Merged Jeffrey MacDonald did it. He really did.

Status
Not open for further replies.
The point is that Stombaugh's testimony is what convicted Dr. MacDonald and that testimony was speculation. It was hardly hard evidence which is what was needed. You must speak only to facts in a deadly place like a court and not to opinions, unless you are a real expert.

Stombaugh thought Colette hit Dr. MacDonald with a hairbrush. Army CID agent Shaw thought Colette murdered the two little girls and CID agent Kearns thought Kim wet the bed, with no supporting evidence at all.

Even Judge Dupree mentioned at the trial this matter of speculation from the 1975 Grand Jury. Dupree mentioned in court in 1979 to Murtagh that it was 'Incompetent' which seems to be the legal term and that Murtagh should know that. Unfortunately after twenty years in charge of the case Judge Fox is still unaware of the irregularities at the MacDonald trial.

This is part of the speculation and load of bull from the MacDonald Grand Jury in about 1975. No wonder a Grand Jury can prosecute and convict a ham sandwich.:

MR. WOERHEIDE: That, of course, is pure speculation.

A Speculation, right.

MR. WOERHEIDE: Well, we can only speculate. We know what the evidence of the threads and the fibers and the garments and the sheet and the bed things and the club and the knives tells us, but you have to speculate as to, you know, just the details of how it was done.

JUROR: I would like your speculation on why you feel that his pajama bottoms probably had O type blood. I hadn't thought of that.

MR. WOERHEIDE: Because Kris was stabbed in her front and she was stabbed on her back, and she was stabbed very deeply, both on the front and the back, and you will notice that her body was down here over the edge of the bed, and there's a pool of blood on the floor and I think he sat on the bed, and he had her on his lap, across his lap while he was stabbing her.
Now, that's--you know--speculation, too.
But I think you would find O blood on his pajama bottoms if you had the pajama bottoms.

JUROR: Mr. Woerheide.

MR. WOERHEIDE: Yes, sir?

JUROR: As much blood as was in that house, if any intruders was in there, wouldn't they have stepped in there and let a shoe print other than a bare footprint?

MR. WOERHEIDE: I think, you know, especially if some intruder was running around, there was--there were quantities of blood, and it's very likely. It's very likely.

JUROR: As much blood as is in there, they would have had blood on them somewhere.

JUROR: In your speculation, then, Mr. Woerheide, assuming things went sort of this way, that Colette had anything to do with any of the killings whatsoever?
 
Last edited:
Documented Fact

Paul Stombaugh was allowed to speculate about certain evidentiary items at the Grand Jury hearings, but he was required to stick to documented fact at the 1979 trial. Stombaugh's analysis was so powerful that Defense experts John Thornton and James Osterburg, concurred with his conclusions regarding bloody fabric impression evidence and the Pajama Top Theory. Nuff said.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Dr. Thornton testified at the 1979 MacDonald trial that Stombaugh's pajama folding theory was impossible, contrived and conceptually unsound. It's true that Dr. Thornton did agree with Stombaugh that the pajama top might have brushed against the sheet, but that is not hard evidence when a forensic expert and the police are supposed to be looking for hard evidence. There was all sorts of contamination at the crime scene which the military police admitted at the Article 32 proceeding in 1970.

Osterburg was a New York police fingerprint expert. He was not qualified under the Federal Rules of Evidence to pontificate in a courtroom on fabric impressions, just like Stombaugh. It must be an expert opinion.

Osterburg testified at the 1979 trial that he was "totally mystified" by the Army CID fingerprint collection at the crime scene. That was unfair on Dr. MacDonald. Crucial evidence could have been missed. Judge Fox needs to pull his socks up. The MacDonald case can still be thoroughly and properly investigated if there was the money and political will.
 
Bloody Fabric Impressions

At the 1979 trial, Paul Stombaugh testified to bloody fabric impressions being present on a blue bedsheet that matched the morphology of the pajama cuffs from Jeffrey and Colette MacDonald's pajamas. Jeffrey MacDonald denies touching this bedsheet, yet two impressions from his right cuff and one impression from his left cuff were found on that bedsheet.

Stombaugh also testified to a bloody impression from Colette's left cuff and an impression from her right cuff being found on that same bedsheet. For whatever reason, John Thornton only analyzed three of the five bloody fabric impressions. He concurred with Stombaugh's conclusions regarding the two right cuff impressions from Jeffrey MacDonald's pajamas and the left cuff impression from Colette's pajamas.

The bloody fabric impressions in conjunction with massive direct bleeding stains from Colette, and blood stains from Kimberley MacDonald, demonstrated that Colette and Kimberley were carried in that sheet.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
The point is that the theory of bodies being carried in a sheet was made up by the Army CID and by Stombaugh, who was never a forensic serologist, or qualifed to testify about the matter in court. That was against the Federal Rules of Evidence. Stombaugh was a former insurance salesman and a con artist.

