ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags "A Wilderness of Error" , "Fatal Vision" , errol morris , Jeffrey MacDonald , Joe MacGinniss , murder cases

Reply
Old 12th October 2020, 01:51 PM   #1801
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,333
Attention Seekers Galore

OWC: In addition to the 6 members of the Stoeckley Seven...

1) Greg Mitchell
2) Dwight Smith
3) Allen Mazzerolle
4) Cathy Perry
5) Don Harris
6) Bruce Fowler

,,, Helena stated that Zig Zag, Janice Fowler, and several unnamed Fort Bragg soldiers also took part in the murders. As you point out, Stoeckley never mentioned Garcia in any of her confessions, ergo, the decision by MacDonald's defense team to exclude Garcia's audiotaped confession from their appellate briefs. Stating that this decades old confession is "new" evidence demonstrates that MacDonald's advocates have no shame.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 12th October 2020 at 01:55 PM.
JTF 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
Old 12th October 2020, 02:39 PM   #1802
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,709
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
OWC: In addition to the 6 members of the Stoeckley Seven...

1) Greg Mitchell
2) Dwight Smith
3) Allen Mazzerolle
4) Cathy Perry
5) Don Harris
6) Bruce Fowler

,,, Helena stated that Zig Zag, Janice Fowler, and several unnamed Fort Bragg soldiers also took part in the murders. As you point out, Stoeckley never mentioned Garcia in any of her confessions, ergo, the decision by MacDonald's defense team to exclude Garcia's audiotaped confession from their appellate briefs. Stating that this decades old confession is "new" evidence demonstrates that MacDonald's advocates have no shame.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
I agree with JTF that several strange people besides the Stoeckley seven have been named as suspects at the MacDonald murders. For one thing the identity of the black man involved was never proven. Others besides Dwight Smith have been named in the past.

Without questioning the integrity of JTF, or saying that he is making it all up, has he any hard documentary evidence that this mysterious Garcia was ever a suspect in the case, or that any MacDonald defense lawyer ever knew about him? I have certainly never heard of him before now.

It could possibly be as Hank seems to thing that mistrials and contempt of court, and withholding evidence, and perverting the course of justice, and corrupt judges, is legal in America. It could be that it's only billionaires for whom the law is fair and just. Ignorance of the law is no excuse and U.S. law could be different to English justice, rather like Nazi justice or Soviet justice. The Irish used to think the police were agents of the rich who were used to oppress the poor.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 12th October 2020 at 02:45 PM.
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
Old 12th October 2020, 03:35 PM   #1803
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Never Mind
Posts: 4,968
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I agree with JTF that several strange people besides the Stoeckley seven have been named as suspects at the MacDonald murders. For one thing the identity of the black man involved was never proven.
Despite my best efforts to educate you, you still have no clue how to avoid logical fallacies.

You are once again begging the question, where you insert into your argument the very point you need to prove. There is no physical evidence of any suspects other than MacDonald. You need to establish there was a black man in the MacDonald family home that night before you start saying the identity of the black man has never been proven.

The identity of the black man in the MacDonald home has never been proven because the existence of the black man in the MacDonald home has never been proven.

You're going at this backwards. But it occurs to me that you know this, but you're committed to arguing for MacDonald's innocence, so you use whatever rebuttal argument is handy, even as you know it's wrong, like a drowning man grasping onto anything to keep himself afloat.

Hank
__________________
I have never ”refused” to provide evidence. I provide evidence if requested to do so in a specific and relevant manner.

Hanks ”method” [of requesting evidence] is not going to [get me to] provide any evidence since it has a completely different purpose. To create the the illusion of me not providing evidence when requested to do so.
- Manifesto

Last edited by HSienzant; 12th October 2020 at 03:41 PM.
HSienzant 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
Old 12th October 2020, 08:11 PM   #1804
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,333
Dwight Smith

HANK: Much to Henri's chagrin, Dwight Smith was the only viable African-American suspect presented by MacDonald's defense team. During one of her early confessions, Stoeckley stated that the African-American suspect was named or nicknamed Zig Zag.

From 1970-1997, the MacDonald defense team considered Smith to be the prime African-American intruder suspect. Smith lived in the same apartment complex as Pat Reese, he was questioned by the FBI in 1982, and subsequently cleared as a suspect. In 1983, Smith was interviewed by Fayetteville newspaper reporters Steve Huettel and Pat Reese, and he denied any involvement in the murders. Smith called Helena Stoeckley's confessions the "craziest thing I've ever heard," and "totally insane." In 1997, author Fred Bost admitted that it was unlikely that Smith was a viable suspect. Bost based this on the fact that Smith does not match the physical descriptions of the unidentified black male intruder provided by MacDonald in 1970 and 1979.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com/html/suspects.html

Last edited by JTF; 12th October 2020 at 08:15 PM.
JTF 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
Old 13th October 2020, 12:03 AM   #1805
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,709
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
HANK: Much to Henri's chagrin, Dwight Smith was the only viable African-American suspect presented by MacDonald's defense team. During one of her early confessions, Stoeckley stated that the African-American suspect was named or nicknamed Zig Zag.

From 1970-1997, the MacDonald defense team considered Smith to be the prime African-American intruder suspect. Smith lived in the same apartment complex as Pat Reese, he was questioned by the FBI in 1982, and subsequently cleared as a suspect. In 1983, Smith was interviewed by Fayetteville newspaper reporters Steve Huettel and Pat Reese, and he denied any involvement in the murders. Smith called Helena Stoeckley's confessions the "craziest thing I've ever heard," and "totally insane." In 1997, author Fred Bost admitted that it was unlikely that Smith was a viable suspect. Bost based this on the fact that Smith does not match the physical descriptions of the unidentified black male intruder provided by MacDonald in 1970 and 1979.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com/html/suspects.html
MacDonald was convicted on manufactured evidence and by judges who were in favor of the prosecution. It was a legal Woolworths.

I remember once reading that Dwight Smith was overheard saying that he had no alibi at all for the MacDonald murders and so he was trying to get out of Fayetteville. Does JTF honestly expect that anybody is going to admit to Pat Reese that they were involved in the murders? It doesn't happen.

I hope I'm not being politically incorrect by saying this but I find many black people look similar to me and they can be difficult to identify individually. They would all have different DNA and different fingerprints.

This is part of what Madden of the FBI had to say about Dwight Smith. Madden's job was to whitewash Stoeckley and her pals so that they could not be used by MacDonald defense lawyers to help him in the Judge Dupree appeals. Madden died about the time of the 2012 hearing:

http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_ma...03_madden.html

" He noted that in 1970, he resided in an apartment complex at 1810 Fort Bragg Road, Fayetteville, North Carolina, and he is known by the nickname of "Smitty". He resided in the same apartment complex as did Pat Reese.

5. He could not recall the names or identities of any of Helena Stoeckley's friends and/or associates. He was of the opinion she resided somewhere in the Haymont area, possibly with her parents. The names of Bruce Johnny Fowler, Shelby Don Harris, Allen Patrick Mazerolle and "Wizard" meant nothing to him whatsoever. He believes he remembers the name of Gregory Howard Mitchell and thinks Mitchell was probably acquainted with Helena Stoeckley, although he could not provide any information regarding Mitchell.

6. He could not recall specifically where he was during the evening of February 16 or the early morning hours of February 17, 1970. He does remember that during the early or mid-morning hours of February 17, 1970, that Ray Davis and Cuyler Windham, SBI Agents, came to his residence and spoke with him and Pat Reese regarding the MacDonald murders. They were seeking information from Smith and Reese as to possible suspects as the SBI had a description of a group of individuals which may have participated in the MacDonald murders. To the best of Smith's recollection, he was unaware of the MacDonald murders until informed about same by Windham and Davis. Windham and Davis were obviously looking for help as to suspects as he worked closely with them with various drug users. Smith noted he did many programs of a community nature at schools and churches regarding drugs with Windham and Davis. To the best of his recollection, at the time he was contacted he could not furnish any suspects to Windham and Davis. He advised Helena Stoeckley never entered his mind as a suspect and it was his recollection that after the murders, she started wearing a brown floppy hat which was kind of a joke among the drug scene in Fayetteville, North Carolina, as it was felt she was merely wearing the hat to gain attention and a possible connection with the MacDonald murders."

