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 28th December 2017, 01:59 PM   #3481
carrps
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 58
I glance at this thread off and on just out of curiosity. I always thought MacDonald was guilty, and a minor point that first had me leaning in that direction was his description of the "hippies" who supposedly had committed the murders.

It was so lame. This was how someone who had no idea of what hippies were like would fantasize about an imaginary scenario. Reminded me of an aging Bob Hope trying to riff on contemporary situations in skits in the 60s where he and other antediluvian comics would don fakety fake "Beatle wigs" and pretend to be hip.
carrps 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 28th December 2017, 02:26 PM   #3482
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 41,157
Originally Posted by carrps View Post
I glance at this thread off and on just out of curiosity. I always thought MacDonald was guilty, and a minor point that first had me leaning in that direction was his description of the "hippies" who supposedly had committed the murders.

It was so lame. This was how someone who had no idea of what hippies were like would fantasize about an imaginary scenario.
I don't think the descriptions were lame in themselves (MacDonald's complete story certainly was). Remember this was soon after the Manson murders, and he could have been describing some of that gang.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking 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 28th December 2017, 03:50 PM   #3483
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 858
Inspiration

CARRPS: One of the issues that has been completely ignored by inmate's advocates involves MacDonald's inspiration for the mythical hippie home invaders.

Law enforcement officers arrested Kenneth Barnett, Annette Cullity, Gary Burnett, and Joseph Lee in Suffolk County, New York on May 9, 1970. The Suffolk County police subsequently contacted the CID due to the fact that these four individuals matched the physical descriptions of the intruder suspects in the MacDonald murders.

CID agent Bennie Hawkins subsequently traveled to Suffolk County to discuss the case with police officials. Hawkins discovered that these four individuals had rented a house in Fire Island with Jeffrey MacDonald's brother, Jay, in the summer of 1969. Jeffrey MacDonald had visited his brother during that summer and was seen conversing with people who matched the descriptions of the New York Four at the Shortstop Bar in Long Island.

Joseph Lee was an African-American male, Gary Burnett and Kenneth Barnett were Caucasian males, and Annette Cullity was a Caucasian female. Lee was seen wearing an army field jacket and Cullity was known to wear a floppy hat and hip boots. The number of intruders, their racial make-up, and their clothing items all matched the descriptions provided by Jeffrey MacDonald. Hawkins obtained fingerprint exemplars of the New York Four and their prints did not match any of the prints found at 544 Castle Drive.

In December of 1970, Jeffrey MacDonald and his lawyer, Judge Rogers (William Rogers), went to the Suffolk County Police Department to read the May 9, 1970 arrest report. This trip occurred several months after the completion of the Article 32 hearings. Despite the New York Four matching the descriptions of the four intruders, MacDonald never publicly commented on this visit to the Suffolk County Police Department.

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 28th December 2017, 11:19 PM   #3484
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,718
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It's all trust me I'm in the FBI. It's Egyptian or Iranian justice.
First you need to prove that you actually know something about the administration of justice, as opposed to your fact-free opinions on the subject.

If that near miracle level event ever occurs (and in all probability that's about as likely as your man crush being released from prison to take over the leadership position in the National Organization of Women) I'll make a concerted effort to weigh your arguments w/o bias.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"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 29th December 2017, 09:18 AM   #3485
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,109
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
In December of 1970, Jeffrey MacDonald and his lawyer, Judge Rogers (William Rogers), went to the Suffolk County Police Department to read the May 9, 1970 arrest report. This trip occurred several months after the completion of the Article 32 hearings. Despite the New York Four matching the descriptions of the four intruders, MacDonald never publicly commented on this visit to the Suffolk County Police Department.

www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
The background to all that is that there was an unfortunate incident when Dr. MacDonald went to New York a few months before the murders to try to help out his drug addict brother Jay who was having problems. During the course of that MacDonald punched Jay's drug dealer in the face in a bar. The silly thing is that drug dealer has never been identified. Surely Jay must know his name? That drug dealer could be in the Mafia and may have known Mazerolle and Rizzo. Mazerolle was born in New York.