As JTF points out Dr. Thornton and Morton did agree that the pajama top might have brushed against the sheet and that there might even have been some cuff impressions, but that was never hard evidence of any bodies being carried in the sheet. Both forensic experts were in disagreement with Stombaugh's theory of hand impressions on the sheet, or of any bare left shoulder impression, as Stombaugh insisted.

The matter was discussed at the 1979 MacDonald trial. Unfortunately, I think this was all too academic for a North Carolina jury and for Judge Fox. The public and the House of Commons only understand straight lines:

"Were you present in this court during the testimony of Mr. Stombaugh--Mr. Paul Stombaugh
--formerly of the FBI?
A Yes; I was.
Q Did you hear his testimony in regard to the sheet taken from the master bedroom of the MacDonald house?
A Yes; I did.
Q And I want to hand you this sheet again--211--and just let me leave this here for a few minutes and take these other things away. Were you present when Mr. Stombaugh testified that in the area he has marked "G" he found an impression in blood that he described as one which conforms to the right cuff of Colette MacDonald's pajama top?
A Yes; I was.
Q Now, based upon your own knowledge, information, experience, and your own examination in this matter, do you have an opinion as to whether or not the impression that Mr. Stombaugh identified as "G" was made or could have been made by the pajama cuff of Colette MacDonald?
A Yes; I do.
Q And what is your opinion, sir?
A That it was not.
Q It was not.
A That is correct.
Q By the way, I perhaps presumed something I hadn't fully stated. Had you examined that sheet you have in front of you prior to my handing it to you today?
A Yes; I have.
Q And have you examined the pink pajama top that has been identified as being taken from the body of Colette MacDonald?
A Yes; I have.
Q Now, with that as background, would you tell us, please, on what did you base your conclusion that the area "G" was not made by the pink pajama top cuff of Mrs. MacDonald?
A My examination of the area "G" showed that there was a strip of blood staining--apparent blood staining--which was approximately 3/4 of an inch wide which approximated the width of the cuff on the pajama top--


More about what Dr Thornton thought about Stombaugh's speculations:

Q Dr. Thornton, I would like to ask you about the areas that you had sort of gotten into, "C" and "D," which were described by Mr. Stombaugh at page 4141 of his testimony. I am going to ask your opinion about those.
He stated at that time that, "Area 'C' conforms to a bloody handprint." He then said, "Area 'C' on the sheet...conforms to a bloody left hand--the two portions of it, here, here and here." He said, "As to Area 'D,' it conforms to a bloody right hand." Let me ask you, first of all, do you agree with his opinion and his conclusion?
A No, I think that is exceedingly unlikely

More about what Chuck Morton thought about Stombaugh's testimony :

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Now, were you also asked--did you also hear the testimony of Mr. Stombaugh about areas "C" and "D" on the blue sheet?
A Those are the areas that he had identified as hand impressions?
Q Yes, sir?
A Yes; I did.
Q Now, having heard his testimony, having examined the sheet yourself, do you have an opinion as to whether or not those areas represent impressions made by a hand, either having blood on it or pressing on blood?
A I find no evidence in those areas that would be convicing that those were caused by hand impression.
Q Did you hear the testimony of Dr. Thornton in that regard earlier today?
A Yes; I did.
Q Do you agree or disagree with his explanation and his statement with regard to those areas, "C" and "D"?
A Yes. I think it is much more likely that that blood got in those areas by either flow--blood flow--or fabric transfer, a contact with another area of the fabric that caused the transfer.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Let me show you, Mr. Morton, three photographs marked Government--they are copies of Government 210, 212 and 211, which are all of the master bedroom and show the bedclothing we are talking about. Will you take a moment, please, and examine those, and I will ask you one single question?
A Yes, sir.
Q Have you looked at those photographs?
A Yes, sir.
Q And at the pile of bedclothing there?
A Yes, sir.
Q Is there anything in those photographs that would cause you to either change, add to or detract from your opinion as to how the fact that the impression on that sheet was made by a palmprint rather than a cuff as was testified to by Mr. Stombaugh?
A No; there is not.
 
Destroyed

At cross, Brian Murtagh hammered Morton to the point where his "expert" testimony was ignored by the jury. Morton agreed with Stombaugh's conclusions regarding the morphology, length, and width of the bloody fabric impression matching Colette MacDonald's right pajama cuff.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
The point is it's legally inadmissible evidence. Success in a North Carolina courtroom is achieved by cunning and trickery and not by clear thinking or knowledge of the law. Americans are an emotional people.