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 13th October 2020 at 12:09 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
Old 13th October 2020, 08:20 AM   #1806
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Never Mind
Posts: 4,968
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
MacDonald was convicted on manufactured evidence and by judges who were in favor of the prosecution. It was a legal Woolworths.
MacDonald was convicted on actual evidence by an unbiased jury of his peers.


Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I remember once reading that Dwight Smith was overheard saying that he had no alibi at all for the MacDonald murders and so he was trying to get out of Fayetteville.
That's funny, I remember once reading that Dwight Smith was overheard saying that he had an alibi for the MacDonald murders and so he wanted to to stay in Fayetteville to establish his innocence.


Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Does JTF honestly expect that anybody is going to admit to Pat Reese that they were involved in the murders? It doesn't happen.
Hilarious. It does happen. I have two words for you:
1. Stoeckley.
2. Garcia.

Some people confess to crimes for all kinds of reasons, mostly to see their names in the news. False confessions are a real thing.
https://www.apa.org/research/action/...se-confessions
"One – there is a category of false confessions known as voluntary false confessions. These are cases, and they often happen in high-profile cases that are in the news, where people come out of the woodwork and volunteer confessions to crimes that are in the news that they didn’t commit. Kind of the poster child instance of that in history is when Charles Lindbergh’s infant son was kidnapped in 1932, 200 people volunteered confessions and all of them were false. You see that again in high-profile cases. Sometimes people volunteer confessions because they’re seeking attention. Sometimes they’re looking to actually protect somebody else who is the culprit. And sometimes it reflects some degree of delusion and it reflects on their mental health. Honestly, I don’t see the voluntary false confessions, while they happen and happen with some degree of regularity and always have, I don’t see them as a particular problem for the criminal justice system. I think it’s interesting that when somebody volunteers a confession to police — police typically react with some degree of skepticism. And they ask the question, well. And so they say you’ve committed this murder – prove it. What do you know about the crime? And if the individual who is offering to admit guilt can’t also provide details about the crime that are accurate as known to the police, then the police don’t follow that case. And so those voluntary false confessions don’t tend to enter the criminal justice system as problematic."

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I hope I'm not being politically incorrect by saying this but I find many black people look similar to me and they can be difficult to identify individually. They would all have different DNA and different fingerprints.
Who you can identify or not identify is not the issue here. Was any DNA or fingerprints of Smith found in the MacDonald house? No.


Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
This is part of what Madden of the FBI had to say about Dwight Smith.
6. He could not recall specifically where he was during the evening of February 16 or the early morning hours of February 17, 1970. "
Yes, BINGO! Think about it, if you were involved in the murder of anyone, would you not come up with an alibi and an alibi witness or two? And in that regard, you would no doubt stand out from the vast majority of people who couldn't remember what they were doing at a specific time on a Saturday a week before last. An innocent person won't have an alibi or an alibi witness, and more than likely won't even recall what they were doing on that day at that specific time.

I speak from experience. In grammar school, the police interviewed all the boys from my entire class (and maybe some other classes). I was about 12 or 13, and they asked me a series of questions. I said "I don't know" or "I don't remember" to just about all of them. And I imagine everyone else in the class had pretty much the same responses. Except the guilty party, whoever he was, and if he was in my class at all. I pretty much figure he not only stood out to the police because he had an alibi all lined up, he also had an alibi witness or two already to swear he and they were elsewhere. And he remembered exactly what he was doing on that Saturday the week before last.

Hank

PS: I still don't know what they were investigating or if they ever solved it. But I doubt if it was anything as serious as what MacDonald did.
__________________
I have never ”refused” to provide evidence. I provide evidence if requested to do so in a specific and relevant manner.

Hanks ”method” [of requesting evidence] is not going to [get me to] provide any evidence since it has a completely different purpose. To create the the illusion of me not providing evidence when requested to do so.
- Manifesto

Last edited by HSienzant; 13th October 2020 at 08:36 AM.
HSienzant 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
Old 13th October 2020, 10:26 AM   #1807
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,709
Originally Posted by HSienzant View Post
MacDonald was convicted on actual evidence by an unbiased jury of his peers.
Stoeckley and her pals were never properly investigated by the Army CID, police, or FBI or by Judge Dupree.

Personally, I find this account where the so-called fingerprint expert,Medlin, was trying to find her fingerprints while eating a cheeseburger and feeding MacDonald's cat at the same time as farcical:

http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_ma...iscussion.html

THE COURT: Thank you. How about this girl with the floppy hat on who was in that house that night, named Helena Stoeckley alias something else?

MR. SEGAL: I think that has resolved itself, Your Honor. The Government has now introduced her fingerprints in evidence and identified them through Mr. Medlin.

MR. MURTAGH: To prove they weren't found at the crime scene, Your Honor.

THE COURT: No; this had to do with statements made by them.

MR. MURTAGH: That is the motion. But Mr. Segal is saying that we have resolved it by introduction of her fingerprints. We have done no such thing. We have shown that her prints were not found at the crime scene. And what we are concerned with about in the motion is Helena Stoeckley --

THE COURT: (Interposing) With this limited search that this guy Medlin made, you --

MR. MURTAGH: Sir?

THE COURT: With that limited walkthrough that this Medlin made, you didn't find them. That is what you mean.

MR. BLACKBURN: As he was eating his cheeseburger.

THE COURT: Yes; that is right.

MR. SMITH: And feeding the cat.

MR. MURTAGH: Judge, it was MacDonald's cat. We couldn't do anything about it.
We feel that these are two issues with the Helena Stoeckley thing: one, we anticipate that the Defense is going to say that because she is apparently unavailable to them, or they haven't found her, that the statement should come in. Well, without regard to her availability or lack thereof, we think that the statements themselves, because of their inherent lack of credibility and because they are being sought to be introduced -- they are hearsay statements that are being sought to be introduced by the Defense to the truth of the matter stated. You know, she thinks she did it; therefore, the Defendant couldn't have done it -- you know.
We don't think they are admissible, Your Honor, based on the authorities cited in our motion.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 13th October 2020 at 10:29 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
Old 13th October 2020, 11:16 AM   #1808
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,333
Sounds Proper To Me

HANK: For the past 17 years, Henri has regurgitated the same talking points on several MacDonald Case discussions boards, and he has a penchant for taking shots at those who had the audacity to play a role in MacDonald having to scrub correctional center toilets. Pat Reese is one of the individuals on his hit list. Reese was an investigative reporter for the Fayetteville Observer and he was acquainted with many of the individuals who would later become suspects in the MacDonald murders. One such suspect approached Reese just two days after the murders. Helena Stoeckley told Reese that she had no recollection of her whereabouts on February 17th as a result of her excessive drug use.

Reese viewed Stoeckley as an attention-seeking drug addict and his subsequent articles on the case reflected his belief that intruders were not responsible for these horrific murders. The city editor at the Fayetteville Observer was Jim Pharr and he had a great deal of respect for Reese as a journalist. Bill Kirby of the Fayetteville Observer once said, "Before the Washington Post had Woodward and Bernstein, this newspaper had Reese and Pharr, and they gave us credibility and pride for cub reporters to ply their craft." That respect extended to national newspaper reporters as their stories echoed the sentiments of Reese.