The thing is it has been said that anybody who punches somebody in face and who is in the Mafia is severely punished. The Army CID and CIA and Stoeckley group, if not the FBI, were mixed up with the Mafia at the time with drug smuggling from Vietnam and other countries. These 4th Circuit judges and Supreme Court Justices should no be so absurdly credulous about all this and try to get in touch with all classes, and even fight corruption. What can you do about it?

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.c...2-hawkins.html

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 29th December 2017 at 09:21 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 29th December 2017, 09:46 AM   #3486
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,109
This is Jeff MacDonald's side of the story about his brother Jay from the Grand jury in 1975. The trouble is MacDonald is not a professional criminal investigator and he probably does no have much knowledge of the law on common assault, or the activities of the Mafia. He was a bit naοve about all that:

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.c...3-gj-jmac.html

Quote:
A Okay. The implication that was gotten through a lot of other testimony that was really third-hand and fourth-hand hearsay. It was unbelievable. My brother knew a group that corresponded roughly to this group of intruders that I had seen in my house on 17 February.
Q You went to this bar?
A Yes.
Q You saw people in the bar?
A Right.
Q Now, tell us about them.
A I spoke to a couple of individuals, Caucasian males. At that point, I had absolutely no reference to this other group until a CID agent, Bennie Hawkins, walks into the Article 32 with this wild bizarre story about another group of four people, including a black male and a blonde female. But at the Shortstop Bar I was unaware of this other group..........

I had an argument in the Shortstop Bar with a couple of guys who said they knew Jay. And I had been told that the bartender was one of the guys supplying Jay with speed. So I guess I got a little pushy with them and there was a little scuffle thereon and I hit the guy or something like that. And I honestly don't -- He was a Caucasian male, brown hair. I'd say probably about six feet tall.
Q All right, you are referring to the bartender?
A I don't know if he was a bartender or not. He was sitting at the end of the bar. There was another bartender. But I was told he was a bartender. I don't know if he was a bartender at the Short -- you know. I come flying in from Puerto Rico and find my brother in a mental institution. Get him out. And I am really mad. And I went to New York City and spent about an hour talking to some people. "Where's Jay?" "Oh, he's out on the island." "I heard he had some trouble," type thing. So I got into sort of a shooting contest with this dope.
Q You say shooting contest. You were shooting off your mouth and he was shooting off your (sic) mouth.
A Yeah, I asked him --
Q There was a little pushing and shoving?
A I went up to him and I said, "Do you know Jay MacDonald?" "Yeah, I know Jay." I said, "Do you know he is in the state hospital," words to that effect. And the guy said, "Well, no, I didn't know that." I said, "Yeah, he had a bad reaction to some pills someone gave him." And he said, "Oh," or something. And I said, "Yeah." And I probably told him he was an *******. And I heard that he had given him the pills. And he said he didn't. You know, who the hell did I think I was sitting in a public bar accusing him of that. So the words got a little heated and I pushed him and he pushed me and I hit him.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 29th December 2017 at 10:04 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 29th December 2017, 06:02 PM   #3487
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 858
Gotcha

During the Article 32 hearing, the CID knew that their discovery of inmate's visit to see his brother in Fire Island had the potential to be a "gotcha" moment. Bernie Segal was so taken aback by this information that he fell over himself trying to innocently explain away this scenario. The following is an excerpt from the Article 32 hearing and includes Army attorney Clifford Somers, CID agent Bennie Hawkins, and Segal.

Somers: Can you describe this group?

Hawkins: Yes, sir, it was a group of four. There were three males and one female in the group. The one male, Negro, approximately 5-9 in height, 170 pounds in weight, black hair, brown eyes. There were two Caucasian males, one of them approximately 5-10 in height with dark brown hair, hazel eyes, of about medium build. The other Caucasian male was approximately 5-6 in height, blond hair, and blue eyes. The female approximately 5-5 to 5-6 in height, 110 pounds in weight. She had blond hair and blue eyes.

