Merged Jeffrey MacDonald did it. He really did.

[desmirelle]

The point is that the Supreme Court is the final court of appeal and it is most important that they get it right.

SCOTUS has consistently refused to hear MacDonald after overturning the ridiculous 'speedy trial' decision. Quite properly, since there is no new evidence (no matter what his new attorneys say, all the evidence has been presented - Segal not wanting to go to NC to examine it notwithstanding).

He's guilty. He's right where he belongs and it's an insult to his victims when media present "is he guilty" when the answer is: Yes, legally and morally, and factually.

 

[Henri McPhee]

SCOTUS has consistently refused to hear MacDonald after overturning the ridiculous 'speedy trial' decision. Quite properly, since there is no new evidence (no matter what his new attorneys say, all the evidence has been presented - Segal not wanting to go to NC to examine it notwithstanding).

He's guilty. He's right where he belongs and it's an insult to his victims when media present "is he guilty" when the answer is: Yes, legally and morally, and factually.

I don't think all American judges are crap, or political appointments. It's just that they are in bed with the prosecution. They support the police and FBI even when the police and FBI make up evidence, and do FBI media campaigns. The father of Judge Carnes in the Ramsey case called Charles Carnes was supposed to have been a good judge.

Jeff MacDonald was sent to prison for the rest of his life on a 6-3 decision by the Supreme Court. The three dissenting judges, or justices, had right judgment.

This is part of what the British judge Tom Bingham has written about appeals in the past:

"The rule of law does not require that official or judicial decision-makers should be deprived of all discretion, but it does require that no discretion should be unconstrained so as to be potentially arbitrary. No discretion may be legally unfettered."

There is some background to this on the internet:

MacDonald was set free in 1980 after the court of appeals overturned the conviction, stating his right to a speedy trial was violated by a five-year delay before his indictment in 1975.

The Supreme Court reversed that ruling March 31 and MacDonald was returned to prison.

Ralph Spritzer, MacDonald's attorney, said the new appeal centers on the refusal by the trial judge to allow testimony about confessions to the murders made by a former Fayetteville woman. He said District Judge Franklin Dupree Jr. improperly disallowed testimony at the trial by seven people who claimed they heard Helena Stoeckley confess to witnessing the murders by a hippie group.

The three-judge panel of the circuit court ruled in August that Dupree properly excluded the testimony as hearsay.

But Sprietzer said the witnesses should have been been allowed to testify because their statements about Stoeckley's confessions were corroborated by MacDonald's versions of the killings.

Stoeckley denied any knowledge of the murders in the 1979 trial but later told a private investigator and reporters that she was in MacDonald's Fort Bragg apartment and saw hippies commit the murders.

 

[desmirelle]

I don't think all American judges are crap, or political appointments. It's just that they are in bed with the prosecution. They support the police and FBI even when the police and FBI make up evidence, and do FBI media campaigns.

Jeff MacDonald was sent to prison for the rest of his life on a 6-3 decision by the Supreme Court. The three dissenting judges, or justices, had right judgment.

This is part of what the British judge Tom Bingham has written about appeals in the past:

From what you've written, you've quite the poor opinion of judges and police, period.

And if the minority SCOTUS judges were right, we'd have a lot fewer trials. Grand Jury indictments are not arrests, nor were his (mac's) freedoms impinged during the time period in question. Therefore, the majority had it right - the speedy trial clause is to avoid ARRESTING & IMPRISONING someone for years prior to trial and EXCLUDES attempts by the defense to delay the trial. You cannot have it both ways: delay the trial and then claim denial of speedy trial rights.

And your British citation is irrelevant to an American case.

 

[JTF]

Coward

HENRIBOY: For months, you ran and hid from my challenge (e.g., produce a lab document sourcing intruder suspect to the crime scene), before finally admitting that no such document exists. You've taken a similar approach to my recent challenge (e.g., provide documentation that proves that the CID and FBI did not investigate ALL of the viable intruder suspects in this case), but I'll remind you that I will not let you off the hook.

Let's talk turkey, your conspiracy narratives are worthless and your lone interest in posting on this forum is to fan the flames. You have no real interest in the truth or engaging in a constructive dialogue about this case. The good news is that your boy will be spending the rest of his miserable life in a Cumberland jail cell.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[byn63]

henri - your presumption that YOU know better than the members of the United States Supreme Court is ridiculous. The current court is only 8 Justices since the passing of Justice Antonin Scalia (who was a graduate of Georgetown University and Harvard Law School, spent 6 years practicing at an International Law firm and was a Professor of Law at the University of Virginia School of Law).

