Merged Jeffrey MacDonald did it. He really did.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Shell Game

Byn is correct. In 2011, I spoke with Errol Morris on the phone for 90 minutes after receiving word that he was writing a book on this case. Morris had written an endorsement on the back jacket of the pro-MacDonald book FATAL JUSTICE. Thee years after the book's publication, an article in Vanity Fair mentions that Morris was seeking funds to make a documentary about the MacDonald case.

When I called Morris, I let him know that I believed in MacDonald's guilt and that I had a website that was dedicated to proving his guilt. I then told him that I assumed his book would advocate for MacDonald's innocence, but he denied that would be the book's theme. He claimed that the book would focus on why this case continues to fascinate the general public.

He then let me do most of the talking and he recorded a majority of the conversation. He asked me a few questions which included why MacDonald would insist that Kristen, not Kimmie, had wet the master bed. I encouraged him to visit my website and to contact me with any feedback.

A year later, Morris did an interview with the Smithsonian, and I quickly realized that he had conned me. The article clearly indicated that he had written a pro-MacDonald book and that his main arguments were the same debunked claims made by MacDonald advocates for the past 30 plus years.

Fortunately, Morris' book was a commercial flop and after some initial positive reviews, his mess of a book started to receive some criticism for flat-out ignoring about 95 percent of the government's case against MacDonald.

The final nails in Morris' credibility coffin were hammered in by Gene Weingarten's Washington Post article and Joe McGinniss' e-book FINAL VISION. Despite some weak attempts by the NY Times to keep Morris' name afloat in this case, he is now a mere blip on the MacDonald case radar screen.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
I think it is important for people to remember that the MPs who responded to Castle Drive that horrible night followed SOP. They believed they were responding to a domestic violence call, upon arrival they attended to the survivors first and then worried about preserving the scene. SOP!
 
Each member of the family had a different blood type.
Type A = Colette; Type AB = Kimmie; Type O = Kristen and Type B = inmate.

Sources say that the odds of a 4 person family each having a different ABO Type is on the order of 1 in 10,000.

Currently in the US the blood groups break down as:
O+ 37.4% and O- 6.6% OR 44% of US population has Type O blood
A+ 35.7% and A- 6.3% OR 42% of US population has Type A blood
B+ 8.5% and B- 1.5% OR 10% of US population has Type B blood
AB+ 3.4% and AB- .6% OR 4% of the US population has Type AB blood

{Quote}From Wikipedia:
Blood groups are inherited from both parents. The ABO blood type is controlled by a single gene (the ABO gene) with three alleles: i, IA, and IB. The gene encodes a glycosyltransferase—that is, an enzyme that modifies the carbohydrate content of the red blood cell antigens. The gene is located on the long arm of the ninth chromosome (9q34).

The IA allele gives type A, IB gives type B, and i gives type O. As both IA and IB are dominant over i, only ii people have type O blood. Individuals with IAIA or IAi have type A blood, and individuals with IBIB or IBi have type B. IAIB people have both phenotypes, because A and B express a special dominance relationship: codominance, which means that type A and B parents can have an AB child. A type A and a type B couple can also have a type O child if they are both heterozygous (IBi,IAi) The cis-AB phenotype has a single enzyme that creates both A and B antigens. The resulting red blood cells do not usually express A or B antigen at the same level that would be expected on common group A1 or B red blood cells, which can help solve the problem of an apparently genetically impossible blood group.{end quote}

What this all boils down to is:

Since each member of the family had a different blood type investigators are able to read the crime scene with a fair amount of accuracy. In this case, it means that inmate continues to LIE since he still insists that Kristen wet the master bed DESPITE the fact that testing of the urine stain makes that a scientific and medical impossibility. Kristen had TYPE O blood therefore her blood contained Antigen H and no antibodies.

The urine stain tested for Antigen A and no antibodies so that means that ONLY Colette or Kimmie could have made that stain. There is no evidence that Colette urinated on herself and there is evidence that Kimmie did. Thus the conclusion that Kimmie wet the bed in the master bedroom. THEN, add to this fact the 6" full thickness soaking stain of Type AB blood and brain serum on the carpet of the master bedroom AND the Type AB blood/brain serum splattered on the interior door jam of the master bedroom door AND the Type AB blood/brain serum found on the white shoes in the master bedroom closet. Also, how about the Type AB blood on inmate's pj top? AND, the Type AB blood on the bedsheet? How about the Type AB blood trail from the Master Bedroom to Kimmie's room? This is cumulative evidence and goes a long way to convicting inmate for his brutal, savage, vicious assault on his family.
 
byn63 said:
....
These men are furious that inmate has been called a Green Beret AND that he has forever linked this marvelous group of soldiers with a despicable and dishonorable act.
....
Click to expand...