Somers: Did you obtain any information about the wearing apparel of these people?

Hawkins: Yes, sir, I did.

Somers: What was that?

Hawkins: They all dressed with the hippie type clothing. They — the colored male was seen wearing an army field jacket or fatigue shirt. The female was known to wear a floppy hat and hip boots.

Somers: Did this group you are speaking about have any connection or association with Captain MacDonald or his family?

Hawkins: They associated with Captain MacDonald's brother.

Segal: That's objected to and move to strike. There's no evidence that Captain MacDonald's brother is involved in this case in any fashion whatsoever. In fact, there's no evidence that he even has a brother, sir.

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

Last edited by JTF; 29th December 2017 at 06:08 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 29th December 2017, 07:19 PM   #3488
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 354
And the best part about post #3486 is that Henri's man crush himself admits to starting a fight with little or no provocation, based upon his perception of the situation.....Mac approached the man, Mac started getting obnoxious to him, Mac pushed first, and Mac threw the first punch.

Last edited by desmirelle; 29th December 2017 at 07:24 PM.
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 29th December 2017, 07:20 PM   #3489
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 354
double post.

Last edited by desmirelle; 29th December 2017 at 07:23 PM.
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 30th December 2017, 09:07 AM   #3490
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,109
Detective Beasley got it right. He was honest.
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 30th December 2017, 11:28 PM   #3491
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 858
Throwing Darts

When exactly did Beasley "get it right?" Was it in 70's, when Beasley ignored the Mazzerolle case file, was told to retire from the police force after causing a disturbance in a busy intersection, and/or when he assisted Ted Gunderson in stalking/manipulating Stoeckley into "confessing?" Was it in the 90's, when Beasley publicly stated his opinion that the Stoeckley Group were NOT viable suspects and/or wrote Freddy Kassab to offer his support?

The huge disparity between the 70's Beasley and the 90's Beasley begs the question...

Was Beasley being honest in one decade and dishonest in another decade or did his inorganic brain disorder make Beasley's musings irrelevant?

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 30th December 2017 at 11:35 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 31st December 2017, 04:11 AM   #3492
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,109
The MacDonald case was biased. It was a gross miscarriage of justice and a criticism of the judicial lawyers in America. There is a bit of background to Detective Beasley's involvement in the case at:

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

Quote:
10. On February 28, 1971, Beasley interviewed Stoeckley at the Holiday Inn between 2:00 and 6:00 p.m., and took her to dinner between 8:15 and 11:15 p.m. According to Beasley, Stoeckley still would not cooperate with us because she thinks that she probably was involved in the MacDonald murders as a witness of some kind. She doesn't know if she is or not and she thinks she has a mental block about her activities on the night of February 16-17, 1970, because she saw something terrible that night. The blue Mustang she drove off in on the night of February 16-17, 1970, Beasley related, belonged to Bruce Fowler, a soldier who lived at the Clark Street residence.
Beasley was an honest and astute detective and the case would have been solved if he had been in charge.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 31st December 2017 at 04:15 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 31st December 2017, 04:19 AM   #3493
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,109
More from that Mahon of the Army CID affidavit:

Quote:
On April 7, 1971, I interviewed Lieutenant Colonel (Ret.) Clarence Stoeckley, and Mrs. Helena Werele Stoeckley, at their residence at 315 Valley Road, Fayetteville, concerning their daughter Helena Werele Stoeckley. The Stoeckleys were aware of my recent trip to Nashville, with Prince Beasley. They expressed to me their concern that the police had placed Helena's life in jeopardy when they used her as a narcotics informant. Mrs. Stoeckley recalled that one man whom Helena had informed on, Allen P. Mazerolle, had said that he would kill Helena and Beasley when he got out of prison.
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 31st December 2017, 02:49 PM   #3494
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 858
Breaking News

I have some breaking news for the landlord. The MacDonald Case HAS been solved. According to several sources, a Grand Jury voted to indict Jeffrey MacDonald and a trial jury voted to convict MacDonald of three counts of murder in less than 7 hours. Less than 7 hours? I guess this case was open and shut.