The rest of the USSC:

Chief Justice John Roberts - Harvard and Harvard Law (where he was managing editor of the Harvard Law Review). Clerked for Judges Henry Friendly and William Rehnquist. Associate Counsel to the President of the United States under Fred Fielding.

Samuel A. Alito - Princeton (summa cum laude) and Yale (where he was an editor of the Yale Law Review). Served in US Army Reserves and Active Duty (Honorable Discharge 1980). 1977-1981 was Assistant US Attorney of NJ where he prosecuted cases including drug trafficking and organized crime.

Stephen G. Breyer - Stanford {B.A}, Magdalen College @ Oxford University{B.A}, and Harvard Law School. Has been a Law Professor and Lecturer at Harvard Law School. Spent time as a FACT CHECKER for the Warren Commission.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg - Cornell University. Started at Harvard Law and transferred to Columbia Law School when her husband transferred jobs. She is the first woman to ever serve on 2 prestigious Law Reviews (Harvard and Columbia). She served as a volunteer attorney for the ACLU later becoming a Chief Counsel for the ACLU. Professor of law at both Rutgers School of Law-Newark and Columbia Law School.

Elena Kagan Princeton, Oxford, and Harvard Law. Clerked at the Federal Court of Appeals and USSC. Associate White House Counsel. Professor of Law at University of Chicago Law School. Also, Professor of Law at Harvard Law School where she became the first woman DEAN.

Anthony Kennedy Stanford and Harvard Law (cum laude) 1961-1963 he was in Private Practice and starting in 1963 he took over his father's Sacremento office (after his father passed away) until 1975. 1965-1988 Professor of Constitutional Law at McGeorge School of Law.

Sonia Sotomayor Princeton (summa cum laude) and Yale where she was an editor of the Yale Law Journal. She was an ADA under NY County DA Robert Morgenthau where she was known to be very effective at Cross-Examination and simplifying a case for juries to better understand them. She worked 15 hour days and was considered to be fair and always prepared.

Clarence Thomas Holy Cross and Yale Law School. 1974-1977 Assistant Attorney General of Missouri in the Criminal Appeals Section. When his AG was elected to Congress Justice Thomas went to work as a lawyer for Monsanto Chemical Company. Later he returned to work with The Honorable Mr. Danforth (as Legislative Assistant Senate Commerce Committee).

So, you think YOU can interpret the law, know the rules of law, Federal Rules of Prosecution etc. better than these honorable Justices? Put up or shut up henri - let us see your Curricula Vitae! From which College or University did you get your BA or BS? What was your degree? From which School of Law did you receive your JD? When did you pass the bar and where were you admitted to the bar? I admittedly only put in the highlights of the careers of the Honorable Justices of the United States Supreme Court, but if you know better than they do then I'd like to see your CV that shows you can come even CLOSE to them.....

put up or shut up literally henri.......I'm waiting.....

 

[JTF]

He Is Who He Is

BYN: For the past 14 years, Henriboy has produced thousands of posts on multiple MacDonald Case forums, yet not once has he produced documentation (e.g., lab notes, corroborative eyewitness testimony) that clearly points toward inmate's innocence. Oh, there has been plenty of innuendo, half-truths, distortions and falsehoods, but no definitive proof of innocence.

He will continue to ignore my challenges, your challenge and the simple fact that Jeffrey MacDonald is a mass murderer. I do, however, enjoy when he sheepishly admits that he has never delivered the goods. The only way he can cope with the truth in this case is to return to old chestnuts like the government "didn't properly investigate the Stoeckley Murder Gang."

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[BStrong]

snipped...

There is some background to this on the internet:

Great, if background on the 'net is to be considered facts in evidence, let's go no farther than post 2401:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11669667&postcount=2401

"He's guilty. He's right where he belongs and it's an insult to his victims when media present "is he guilty" when the answer is: Yes, legally and morally, and factually."

It works for me, let's have the mods close the thread.

 

[Major Major]

It looks like Henri isn't the only one to believe our protagonist.

Still, what do you expect?

 

[byn63]

I have lost any respect I had for People Magazine. I cannot believe they allowed this BS to be published let alone as a cover story. It is pathetic when there is so much easily available supportable documentation that a story would be written like this.....

