Merged Jeffrey MacDonald did it. He really did.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rolfe said:
JTF also indicated that Murtagh has since exerted himself to keep MacDonald in jail. This always makes me uncomfortable. If the case is sound, it shouldn't need that level of support. There is however a danger that an unsafe case may be bolstered by enthusiastic support from a well-regarded authority figure,and an injustice perpetuated. However, as you say, MacDonald appears to be a real scumbag, so I can understand the attitude.
Click to expand...

In fairness to Murtagh, he hasn't had much choice. MacDonald has tried every legal maneuver in the book and a few new ones to get himself freed. Murtagh made a vow to keep that from happening, and as a result, he's been forced to repeatedly exert himself in response to MacDonald's legal maneuvering. I'm sure Murtagh himself would have far preferred to see the case rest many years ago.

I know very little about the Lockerbie case, so can't comment about Murtagh's involvement, but in the MacDonald case, he does have an incredibly thorough knowledge of the myriad details of the case, and, as a result, has been the primary force behind putting MacDonald in prison and keeping him there. I don't think I'd canonize him, but he's done a fine job.

I don't have a problem with someone who questions MacDonald's guilt or innocence if they do so honestly. I do have a problem with someone like SG, who seemed to be trying to establish that McGinniss was a con artist and that Errol Morris made a solid case of wrongful conviction. She watched a single television show that favored Errol Morris, but didn't address the blood evidence Morris continues to ignore, and a few other details. In effect, she armed herself with only a portion of the facts, some erroneous, which is never a good way to debate an issue, and then scoffed at the certainty of others about the justness of the verdict.

That didn't sit well with me, admittedly.
 
Last edited:
Legal Machinations

I never stated that Brian Murtagh was my idol and have been clear about my view of Murtagh as a lawyer and a victims advocate. I'm not wasting any more time on this nonsense.

It's ironic that the issue of why Murtagh is still involved in this case has been a recent topic of discussion. The defense filed a Substitute Post-Hearing Memo on 6/10/13. The defense admitted that their original post-hearing memo was filled with, "technical, formatting, and grammatical errors and omissions in the pleading."

The defense has a history of including healthy doses of "grammatical errors and omissions," in their briefs and memos. The government was supposed to file their response to the original defense memo on 7/1/13, so the defense continues to play their little games just weeks before the government can put the final legal nail in MacDonald's coffin.

This is what the government has had to deal with since MacDonald began scrubbing toilets in 1979. Murtagh has co-authored every government legal brief since MacDonald's conviction and he went before the parole board in 2005. Murtagh has won ALL of the main legal battles in this case and MacDonald was denied parole. He cannot apply again for parole until 2020.

This is simple, really. Brian Murtagh is THE most qualified DOJ lawyer to respond to the legal machinations of the MacDonald defense team. John Stuart Bruce and Leslie Cooley are outstanding lawyers, but Brian knows this case inside and out.

It will be interesting to see if the government asks for an extension on their response memo. My guess is that they want this thing to be over with and will file their memo on 7/1/13. At the September evidentiary hearing, John Stuart Bruce reminded Judge Fox that in their 1998 decision, the 4th Circuit Court stated that this case needs to come to an end.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Quality Of The Evidence

The good news is that Brian, John, and Leslie "get it." They were not happy with the 4th Circuit's 2011 decision, but they understand what the 4th Circuit is looking for and they want to make sure that ALL of the defense claims are thoroughly rebutted in their response memo. When Gordie threw the kitchen sink in his memo, the government was forced to debunk these claims for the 100th time because "evidence as whole" wipes out the FACT that most of those claims have been previously litigated. The government is basically saying, "Fine, you want to play that way, let's play."