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 2nd January 2018, 04:39 AM   #3495
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,109
Part of the trouble is that the Supreme Court judges have no practical knowledge of being a criminal defense lawyer. That leads to an unconscious bias if not a corrupt bias like Judge Dupree and Judge Fox.
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 2nd January 2018, 05:02 AM   #3496
Border Reiver
Philosopher
 
Border Reiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,105
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Part of the trouble is that the Supreme Court judges have no practical knowledge of being a criminal defense lawyer. That leads to an unconscious bias if not a corrupt bias like Judge Dupree and Judge Fox.
Ignoring the fact that every current USSC Justice has a broad range of both legal practice and judicial experience, you also have an unconscious and possibly corrupt bias, as you have demonstrated no practical knowledge of being a criminal defence lawyer, etc.
__________________
Questions, comments, queries, bitches, complaints, rude gestures and/or remarks?
Border Reiver 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 2nd January 2018, 06:37 AM   #3497
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 568
henri does not appear to have any practical knowledge, experience, or expertise in ANYTHING.
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 2nd January 2018, 06:43 AM   #3498
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 568
double post

Last edited by byn63; 2nd January 2018 at 08:39 AM.
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 2nd January 2018, 11:14 AM   #3499
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,718
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Part of the trouble is that the Supreme Court judges have no practical knowledge of being a criminal defense lawyer. That leads to an unconscious bias if not a corrupt bias like Judge Dupree and Judge Fox.
You might be in a position as the mayor to insist that the SC for the Isola di non fatti be comprised of former criminal defense attorneys, but the United States has no such requirement.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"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 2nd January 2018, 06:26 PM   #3500
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 858
At Every Level

The simple fact of the matter is that inmate has gotten his butt kicked at every level. The CID investigated this case not once, but twice, and both investigations concluded that inmate was the lone perp. The FBI has investigated him on several occasions and their conclusions mirror those drawn by the CID.

Not one, but two District Court judges, have concluded that inmate did not meet the burden to receive a new trial. The 4th Circuit Court has also ruled that inmate did not meet that burden and added that his evidentiary arguments were "specious." Finally, the U.S. Supreme Court has twice overturned the 4th Circuit's ruling that inmate's right to a speedy trial was violated.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 2nd January 2018 at 06:32 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 2nd January 2018, 09:47 PM   #3501
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 858
Thought Process Of A Psychopath

Jeffrey MacDonald stated he did not turn on the bedroom lights nor did he go to the neighbor's residence for help. The following is an exchange between William Ivory and Jeffrey MacDonald during a CID interview on April 6, 1970:

MacDonald: Well, I don't know — well, I really don't know if I checked the femorals on both sides of the kids, quite honestly. I probably checked here (pointing to the throat) and picked up their wrist and possibly checked the femoral, but I'm not sure. So, then I was standing in the middle — middle of the hallway after this kind of second trip, and I didn't know what to do. I kept saying to myself, you know, "What — what comes now?" And I remember I — it flashed through my mind to go next door to my idiot neighbor, but I realized that would be futile and —

Ivory: Why was that?

MacDonald: Well, our neighbors are — she's the kind of lady that sits in her window with binoculars and watches the girl across the street undress and stuff like that, you know. And she comes over and she says, "Now, don't leave your windows open because there's a lot of rapists and people around here." We were at a cocktail party one night, and — and she said that and everyone stopped. And I said to her — so I was kind of pulling her chain. So I said, "Well, how — how do you know that — that people look in windows?" I mean — you know, you see types of people and right away this woman had — so, she said, "Well, ‘cause I see her every night. The blonde across the street." And I say, "How do you see her every night?" She said, "I go in my window and watch." And I said, "Why do you do that?" And she said, I swear to God, she said, "Because," you know, "it's unatural for a girl to undress with the blinds up. And I just want to." — you know, "I just want to make sure I know what's going on in the neighborhood." But that's beside the point. So that's the type of person that — that, you know, I just — I said, "Shall I go next door or should I try to call again?" And I decided I should try to call again.

