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 15th June 2017, 05:11 PM   #2921
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 746
History Repeats Itself

Considering that the landlord of MacFantasy Island has ignored several challenges to present a single piece of SOURCED evidence of hippie home invaders, his reference to the importance of evidence in this case is laughable.

http://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 June 2017, 08:06 AM   #2922
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,575
The point is that there is no evidence that Jeff MacDonald did it, and there is strong circumstantial evidence that Helena Stoeckley and Greg Mitchell and Mazerolle, and others were involved, but never properly or thoroughly investigated by the Army CID, or by the FBI. The matter was thoroughly investigated at the Article 32 proceedings in 1970 which came to a right judgment, and was profound and unbiased, and fair and just by Colonel Rock:

Quote:
REASONING FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Rationale for Recommendation Number One

(General) The rationale for recommendation number one is based on two major lines of inquiry; first on analysis of the sworn testimony of the accused and evidence to support his version of the events on the night of 16-17 February and, secondly, an analysis of the government's evidence to refute his statements and testimony. A careful examination was made of the government's charges and its theory of how the crimes were committed as enunciated in the closing argument.

B. Analysis of the Accused's Case

In summary the accused states that four (or possibly more) unidentified assailants attacked him when he awoke on the couch in the living room of his apartment to the sounds of screaming by his wife (Colette) and cries for help from both Colette and the oldest daughter (Kimberly). During a short lived struggle with the assailants he received numerous blows, the most significant being a hit on the head and a hard punch (knife wound) to the chest. He fell into the hallway and apparently was unconscious for an unknown period of time. Upon regaining consciousness he attempted, on several occasions, to resuscitate the members of his family and telephoned for assistance.
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 June 2017, 08:51 AM   #2923
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 461
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The point is that there is no evidence that Jeff MacDonald did it,
NO henri, there is STRONG EVIDENCE THAT INMATE MURDERED HIS FAMILY. IN FACT, AS YOU HAVE BEEN TOLD TIME AND TIME AGAIN EVERY SINGLED SOURCED PIECE OF EVIDENCE POINTS DIRECTLY AT INMATE AS THE SOLE MURDERER. PERIOD. Just because you don't LIKE that fact doesn't make it any less true.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
and there is strong circumstantial evidence that Helena Stoeckley and Greg Mitchell and Mazerolle, and others were involved,
There is not a single piece of evidence that points to either Greg or Helena as being involved. IN FACT there is plenty of circumstantial and physical evidence to show that they WERE NOT INVOLVED.

There is no evidence of any kind that Allen M was involved BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN PROVEN BEYOND ALL DOUBT THAT HE WAS IN JAIL THE NIGHT OF THE MURDERS AND COULD NOT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED. PERIOD. Again, you have been told this, shown evidence of this, and your continued refusal to accept FACTS is beyond ignorant. SHOW US SOME SOURCED EVIDENCE FOR YOUR COMMENTS. Oh, that is right, you cannot because none exists!

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
but never properly or thoroughly investigated by the Army CID, or by the FBI.
I call BS in a loud and resonating manner. The Army CID conducted a very thorough investigation and then an even longer REINVESTIGATION. Again just because you repeat an untruth does not make the FACTS change. The FBI investigated after the 2 year reinvestigation and and with all this the prosecution was able to present over 1,100 pieces of evidence via 28 witnesses at trial. Inmate was convicted and his conviction has stood through every single machination he and his lawyers have attempted. He is guilty.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The matter was thoroughly investigated at the Article 32 proceedings in 1970
No, actually a HUGE portion of the evidence had yet to be analyzed by the time the Article 32 took place. The re-investigation by Army CID and then FBI took place after the Article 32. Due to the Provost Marshall rushing to arrest inmate the investigators didn't have sufficient time to fully complete the analysis.

Despite Bernie Segal using the Article 32 as if it were a trial, it was not/is not a trial. It was the UCMJ version of a Grand Jury hearing.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
which came to a right judgment, and was profound and unbiased, and fair and just by Colonel Rock:
Col Rock was not authorized to make a "judgement" and he was nothing more than an Infantry Officer, totally untrained in legal work and unaware of what he was doing. His "fair and just" decisions were not so fair or just but it is irrelevant because the base Commander was ultimately the one who had the decision role. The Commander found that there was INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE and dismissed the case BUT THAT IS NOT THE SAME THING AS FINDING INMATE NOT GUILTY. In fact, the Commander is the one who set the CID to re-investigate and he authorized inmate's discharge, in part imho so that the Army could be rid of him and the problem he had become.

The DEFINITIVE judicial hearings that determined his guilt are the Civilian Grand Jury, Civilian Trial, and all the hearings and pleadings since that time. Get over it henri, and accept the FACTS. EVERY SINGLE SOURCED PIECE OF EVIDENCE POINTS DIRECTLY AT INMATE AS THE SOLE MURDERER. PERIOD.
byn63 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 June 2017, 05:12 PM   #2924
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 746
Didn't Take Long

It took a grand total of one post before the landlord of MacFantasy Island morphed back into his old self. A decade plus story consisting of conspiracy narratives, debunked claims, and a prodigious amount of true crime trolling.

http://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 19th June 2017, 11:35 AM   #2925
BStrong
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 9,824
Will this trainwreck ever come to a stop?
__________________
"On the issue of immigration, our policy should not be informed by our collective outrage about one man's conduct." - California Attorney General Kamala Harris.

"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.
BStrong is online now   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 19th June 2017, 12:50 PM   #2926
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,235
Not until the fringe resets stop, and they are at about 1 per page of this thread.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker is online now   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 20th June 2017, 01:50 AM   #2927
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,575
You don't make it up and you assume nothing and you don't disregard leads and suspects and you don't jump to conclusions.
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 20th June 2017, 03:33 AM   #2928
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 461
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
You don't make it up and you assume nothing and you don't disregard leads and suspects and you don't jump to conclusions.
roflmao! NO henri, WE don't make things up and we DO NOT assume anything. Investigators followed EVERY LEAD no matter how lame or ridiculous it appeared INCLUDING verifying that EVERY SINGLE SUSPECT had an alibi (i.e. Allen M who had the BEST ALIBI SINCE HE WAS IN JAIL AND THEREFORE COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED PERIOD.) In the case of Greg and Helena, they may not have had an iron clad alibi but since absolutely no trace of either of them was found at the crime scene (no fingerprints, no footprints, no hairs, no fibers, and NO DNA) they were eliminated as viable suspects.

Jumping to conclusions is YOUR territory. YOU do it every time you post some nonsensical rant or red herring up to and INCLUDING disproven claims. It is long past time that you ACCEPT the FACT that just because you don't like the FACTS DOES NOT REPEAT DOES NOT and once more for clarity DOES NOT make them any less true. Every single sourced piece of evidence points to inmate as the sole perp. He was tried and convicted. He is where he belongs (or as close as we can legally get him - I think he should be dead, but can't have everything) and he is not going any where.
byn63 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 20th June 2017, 05:55 AM   #2929
BStrong
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 9,824
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
You don't make it up and you assume nothing and you don't disregard leads and suspects and you don't jump to conclusions.
And you do all of the above.
__________________
"On the issue of immigration, our policy should not be informed by our collective outrage about one man's conduct." - California Attorney General Kamala Harris.

"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.
BStrong is online now   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 21st June 2017, 04:20 PM   #2930
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 746
Three Investigations

The landlord of MacFantasy Island has his own unique definition of the word "disregard." From 1970-1983, the CID/FBI completed three massive investigations with the CID reinvestigation going well beyond the pale in following every possible lead.

Despite the landlord of MacFantasy Island's decade plus case of sour grapes, the CID interviewed 699 people and followed leads in 32 states. This is simply a case of MacDonald advocates taking issue with the conclusions drawn by CID investigators without addressing the data collected in this 3 year investigation.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com/ht...stigation.html
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 23rd June 2017, 02:29 AM   #2931
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,575
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
The landlord of MacFantasy Island has his own unique definition of the word "disregard." From 1970-1983, the CID/FBI completed three massive investigations with the CID reinvestigation going well beyond the pale in following every possible lead.

Despite the landlord of MacFantasy Island's decade plus case of sour grapes, the CID interviewed 699 people and followed leads in 32 states. This is simply a case of MacDonald advocates taking issue with the conclusions drawn by CID investigators without addressing the data collected in this 3 year investigation.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com/ht...stigation.html
There was never any new evidence discovered by the CID/FBI in the "massive investigations" between 1970-1983, apart from a lot of bollocks like a urine stain was retested after ninety weeks, which is scientifically impossible. I suppose you could mention the "conceptually unsound" FBI pajama folding experiment. The only new evidence, and withholding of evidence, was discovered by MacDonald lawyers, which biased judge Dupree then in his 'clearly erroneous' way said would not make any difference to a different jury at the 1992 appeal.

There is a difference between evidence and opinions which people on that biased yuku MacDonald forum don't seem to understand. A court must take into consideration nothing but the evidence in the case before it, and witnesses other than experts must not be allowed to give their opinions, but must speak only as to facts.
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 23rd June 2017, 04:43 AM   #2932
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 461
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There was never any new evidence discovered by the CID/FBI in the "massive investigations" between 1970-1983,
The reinvestigation was not to discover NEW evidence. HOWEVER, it did indeed give the CID and the FBI plenty of time to follow up on EVERY LEAD no matter HOW RIDICULOUS it may have been. Also, since the trial did not take place until AFTER the reinvestigations inmate was still a free "presumed innocent" man. Due to the fact that the Provost Marshall jumped the gun in arresting inmate the Govt was forced to proceed with the Article 32 without having had the opportunity to analyze all the evidence collected. During the reinvestigation the evidence that was untested at the time of the Article 32 was completed. THE FACT IS THAT EVERY SINGLE SOURCED PIECE OF EVIDENCE POINTS AT INMATE AS THE SOLE MURDERER. I know you don't like that FACT but it doesn't make it any less true.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
apart from a lot of bollocks like a urine stain was retested after ninety weeks, which is scientifically impossible.
First it is not bollocks, second lots of leads were followed, lots of interviews were conducted, lots of alibis were checked, lots of "suspects" were considered, and hundreds of pieces of evidence were analyzed.

THIRD, the urine stain was tested and although degraded they were able to get SOME blood type information. The information they did gather eliminates Kristy as the donor of the stain. IT IS MEDICALLY/SCIENTIFICALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR her to have made the urine stain.

Here is a simplified scientific FACT for you:

There are 4 basic human blood groups A, B, AB, and O. Each type has antigens and some also have antibodies. FACT:

Type A blood contains Antigen A and AntiB antibodies
Type B blood contains Antigen B and AntiA antibodies
Type AB blood contains Antigen A and Antigen B and no antibodies
Type O blood contains Antigen H and AntiA and AntiB antibodies.

The urine stain was tested and they found Antigen A. Thus ONLY COLETTE OR KIMMIE COULD HAVE MADE THE URINE STAIN. It was fresh. Colette's clothing/body showed no signs of her having urinated BUT Kimmie's panties and nightgown both showed that she had urinated. FACT henri not sour grapes that because you don't like something doesn't make it untrue.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I suppose you could mention the "conceptually unsound" FBI pajama folding experiment.
The pj folding "experiment" was not "conceptually unsound". Another FACT for you henri IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO FORCE A PATTERN TO EXIST. A pattern either does exist or it does not exist. IN THE CASE OF INMATE'S PJ TOP IT DOES EXIST.

Talking about 'conceptually unsound' experiments means we should be discussing the "ham on a sled" fiasco produced by the defense. It was absolutely and utterly ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The only new evidence, and withholding of evidence, was discovered by MacDonald lawyers,
first of all why do you think only "new evidence" needed to be discovered. there were over a thousand pieces of evidence that had not yet been analyzed by the time of the Article 32. That evidence was analyzed and as more and more of it was reviewed inmate was becoming more and more of a suspect.

secondly OMG you are not SERIOUSLY bringing up the nonsensical and long ago disproven "withheld evidence" are you? IT HAS LONG SINCE BEEN PROVEN that NO EVIDENCE WAS WITHHELD. This FACT does not rest solely on the outstanding, thorough, unbiased, untainted, and highly respected Judge Dupree, but also every level of the US Court System. IF ALL THE COURTS SAY NO EVIDENCE WAS WITHHELD THAN THAT IS FACT. NO EVIDENCE WAS WITHHELD.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There is a difference between evidence and opinions which people on that biased yuku MacDonald forum don't seem to understand.
roflmao! the people on the yuku forum and this forum (at least most of them) understand the difference between evidence and opinion. You are the one who doesn't seem to grasp the fact that all your premises are born of opinion and you always dismiss fact.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
A court must take into consideration nothing but the evidence in the case before it, and witnesses other than experts must not be allowed to give their opinions, but must speak only as to facts.
And that is EXACTLY what happened in this case. The prosecution presented over 1,100 pieces of evidence (FACTS) via 28 witnesses (both lay and expert). The jury convicted. FACT inmate is guilty, the Court System worked as it is supposed to do and a lying, cheating, sociopathic narcissistic murderer is in jail which is where he belongs since we are not allowed to put him under the jail and DP was not an option.
byn63 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 23rd June 2017, 06:23 AM   #2933
BStrong
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 9,824
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There was never any new evidence discovered by the CID/FBI in the "massive investigations" between 1970-1983, apart from a lot of bollocks like a urine stain was retested after ninety weeks, which is scientifically impossible. I suppose you could mention the "conceptually unsound" FBI pajama folding experiment. The only new evidence, and withholding of evidence, was discovered by MacDonald lawyers, which biased judge Dupree then in his 'clearly erroneous' way said would not make any difference to a different jury at the 1992 appeal.

There is a difference between evidence and opinions which people on that biased yuku MacDonald forum don't seem to understand. A court must take into consideration nothing but the evidence in the case before it, and witnesses other than experts must not be allowed to give their opinions, but must speak only as to facts.
It has never stopped you. It must suck out loud that you're only a majority of one.
__________________
"On the issue of immigration, our policy should not be informed by our collective outrage about one man's conduct." - California Attorney General Kamala Harris.

"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.
BStrong is online now   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 23rd June 2017, 08:42 AM   #2934
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,575
Judge Dupree and Judge Fox were in bed with the prosecution and the prosecutors were dishonest and the CID and FBI were idle and incompetent.
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 23rd June 2017, 09:00 AM   #2935
BStrong
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 9,824
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Judge Dupree and Judge Fox were in bed with the prosecution and the prosecutors were dishonest and the CID and FBI were idle and incompetent.
Even if they were all of those things, (they weren't) it wouldn't preclude the fact that your man crush murdered his family.
__________________
"On the issue of immigration, our policy should not be informed by our collective outrage about one man's conduct." - California Attorney General Kamala Harris.

"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.
BStrong is online now   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 24th June 2017, 03:17 PM   #2936
desmirelle
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 241
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
You don't make it up and you assume nothing and you don't disregard leads and suspects and you don't jump to conclusions.
We didn't make it up: Jeffrey Macdonald murdered Colette, Kim, Kris and the unborn son. All of the evidence points to him. You're just pissed because none of it points elsewhere.

YOU have ASSUMED Jeff is telling the truth when he says he didn't do it. You're wrong. Again. We looked at the facts, we made a decision on FACTS and EVIDENCE, not just "Jeffy says he didn't do it and he fed the pony so he's good guy." Which seems to be your criteria, because you've presented nothing else.

No one disregarded leads or suspects. There were no LEADS for any other SUSPECT other than (then) Captain Macdonald.

Again, you apply what YOU have done to us. We've jumped to no conclusions. Speaking for myself, Byn & JTF, we've read the transcripts (I'm saving them the trouble); it points to no one but your man crush.

I hate to tell you this, Henri, you're sweet on a bad guy. He can't even admit he did it and that there is no evidence against anyone save himself. Doesn't even qualify as a MAN in my books.

And all you can do is make libelous commentary about the people tasked with justice. REALLY SAD, HENRI. REALLY, REALLY SAD.

Last edited by desmirelle; 24th June 2017 at 03:20 PM. Reason: to add
desmirelle 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 25th June 2017, 12:42 PM   #2937
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 746
Wrong Again

The landlord of MacFantasy Island uses most of his limited cognitive resources to ignore the mass of inculpatory evidence that led to inmate's conviction. On occasion, he will simply make something up in the misguided hope that someone new to this case or a fellow true crime troll will agree with his latest concoction.

His most recent talking point is the ultimate in fantasy narratives. Despite his claims to the contrary, each successive investigation produced new data which helped to put inmate in his concrete bunker. This includes the FBI's 1971 forensic re-analysis, the mass of data collected by the CID in their reinvestigation, and the FBI's 1974 forensic re-analysis.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 25th June 2017 at 01:01 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 10th July 2017, 02:07 AM   #2938
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,575
The Jeffrey MacDonald case is a bit like Tony Blair with regard to Iraq, or even Russiagate. It was beliefs instead of facts.
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 10th July 2017, 08:01 AM   #2939
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 461
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The Jeffrey MacDonald case is a bit like Tony Blair with regard to Iraq, or even Russiagate. It was beliefs instead of facts.
Only when it comes to YOU henri; the rest of us use FACTS and our FACTS are documented and supported.
byn63 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 10th July 2017, 10:41 AM   #2940
desmirelle
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 241
We believe the facts so we're wrong?

I don't think you quite understand how justice works, Henri. It's not whether YOU believe the man is guilty, it's the ex-Green Beret (who was probably hoping the most that Mac wasn't guilty) and the other eleven jurors who decide it based upon the facts presented.
desmirelle 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 11th July 2017, 07:51 AM   #2941
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,575
The police evidence was false.
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 11th July 2017, 01:17 PM   #2942
desmirelle
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 241
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The police evidence was false.
Specifically, how?

Put up or shut up, I'm calling this bluff.
desmirelle 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 11th July 2017, 01:56 PM   #2943
BStrong
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 9,824
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The police evidence was false.
Your man crush murdered his family.

Your opinion on the subject isn't material.
__________________
"On the issue of immigration, our policy should not be informed by our collective outrage about one man's conduct." - California Attorney General Kamala Harris.

"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.
BStrong is online now   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 July 2017, 06:22 AM   #2944
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 461
roflmao! only henri would try to claim that over 1,100 pieces of evidence that was presented at trial is wrong. Also, those evidence items were only 60% of the available evidence and with the DNA results proving that the mystery hair was 100% DNA match to inmate the case NOW would be even stronger against inmate.

He is guilty and we all know he is guilty.
byn63 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 July 2017, 03:52 PM   #2945
KatieG
Rootin' Tootin' Raspberry
 
KatieG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: at the end of the Oregon Trail
Posts: 3,687
Originally Posted by byn63 View Post
roflmao! only henri would try to claim that over 1,100 pieces of evidence that was presented at trial is wrong. Also, those evidence items were only 60% of the available evidence and with the DNA results proving that the mystery hair was 100% DNA match to inmate the case NOW would be even stronger against inmate.

He is guilty and we all know he is guilty.
And he knows he's guilty. Having denied his guilt for so many years, even dangling probation under his nose couldn't make him back down. Pride goeth before destruction and a haughty spirit before a fall.
__________________
Trumps, Hiltons and Kardashians are proof there is no god and the universe hates decent people.

"I never thought leopards would eat MY face", sobs the woman who voted for Leopards Eating People's Faces Party
KatieG 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 July 2017, 04:14 PM   #2946
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 746
Consciousness Of Guilt

From the moment he ran his mouth during the 4/6/70 CID interview, inmate exhibited a "consciousness of guilt."

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com/ht..._of_guilt.html
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 July 2017, 04:40 PM   #2947
desmirelle
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 241
One of the saddest parts of this case: If you edit his conversation with the operator down when he 'called for help' - it boils down to "Some people killed some people and then he says the operator is an ******* because she wants his address so she could send appropriate help.

The intruders were "some people".....his slaughtered family were "some people"......but asking where he lived so the MPs or Civilian authorities could be called made a woman trying to help "an *******". Seriously? These are the words of a loving husband and father? Darlie Routier at least had the "somebody killed my babies..." schtick. Her kids weren't just "some people".
desmirelle 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 July 2017, 02:40 AM   #2948
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,575
Originally Posted by KatieG View Post
And he knows he's guilty. Having denied his guilt for so many years, even dangling probation under his nose couldn't make him back down. Pride goeth before destruction and a haughty spirit before a fall.
There is an interesting quote in that English Justice book published in 1932 by a solicitor which is relevant to the MacDonald case:

Quote:
Yet all serious criminal charges are tried with a jury, with the result that innocent men are sometimes convicted. How often this occurs no one can say, for Judges and Recorders, knowing what juries are, usually strain every possible point against the prosecution, and thus many guilty men are acquitted. The position would be farcical were it not for the tragedy often involved.
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 July 2017, 04:10 AM   #2949
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 461
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There is an interesting quote in that English Justice book published in 1932 by a solicitor which is relevant to the MacDonald case:
Sorry, but that quote has no relevance to inmate's case because as we all know and you do too (you just refuse to admit it) inmate is guilty. Not just guilty but guilty beyond ALL doubt. The final nail in the coffin was the "mystery hair" that even the defense said would be from the murderer and is a 100% DNA match to inmate. He is guilty.
byn63 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 July 2017, 04:13 AM   #2950
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 461
desi - you nailed it/him "some people" killed "some people" and not just the operator was a ******* remember his reason for not going to the neighbor across the street? She too was a *******......and seriously, IF my family had been attacked I wouldn't have cared a wit if a neighbor was nosey or if I "barely" knew them or any of that BS, I'd have gone screaming and banging on every damn door I could get to begging for assistance. That is what real humans with feelings would do.....
byn63 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 July 2017, 06:10 AM   #2951
Jungle Jim
Muse
 
Jungle Jim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 915
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Will this trainwreck ever come to a stop?
I think it will slow down quite a bit once the inmate is deceased.
Jungle Jim 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 July 2017, 02:00 AM   #2952
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,575
Originally Posted by byn63 View Post
Sorry, but that quote has no relevance to inmate's case because as we all know and you do too (you just refuse to admit it) inmate is guilty. Not just guilty but guilty beyond ALL doubt. The final nail in the coffin was the "mystery hair" that even the defense said would be from the murderer and is a 100% DNA match to inmate. He is guilty.
That mystery hair was unidentified until 2006. I reckon it was substituted by dishonest Murtagh and Malone at the FBI lab as a MacDonald hair for the DNA testing at the AFIP lab, despite Judge 'in bed with the prosecution' Fox previous ruling that any tampering with the forensic evidence should be videotaped. That's known technically as forensic fraud. That was to try to prevent any further MacDonald appeals. MacDonald was screwed and the prosecution never proved its case.
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 July 2017, 04:36 AM   #2953
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 461
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
That mystery hair was unidentified until 2006.
Yes, it was unidentified thus it was called the mystery hair but there is no mystery WHY it was unidentified. You have been told this before but PERHAPS this time you will try and grasp the FACTS......

the mystery hair was the distal (tip) portion of a limb hair. ONLY HEAD and PUBIC hair have enough distinguishing characteristics to be microscopically compared. any other human hair it can be determined if it is a limb or body hair and that is ALL. Now, of course DNA testing is available, the hair was tested, and it was proven to be a 100% match to inmate. period.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I reckon it was substituted by dishonest Murtagh and Malone at the FBI lab as a MacDonald hair for the DNA testing at the AFIP lab, despite Judge 'in bed with the prosecution' Fox previous ruling that any tampering with the forensic evidence should be videotaped.
What you reckon is beyond ridiculous. The hair fragment was secured with other evidence since its collection. HOW EXACTLY would Murtagh or anyone else manage to collect an exact size, type, and BLOODY limb hair from inmate without his knowledge to add it to the hair samples bound for DNA testing? Judge Fox didn't rule that any "tampering" be videotaped. Judge Fox ruled that the preparation and packing of the evidence bound for DNA testing be videotaped AND members of the defense team were authorized to be present. As far as I know the process was taped and observed. So, if the defense doesn't dismiss the FACTS why do you think YOU have a right to do so? I also, as I have noted many times find your comments about Murtagh and Judge Fox offensive. Just because you do not like the fact that they are right and you are wrong and that your man crush is guilty doesn't mean you have the right to bad mouth and make unsubstantiated and ridiculous claims about these honorable men.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
That's known technically as forensic fraud. That was to try to prevent any further inmate appeals. inmate was screwed and the prosecution never proved its case.
The prosecution proved its case back in 1979 AT TRIAL and that is why inmate is a convicted felon and in prison. There was no fraud of any kind and your comments to the contrary show a decided lack of intellect.

if inmate had not slaughtered his pregnant wife Colette, and his precious daughters Kimmie and Kristy as well as his unborn son, he would not have been "screwed". You reap what you sow and he did. Inmate has had many more appeals than he should have been allowed but the Government does not need to commit fraud or do anything illegal to keep him in prison. The decision in re: his last appeal should be confirmed any time now.
byn63 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 21st July 2017, 03:04 PM   #2954
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 746
Putting It To Bed

The following are clarifications to the repetitive claims put forth by the landlord of MacFantasy Island.

1) Brian Murtagh was last involved in the handling (e.g., transported sealed evidentiary items to Paul Stombaugh) of evidence in 1974.

2) Michael Malone was last involved in the handling (e.g., microscopic hair and fiber analysis) of evidence in 1991.

3) The defense didn't put in a request for DNA testing until 1995.

4) The FBI's packaging of evidentiary items for DNA testing was undertaken in 1999.

5) Per the order of Judge Fox, this process was photographed and videotaped.

Despite the conspiracy claims leveled by the landlord of MacFantasy Island, the documented record proves beyond ALL doubt that neither Murtagh nor Malone had access to evidentiary items post-1995 request for DNA testing. The icing on the cake comes in the form of Fred Bost's comment to me during a phone conversation in 1999. Fred expressed to me that ALL of the significant hair exhibits were being DNA tested by the AFIP.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 21st July 2017 at 03:09 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 Today, 08:17 AM   #2955
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,575
Fred Bost didn't know anything about forensic fraud by the FBI and Murtagh, or about Mazerolle's fraud documentation with regard to his incarceration in various parts of the country.
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 Today, 11:48 AM   #2956
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 746
Living In A Dream World

What does that statement even mean? This kind of conspiracy word salad speaks to the desperate measures employed by the landlord of MacFantasy Island. Not only does he speak for the now deceased Fred Bost, he takes credit for one of Bost's main talking points (e.g., massive cover-up involving the CID/FBI/DOJ).

In addition, he argues that Bost should have somehow figured out that all of Mazzerolle's court/corrections documents were forged. The landlord doesn't provide a stitch of proof as to how this was accomplished, but this is par for the course on MacFantasy Island.

He knows that he cannot dispute the timeline I constructed in my prior post, so his only option is to dip into the vague references pool. It seems that he usually stays in the shallow end for he rarely includes any corroborative data.

http://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
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 04:03 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
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.