View Single Post
Old 15th February 2019, 04:02 AM   #943
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,127
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
This makes sense to me from that MacDonald defense legal document:

Quote:
As explained in
his Opening Brief, the Government theory adopted by the panel relies
on highly illogical coincidences:
To accept the Government’s theory of guilt, one must accept that MacDonald created a story about a woman with a floppy hat being with intruders who killed his family, and that by coincidence such a woman did exist in the community on that very night, and that by coincidence that woman would then falsely confess repeatedly (both before, during, and after the 1979 trial) to being present during the murders with the murderers in a way that was entirely consistent with the story that MacDonald supposedly made up from whole cloth. In addition, one would have to accept that one of the men identified by Stoeckley as one of the killers in her many confessions, Greg Mitchell, would by coincidence himself falsely confess repeatedly to taking part in the killings, in a way that is entirely consistent with the story supposedly created by MacDonald. What are the chances of this occurring?

(Opening Brief at 35). The panel opinion does not address this point in...…
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top