Four months later at the Article 32 hearing, MacDonald was asked why he didn't seek assistance from neighbors and he replied, "I didn't know them that well."

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 7th January 2018, 03:11 AM   #3502
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,109
The MacDonald case was a legal Woolworths and a lack of vision and it was biased.
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 7th January 2018, 03:12 AM   #3503
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,718
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The MacDonald case was a legal Woolworths and a lack of vision and it was biased.
And the conviction of your man crush stands.

Sucks to be you.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"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 7th January 2018, 05:03 PM   #3504
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 354
Originally Posted by byn63 View Post
henri does not appear to have any practical knowledge, experience, or expertise in ANYTHING.
Point of fact, byn: You are incorrect (partially). Henri's had over a decade of experience backing the guilty. (Which makes you feel sorry for the Ramsey boy, because Henri is supporting him as innocent.) His experience is in being wrong. He has posted for years that Jeffrey (aka "Family Annihilator") is innocent by posting rumors, theories proven wrong, and seriously erroneous items that simple research show to be false. But at least he's consistent, like Rebby (and Cleo). He's going to defend that hill until there is no hill left. You could respect it, except he never addresses any questions to him. I keep hoping he'll come to see the evidence as it is, not as he wants it to be. NONE of us want Macdonald to be a wife and children slaughtering piece of ****, but he is. The difference is, most of us can acknowledge it while a few cling to their wishes rather than facts.

Last edited by desmirelle; 7th January 2018 at 05:14 PM.
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 8th January 2018, 02:55 AM   #3505
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,109
The police, and even the FBI, become attached to a theory instead of the facts and the evidence.
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 8th January 2018, 06:52 AM   #3506
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 568
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The police, and even the FBI, become attached to a theory instead of the facts and the evidence.
No henri THE FBI AND THE POLICE DO NOT GET ATTACHED TO A THEORY RATHER THAN THE EVIDENCE AND/OR FACTS.

Henri McPhee becomes attached to a theory (no matter how implausible) and totally ignores the FACTS and the EVIDENCE (the stronger they are the harder he tries to ignore them). henri does this to the point of making himself a caricature.....
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 11th January 2018, 07:37 AM   #3507
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,109
The Americans are an emotional people.
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 January 2018, 08:00 AM   #3508
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 858
Evidence Gives Birth To Theory

The landlord never has nor will ever have an understanding of how a theory is postulated. In this case, CID and/or FBI investigators used the evidence in its totality to formulate several theories on what occurred at 544 Castle Drive on 2/17/70. The theory that received the most publicity was the Pajama Top Theory. Contrary to the claims put forth by inmate's advocates, this theory was constructed by the original CID investigators.

The original CID investigators looked at the condition of inmate's pajama top, inmate's statements in regards to his handling of the pajama top, and Colette's autopsy report. In concert, they concluded that inmate had stabbed his wife through his pajama top with the ice pick. They were convinced that Colette's body was inert when stabbed with the ice pick and that the circular deficits in the pajama top were not the result of a fight in the living room.

Army lawyer Clifford Somers presented this theory at the Article 32 hearing and this theory was later presented to the DOJ and the FBI. Paul Stombaugh then assigned Shirley Green the task of proving or disproving this theory. In 1974, Green concluded that the pattern of ice pick wounds in Colette's chest matched the pattern of puncture holes in the pajama top. Green testified to her methodology at the 1979 trial.

Shirley Green's attempt to align the 48 puncture holes in the pajama top with the 21 ice pick wounds in Colette's chest was akin to fitting a broken piece of headlight glass found at a hit and run scene back into the light on the suspect's car. Green was subsequently able to find a matching pattern using three different techniques. Green's techniques included a graph paper overlay, a numbering system using push pins, and the insertion of steel rods into the puncture holes in order to duplicate the hole patterns.