In addition to Judge Fox's limited knowledge of what was presented at the 1979 trial, the government's rationale for presenting the trial evidence at the evidentiary hearing was to demonstrate the huge difference between the QUALITY of their evidence and the disjointed/unproven claims put forth by Gordie in his defense memo. The "evidence as a whole" doesn't lessen the high burden placed on the defense by the 2255, and the government has continually reminded Judge Fox that the burden of proof is on the defense. IMO, the defense failed miserably in meeting that burden.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
Is there no facility in the USA for an independent review of a case? No alternative but to keep on setting adversaries to go up against each other?

Rolfe.
 
Legal History

After MacDonald was convicted of three counts of murder, he has had more chances at obtaining a new trial than any murderer in history. The following is an incomplete timeline of the legal process since MacDonald's conviction in 1979.

- MacDonald spent 11 months in prison before his conviction was overturned by the 4th Circuit Court due to speedy trial issues

- MacDonald had 18 months of freedom before the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the 4th Circuit's decision

- In 1985, MacDonald went before the District Court to argue for a new trial and he was denied relief

- In 1990, MacDonald again went before the District Court to argue for a new trial and he was denied relief

- In 1992, MacDonald went before the 4th Circuit Court to argue for a new trial and he was denied relief

- In 1998, the defense filed several motions to the 4th Circuit Court, but MacDonald was again denied relief

- In 2005, MacDonald attempted to garner parole, but the parole board denied his request

- In 2006, the defense filed several motions to the District Court

- In 2008, the District Court Judge denied MacDonald relief

- In 2011, the 4th Circuit Court overturned the District Court's decision and ruled that the case must be judged on "evidence as a whole"

- In 2012, an evidentiary hearing took place on the issues contained under the "evidence as a whole" umbrella

- The government's post-hearing response memo is due on 7/1/13, and most legal experts feel that this is MacDonald's last shot at a new trial

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
Comments on the Government's 200 page response memo.

The Government hammers away at the credibility and reliability of the claims presented in the Defense memo. They also cover the trial evidence in detail and emphasize the decisions made by Judge Dupree during the 1984-1985 appellate hearings. I found the following pieces of information to be quite interesting.

1) Jimmy Britt produced FIVE statements/affidavits. The details contained in the statements are inconsistent.

2) In his book, Errol Morris made numerous errors when referring to trial/court testimony.

3) Clarence Stoeckley had a heated discussion with Eugene Stoeckley and Kathryn MacDonald outside of the nursing home where Mrs. Stoeckley resided. Clarence did not want Eugene and Kathryn to speak to his mother about the MacDonald case, but Eugene/Kathryn persisted.

4) Britt twice lied about circumstances involving his two ex-wives. In regards to his 1st wife, he lied when he denied having a former living spouse to whom a court order had given an annuity. In order to receive a family inheritance, Britt's 2nd wife filed for divorce in 2000, but Britt lied when he maintained that he no longer had a relationship with her. Nancy Williams resided with Britt until his death in 2008.

5) The Government handled Jerry Leonard with kid gloves at the hearing, but went for the throat in their memo. They pointed out that in 1995, Leonard was censured by the North Carolina Supreme Court for his ongoing alcohol dependence issues.

6) The irony of the "evidence as a whole" is that the Defense couldn't stop the affidavit of the late Vernoy Kennedy from being introduced at the hearing or in the Government's memo. Kennedy transported Stoeckley from Pickens County Jail to Charlotte.

7) The Government wisely stressed the importance of the evidence that led to MacDonald's conviction. They combined the trial evidence, the evidence presented at the 1984-1985 appellate hearings, and William Ivory's testimony at the hearing to formulate a complete picture of the Government's massive case.

8) The Government argued that the Ken Mica sighting was overblown and used several examples to prove their point. Bernie Segal attempted to manipulate Mica into claiming that the woman on the corner was only a few blocks away, but Mica stuck to his guns by stating that she was "at least 5 country blocks away." To Mica, this translated into over half a mile. Mica also admitted that although seeing a woman alone at that hour was unsual, it was not uncommon.