What does this mean? Was MacDonald not a Green Beret? Or was he assigned to a Green Beret unit as their doctor without actually undergoing their grueling training? Or what? Real Green Berets certainly have good reason to be outraged at MacDonald, but he either was one or he wasn't.
 
Henri McPhee states: "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."

What an incredibly brazen, not to mention hypocritical, statement from someone trying to convince others that Jeffrey MacDonald didn't brutally murder his own family. Amanda Knox didn't "go free" due to "sobbing in court". Rather she went free due to the singular competance of one Judge Hellman who saw what anyone else looking at the evidence can see so easily. That there isn't a shred of credible evidence, opportunity or motive linking her, or Raffaele Sollecito, to the murder of Meredith Kercher. The same cannot be said for the case against MacDonald, not by a longshot.
 
Last edited:
Weak Kitten said:
On the other hand just think of all the legal presidents and refinements that came out of this case. I'm sure it will be quite useful as a teaching tool for future lawyers and judges.
Click to expand...

Not just a learning tool for future lawyers and judges but used as a learning tool for CID/CIL investigators also! :cool:
 
Bob001 said:
What does this mean? Was MacDonald not a Green Beret? Or was he assigned to a Green Beret unit as their doctor without actually undergoing their grueling training? Or what? Real Green Berets certainly have good reason to be outraged at MacDonald, but he either was one or he wasn't.
Click to expand...

according to my former Green Beret colleagues there is some discrepancy as to whether or not inmate completed ALL of the grueling training that would make him "full flash". inmate was assigned as Group Surgeon to a Green Beret unit which does not necessarily make him a full flash Green Beret. Most Green Berets that I've ever talked to say he is NOT a Green Beret and should not be associated with the Green Berets.
 
JTF said:
In 1997, MacDonald's advocates put forth the claim that an unidentified bloody palm print was found on the footboard of the master bed. CID Exhibit D-270 states "Red-brown stain from left edge of bed footboard in east bedroom," and Exhibit W-5 states "one partial latent palm print on the footboard." There is not a single lab document that describes the unidentified print as a bloody palm print and if the print had any discernable ridge lines, it would have been labeled as a patent palm print. Considering that palm print samples obtained at autopsy from Colette MacDonald were of poor quality, there is a reasonably good chance that the palm print found on the footboard was Colette's.
Click to expand...

in actuality the "bloody palm print" is a typical inmate groupie/fatal justice argument. there are 2 different evidentiary items; one is blood on the footboard and the other is a partial palm print.

if it was in any way usable print it would be a LATENT print.

if a print is found that is made in any substance (other than the normal skin oils) it would be described as a PATENT print. so a bloody palmprint would be listed as Patent Print - footboard for example. this would be true if a print was made in ice cream, blood, motor oil, paint, powder etc - anything of that sort is a PATENT print not a latent print.
 
Debunked

In their 2013 Response Memo, the government finally ended any controversy that remained about the alleged "bloody palm print." In addition to what has been presented on this forum, the government pointed out that the unsourced palm print was photographed by the CID, and that the print was in a different location on the footboard than the blood stain.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
I am slowly working my way through all the posts on this board and I noticed a couple of conversations discussing the terms psychopath and sociopath. These are the definitions:

psychopath: noun; a person having a personality disorder, especially one manifested in aggressively antisocial behavior.

sociopath: noun; a person manifesting a social or antisocial behavior or character traits.

from Psybox: sociopathy also known as psycopathy is a pesonality syndrome often (and usually inaccurately) protrayed in the media: this portrayal has led to certain misunderstanding about the syndrome. Sociopaths are characterized by certain personality characteristics, including personal charm, selfishness, impulsiveness, lack of guilt or anxiety, and cruelty. The sociopath usually has a history of minor misbehavior in childhood which often becomes deviant during adolescence. In adulthood a significant number of sociopaths become criminals. They may be distinguished from most convicted or known criminals in so far as they are usually lone wolves contrasting with other criminals who tend to belong to gangs wich possess their own rules of conduct. The syndrome may have organic pathology. (significant number of sociopaths exhibit unusual EEG patterns).

narcissism: noun; excessive admiration or love for ones self; arrestment of develoopment at or regression to the infantile developmental stage in which ones own body is an object of erotic interest.
 