Several weeks before the 1979 trial, Green was able to replicate the results of her experiments using the same three techniques. At trial, Brian Murtagh began his direct examination of Shirley Green by asking her about the significance of the steel rods that were inserted into each puncture hole in MacDonald's blue pajama top. Green stated that the rods or probes were used to "demonstrate the alignment of the holes" in the pajama top with the wound pattern on Colette's chest. Green admitted that some of the probes went through several layers of fabric and that a singular probe could encompass a grouping of puncture holes.

For example, Green discovered that puncture holes one through 12 could be aligned with five separate probes. Murtagh then asked Green whether she was able to align all 48 puncture holes in MacDonald's pajama top with 21 probes going through any other holes. Green stated that her painstaking analysis, "took over a week just to find one solution, to find this solution."

Green then described how she was able to replicate this pattern using a completely different technique. Green began by folding MacDonald's pajama top in the manner in which it was found on Colette's chest. Green pointed to several crime scene photographs which depicted the "inside of the pajama top facing upward, the right collar area over to the right, to the victim's left, right shoulder seam over to the right."

Green then placed a piece of graph paper over a box, she put the folded pajama top down on the box, and inserted 21 push pins through the pajama top. Green discovered that the puncture hole pattern in the graph paper and the box matched the puncture wound pattern in Colette's chest.

www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 11th January 2018 at 08:07 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 12th January 2018, 09:28 AM   #3509
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,109
This is part of what Dr Thornton said about the pajama folding experiment at the 1979 trial:

Quote:
BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Can we say in lay person's terms that she did it differently than the way he described the holes?
A Yes.
Q All right. Hereafter, let's use my terms and then see if that will work better. What, if anything else, did you base your opinion on?
A Hole 36 was originally designated by Mr. Stombaugh as inside-out or an exit hole. In Ms. Green's reconstruction, it is designated as outside-in or an entrance hole. Again, just with respect to that one particular discrepancy, I think that it negates the validity of this reconstruction.


More from Dr Thornton with regard to Ms Green:

Q I asked you whether you had read testimony of Shirley Green in regard to the reconstruction experiment that she said she did in terms of putting 48 probes into holes in the--rather, taking 48 holes in the pajama top and making them fit into 21 holes.
A Yes.
Q And I asked you at that time the question of whether you had an opinion as to whether or not she did in fact do what she said she did, and you said you had an opinion in that regard.
A Yes.
Q And what was that opinion?
A I consider her reconstruction to be impossible. I consider it to be conceptually unsound and contrived.

Q Is it possible, based upon your knowledge, information, and training, for Ms. Green, using the information that she had, to have made the reconstruction of the pajama top as she did? Is it possible for her to have done that and done it correctly--moving the 48 holes into 21?
A No.
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 January 2018, 09:31 AM   #3510
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,109
I think Judge Dupree was quite sharp with Murtagh about that ludicrous pajama folding experiment, which I find a bit surprising for a judge who was so pro-prosecution biased in the MacDonald case.

The trouble is that North Carolina jury were too stupid, and too violently prejudiced against Dr MacDonald, to see through that Army CID and FBI pajama folding con trick because Stombaugh and Shirley Green were in the FBI.

This is part of what Judge Dupree said about the pajama folding matter. The Court in this is Judge Dupree:

Quote:
THE COURT: If he told me that you could arrange 48 places and arrange those same 48 so they would still go into those 21 holes other than the way that they say they arranged them in this case, I wouldn't believe it. But, now, thankfully, I don't have to make that decision, nor will that opinion ever be expressed to this jury.

MR. MURTAGH: Your Honor, if there is another way to reconstruct it--and if it was tough enough to do it one way--I think this is merely the conservative nature of the laboratory examiner. It is like the hair could have come--the same thing with respect to the threads.

THE COURT: If I have ever heard a man disclaim, not one time but fifty, old Stombaugh kept saying that, "I only said it could be."

MR. MURTAGH: That is right, sir.
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 January 2018, 02:48 PM   #3511
carrps
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 58
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
CARRPS: One of the issues that has been completely ignored by inmate's advocates involves MacDonald's inspiration for the mythical hippie home invaders.