His claim that the Stoeckley Seven "were never properly investigated," is another ongoing theme that holds no water. The CID reinvestigation (e.g., 1970-1972) team looked into the possible involvement of the Stoeckley Seven in these horrific murders. They interviewed several suspects (e.g., Stoeckley, Fowler, Mitchell), obtained hair and fingerprint samples, and had each of them take polygraph exams. None of the hair/print exemplars matched hairs/prints found at the crime scene, and both Fowler and Mitchell passed their polygraph exams. On June 1, 1972, the 10,000-page reinvestigation report was submitted to the Department of Justice. The report was authored by Peter Kearns and it recommended that Jeffrey MacDonald be prosecuted for the murder of his family. The reinvestigation report was beyond thorough as evidenced by the fact that 699 people were interviewed, leads were pursued in 32 states, and the evidence was reanalyzed by both the CID and the FBI.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
JTF 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
Old 13th October 2020, 11:38 AM   #1809
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,333
Whoops

ESSEXMAN: The date of the Free Jeffrey MacDonald Facebook post on the, ahem, "new" evidence was August 8th. Considering that WOE's August trailers contained a clip of someone putting a cassette into a tape recorder and Morris commenting on things coming to light when you least expect it... methinks that Smerling later found out that Garcia's audiotaped confession was an old and well known facet of this case. I'm assuming that is the reason why Smerling didn't include the audiotape or Morris' commentary in the series. That would explain why the FJM FB page has not provided updates on this claim and why they have removed any mention of the WOE series. The most recent posts on the FJM FB are in regards to the audacity of Freddy Kassab filing a citizens complaint against MacDonald with an accompanying claim that filing such a complaint is/was illegal. As evidenced by the fact that MacDonald was subsequently indicted by a Grand Jury, this filing was perfectly legal.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 13th October 2020 at 11:53 AM.
JTF 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
Old 13th October 2020, 12:57 PM   #1810
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,038
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post

I remember once reading that Dwight Smith was overheard saying that he had no alibi at all for the MacDonald murders and so he was trying to get out of Fayetteville. Does JTF honestly expect that anybody is going to admit to Pat Reese that they were involved in the murders? It doesn't happen.


To the contrary:

https://www.theawl.com/2014/02/will-...ease-stand-up/

On Wednesday, the identity of the Zodiac Killer was finally revealed: It was Louis Myers, only 17 when he began the killings, who confessed from his deathbed back in 2001. In 2012, the identity of the Zodiac Killer was finally revealed: It was George Russell Tucker, a pseudonym for a then-recently-diseased 91-year-old former real estate salesman from Fairfield, California. In 2009, the identity of the Zodiac Killer was finally revealed: It was Guy Ward Hendrickson, a carpenter who brought his 7-year-old along for the ride during the killings.

https://www.bustle.com/articles/1823...-was-a-strange

It's been twenty years since JonBenet Ramsey's murder captured the nation's attention, and America will get a fresh look at the case with A&E's new documentary The Killing of JonBenet: The Truth Uncovered, which premiered on Labor Day. Among the many odd aspects of the still-unsolved case is the fact that in 2006, a man confessed to killing Ramsey even though subsequent DNA evidence exonerated him. It raises a baffling question: Why did John Mark Karr confess to a crime he didn't commit?


https://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/f...ullet-head.pdf


In a cell in an Illinois prison sits a 75-year-old ex-Mafia man who says he was
the real assassin of US President John F Kennedy. James Files, who claims he
was the legendary ‘grassy knoll gunman’ of 22 November 1963, is due for
parole soon. The precise date of his release is not clear, having previously been given as January 2016 and Spring 2016, both of which are now well behind us.

Illinois Department of Corrections gives the parole date of 5 June 2016 and a
discharge date in 2019. No doubt, once he regains his liberty, Files (now
ostensibly a devout Christian) will have a lucrative old age in the limelight.
Mainstream journalists have lavished attention upon Files’ tales in a way that
they have have not done with other assassination ‘confessions’, of which there
has been no shortage.


There are two demographics that flock to notorious crimes.

Amatuer crime buffs and false confessors.

There's a good reason why LEA's always hold out a key piece of evidence during the course of an investigation.

There must be a material fact that could only be known to the actor involved to suss out false confessors.

ETA

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019...-didn-t-commit


This psychologist explains why people confess to crimes they didn’t commit

By Douglas StarrJun. 13, 2019 , 8:00 AM

At 16, Huwe Burton confessed to killing his mother. He was still in shock from discovering her body when New York City police began to interrogate him. After hours of being threatened and cajoled, he told the police what they wanted to hear. He soon recanted, knowing he was innocent and hoping the justice system would clear him.

Burton was convicted of second-degree murder in 1991 and received a sentence of 15 years to life.

After 20 years in prison, he was released on parole, but he never could shake the stigma of the conviction. Attorneys from several organizations worked for more than a decade to clear him. They produced facts that contradicted the confession and showed evidence of prosecutorial misconduct. But for the Bronx District Attorney's Office, Burton's confession outweighed all other evidence; after all, who would admit to a crime they did not commit? Finally, last summer Burton's attorneys brought in Saul Kassin, a psychologist at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York City who is one of the world's leading experts on interrogation.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus

Last edited by BStrong; 13th October 2020 at 01:10 PM.
BStrong 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
Old 13th October 2020, 02:38 PM   #1811
Pacal
Graduate Poster
 
Pacal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,091
Well it appears that despite the attempt to create false "balance" that the 5 part documentary series on Jeffrey MacDonald may simply have put one more nail in MacDonald's coffin. Also it appears that Smerling although he did try to create to some extent a false 'balance" was just too honest to not come out concluding MacDonald probably did it.

Now Morris will have to deal with not just the pushback from his distorted book but the fact that a documentary series he was heavily involved with has come up with a conclusion he doesn't like or want.

I expect more rats leaving the sinking ship.
Pacal 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
Old 13th October 2020, 03:06 PM   #1812
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Never Mind
Posts: 4,968
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post

To the contrary:

https://www.theawl.com/2014/02/will-...ease-stand-up/

On Wednesday, the identity of the Zodiac Killer was finally revealed: It was Louis Myers, only 17 when he began the killings, who confessed from his deathbed back in 2001. In 2012, the identity of the Zodiac Killer was finally revealed: It was George Russell Tucker, a pseudonym for a then-recently-diseased 91-year-old former real estate salesman from Fairfield, California. In 2009, the identity of the Zodiac Killer was finally revealed: It was Guy Ward Hendrickson, a carpenter who brought his 7-year-old along for the ride during the killings.

https://www.bustle.com/articles/1823...-was-a-strange

It's been twenty years since JonBenet Ramsey's murder captured the nation's attention, and America will get a fresh look at the case with A&E's new documentary The Killing of JonBenet: The Truth Uncovered, which premiered on Labor Day. Among the many odd aspects of the still-unsolved case is the fact that in 2006, a man confessed to killing Ramsey even though subsequent DNA evidence exonerated him. It raises a baffling question: Why did John Mark Karr confess to a crime he didn't commit?


https://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/f...ullet-head.pdf


In a cell in an Illinois prison sits a 75-year-old ex-Mafia man who says he was
the real assassin of US President John F Kennedy. James Files, who claims he
was the legendary ‘grassy knoll gunman’ of 22 November 1963, is due for
parole soon. The precise date of his release is not clear, having previously been given as January 2016 and Spring 2016, both of which are now well behind us.

Illinois Department of Corrections gives the parole date of 5 June 2016 and a
discharge date in 2019. No doubt, once he regains his liberty, Files (now
ostensibly a devout Christian) will have a lucrative old age in the limelight.
Mainstream journalists have lavished attention upon Files’ tales in a way that
they have have not done with other assassination ‘confessions’, of which there
has been no shortage.


There are two demographics that flock to notorious crimes.