9) Two unsourced black synthetic fibers used in the manufacture of wigs used for human wear were found in one of the hairbrushes, but the Government argues that the Defense ignored those fibers for several reasons. Stoeckley claimed she wore a blond wig and if the blond saran fibers were the result of Kimmie and/or Kristen brushing a doll, then one could argue that they brushed a doll with black hair. In regards to the saran fiber issue, the Government added the following 1997 quote from Judge Fox...

"MacDonald histrionically mischaracterizes both the nature and magnitude of the dispute now before the court."

10) At the September hearing, Gordon Widenhouse admitted to Judge Fox that none of the 3 unsourced hairs were bloody or showed signs of forcible removal. Widenhouse, however, claims the opposite in his memo to Judge Fox. Widenhouse presented no hair or DNA experts at the hearing nor does he provide any citations to back this flip-flop in his memo.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Further commentary...

1) In regards to MacDonald's excuse for how his broken and bloody arm hair found its way in his dead wife's left hand, the Government states...

"It is hard to conceive how checking for a pulse on a dead body would result in a limb hair being broken off at the root."

2) The bloody palmprint claim was finally put to rest when the Government pointed to photos taken by the CID of the master bed footboard. The unsourced partial latent palmprint was photographed (GXP 1003) as were the two blood stains (GXP 41-42) and the photographs clearly show two contiguous, but different areas on the footboard. In other words, the palmprint and the blood stains were in different locations on the footboard.

3) The Government has rarely used the following explanation for the candle wax drippings in prior briefs, but they argue that since the MacDonalds liked candles, the wax deposits were the result of...

"candles previously lit, and either consumed entirely or discarded the remnants."

4) The statement that MacDonald's pajama top was identical in composition to his pajama bottoms is not a fact, but a hypothetical. In 1982, the Supreme Court treated it as a settled issue when pointing out that pajama fibers were found in all 3 bedrooms, but no pajama fibers were found in the living room.

5) The Government argues that when Greg Mitchell was not under the influence, he was a reliable witness, but when under the influence...

Mitchell's behavior was akin to Stoeckley and Perry in what the Government deemed a "Fatal Attraction." They knew each other, abused substances, had bouts of depression and paranoia, and were attention seekers. The relentless publicity of this case exacerbated this attraction and created a phenomenon that even MacDonald attorney Brian O'Neill acknowledged was very real. During oral arguments in 1985, O'Neill stated...

"aberrant mental patients, people who read about an event and are looking to take part in this event through this bizarre phenomenon of claiming. Wacky as it is, we know it exists."

6) In terms of the unsourced body hair found on Kristen's bed, the Government quotes Brian Murtagh at the hearing...

"the defense has failed to prove when this hair got on the bedspread. And I think that's the key issue with respect to all of the unsourced hairs, when did they get there...And it's their burden."

The MacDonalds did not have a dog, but several black dog hairs were found on the bedspread leading the Government to state that if one uses the logic put forth by the Defense, one of the intruders was a black dog.

7) For the first time, the Defense stated in their memo that the unsourced hair allegedy found under Kristen's fingernail could have been located in her hand. The Government also points out that the sourced hairs strengthen their case and are a part of the "evidence as a whole."

8) The Government concludes their memo on a powerful note stating that the Britt claim does not meet the gatekeeping standards of the 2255 and that the constitutional violation has not been proven on the merits. In addition, the unsourced hair claim does not meet the gatekeeping standards of the 2255 and has not met the "extraordinarily high burden as to merits and as a free standing claim of actual innocence..."

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
More Cognitive Tidbits

1) The Government argues that the Defense, "fails to reckon with the fact that, in some instances, whether the thread or yarn came from the pajama top or the bottoms, its presence is equally inculpatory." Examples used were Colette's bloody head hair entwined with a bloody pajama fiber and the pajama fiber found embedded under Kristen's fingernail.