 

[Henri McPhee]

Congratulations to People Magazine. At last an accurate newspaper report, or magazine report, about the MacDonald case.

 

[BStrong]

Congratulations to People Magazine. At last an accurate newspaper report, or magazine report, about the MacDonald case.

An interview where the inmate claims innocence doesn't constitute exculpatory evidence.

 

[JTF]

Same Old Crap

Despite the documented record being available for public view, the author of the article clearly didn't take the time to determine whether inmate's claims passed the sniff test. The article was basically a gigantic fluff piece with no real connection to the truth.

John Stuart Bruce refused to comment on inmate's regurgitated claims and he told the People Magazine reporter that he was not going to litigate the issues with members of the media. John added that his lone focus was to litigate (e.g., oral arguments) the issues before the 4th Circuit Court on 1/26/17.

Bob Stevenson provided a singular quote which revolved around his opinion that this case will never really end until inmate is worm food. IMO, inmate has no chance at garnering a new trial. In 2011, the 4th Circuit provided a legal road map for Judge Fox and he followed that map to a tee.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[Henri McPhee]

Bob Stevenson provided a singular quote which revolved around his opinion that this case will never really end until inmate is worm food. IMO, inmate has no chance at garnering a new trial. In 2011, the 4th Circuit provided a legal road map for Judge Fox and he followed that map to a tee.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Bob Stevenson is soft in the head. There has been deafening silence from him about the ludicrously unsatisfactory Army CID theory without facts that his sister Colette murdered one of the little girls. Bob Stevenson has said publicly that he intends to keep Jeff MacDonald in prison because of a vow he made to his step-father Kassab on his death bed, rather like Judge Fox vowed to keep MacDonald in prison on Judge Dupree's deathbed. Bob Stevenson has also said publicly that he knows nothing about the forensic evidence in the MacDonald case.

When I first became interested in the MacDonald case Bob Stevenson appeared on American radio at about the time of the Parole Hearing in 2005 to say that Kassab thought MacDonald molested his daughters. There isn't one iota, or any medical evidence, to back up that assertion. It's criminal libel.

This is what Bob Stevenson has said about that quite ludicrously unsatisfactory retesting of the urine stain after ninety weeks by Army CID agent Kearns. It's impossible:

"MacDonald had said that the urine on the bed in the master bedroom was from his youngest child yet as a matter science it was determined to have been that of Kimberly." What a load of bollocks!

 

[wasapi]

Congratulations to People Magazine. At last an accurate newspaper report, or magazine report, about the MacDonald case.

Oh. Henri. Really? Really? This post of yours made me laugh out loud. Such brilliant folks at . . . People Magazine. Really? Sure, when I need intellectual stimulation I always turn to that shining example

Off topic, but Henri. Is there anyone convicted of a horrific crime that you think
is actually guilty? Or anyone who got away with murder like OJ Simpson?

 

[BStrong]

Bob Stevenson is soft in the head. There has been deafening silence from him about the ludicrously unsatisfactory Army CID theory without facts that his sister Colette murdered one of the little girls. Bob Stevenson has said publicly that he intends to keep Jeff MacDonald in prison because of a vow he made to his step-father Kassab on his death bed, rather like Judge Fox vowed to keep MacDonald in prison on Judge Dupree's deathbed. Bob Stevenson has also said publicly that he knows nothing about the forensic evidence in the MacDonald case.

When I first became interested in the MacDonald case Bob Stevenson appeared on American radio at about the time of the Parole Hearing in 2005 to say that Kassab thought MacDonald molested his daughters. There isn't one iota, or any medical evidence, to back up that assertion. It's criminal libel.

This is what Bob Stevenson has said about that quite ludicrously unsatisfactory retesting of the urine stain after ninety weeks by Army CID agent Kearns. It's impossible:

"MacDonald had said that the urine on the bed in the master bedroom was from his youngest child yet as a matter science it was determined to have been that of Kimberly." What a load of bollocks!

You have -0- credibility.

What you believe about the JM murders (and any other case I've encountered you discussing) is based on some twisted interpretation of how criminal investigations are conducted along with a side order of wishful thinking.

You have -0- training in the subject matter, -0- experience in the subject matter and you actually cite Gunderson as a credible individual when in fact he had been officially declared as having -0- credibility as an investigator or witness by the California state Attorney General's office.

If I didn't know better, I'd develop sympathy for the inmate for having the worlds most incompetent defender.