Amatuer crime buffs and false confessors....
I made the same point to Henri, but like JFK conspiracy theorists, I fear Henri is just another to whom facts are like water off a duck's back. He's given no indication of changing his mind on anything, no matter how much evidence is presented to him.

Hank
__________________
I have never ”refused” to provide evidence. I provide evidence if requested to do so in a specific and relevant manner.

Hanks ”method” [of requesting evidence] is not going to [get me to] provide any evidence since it has a completely different purpose. To create the the illusion of me not providing evidence when requested to do so.
- Manifesto
HSienzant 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
Old 13th October 2020, 04:22 PM   #1813
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,333
Context

BSTRONG: In 1982, Dwight Smith was interviewed by the FBI, he denied any involvement in the murders, and the agents asked him about his whereabouts on 2/17/70. Henri's penchant for ignoring context is exemplified by his purposeful exclusion of the fact that Smith was first asked this question 12 years after the murders. He then gives a hand wave to the fact that on 2/19/70, Helena Stoeckley told Fayetteville Observer reporter Pat Reese, that she had no memory of her whereabouts on 2/17/70. He then gives credence to all of her subsequent confessions, but ignores the fact that the story she gave Reese in 1970, mirrors the story she gave to jurors at the 1979 trial.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 13th October 2020 at 04:27 PM.
JTF 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
Old 13th October 2020, 11:24 PM   #1814
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,709
How much is this Smerling being paid by Murtagh for his ant-MacDonald propaganda? Just because that former drug addict journalist Pat Reese accuses you of murder does not make it so. Front-line police officers like Detective Beasley and Gaddis and the former senior FBI man Gunderson were fully convinced Helena Stoeckley was as guilty as hell.

I fully appreciate the problems of confessions. There was that case a few years ago of a murdered little girl called Riley Fox from, I think Wilmington, Illinois. The police interrogated her father for several hours and then promised him he could go home if he confessed. The father was imprisoned then for a year or two until DNA results came which proved another man did it who was subsequently imprisoned for the crime himself.

I still find this supposed prison audiotape confession by Garcia interesting information unless Murtagh has gone and 'lost' it by now. There were at least twelve out of court confessions by Helena Stoeckley which Judge Dupree never allowed the jury to hear on the spurious grounds that she was supposed to be a poor demented creature and he was in bed with the prosecution. Why not let the jury decide for themselves? Dupree was supported in this by Judge Fox and the 4th Circuit judges and even most of the Supreme Court, and most of the Press and TV.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 14th October 2020 at 12:16 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
Old 13th October 2020, 11:43 PM   #1815
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,709
That hair in Colette's left hand was controversial right from the start. CID agent Ivory seemed to be the senior officer in charge of the investigation: He was very inexperienced aged about 28 and some say he was involved in the drugs trade himself. He appeared at that 2012 hearing, though no transcript of it seems to be available. Some say he seems to have gone a bit deaf over the years. He decided MacDonald did it right from the start and his interview with Helena Stoeckley was an absolute farce:

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.c...a32-ivory.html

QUESTIONS BY ATTORNEY EISMAN:
Q Have you had occasion to make any affidavit as to any physical evidence which you wish to obtain at this time?
A (Affirmative nod.)
Q What was this affidavit pertaining to?
A Hair samples.
Q Hair samples from whom?
A Captain MacDonald.
Q What did you want to take hair samples for?
A For comparison.
Q With what?
A With a yet unknown hair.
Q Where was that hair found?
A In the hand of Colette.
Q Can you tell which hand?
A The left hand.
Q When was the hair found in the hand of Colette? Are you saying in the hand or in the area?
A In the hand.
Q When was this hair found inside of the hand of Colette MacDonald?
A At the morgue.
Q Is there any reason why there was some type of delay of something like two and a half months before the Criminal Investigation Division decided they wanted hair samples from Captain MacDonald?
A No. You have got the laboratory report back, all known hair samples, Colette and the children, and we exhausted all those samples and it is still an unknown hair.
Q Where was it found, clinched in the hand, or under the fingernails?
A I can say in the hand.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 13th October 2020 at 11:49 PM.
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
Old 14th October 2020, 02:58 AM   #1816
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,709
Ivory's 'fierce' interrogation of Helena Stoeckley was mentioned at the Article 32 proceedings in 1970. It would be funny if it wasn't so serious. There was one witness to what happened that night who had a rifle pointed at her window from a car then, never to be heard of again:

Ivory being cross-examined by Segal at the Article 32 in 1970:

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.c...a32-ivory.html

Q Did she tell you what is the last thing she can remember doing prior to 4 a.m. on February 17th?
A Yes, leaving the house she was living in alone, and driving in the car, just driving aimlessly, she said.
Q Did she have any idea about what time it was she left the house?
A Sometime -- midnight or after.
Q Did she indicate how she fixed the time when she left the house?
A No, just knew in her mind that it was midnight or after.
Q You mean she knew in her mind or that's all she chose to tell?
A Well, that's what she told me.
Q Did you ask for the description of the owner of that blue Mustang she was driving?
A Yes, I did.
Q And what, if anything, did she tell you in that regard?
A He was a white male, former enlisted man in the Army, and she couldn't go into more specific details, other than the physical description.
Q Did you ask her any questions about specific identification points?
A I asked her to describe the man to me as best she could, and she said he was twenty or under and a white male, dark hair.
Q Did you ask her any other questions in regard to the identification of that person, or the description of that person?
A That's all she could furnish me, in any way of a description.
Q But did you ask her any specific points of identification?
A Yes, sir, I asked her to describe any facial features, et cetera.
Q Is it fair to say that's the only type of question you put to her?
A Yes, she just could give me a general description.
Q When you say she could just give you, you mean she could or that's all she chose to give you?
A I couldn't read her mind. That's what she gave me.
Q How about her manner of demeanor? Did she strike you as being frank, candid and open?
A Yes, she struck me as being frank.
Q Candid and open. Is that right?
A Right.
Q And you though a person who did not know the names of the persons she lived with as being frank, candid and open?
A Yes.
Q And you thought that her inability to tell you the last name of the owner of the automobile that she used for the evening was also frank, candid and open?
A Yes.
Q And you thought that her telling you that she could not remember where she was for approximately four hours, because she was smoking marijuana is a frank, candid and open answer?
A That's the answer she gave me, and I couldn't get anything else.
Q Well, I appreciate your difficulty in the interview, Mr. Ivory. I don't underestimate that for a moment. What I am asking you is did you honestly take that as a frank, candid and open answer that she said because of marijuana she was not able to remember her whereabouts?
A I could not -- I could only take it as face value as what she gave me.
Q Well, the face value of that statement is a lie, since you know that marijuana doesn't have that effect on persons.
A I've never tried it. I do not know.
Q Well, I didn't suggest that. I said based upon your experience as an investigator, I am sure you've talked with physicians in regard to marijuana, the fact you are aware, I am sure, that marijuana does not -- is not reported in any way to effect the memory processes.
A As far as I know.
Q So knowing that, at least, you still felt that she was being frank, candid and open when she told you that she couldn't remember her whereabouts when she was smoking marijuana?
A What else could I say?
Q You could say that she was a liar and ask her to be more specific about what she was doing and where she was.
A I possibly could have.
Q But you did not, sir?
A No, I did not.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 14th October 2020 at 03:01 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
Old 14th October 2020, 08:10 AM   #1817
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,333
Open And Shut

Getting back to the basics...

- The CID's massive reinvestigation led to a 1975 Grand Jury indictment of Jeffrey MacDonald on 3 counts of murder.

- The prosecution presented over 1,000 evidentiary items at the 1979 trial.

- This included blood, hair, fiber, bloody footprint, fabric damage, and bloody fabric and non-fabric impression evidence.

- The jury took less than 7 hours to come forth with a guilty verdict.

- Analysis of the physical evidence by the CID/FBI/AFIP led to the uniform conclusion that not one of the evidentiary exhibits were definitively sourced to a known intruder suspect.

- MacDonald was given more chances (e.g., 8 chances) to obtain a new trial than any convicted murderer in history.

- MacDonald's attempts (e.g., 1984-1985, 1989-1992, 1995-1997, 2007, 2012-2014, 2018-2019) at obtaining a new trial were unsuccessful.

- MacDonald's only option to go before an appellate court for the 9th time is to present new evidence that has not been previously litigated.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 14th October 2020 at 08:22 AM.
JTF 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
Old 14th October 2020, 09:34 AM   #1818
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,709
I think MacDonald did make a remark once that Congress could be a last resort to free him seeing as the Supreme Court is not up to the job. The American Press is not much help.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 14th October 2020 at 09:36 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
Old 14th October 2020, 10:13 AM   #1819
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,709
There is an interesting affidavit from that FBI man Madden on the internet about Mrs Garcia. Perhaps she had a son who knew Cathy Perry and Helena Stoeckley? Cathy Perry,, now deceased, was told by her parents to categorically deny everything so that's as far as that line of inquiry went:

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.c...984-07-12.html

"It was obvious to Nance that Investigator Ivory was not impressed by any of the items that he had turned over and it was Mr. Nance's opinion that Ivory had a preconceived idea of the MacDonald case and that it was Ivory's opinion that Dr. MacDonald was guilty."

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 14th October 2020 at 10:15 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
Old 14th October 2020, 12:55 PM   #1820
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,333
No Connection

HENRI: I should just let your disjointed case narratives die on the vine, but there is no connection between Betty Garcia and the individual who confessed on audiotape that he was present at the crime scene. In an attempt to be completely transparent, Betty contacted me (e.g., 2010 or 2011) with questions about the case and she processed her experiences with Cathy Perry. She made no mention of having a son or relative that confessed to being present and/or taking part in the MacDonald murders. Cathy Perry was an acquaintance of Stoeckley's, but Stoeckley did not implicate her in the murders until the early 1980's. In 1971, CID investigators Mike Pickering and Jack Bennett interviewed Perry in Florida and she denied any involvement in the murders. The CID also obtained head hair and fingerprint exemplars from Perry, and no match was found at the crime scene.

In 1971, Perry was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, and she had a history of severe drug use. In 1984, Perry called the FBI and stated that she wanted to confess to being involved in the MacDonald murders. Perry's confession was a bizarre tale with no connection to the facts of this case. Perry claimed that she was picked up off the streets by a group of unknown individuals who recruited her into partaking in a home invasion. Perry states that the group entered through the front door of the MacDonald residence, that she went upstairs to kill one of the two MacDonald boys, and that Jeffrey MacDonald was subdued in the living room with narcotics. Perry added that one of the white male intruders was dark-skinned and that she killed Colette by stabbing her in the legs and stomach. Perry recanted this confession later that same year.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 14th October 2020 at 12:58 PM.
JTF 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
Old 15th October 2020, 08:46 AM   #1821
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,709
I can't quite see why Gwyka, or Christina as she is sometimes known, still tries to defend Helena Stoeckley on internet forums. Helena's own brother and mother thought she was as guilty as hell, as well as Helena's lawyer, Leonard, who has been quoted as saying MacDonald was screwed. It could be that women are unreliable in these sort of cases and they don't care when innocent people get convicted. There needs to be a careful investigation. There is a bit about the matter at this website:

https://www.bustle.com/entertainment...macdonald-case

"According to the Washington Post, Stoeckley died in 1983 from cirrhosis, a liver disease linked to overconsumption of alcohol. She was 32. Afterward, her brother claimed to ABC News that Stoeckley again confessed to being in MacDonald's house on the night of the murders while on her death bed."

There is a bit about all this in that old law book English Justice published in 1932:

"The absolute confidence in police evidence displayed by magistrates is by no means shared by High Court and County Court judges, In view of the temptations to which the police are subjected it is dangerous to put them in a position in which their uncorroborated evidence will make a conviction certain. We have an object lesson in the United States of what results from unpopular laws enforced by a corrupt police before political benches. To suppose that evils which exist elsewhere never happen in this country is a fallacy to which Englishmen are particularly prone."

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 15th October 2020 at 09:03 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
Old 15th October 2020, 09:32 AM   #1822
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,038
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I can't quite see why Gwyka, or Christina as she is sometimes known, still tries to defend Helena Stoeckley on internet forums. ."
Oh! The irony! It burns!
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong 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
Old 15th October 2020, 05:27 PM   #1823
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,333
It's Not One Thing, It's Everything

Today's decision by the California Supreme Court to have a trial judge examine the Scott Peterson trial/case is a reminder of the absurd nature of the appellate system as it applies to the Jeffrey MacDonald Case.

FORENSIC EVIDENCE: The totality of the prosecution's forensics presentation at the Scott Peterson trial included 2 hairs found in a pair of needle nosed pliers that matched the DNA profile of Laci Peterson and cement impressions found in Scott Peterson's bayside storage unit. That's it. The prosecution at the MacDonald trial introduced over 1,000 inculpatory evidentiary items (e.g., blood, hair, fiber, bloody footprint, bloody fabric and non-fabric impression evidence), and in 2006, the release of inculpatory DNA test results. Despite the scant amount of evidence linking Peterson to the murder of his wife, today's decision by the California Supreme Court is Peterson's 2nd chance at a new trial whereas MacDonald has received 8 chances at a new trial.

CONSCIOUSNESS OF GUILT AND OTHER STUFF: A list of Scott Peterson's scumbaggery and COG.

- Cheating on his wife with Amber Frey.

- Purchasing a porn channel after his wife goes missing.

- Inquiring into selling his home after his wife goes missing.

- During a community gathering for his missing wife, Peterson is speaking with Frey on the phone and stating that he was calling her from Paris France.

- Refusing to take a polygraph exam.

- The bodies of Laci Peterson and her unborn child wash ashore in the same location where her husband claims he was fishing on the morning she went missing.

MacDonald took this nonsense to another level.

- MacDonald flunks a defense funded polygraph exam in the Spring of 1970.

- MacDonald calls his father in-law and tells him that he and a group of Green Beret buddies killed one of the hippie home invaders.

- The CID reinvestigation concluded that MacDonald had at least 8 sexual affairs, but were confident that he had up to 15 affairs.

- He told Colette that he may not be present for the birth of their 3rd child with his rationale being that he would be accompanying the Fort Bragg boxing team to Russia as their assigned physician. This was a ruse concocted by MacDonald so that he could spend time with his high school girlfriend in New York.

- MacDonald visited his brother at his Fire Island residence in the summer of 1969, but denies ever meeting his four roommates. The roommates matched MacDonald's descriptions of the hippie home invaders and he was seen speaking to four people matching the descriptions at a local bar.

- During the Article 32 hearing, MacDonald was having sexual relations with a woman while under house arrest and within shouting distance of where the Kassabs were housed.

- Mrs. Joan T. Kane, wife of the former commanding officer of Jeffrey MacDonald, executed a written statement wherein she discussed certain details of a telephone call she received at her residence on February 17, 1970. Mrs. Kane states that the call was between 3:20 and 3:30 in the morning. She said the caller was a male, but she could not identify his voice or recall the conversation due to her sleepy state. Mrs. Kane stated that she only met Jeffrey MacDonald on one or two occasions and, in her opinion, his lawyers used legal trickery and deception in defending him.

-The significance of this call lay in the fact that Mrs. Kane's phone number was written in pencil on the murder club and that CID investigators were convinced that MacDonald had a sexual relationship with the wife of another of his commanding officers. This led to speculation that MacDonald may have had a sexual relationship with Mrs. Kane. At the Grand Jury hearings, Victor Woerheide confronted MacDonald with the fact that the Kane's phone number was written on the club in pencil. He then asked MacDonald whether he called the Kane residence on the morning of February 17th. MacDonald denied contacting Mrs. Kane, nor was he aware that the Kane's phone number was written on the club. CID investigators did not believe that this was simply some sort of bizarre coincidence, but they did not have enough corroborative data to prove that the male caller was Jeffrey MacDonald.

Peterson was convicted of murder on this type of data, yet compared to MacDonald, he was a rank amateur. Despite the stark differences between the amount of inculpatory evidence presented in each case, there are far more voices (e.g., media, general public) shouting for MacDonald's innocence.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 15th October 2020 at 05:44 PM.
JTF 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
Old 16th October 2020, 12:10 AM   #1824
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,709
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
- He told Colette that he may not be present for the birth of their 3rd child with his rationale being that he would be accompanying the Fort Bragg boxing team to Russia as their assigned physician. This was a ruse concocted by MacDonald so that he could spend time with his high school girlfriend in New York.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
The matter of the proposed boxing trip to Russia was discussed at the August 24 1979 trial. I believe MacDonald was telling the truth about it. The JTF version is not correct.

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.c...macdonald.html

MacDonald never denied that he had little difficulty getting to know ladies intimately. That's not a crime.
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
Old 16th October 2020, 12:26 AM   #1825
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,709
Originally Posted by JTF View Post

- Mrs. Joan T. Kane, wife of the former commanding officer of Jeffrey MacDonald, executed a written statement wherein she discussed certain details of a telephone call she received at her residence on February 17, 1970. Mrs. Kane states that the call was between 3:20 and 3:30 in the morning. She said the caller was a male, but she could not identify his voice or recall the conversation due to her sleepy state. Mrs. Kane stated that she only met Jeffrey MacDonald on one or two occasions and, in her opinion, his lawyers used legal trickery and deception in defending him.

-The significance of this call lay in the fact that Mrs. Kane's phone number was written in pencil on the murder club and that CID investigators were convinced that MacDonald had a sexual relationship with the wife of another of his commanding officers. This led to speculation that MacDonald may have had a sexual relationship with Mrs. Kane. At the Grand Jury hearings, Victor Woerheide confronted MacDonald with the fact that the Kane's phone number was written on the club in pencil. He then asked MacDonald whether he called the Kane residence on the morning of February 17th. MacDonald denied contacting Mrs. Kane, nor was he aware that the Kane's phone number was written on the club. CID investigators did not believe that this was simply some sort of bizarre coincidence, but they did not have enough corroborative data to prove that the male caller was Jeffrey MacDonald.


https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

I mentioned this matter of Mrs. Kanes's phone number supposedly being on the murder weapon in 2018 on this forum. The point being that the prosecution never presented any concrete evidence that her phone number ever was on the murder weapon. I don't have the exact reference where this was said at the moment as it would take a bit of time to wade through the testimony, but this is what was said at the Grand Jury 1974/5:

This matter was briefly mentioned at the Grand Jury in about 1975:

Quote:
Q Now, I am told that somewhere on this piece of wood, there was a telephone number written, and I have been looking at it to see if I could make out the telephone number.
A Well, the CID probably destroyed it, sir.
Q And I don't find it. But -- did you ever discuss the telephone number being on this club with anyone?
A No, sir.
Q During the course of the investigation?
A Never.
Q Okay.

MR. WOERHEIDE: Miss Reporter, this is the wrapper that that club came in and I am going to put it back in here. Would you mark that as MacDonald Exhibit number 9 of this date?

(MacDONALD EXHIBIT 9, DATED 8-16-1974, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)

MR. WOERHEIDE: Can you mark this?

Q (Mr. Woerheide) All right, I'm going to ask you about a telephone number, 842-5226. Does it mean anything to you, Dr. MacDonald?
A No, sir.

MR. WOERHEIDE: Miss Reporter, would you mark this as MacDonald Exhibit number 10 of this date?

(MacDONALD EXHIBIT 10, DATED 8-16-1974, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 16th October 2020 at 12:27 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
Old 16th October 2020, 07:33 AM   #1826
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,038
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The matter of the proposed boxing trip to Russia was discussed at the August 24 1979 trial. I believe MacDonald was telling the truth about it. The JTF version is not correct.

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.c...macdonald.html

MacDonald never denied that he had little difficulty getting to know ladies intimately. That's not a crime.
Chalk up another know-nothing talking point -

https://militarylawcenter.com/milita...ense-attorney/

Members of the military are held to higher ethical standards than civilians. This is best exemplified by the fact most civilian jurisdictions do not prosecute cases of adultery, but the military does.

Prior to 1 January 2019, Adultery was defined as “sexual intercourse” between a married person and someone other than his or her spouse. However, with the abolishment of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the acceptance of diversity within the ranks of the military over the past several years to include the legal recognition of same sex marriages in the military, the original definition of “Adultery” was no longer effective in dealing with extramarital affairs within the military ranks. Accordingly, effective 1 January 2019, the Military Justice Act replaced the offense of “Adultery” with the offense “Extramarital Sexual Conduct.”


Your mancrush could have had his military career ended over his inability to keep it in his pants.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong 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
Old 16th October 2020, 09:31 AM   #1827
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,333
Colonel Soft

BSTRONG: In terms of decision-making, one has to question the motivations and competence of Colonel Rock at the Article 32 hearing. MacDonald admitted to having sexual relations with several women outside of his marriage at the Article 32 hearing, but Rock gave that behavior a big hand wave. Rock also didn't understand or care about the inculpatory nature of the evidence collected by the CID. The subsequent CID reinvestigation determined that MacDonald vastly undersold the number of women he slept with during his marriage to Colette. Newspaper reporter Bob Keeler told Janet Malcolm that MacDonald's cheating behaviors were so frequent that, "Jeff's penis should be in the Smithsonian."

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
JTF 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
Old 16th October 2020, 09:44 AM   #1828
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,709
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Your mancrush could have had his military career ended over his inability to keep it in his pants.
You may be correct about adultery with regard to military law in America. It seems a bit strange to me and not good strategy for the American deputy commander in Afghanistan to lose his job there because of adultery. No wonder America is losing there.

With regard to MacDonald his first Colonel, Colonel Kingston, spoke most highly of him at the Article 32 proceedings in 1970 and so did Kingston's wife and daughter. The two families were quite friendly at the time and they used to visit each other. Then there was some sort of regimental reorganization and his new Colonel was Colonel Kane. It strikes me that Colonel Kane was not at all friendly with MacDonald or sympathetic about rumors with his wife or about the MacDonald murders. The worst that could have happened to MacDonald then was some sort of court-martial and then to be dismissed from the service for adultery.

Journalists and TV executives sometimes commit adultery.

Murtagh has been quoted as saying he would never have been able to convict MacDonald if he had kept his mouth shut.

It must be remembered that Helena Stoeckley was a police informant. She would never have been used by Detective Beasley or by Officer Gaddis if her information was not accurate. She was also putting herself in great physical danger. Both front-line policemen described her as the best informant they ever had. She can't be disregarded and the police and judges must get it right.

There is a bit about informants in that English Justice book published in 1932 which applies to Helena Stoeckley:

"Police spies, "narks", as they are sometimes called are singularly unpleasant men. I have known a good many, none of whom was capable of telling the truth. Sometimes they are called in licensing and betting cases, but as a rule they are used for getting information. What it is that gives these men their repulsive appearance I do no know, but those I have seen would easily have been picked out in any crowd as the worst in it......"

That seems to apply to Joe McGinniss as well.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 16th October 2020 at 09:47 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
Old 16th October 2020, 09:58 AM   #1829
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,038
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
You may be correct about adultery with regard to military law in America.
SOP HM waffle snipped
There's no "may be" to it.

I'm as right about this issue as I am about conditions on the ground at Bragg.

That's the difference between someone having lived in that world and an internet crime buff with a man crush.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong 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
Old 16th October 2020, 10:05 AM   #1830
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,038
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
BSTRONG: In terms of decision-making, one has to question the motivations and competence of Colonel Rock at the Article 32 hearing. MacDonald admitted to having sexual relations with several women outside of his marriage at the Article 32 hearing, but Rock gave that behavior a big hand wave. Rock also didn't understand or care about the inculpatory nature of the evidence collected by the CID. The subsequent CID reinvestigation determined that MacDonald vastly undersold the number of women he slept with during his marriage to Colette. Newspaper reporter Bob Keeler told Janet Malcolm that MacDonald's cheating behaviors were so frequent that, "Jeff's penis should be in the Smithsonian."

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
A reasonable observer armed with the facts might come to the conclusion that JM had a real motive to murder his family. Had Colette blown the whistle on JM he would have been on the fts* out of Bragg w/ a bcd* to take with him. Not exactly the way to start his civilian career as a physician.

*FTS = First Thing Smoking
*BCD = Big Chicken Dinner, A.K.A. Bad Conduct Discharge.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong 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
Old 16th October 2020, 06:25 PM   #1831
Essexman
Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 133
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
A reasonable observer armed with the facts might come to the conclusion that JM had a real motive to murder his family. Had Colette blown the whistle on JM he would have been on the fts* out of Bragg w/ a bcd* to take with him. Not exactly the way to start his civilian career as a physician.

*FTS = First Thing Smoking
*BCD = Big Chicken Dinner, A.K.A. Bad Conduct Discharge.

I doubt it. Had he pre-planned the murder of his wife, I would then expect him to do it in such a way he would not need to dispose the children as witnesses.
Essexman 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
Old 16th October 2020, 11:44 PM   #1832
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,333
Circumstances Dictate

ESSEXMAN: I agree that MacDonald had not planned to murder his wife and children, but it was clear that he wanted to be anywhere but 544 Castle Drive. He methodically created a world that didn't include his wife, daughters, and unborn son. This included working 2 moonlighting jobs, fulfilling his army and hospital duties, having sexual relationships with at least 8 different women, and creating an elaborate ruse that would keep him away from the birth of his 3rd child and land him in the bed of his high school girlfriend.

If you add the fact that his wife knew about some of his sexual conquests, that MacDonald was taking an unknown amount of amphetamines, and that Kimmie wet his side of the master bed on 2/17/70... well, you have several motives or reasons why he became one of the most notorious family annihilators in the history of true crime. For the past 40 years, the legal system has labeled MacDonald as a mass murderer, and the main reason for that label is that he created the circumstances that dictated his heinous acts on 2/17/70.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
JTF 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
Old 17th October 2020, 12:28 AM   #1833
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,709
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
ESSEXMAN: and creating an elaborate ruse that would keep him away from the birth of his 3rd child and land him in the bed of his high school girlfriend.

If you add the fact that his wife knew about some of his sexual conquests, that MacDonald was taking an unknown amount of amphetamines, and that Kimmie wet his side of the master bed on 2/17/70... well, you have several motives or reasons why he became one of the most notorious family annihilators in the history of true crime. For the past 40 years, the legal system has labeled MacDonald as a mass murderer, and the main reason for that label is that he created the circumstances that dictated his heinous acts on 2/17/70.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
That's a load of bull from JTF. All that amphetamine business was disproved in the 1987 McGinniss breach of contract case. Which little girl wet the bed is still highly controversial and never been proved. Frankly, I believe MacDonald' version about it. Personally, I think all that stuff about sexual conquests is not relevant. Colette was pregnant and she was never proved to be unhappy about that. Any proposed boxing trip to Russia would never have prevented MacDonald from being at the birth of his next child.

There is some recent waffle about all this at this website. I think Errol Morris has the right idea and it would be a pity if he now goes and changes his mind:

https://www.eonline.com/uk/news/1191...-being-debated

"And Oscar-winning documentarian Errol Morris thought, simply, that MacDonald got screwed—by McGinniss, certainly, but also by the media in general and also quite possibly by police, prosecutors and the overall justice system.

He told CNN at the time, "We've been sold a bill of goods about this case. It's as phony as a three-dollar bill."

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 17th October 2020 at 12:31 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
Old 17th October 2020, 09:56 AM   #1834
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,709
There is an interesting criticism of Joe McGinniss and his Fatal Vision book which I think is probably true. It explains how all this talk about adultery came in to the MacDonald case from McGinniss which is something which is normally private with people like TV executives and publishers:

https://venetianvase.co.uk/2011/09/2...-fatal-vision/

" In his search for a writer to portray his case in a good light, MacDonald had written to Joseph Wambaugh requesting that the novelist would take on the job but Wambaugh declined. Ironically, Wambaugh would later get into even more trouble than McGuinniss for his true crime book Echoes in the Darkness (1987). Throughout the drafting of Fatal Vision McGinniss told MacDonald that he thought he was innocent long after he had been found guilty at trial, yet all the while he was busily writing a very different version of events. One of McGinniss’ techniques for encouraging MacDonald’s full disclosure was to condone MacDonald’s adultery by giving him multiple examples of his own infidelities. It makes you wonder how McGinniss obtained the revelations of cocaine use for his book on Palin.

Fatal Vision’s legacy is not just the controversies surrounding a single book but its negative impact on the True Crime genre. Fatal Vision and many other books have given the genre a reputation for sensationalism, bad journalism and in some cases the publication of outright lies. This is a shame because there are many brave and honest writers working in the true crime field today. It’s difficult to imagine that over forty years ago Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood (1965) raised the true crime genre or non-fiction novel as he called it to an art form. But even the reputation of that book has suffered somewhat as Capote’s questionable behaviour during its composition has come under scrutiny."

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 17th October 2020 at 09:57 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
Old 17th October 2020, 11:19 AM   #1835
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,333
Old Evidence

The MacDonald Case file is so massive that even those who have studied the case for several decades sometimes needs a little assistance. Two fellow MacDonald Case researchers supplied me with the following information on the "new" evidence that Smerling decided to keep out of WOE.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

WALLACE LLOYD RHODES JR.

Last name also appears misspelled as Rhoes.  Convicted with accomplice James Marcus Shields of first degree murder, kidnapping and robbery, offenses which occurred on Sept. 17, 1972 after the two had escaped from an Idaho jail.  On July 19, 1974, the Supreme Court of Montana reversed sentences of death on the first degree murder counts, and modified the judgments by imposing terms of life imprisonment in the Montana State Prison.  While serving time at Marion Penitentiary, Rhodes and Shields allegedly bragged to fellow inmate A. Ken Bankston about being present during the Macdonald murders.

JAMES MARCUS SHIELDS

Born 1952. First name also appears misspelled as Jones. Convicted with his accomplice, Wallace Lloyd Rhodes, of first degree murder, kidnapping and robbery, offenses which occurred on Sept. 17, 1972 after the two had escaped from an Idaho jail. On July 19, 1974, the Supreme Court of Montana reversed sentences of death on the first degree murder counts, and modified the judgments by imposing terms of life imprisonment in the Montana State Prison. On Aug. 10, 1981, Shields escaped from prison; he was captured and on May 27, 1982 received a three-year sentence for that offense. While serving time at Marion Penitentiary, Shields and Rhodes allegedly bragged to fellow inmate A. Ken Bankston about being present during the Macdonald murders.

ALBERT KENNETH (KEN) BANKSTON (the inmate to whom RHODES and SHIELDS "confessed")

Died in prison of cancer in 1983. In early 1976, was a prisoner at Marion Penitentiary in Illinois. Allegedly heard fellow inmates James Marcus Shields and Wallace Lloyd Rhodes, Jr. brag about having been involved in the "murder," which was taken to refer to the murders of Colette, Kimberley and Kristen MacDonald.

References to all three are contained in:
Page 2
http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_ma...2_murtagh.html
Affidavit #2 of Brian Murtagh re: Availability of Evidentiary Items for Defense Examination

References to RHODES and SHIELDS
Pages 73-74 (footnotes):
http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_ma...new_trial.html
USDC: Government's Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in Response to Motion by Jeffrey MacDonald for New Trial

Page 59:
http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_ma...vol-ix_pt2.pdf
USDC: Memorandum in Support of Response of the United States to Petitioner's Motion to Add an Additional Predicate to His Previously Filed Motion for Relief Under 28 U.S.C. 2255:
Appendix Vol. IX, Part 2

Page 150:
http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_ma...aring_memo.pdf
USDC: Government's Post-Hearing Memorandum
JTF 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
Old 17th October 2020, 02:57 PM   #1836
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,709
The so-called police evidence against MacDonald is that Stombaugh only said it could be and the same with the hairs and threads. He was sleeping in his apartment when his wife and kids were murdered. There was some blood at the crime scene which could have been of different blood types. There was a urine stain which after being retested after ninety weeks could have come from the little girl Kim. Helena Stoeckley was a poor demented creature to be ignored so MacDonald is obviously guilty. Greg Mitchell was talking about horrible events in Vietnam and anybody who says otherwise has a false memory.

It's quite ludicrously unsatisfactory and biased. I can't quite see how judges and journalists can believe all that crap.
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
Old 17th October 2020, 03:14 PM   #1837
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,709
There needs to be independent judgment.
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
Old 18th October 2020, 11:14 AM   #1838
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,333
Old Evidence

The MacDonald Case file is so massive that even those who have studied the case for several decades sometimes needs a little assistance. Two fellow MacDonald Case researchers supplied me with the following information on the "new" evidence that Smerling decided to keep out of WOE.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

WALLACE LLOYD RHODES JR.

Last name also appears misspelled as Rhoes.  Convicted with accomplice James Marcus Shields of first degree murder, kidnapping and robbery, offenses which occurred on Sept. 17, 1972 after the two had escaped from an Idaho jail.  On July 19, 1974, the Supreme Court of Montana reversed sentences of death on the first degree murder counts, and modified the judgments by imposing terms of life imprisonment in the Montana State Prison.  While serving time at Marion Penitentiary, Rhodes and Shields allegedly bragged to fellow inmate A. Ken Bankston about being present during the Macdonald murders.

JAMES MARCUS SHIELDS

Born 1952. First name also appears misspelled as Jones. Convicted with his accomplice, Wallace Lloyd Rhodes, of first degree murder, kidnapping and robbery, offenses which occurred on Sept. 17, 1972 after the two had escaped from an Idaho jail. On July 19, 1974, the Supreme Court of Montana reversed sentences of death on the first degree murder counts, and modified the judgments by imposing terms of life imprisonment in the Montana State Prison. On Aug. 10, 1981, Shields escaped from prison; he was captured and on May 27, 1982 received a three-year sentence for that offense. While serving time at Marion Penitentiary, Shields and Rhodes allegedly bragged to fellow inmate A. Ken Bankston about being present during the Macdonald murders.

ALBERT KENNETH (KEN) BANKSTON (the inmate to whom RHODES and SHIELDS "confessed")

Died in prison of cancer in 1983. In early 1976, was a prisoner at Marion Penitentiary in Illinois. Allegedly heard fellow inmates James Marcus Shields and Wallace Lloyd Rhodes, Jr. brag about having been involved in the "murder," which was taken to refer to the murders of Colette, Kimberley and Kristen MacDonald.

References to all three are contained in:
Page 2
http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_ma...2_murtagh.html
Affidavit #2 of Brian Murtagh re: Availability of Evidentiary Items for Defense Examination

References to RHODES and SHIELDS
Pages 73-74 (footnotes):
http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_ma...new_trial.html
USDC: Government's Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in Response to Motion by Jeffrey MacDonald for New Trial

Page 59:
http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_ma...vol-ix_pt2.pdf
USDC: Memorandum in Support of Response of the United States to Petitioner's Motion to Add an Additional Predicate to His Previously Filed Motion for Relief Under 28 U.S.C. 2255:
Appendix Vol. IX, Part 2

Page 150:
http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_ma...aring_memo.pdf
USDC: Government's Post-Hearing Memorandum
JTF 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
Old 18th October 2020, 02:14 PM   #1839
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,333
There Ya Go

The following is from the government's post-hearing (e.g., 2012 evidentiary hearing) memo and it put a final nail in the confessor(s) coffin.

In addition, due to the relentless publicity, the case had for both Mitchell and Stoeckley a fatal attraction, which Judge Dupree noted, “Helena Stoeckley, Cathy Perry Williams, and, to a lesser extent, Greg Mitchell, were drawn to the case and have contributed to a factual charade which has allowed it to continue for more than a decade and a half [as of 1985].” 640 F.Supp. at 334. Even MacDonald’s own attorney, Brian O’Neill, acknowledged this phenomenon at the 1985 oral argument. Government counsel, in an effort to compel an election among incompatible confessions, enumerated some of the confessors, such as Neil Braswell, and prison inmates Shields and Rhodes, who had also said “I was there.” DE-136-12 at 59-60.

Judge Dupree invited O’Neill to respond, “Mr. Murtagh is correct. There is a phenomenon of 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.” Id. Stoeckley, Mitchell, and Perry, are all examples of this phenomenon, and they all have the common denominator of substance abuse.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
JTF 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
Old 18th October 2020, 04:21 PM   #1840
Pacal
Graduate Poster
 
Pacal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,091
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The so-called police evidence against MacDonald is that Stombaugh only said it could be and the same with the hairs and threads. He was sleeping in his apartment when his wife and kids were murdered. There was some blood at the crime scene which could have been of different blood types. There was a urine stain which after being retested after ninety weeks could have come from the little girl Kim. Helena Stoeckley was a poor demented creature to be ignored so MacDonald is obviously guilty. Greg Mitchell was talking about horrible events in Vietnam and anybody who says otherwise has a false memory.

It's quite ludicrously unsatisfactory and biased. I can't quite see how judges and journalists can believe all that crap.
Henri you can't help yourself can you. Actually MacDonald wasn't sleeping when his family was killed. Remember MacDonald's own story was that he was attacked and in the course of the attack on him and when he was un conscious his family was murdered. After all didn't MacDonald claim Colette was screaming about being attacked? Of course MacDonald was not asleep since he almost certainly was murdering his family.

Yes there were different blood types each one matching the blood type of each member of the family. The urine was almost certainly Kimn's.

As for Stoeckley well yes she was an utterly pathetic case. Her story, in everyone of it's different versions does NOT match MacDonald's. Do you take seriously the stuff about them going to MacDonald's to get drugs? The affair with MacDonald? Babysitting MacDonald's kids? Or Stoeckley's ever repeated, confessions, retractions, and claiming she was too stoned to know what she did that night.

As for Mitchel, like Stoeckley he managed to not leave a trace of himself in the house. And of course isn't it interesting that the weapons seemed to have all come from the house! (One we know for certain, the other's like the missing ice pick are likely from the house.)

Al sorts of people have made all sorts of claims about these murders yet somehow a bunch of deranged, high "Hippie" home invaders managed to get into the house and kill 3 people in a particularly horrid way and not leave a trace of themselves. Whatever.

The crap is MacDonald's absurd story, which from the get go makes no sense. That so many journalists and lawyers fell and continue to fall for it is hilarious.
Pacal 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
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:56 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.