2) The Government also argues that adhering to the philosophy that all of the pajama fibers found in the bedrooms came from MacDonald's pajama bottoms defies logic. The Government states, "a pajama top that has approximately 5 feet of torn seams and approximately 2 feet of torn fabric, demands an explanation as to where the seam threads and fabric yarns from the top went, if not in the bedrooms."

3) Stoeckley confessed to Ted Gunderson and Prince Beasley numerous times, yet she NEVER made mention of confessing to a U.S. Marshal and/or James Blackburn. In addition, Stoeckley NEVER made mention of Blackburn threatening her.

4) The Government contends that the Defense mislabels many of their evidentiary claims in regards to the arguments put forth at the 1984-1985 appellate hearings. They add that categorizing these claims as "newly discovered evidence" does nothing to alter Judge Dupree's original rulings on these claims.

5) In regards to Cathy Perry's 1984 confession to the FBI, Judge Dupree states, "this statement is yet another example of the bizarre behavior that the case has evoked from people who for some reason find it fascinating and see themselves as having played a part in the gruesome story."

6) Since 1990, the Defense has flip-flopped several times in regards to the fibers found on the club. In some briefs, they claim that the CID misidentified two dark woolen fibers as being purple cotton threads from MacDonald's pajama top. In other briefs, they claim that BOTH dark woolen fibers and pajama fibers were found on the club. The Government contends that the latter position is the only position that is backed by documented fact.

7) In terms of the saran fiber issue, the Defense can't even get the little things right. In their post-hearing memo, they state that the hairbrush containing the saran fibers was found in the kitchen of the MacDonald home. The brush was found next to Colette's purse in the dining room.

8) The only saran wig exemplar ever produced by the Defense was a black wig found on a manikin of an Indian woman. This manikin was found in the Mexico City Museum of Anthropology and History in 1993. The Defense was unable to obtain expert testimony in regards to whether saran wigs were exported to the United States in the period 1955-1970.

9) Great quote regarding the Britt claim, "It borders on the absurd to claim now that success on the Britt claim does not require proof of a constitutional violation."

10) The only intruder suspects whose known DNA the Defense asked to test by the AFIP were Mitchell and Stoeckley. The Government argues that since no hair exhibit matched the DNA profile of either suspect, the test results were actually inculpatory. This is due, in large part, to the hair found clutched in Colette's left hand that matched the DNA profile of Jeffrey MacDonald.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Snakes In The Grass

I love how the Government took the time to point out that the authors of two MacDonald Was Railroaded books were prone to exaggerations, distortions, and mistakes. Fred Bost and Errol Morris were clearly authors with an agenda and the truth meant very little to them. Both men were clearly envious of Joe McGinniss as evidenced by their pot shotting chapters on FATAL VISION. McGinniss' true crime masterpiece sold over 3 million copies and was made into a television movie whereas both FJ and WOE were huge flops.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
JTF said:
The good news is that Brian, John, and Leslie "get it." They were not happy with the 4th Circuit's 2011 decision, but they understand what the 4th Circuit is looking for and they want to make sure that ALL of the defense claims are thoroughly rebutted in their response memo. When Gordie threw the kitchen sink in his memo, the government was forced to debunk these claims for the 100th time because "evidence as whole" wipes out the FACT that most of those claims have been previously litigated. The government is basically saying, "Fine, you want to play that way, let's play."

In addition to Judge Fox's limited knowledge of what was presented at the 1979 trial, the government's rationale for presenting the trial evidence at the evidentiary hearing was to demonstrate the huge difference between the QUALITY of their evidence and the disjointed/unproven claims put forth by Gordie in his defense memo. The "evidence as a whole" doesn't lessen the high burden placed on the defense by the 2255, and the government has continually reminded Judge Fox that the burden of proof is on the defense. IMO, the defense failed miserably in meeting that burden.

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

Sorry, but I don't want to reread this entire thread.
John who and Leslie who?
 
GT/CS said:
Was Jeff McDonald's chest wound too narrow to have been made by the paring knife?
Click to expand...

MacDonald didn't claim the wound was made with the paring knife, but with the icepick. Actually, he didn't claim even that - just that he felt a blow to his chest, thought to himself that the intruder had thrown a good punch, and looked down to see the glint of the icepick blade in the intruder's hand. I don't believe the wound was compared to the paring knife. It was, however, a very neat, precise, and clean incision that could have been done with the icepick...or a scalpel. Uncannily precise for an intruder stabbing wildly with an icepick.

Given the relative dullness of a paring knife, wouldn't the incision have been more ragged?
 
Types Of Cuts

At the 1974-1975 Grand Jury hearings, Paul Stombaugh testified that it was his opinion that the dull, bent Geneva Forge knife caused most of the superficial lacerations on Jeffrey MacDonald's upper body. MacDonald's torn pajama top contained only two cuts and Stombaugh concluded that both cuts were made with the Geneva Forge knife.

All of the cuts in Colette's and Kristen's pajamas were made with the straight, sharp Old Hickory knife. Colette, Kimmie, and Kristen were all stabbed with the Old Hickory knife. Colette and Kristen were both stabbed with the ice pick. The evidence suggests that Colette attempted to defend herself with the Geneva Forge knife.

In terms of the chest wound that resulted in a 20 percent collapse of Jeffrey MacDonald's lung, the depth and morphology of the wound suggests that neither the Geneva Forge/Old Hickory knife nor the ice pick was the instrument used to inflict that wound.

Three smears formed in Jeffrey MacDonald's blood type were found on the door of a closet that contained drugs, syringes, and scalpel blades. MacDonald's blood was also found on the edge of the bathroom sink leading investigators to surmise that he obtained a scalpel blade from the closet, went to the bathroom sink, and stabbed himself in the chest.

The chest wound was the only serious wound on Jeffrey MacDonald's body. His vital signs were normal upon arrival to the Womack ED and none of his other words required a single suture. The autopsy reports paint a completely different picture as Colette, Kimmie, and Kristen were killed in a brutal fashion.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
Sur-Reply

Gotta luv the legal history of this case. Despite the order from Judge Fox specifying that the Defense would file a post-hearing response memo followed by the Government filing their response memo, the Defense requested that they be allowed to file a response to the Government's 200 page memo.

Judge Fox granted their request, but stated that the Government has the opportunity to file a Sur-Reply by September 8th. The Government most certainly will file a Sur-Reply and as they did with their original response memo, John Stuart Bruce, Brian Murtagh, and Leslie Cooley will thoroughly destroy the dubious claims leveled by the Defense.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
History Of The 4th Circuit Court

The recent Defense delay (e.g., reply memo now due on 8/14 with Government Sur-Reply due 30 days later) reminded me of the long and winding road that is the legal phase of the Jeffrey MacDonald case. Considering that the 4th Circuit Court has allowed this nonsense to continue, I wanted to look back at their decision-making process in this case starting in the early 90's.

On February 5, 1992, oral arguments were presented to Judge Murnaghan, Judge Butzner, and Judge Russell. It was Judge Murnaghan who expressed an unease with this case, but that comment was made 12 years prior to oral arguments. The 1980 comment was in response to Judge Dupree's decision to not allow the "Stoeckley witnesses" to testify before a jury. He then added that Stoeckley's memory may have been more clear if this case went to trial in the early 70's. Freddy Kassab was so furious with the 2-1 decision rendered by the 4th Circuit Court, he constructed the following document.

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/html/kassab_1980-12-19.html

Outside of Murnaghan's comment, there is no clear indication that other 4th Circuit judges continued to have an issue with the Government being able to convene a Grand Jury and/or force MacDonald to face the music at a jury trial. The reactions of Murnaghan, Butzner, and Russell to the histrionics of Silverglate/Dershowitz seemed to demonstrate that any potential unease with this case was long gone. The following is an excerpt from Fatal Justice.

Now Russell interrupted. "You don't mean to say you're charging that Mr. Murtagh told a lie, are you?" he demanded. "We are charging, and we have charged in our papers, that Mr. Murtagh engaged in a conspiracy to deflect attention away from this material," Dershowitz retorted angrily. Judge Russell tossed up a hand in apparent anger, rolled his eyes, and threw back his head in an expression of disgust. As Dershowtiz continued to argue this charge, the judge held his angry gaze steadfastly on the ceiling.

Since MacDonald returned to prison in 1982, the 4th Circuit Court has sided with the Government on all but two occasions. In 1997, they concurred with all but one of Judge Fox's rulings on a variety of issues. This lone victory for the Defense involved MacDonald being allowed to DNA test evidence in this case. The other victory was the 4th Circuit's 2011 decision to remand the case back to Judge Fox. The small victory in 1997, didn't result in MacDonald's freedom and IMO, the 2011 decision will not alter MacDonald's housing situation one bit.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
There were at least three supreme court judges who were in disagreement with the decision to prosecute Dr. MacDonald during the MacDonald appeal in about 1980/81, and not only on the grounds of him not having a speedy trial. He had the case hanging over his head ever since the Article 32 proceeding in 1970 when he was correctly cleared. This led to severe financial anxiety for him with things like legal fees, and other worry and anxiety. That's just because you are assumed to be guilty in America, and the police are too lazy and incompetent to solve difficult murders. The police are not very bright.

The North Carolina judges were biased, and so was the jury. The prosecution was dishonest and involved in forensic fraud. One of the prosecutors served time for dishonesty It was not an impartial judge and jury, and the judges were not competent and just. They had pajama fibers on the brain.

What is needed is for some good and astute detectives to investigate the real culprits, even at this late stage, and even though some of the suspects are now dead. The Army CID just disregarded leads and suspects. Dr. MacDonald can no longer afford any private detectives to do it for him. If the real culprits started squealing, and detectives found out exactly what happened, I think that would be grounds to release him from prison.

The FBI is not much help. Their investigation of the real culprits in the MacDonald case by the FBI was very superficial and cursory and amateurish. It all reminds me so much of the time the British double agent Popov warned Hoover of the FBI that Pearl Harbor was about to be attacked, and he was then disregarded by Hoover because Hoover didn't like foreigners.
 
Henri McPhee said:
The FBI is not much help. Their investigation of the real culprits in the MacDonald case by the FBI was very superficial and cursory and amateurish. It all reminds me so much of the time the British double agent Popov warned Hoover of the FBI that Pearl Harbor was about to be attacked, and he was then disregarded by Hoover because Hoover didn't like foreigners.
Click to expand...

Maybe Hoover mis-heard Popov about the the attack on Pearl Harbor and thought that Popov said the Japanese were about to attack Pearl Bailey.

Michael
 
Henriboy's Lack Of Critical Thinking Skills

Hey, Henri. Where have you been the past several months? Your conspiracy related posts and unsubstantiated claims never get old. Not surprisingly, the Defense asked for another delay in filing their response memo. This is the 8th Defense-related delay in the past 2 years and speaks to the wide competence gap between the Defense and the Government.

The Government is always prepared and they rely on documented fact whereas the Defense relies on assumption, distortion, half-truths, and falsehoods. The merits of the evidence presented by the Government at the 1979 trial, have never been disputed by any appellate court. The only significant victories by the MacDonald camp involved speedy trial issues.

The facts speak for themselves. MacDonald was convicted due to a mass of inculpatory evidence which includes blood, fiber, hair, bloody footprints, bloody fabric/non-fabric impressions, and fabric damage. In 2006, DNA testing by the AFIP resulted in 5 inculpatory test results. MacDonald is not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, he is guilty beyond ALL doubt.

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

Back
Top Bottom