JTF seems to think that Darlie Routier is guilty and that Steve Thomas in the Ramsey case is an experienced homicide detective, and that the CIA didn't murder President Kennedy, and that IRA brutal Irish murderers should have gone scot free for the sake of a peace agreement. I entirely disagree with him about that.

Murtagh might have swayed the jury with his 'hammering' of Morton at the 1979 but it doesn't influence me. I don't think it influenced the judge either.

This is part of Murtagh's cross-examination of Morton at the 1979 trial. It doesn't prove that bodies were carried in a sheet which the Army CID and prosecution made up to wrongly convict Dr. MacDonald. It's Nazi justice like in Egypt:

MR. MURTAGH: Does he agree or disagree?

MR. SEGAL: Let him talk about it, Mr. Murtagh.

THE COURT: Let's ask him just one of them, "Do you agree?" He can answer that "yes" or "no."

THE WITNESS: No; I do not.

BY MR. MURTAGH:
Q I am sorry?
A No. I do not agree.
Q That in terms of dimensions it does not conform?
A It conforms in a general way. But you can't just take the dimension by itself--one dimension--and say that that is a significant amount of agreement.
Q Well, let's take two dimensions. How about length and width?
A I did not look at the length that critically, because when I saw the ridge structure in there and the fact that it was not consistent with the ridge pattern of the fabric, it didn't seem that there was any point in going ahead and looking at the width.
Q Oh. Do I understand, then--

MR. MURTAGH: Excuse me.

THE COURT: Let him finish.

THE WITNESS: It would be like looking at the fact that two people were 6' 1" and then ignoring the fact that one of them was black and one of them was white. I mean, you know, you don't continue your comparison when there are obvious differences.

BY MR. MURTAGH:
Q Okay. Well, do I take it, then, that you did not measure, say, with calipers or some other device, the dimensions of this stain and compare them to the dimensions of the cuff of the pajama top?
A No; I did not.
Q Okay. You didn't do that length-wise or--
A (Interposing) That is correct.
Q Or the width?
A I measured the width with a ruler.
Q Okay. And did that conform?
A Yes, generally in the area of three-quarters of an inch.
Q Okay. Now, with respect to Dr. Thornton's testimony this morning, I believe he testified that area "F," which is not depicted in the photograph here, conformed to the left cuff or could have been made by the left cuff of Colette MacDonald's pajama top. Do you recall that, sir?
A I believe that is Jeff MacDonald's pajama top.
Q No, sir.
A Not Colette MacDonald's.
Q I don't believe it is Jeffrey MacDonald's. I will be happy to show it to you.

MR. SEGAL: Your Honor, either way. The only thing I asked him about were two other areas.
And I don't know what we are doing going into this particular matter he wasn't asked to examine, Your Honor.

MR. MURTAGH: I did not ask him that, Judge.

THE COURT: Proceed.
 
Conspiracy Buff

KATIE: Henriboy has been at this for the past decade. He is a conspiracy buff who believes that Jeffrey MacDonald, O.J. Simpson, Darlie Routier, Lee Harvey Oswald, and every other high profile psychopath has been railroaded by the MAN. In terms of the MacDonald case, he flat-out ignores the FACT that the jury only took 6 hours to convict MacDonald on three counts of murder. Their conviction was based on the 1,100 evidentiary items produced by the prosecution and the FACT that not a single evidentiary item was sourced to a KNOWN intruder suspect. No hairs, no fibers, no fingerprints, nothing, nada, zip.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Selective Analysis

In terms of the testimony of Charles Morton, he was one of two forensics experts who testified for the Defense at the 1979 trial. The odd thing about their testimony is that John Thornton agreed with Paul Stombaugh's conclusion that two bloody fabric impressions found on the blue bedsheet matched the right cuff from Jeffrey MacDonald's pajama top and a singular bloody impression matched the left cuff from Colette's pajama top.

For whatever reason, he didn't analyze the impressions that Stombaugh determined matched the left cuff from Jeffrey MacDonald's pajama top and the right cuff from Colette's pajama top. It gets weirder. Morton didn't analyze the bloody impression matching the left cuff from Jeffrey MacDonald's pajama top, but he did analyze the right cuff impression and concluded that it wasn't a bloody cuff impression. This selective analysis did the Defense no favors and rang hollow to the jury.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
Stombaugh's Analysis

Paul Stombaugh labeled each bloody fabric impression found on the blue bedsheet with a letter designation. The following are the impressions that Stombaugh identified, marked, and testified to at the 1979 trial:

Area A Jeffrey MacDonald’s right sleeve cuff

Area B Jeffrey MacDonald’s right sleeve cuff

Area C Bloody left hand impression

Area D Bloody right hand impression

Area E Bare left shoulder impression

Area E Jeffrey MacDonald’s torn left sleeve cuff

Area F Colette MacDonald’s left sleeve cuff

Area G Colette MacDonald’s right sleeve cuff

John Thornton and Charles Morton testified for the defense at the 1979 trial. Thornton agreed with Stombaugh on Areas A, B, and F. Thornton and Morton disagreed with Stombaugh on Areas C, D, and the shoulder impression located in Area E. Morton disagreed with Stombaugh on Area G and admitted that he never studied Areas A, B, E, and F, while Thornton admitted that he never studied the fabric impressions in Areas E and G. Thornton theorized that the impressions in Areas C and D were the result of direct bleeding, and Morton admitted to Murtagh at trial that Area G matched the morphology of Colette’s right pajama cuff, but insisted that the impression was a bloody palm print.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Wow

Joe was an incredible writer, family man, and a good dude. Fatal Vision is one of the best true crime books ever written and exposed Jeffrey MacDonald as a serial liar, a coward, and a psychopath. RIP, Mr. McGinniss.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
I was very sorry to hear of the loss of Joe McGinniss. Fantastic writer - - Fatal Vision is one of the very best true crime books out there - - and crusader for justice. He won't be forgotten.

I would like to ask Henri, or any other supporter of MacDonald and his story, a legitimate question. I have read this thread through and while Henri has made many posts about how MacDonald was unfairly convicted, how North Carolina is biased, etc., I don't see actual proof and facts that MacDonald was innocent and/or unfairly convicted.

Henri, can you provide this? You may be of the opinion that MacDonald is innocent and that's your choice to make but you are so vehement in your defense of him, it seems you should have actual facts to back up your claims.

Thank you.
 
JTF said:
KATIE: Henriboy has been at this for the past decade. He is a conspiracy buff who believes that Jeffrey MacDonald, O.J. Simpson, Darlie Routier, Lee Harvey Oswald, and every other high profile psychopath has been railroaded by the MAN. In terms of the MacDonald case, he flat-out ignores the FACT that the jury only took 6 hours to convict MacDonald on three counts of murder. Their conviction was based on the 1,100 evidentiary items produced by the prosecution and the FACT that not a single evidentiary item was sourced to a KNOWN intruder suspect. No hairs, no fibers, no fingerprints, nothing, nada, zip.

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

You decide on the evidence in any murder case and you follow the evidence. That evidence in the MacDonald case leads to Mazerolle and Greg Mitchell as the real culprits and not what the late Joe McGinniss made up about the case. Just because the lazy and incompetent Army CID decided from the start that Dr. MacDonald did it doesn't make it a fact.

I happen to think that OJ Simpson was guilty and that Amanda Knox was lucky to go free by sobbing in court in front of the American public on TV.

These judges need to be independent and impartial and extremely competent and not biased judges as in the MacDonald case. There has been an extraordinary decision by a Herbert Londoner judge recently when an Italian mafia man walked free because the judge said the prisons in Italy are too harsh for him to be extradited. It's absurd leniency. There was also a rumor on TV that an American Supreme court judge socialized with the Koch brothers in regard to legal work for American oil interests. There needs to be judgement and diplomacy.
 
Henri McPhee said:
You decide on the evidence in any murder case and you follow the evidence. That evidence in the MacDonald case leads to Mazerolle and Greg Mitchell as the real culprits and not what the late Joe McGinniss made up about the case. Just because the lazy and incompetent Army CID decided from the start that Dr. MacDonald did it doesn't make it a fact.

I happen to think that OJ Simpson was guilty and that Amanda Knox was lucky to go free by sobbing in court in front of the American public on TV.

These judges need to be independent and impartial and extremely competent and not biased judges as in the MacDonald case. There has been an extraordinary decision by a Herbert Londoner judge recently when an Italian mafia man walked free because the judge said the prisons in Italy are too harsh for him to be extradited. It's absurd leniency. There was also a rumor on TV that an American Supreme court judge socialized with the Koch brothers in regard to legal work for American oil interests. There needs to be judgement and diplomacy.
Click to expand...

The evidence leads directly to Jeffery MacDonald, no one else.
 
Lone Perp

Henri knows that Greg Mitchell was cleared as a suspect by the CID in 1971, and the FBI in 1981. He knows that Mitchell passed a polygraph exam, his prints were not found at the crime scene, and none of his DNA was found inside 544 Castle Drive. Henri also knows that Allen Mazerolle was in jail on 2/17/70. Guess who ratted him out to the cops? Yup, you guessed it, Helena Stoeckley.

Henri and other MacDonald advocates do not go where the evidence leads them. They studiously avoid the evidence because all of the SOURCED evidentiary items point directly at Jeffrey MacDonald as being the lone perp.

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

Back
Top Bottom