 

[Henri McPhee]

Oh. Henri. Really? Really? This post of yours made me laugh out loud. Such brilliant folks at . . . People Magazine. Really? Sure, when I need intellectual stimulation I always turn to that shining example

Off topic, but Henri. Is there anyone convicted of a horrific crime that you think
is actually guilty? Or anyone who got away with murder like OJ Simpson?

I think Fleet White in the JonBenet Ramsey case got away with murder because of the keystone cops in the Boulder Police Department, and the FBI, and Mazerolle and his pals in the MacDonald case because of the idle and incompetent and corrupt Army CID, and incompetent FBI. Personally, I think OJ Simpson should have been found guilty, but it was an anti-white jury, That is not an impartial jury.

Many people seem to think that it is dangerous to criticize judges, magistrates, or police. Without public criticism institutions, however excellent, become unhealthy and decay. Even if it were desirable to do so, however, it is impossible to hush things up. The mischief is done. What is urgently required is that criticism shall be well informed, and directed to the proper quarters. Diagnosis is needful before remedies are applied. But first it is necessary to convince the upper and middle classes, from whom alone reform can come, that English and American justice is not what they vaguely suppose it to be. What are called the lower classes are sufficiently convinced, but the only remedy they can apply is destruction.

 

[BStrong]

I think Fleet White in the JonBenet Ramsey case got away with murder because of the keystone cops in the Boulder Police Department, and the FBI, and Mazerolle and his pals in the MacDonald case because of the idle and incompetent and corrupt Army CID, and incompetent FBI. Personally, I think OJ Simpson should have been found guilty, but it was an anti-white jury, That is not an impartial jury.

Many people seem to think that it is dangerous to criticize judges, magistrates, or police. Without public criticism institutions, however excellent, become unhealthy and decay. Even if it were desirable to do so, however, it is impossible to hush things up. The mischief is done. What is urgently required is that criticism shall be well informed,and directed to the proper quarters. Diagnosis is needful before remedies are applied. But first it is necessary to convince the upper and middle classes, from whom alone reform can come, that English and American justice is not what they vaguely suppose it to be. What are called the lower classes are sufficiently convinced, but the only remedy they can apply is destruction.

You've consistently failed that standard.

 

[byn63]

well informed criticism? Henri YOU ARE NOT even CLOSE to well-informed.

 

[desmirelle]

But first it is necessary to convince the upper and middle classes, from whom alone reform can come, that English and American justice is not what they vaguely suppose it to be. What are called the lower classes are sufficiently convinced, but the only remedy they can apply is destruction.

Seriously? You think the "lower classes" can only destroy? Haven't you heard? You no longer have to be a property owner to vote, nor is there an income level requirement. Just thought you'd like to know.

 

[JTF]

Challenge Before The Final Beatdown

HENRIBOY: The irony of your obsession with Mazzerolle is that no other MacDonald advocate shares your fantasy narrative. Gunderson, Bost, Silverglate and a host of other advocates admitted that Mazzerolle was in jail on 2/17/70. This collective opinion was based on the correctional records, Mazzerolle's firm denials of involvement in this crime and the FACT that no trace evidence collected at the crime scene was sourced to Mazzerolle.

It's important to note that when given the opportunity to DNA test exemplars from the "Stoeckley Gang," inmate's defense team only requested exemplars from Stoeckley and Mitchell be tested by the AFIP. Hmmm, what does that tell ya? The defense had access to hair exemplars from Cathy Perry and Harris, Smith, Fowler and yes, Mazzerolle were alive when DNA testing protocol was being formulated.

The fact that the defense only requested exemplars from two members of the Stoeckley Seven, speaks to the defense team's lack of confidence that Perry, Harris, Smith, Fowler and yes, Mazzerolle had any involvement in this horrific crime. Heck, the defense never even attempted to contact Perry, Harris, Smith, Fowler and yes, Mazzerolle for permission to provide DNA samples to the AFIP.

It took several months for you to admit that no lab documentation exists that sources a known intruder suspect to this crime. It has now been a few weeks since I issued a new challenge, yet you have failed to provide documentation that proves the CID and FBI failed to investigate a viable intruder suspect.

Considering the depth and scope of the CID's 4 year reinvestigation and the FBI's 3 year investigation into suspects not named Jeffrey MacDonald, I would wager it's going to take another several months before you admit that you cannot come up with the goods.

Two days away from the government pounding the final nail in inmate's legal coffin.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com