ignore facts and make up a different standard for making statements of discussion in re: this case. THE FACT is that the Honorable Judge Dupree made huge efforts to ensure that inmate got a fair trial INCLUDING trying to get Bernie Segal to recognize how being condescending to the jury was NOT a smart move and would hurt his client. The Honorable Judge Fox has made every possible effort to continue to give inmate every legal chance possible DESPITE the FACT that this case should long have been out of the courts. THE FACTS were long ago proven to be that inmate viciously, savagely, brutally slaughtered Colette and the unborn baby she carried, Kimmie and Kristy his own flesh and blood. Inmate is a narcissistic sociopathic familial slaughterer and THAT IS FACT.
 
AnimalFriendly said:
I've actually always liked Wade Smith for his work on some other cases, such as the Duke Lacrosse players'. I'm not sure if he's even involved with JM any more but, regardless, I'll never be convinced he believes anyone other than his (former?) client killed that family.
Click to expand...

Wade Smith has always appeared (to me) to be a TRUE Southern gentleman lawyer. I believe that he has removed himself from the rotating members "legal team" that defends inmate. I believe the last act for Wade Smith on "behalf of" inmate was to put Jimmy Britt in touch with more active members of the team.

Due to his ethics, even if he does not believe inmate to be innocent, we will never hear that he has made a statement to that effect. A fine quality in a defense lawyer.....
 
I have always thought that if Eisman from the Article 32 proceedings in 1970 had been at the 1979 trial he would have given prosecutors Murtagh and Blackburn a hard time. Eisman understood the forensics of the MacDonald case, unlike Wade Smith, or even Segal. Wade Smith became too much like pals, or even boyfriends, to Blackburn, and the dour Irishman Joe McGinniss for my liking.

There is a bit of waffle about this matter at this website:

https://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/how-i-changed-my-mind-about-jeffrey-macdonald-murder-case

Worse still, Judge Franklin Dupree seemed to have his mind made up before the trial began. Some said he should never have taken the case because his former son-in-law was the prosecutor in the original army hearing. Dupree would not admit overwhelming psychiatric testimony in MacDonald’s favor, nor the testimony of witnesses to whom Helena Stoeckley had confessed her involvement. Bernie Segal, a long-haired Jewish lawyer from Philadelphia, took the lead in the case and managed to alienate the entire courtroom. Segal took up nearly all the time in the critical period for closing remarks and left only a few minutes for co-counsel Wade Smith, an eloquent native North Carolinian who understood the jury.

One thing about this case is never in doubt no matter who’s talking: If Wade Smith had been able to lead and give his closing remarks, MacDonald would be a free man today.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Eisman was not a a great lawyer, he was the one who staged the whole "hair sample" episode during the Article 32. That sort of machination is the provenance of cheaters and liars (both of which inmate is/was). IF inmate had been innocent then he should have provide hair and print exemplars voluntarily (even if the Government didn't ask for it). Create the whole, they followed us, jumped us, and knocked us around nonsense (that Eisman created) is another episode of "consciousness of guilt".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom