View Single Post
Old 10th August 2018, 08:57 AM   #162
Henri McPhee
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,028
Originally Posted by byn63 View Post
The official court records/transcripts show that no Brady Violations were found. Discovery was not theoretical it was FACT.
Three hairs were found at the crime scene at strategic locations which were not MacDonald's. Murtagh then declared in 2006 that this was not significant! Judge Dupree always maintained in the MacDonald appeals that if the Brady violations had been disclosed it would not have changed the mind of an average juror. That's just a silly remark by a very bad judge. The trouble is that none of the judges at the Supreme Court have wide and practical experience of being a criminal attorney. They don't sufficiently appreciate the practical difficulties. Three of them were on MacDonald's side in about 1981/2 but he then lost by a 6/3 majority. There needs to be INVESTIGATING.

The matter is discussed in more detail at this website:

JD Editorial Comment About Jeffrey MacDonald’s Case Brian Murtagh was an Army captain in his mid-20s, when in 1971 he became involved in the investigation of the murder of Jeffrey R. MacDonald’s wife and two daughters at Ft. Bragg, North Carolina. After the Army cleared MacDonald and he left the Army, Murtagh continued investigating him. As an Army officer Murtagh assisted the US Department of Justice with the grand jury’s indictment of MacDonald in 1975. Murtagh then accepted an offer to resign from the Army and take a DOJ job assisting with MacDonald’s prosecution. Murtagh became co-counsel to lead prosecutor AUSA James Blackburn by claiming he “would assure a conviction.” Murtagh was true to his word. MacDonald was convicted in 1979 after Blackburn (with Murtagh remaining silent) failed to disclose exculpatory evidence and suborned perjury by key defense witness Helena Stoeckley. For the past 30 years Murtagh has remained the government’s point man in fighting to prevent MacDonald’s retrial by a jury that would hear the truth about Stoeckley’s participation in the murders, as well as additional testimonial and DNA evidence supporting that intruders murdered MacDonald’s wife and children ... just as he has maintained since the day of the crime. Murtagh became involved in MacDonald’s case38 years ago. The evidence supporting MacDonald’s innocence has reached the point that Murtagh’s opposition to a new trial can be interpreted as a strategy to avoid conceding MacDonald should not have been indicted ... much less imprisoned for 30 years. At what point does a prosecutor’s zeal lose legitimacy and become a “truth be damned” psychotic obsession? U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced on April 1, 2009 that “in the interests of justice” the DOJ filed a motion to dismiss the indictment and set aside former Alaska Senator Ted Stevens’ October 2008 convictions for making false financial statements. The DOJ acted in response to media stories about the federal prosecutor’s failure to disclose exculpatory evidence to Steven’s lawyers in order to ensure his conviction. Murtagh and Blackburn acted with the same “win at all costs” mentality as Stevens’ prosecutors. The evidence of MacDonald’s innocence is compelling, and AG Holder should act in “in the interests of justice” and order Murtagh and his DOJ allies to cease opposing a new trial for MacDonald, or in the alternative to move for dismissal of his indictment and to set aside his convictions.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 10th August 2018 at 09:07 AM.
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