Last edited:
More about blood types:

ABO and International Blood Group = same 4 basic groups
A, B, AB, and O

Antigens = A, B, and H
Antibodies = anti-A and anti-B

Antibodies are a substance found in the liquid portion of the blood, which can react with red blood cells to cause clumping (agglutination)

Antigens are found on the surface of the red blood cells and are also involved in the agglutination process.

antigens are present in both liquid blood and the resulting dry blood stains. antibodies are found in the liquid blood but remain in the stain upon drying.

Type A - antigen A on surface and anti B in liquid portion
Type B - antigen B on surface and anti A in liquid portion
Type AB - antigen A and antigen B and no antibodies
Type O - antigen H on surface and anti A and anti B in the liquid portion.
 
desertgal said:
Henri also thinks Helena Stoeckley was a Mafia hitman. He pretty much abolished any semblance of credibility with that one post. I doubt anyone is even bothering to read his posts anymore.
Click to expand...

roflmao! for some reason this post made me remember back at the old A&E board when henri was either Albie or Artie, one of the other posters got so tired of his rambling nonsense she tossed a nickel into a round room and told him to go find it! Albie or Artie (whichever he was at that time) went in and never came back! Think we might try it here??? Maybe henri will fall for it again?:D
 
byn63 said:
r
.....
she tossed a nickel into a round room and told him to go find it!
....
Click to expand...

What does this mean? Is this computer jargon? Is it like sending an apprentice to find a left-handed monkey wrench? Or what?
 
Bob001 said:
What does this mean? Is this computer jargon? Is it like sending an apprentice to find a left-handed monkey wrench? Or what?
Click to expand...

sorry it should have said she told henri/albie/artie that she'd tossed a nickel into the corner of a round room and sent him to find it.......he never came back to that board.....
 
Interesting Excerpts

Some of my favorite excerpts from Daniel Kornstein's closing arguments at the 1987 MacDonald VS McGinniss civil trial.

In 1974, he's in front of the grand jury, they ask him, "Did you ever have a polygraph examination in April 1970?" Remember he'd had two, John Reid and Cleve Backster. And his answer was no. That's what he told the grand jury. He lied to the grand jury.

Then here in the courtroom he says, "Well, the Baxter one I thought was incomplete and the John Reid one I just forgot about that." Now how many polygraphs has he had in his life that he could forget about a polygraph when asked by the grand jury? You can't believe that. He was trying to sell the grand jury the Brooklyn Bridge.

He says Wambaugh offered him $200,000 or $300,000. Wambaugh says that's crazy, that never happened, pure fantasy. Who do you think's lying? Then the promise to Joe that he would cooperate and give him access to everybody. Doesn't give him access to Baxter. You know why.

Every time he said on the stand, "I don't recall--remember how many times that happened? I asked him things that were in transcripts, sworn testimony, simple questions. Every time it got a little bit too close to the bone, every time it got a little bit too uncomfortable, he retreated into the phrase, "I don't recall, I don't recall." Do you believe that?

How evasive does a person have to be on the stand? How many countless lies does he have to tell before he loses credibility? We could talk for hours about the deception within his marriage. We know what that was about.

Out of a 700-page book, look at how much went unchallenged. The central theme of the book that was not challenged was the murder and his guilt in it. And look at the kinds of challenges he made. Remember, it's his burden of proof to prove that they were false.

And you have to separate fact from opinion, remembering also that once a subject is shown to be a liar, every expert testified that you don't have an obligation to confront him with the contrary version because it's your right as a writer to make your own conclusions.

We have MacDonald's attitude towards amphetamines. He says on the tape, "I could understand taking some amphetamines, after all, they weren't so bad, just to stay up and party a little bit." He talks about having taken them previously. And denial is one of the characteristics of a drug abuser.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
JTF said:
He says Wambaugh offered him $200,000 or $300,000. Wambaugh says that's crazy, that never happened, pure fantasy. Who do you think's lying? Then the promise to Joe that he would cooperate and give him access to everybody. Doesn't give him access to Baxter. You know why.
Click to expand...

Wait, what? Wambaugh offered "him" (MacDonald?) $200,000 or $300,000 for...what? Pre payment for participation in a proposed book, a la Fatal Vision? A portion of the royalties?
 
Serial Liar

DG: Kornstein is referring to MacDonald's dubious assertion that Joseph Wambaugh offered him $200,000-$300,000 dollars for the exclusive right to construct a book on the case. Talks with Wambaugh were only in the preliminary stages, money was not discussed, and his 1975 letter to MacDonald soured Segal/MacDonald on working with Wambaugh. In the letter, Wambaugh told MacDonald that he would have no editorial input on a proposed book and he warned MacDonald that it was possible that he would come to the conclusion that MacDonald was guilty. Wambaugh denied inmate's claim of a financial offer being made and he testified that, in his opinion, MacDonald was a psychopath.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
Dirtbag

The following was Kornstein on Cross at the 1987 MacDonald VS McGinniss civil trial. MacDonald has no shame.

KORNSTEIN: Now, there was some testimony on your direct examination about the trip across country with Marion Stern, and Danny Stern, and Nina Stern. Remember that?

MACDONALD: Yes, I do.

KORNSTEIN: Bob Stern was Marion Stern's husband?

MACDONALD: Yes, that's true.

KORNSTEIN: And friends of yourself?

MACDONALD: Yes.

KORNSTEIN: And you had a sexual relationship with Marion Stern?

MACDONALD: I did.

KORNSTEIN: And you also had a sexual relatioship with her daughter Robin? Her 22-year-old daughter?

MACDONALD: Yes, that's true.

KORNSTEIN: Did you feel any sense of deception against your friend Bob Stern?

MACDONALD: Yes, I think I did.

KORNSTEIN: And did you feel any sense of deception against your friend in medical school whose wife you had a relatioship with?

MACDONALD: I'm not sure I thought of it at the time, unfortunately, but in retrospect, yes.

Three months prior to telling Freddy Kassab that he had tracked down and killed one of the hippie home invaders, MacDonald told Bob Stern this exact same fairy tale.

Danny Stern was the unnamed 10-year-old boy in Fatal Vision who processed with Joe McGinniss that MacDonald threatened to crush his head against the dock. McGinniss interviewed Danny when he was attending college and Danny told McGinniss that the rage in MacDonald's eyes was something he would never forget.

In addition to bedding Marion Stern, Robin Stern, and the wife of a friend in medical school, MacDonald had anywhere from 8-15 sexual relationships during his marriage to Colette. One of his conquests took place during the Article 32 hearings and was in earshot of where the Kassabs were housed.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
JTF said:
DG: Kornstein is referring to MacDonald's dubious assertion that Joseph Wambaugh offered him $200,000-$300,000 dollars for the exclusive right to construct a book on the case. Talks with Wambaugh were only in the preliminary stages, money was not discussed, and his 1975 letter to MacDonald soured Segal/MacDonald on working with Wambaugh. In the letter, Wambaugh told MacDonald that he would have no editorial input on a proposed book and he warned MacDonald that it was possible that he would come to the conclusion that MacDonald was guilty. Wambaugh denied inmate's claim of a financial offer being made and he testified that, in his opinion, MacDonald was a psychopath.

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

Dubious is right, as well as being an accusation completely lacking in logic. Wambaugh had no motivation to pay MacDonald any sum prior to writing the book MacDonald proposed.

One is left wondering how MacDonald managed to graduate from high school, much less medical school. You could drive a cargo jet through the holes in his reasoning.
 
Serial Fabricator

MacDonald's special brand of b.s. was at its apex during the 4/6/70 CID interview. When asked by CID investigators why he didn't go to his neighbors for help, he countered by describing one of his female neighbors as being a Peeping Tom and that he didn't know the remaining neighbors that well.

As Freddy Kassab pointed out in his notes, how well does one have to know his neighbors when his entire family has been slaughtered? In addition, MacDonald knew his neighbors well enough to invite them over for a Christmas party.

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

Back
Top Bottom