Law enforcement officers arrested Kenneth Barnett, Annette Cullity, Gary Burnett, and Joseph Lee in Suffolk County, New York on May 9, 1970. The Suffolk County police subsequently contacted the CID due to the fact that these four individuals matched the physical descriptions of the intruder suspects in the MacDonald murders.

CID agent Bennie Hawkins subsequently traveled to Suffolk County to discuss the case with police officials. Hawkins discovered that these four individuals had rented a house in Fire Island with Jeffrey MacDonald's brother, Jay, in the summer of 1969. Jeffrey MacDonald had visited his brother during that summer and was seen conversing with people who matched the descriptions of the New York Four at the Shortstop Bar in Long Island.

Joseph Lee was an African-American male, Gary Burnett and Kenneth Barnett were Caucasian males, and Annette Cullity was a Caucasian female. Lee was seen wearing an army field jacket and Cullity was known to wear a floppy hat and hip boots. The number of intruders, their racial make-up, and their clothing items all matched the descriptions provided by Jeffrey MacDonald. Hawkins obtained fingerprint exemplars of the New York Four and their prints did not match any of the prints found at 544 Castle Drive.

In December of 1970, Jeffrey MacDonald and his lawyer, Judge Rogers (William Rogers), went to the Suffolk County Police Department to read the May 9, 1970 arrest report. This trip occurred several months after the completion of the Article 32 hearings. Despite the New York Four matching the descriptions of the four intruders, MacDonald never publicly commented on this visit to the Suffolk County Police Department.

www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
I hadn't heard this before! More evidence for the home invasion scenario being totally bogus.

Last edited by carrps; 12th January 2018 at 02:50 PM. Reason: Words should be separated by spaces.
carrps 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 January 2018, 08:58 AM   #3512
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,109
Originally Posted by carrps View Post
I hadn't heard this before! More evidence for the home invasion scenario being totally bogus.
Jeff MacDonald did comment on this matter publicly at the Grand Jury in about 1975. JTF is being economical with the truth as usual:

Quote:
A I spoke to a couple of individuals, Caucasian males. At that point, I had absolutely no reference to this other group until a CID agent, Bennie Hawkins, walks into the Article 32 with this wild bizarre story about another group of four people, including a black male and a blonde female. But at the Shortstop Bar I was unaware of this other group..........

I had an argument in the Shortstop Bar with a couple of guys who said they knew Jay. And I had been told that the bartender was one of the guys supplying Jay with speed. So I guess I got a little pushy with them and there was a little scuffle thereon and I hit the guy or something like that.
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 January 2018, 10:36 AM   #3513
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 858
Ducking And Dodging

The irony of the landlord's latest pot shot is palpable. It is fair to say that the Ice Pick Baby Killer was being "economical" with the truth in regards to the New York Four. Notice how inmate attempted to separate the New York Four from the alleged group of Caucasian males he confronted at the Shortstop Bar? This was a tactical maneuver on his part for he knew full well that multiple witnesses saw him conversing with two white males, a black male, and a white female at the Shortstop Bar.

Whenever inmate was backed into a corner by documented fact, he would invariably use words like "bizarre" to dismiss the ominous nature of the issue at hand. To this day, inmate has never publicly commented on his trip to Fire Island or his visit to the Suffolk County Police Station to read the arrest report of the New York Four. His Grand Jury testimony is a prime example of inmate's attempts to duck and dodge his inspiration for the physical descriptions of the hippie home invaders.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 13th January 2018 at 10:41 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 January 2018, 11:05 AM   #3514
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 858
Questions Galore

Despite his penchant for mixing in a little truth with a pack of lies, inmate's bluster about the "bizarre" investigation by CID Agent Bennie Hawkins actually got him off the hook. That was the last time this issue (e.g., New York Four) was a major legal talking point in this case. It was not mentioned at the 1979 trial nor was it mentioned in any subsequent government brief.

The problem for inmate is that this issue will always be part of the documented record and I would love to ask inmate several questions about this issue. I'm surprised that no interviewer has broached this subject with him.

- If this is a non-issue, why did you feel the need to visit the Suffolk County Police Department?

- If this is a non-issue, why did you feel the need to have your lawyer present when you read the New York Four's arrest report?

- Is it merely a coincidence that members of the Stoeckley Seven do not match your descriptions of the intruders whereas the descriptions of the New York Four do match?

- How do you explain the fact that multiple patrons at the Shortstop Bar saw you speaking with 4 individuals who match the descriptions of the New York Four?

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

Last edited by JTF; 14th January 2018 at 11:10 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 16th January 2018, 10:03 AM   #3515
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,109
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
- Is it merely a coincidence that members of the Stoeckley Seven do not match your descriptions of the intruders whereas the descriptions of the New York Four do match?

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com/html/suspects.html
I don't think the unfortunate incident at the bar in New York was ever properly or thoroughly investigated. Detective Beasley at the trial identified Mazerolle from a picture he was shown and Jeff MacDonald made a likeness to Helena Stoeckley. I suppose you could say that Dwight Smith was never identified but personally, I find trying to identify black people can be difficult. Dwight Smith could not possibly remember where he was the night before.

Mazerolle came from New York, though I think he now lives prospering in New Jersey, though he may have been born in Maine. The Mafia were involved in drug smuggling with the Army CID and CIA, and possibly corrupt police. There is a code of silence in the Mafia.
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 January 2018, 11:34 AM   #3516
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 568
OMG henri - inmate didn't want the bar incident looked into any further than it was....don't you understand that the New York Four (Jay's room mates) matched the description of the intruders? don't you understand that the NY 4 could easily have proven themselves to be in NY vice NC on the night of the murders? this would have made inmate look even MORE ridiculous if it had been further investigated!

Just FYI for anyone who is interested to drive from NY to NC is probably a minimum of 12 hours border to border. An airplane ride from Baltimore Washington International Airport to Raleigh is approximately 1.5 hours and it would be several additional hours driving to Ft. Bragg.
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 January 2018, 05:19 PM   #3517
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 354
And the landlord once again (post 3512) has the Family Annihilator admitting that he starts fights based upon personal beliefs. Doesn't have to be true, ol' Jeffy just has to think there's a problem. Like Colette not liking him lying about Russia. Or not liking him planning on bailing when the baby's due and she's had two hard pregnancies already. (Hell, according to the man crush, he 'saved' Colette's life after the second one - and he's volunteered to go away for the third?)
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 16th January 2018, 05:36 PM   #3518
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,718
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
blah blah snipped

Mazerolle came from New York, though I think he now lives prospering in New Jersey, though he may have been born in Maine. The Mafia were involved in drug smuggling with the Army CID and CIA, and possibly corrupt police. There is a code of silence in the Mafia.
If you could make that rhyme and put it to music you'd have the framework for a half way decent gangster rap song.

As a working theory it doesn't even make it to half way of anything.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"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 17th January 2018, 04:53 AM   #3519
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,109
I remember seeing on TV once a Mafia mayor of Las Vegas saying the Mafia don't like a snitch for the government. That's why it's so difficult now to get people like Bruce Fowler and Dwight Smith, and even Jeff MacDonald's brother Jay to spill the beans. Jay's pals in New York may have been indirectly involved but they were not directly involved in any murderous activities and were not giving the orders
like Mazerolle's pals.

Detective Beasley immediately suspected the Stoeckley group and Mazerolle when the description Jeff MacDonald had given when the MacDonald murders happened, because they were people known to the local police. Beasley had to let them go from the police station because the Army CID were not interested. They had decided MacDonald did it from the first minute and they were supported in that theory without facts by the FBI.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 17th January 2018 at 04:57 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 January 2018, 05:20 AM   #3520
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 568
No way Beasley suspected Helena and her friends by inmate's description of the intruders. Helena didn't match the female suspect description AT ALL. In fact, when inmate was interviewed by the CID they showed him a picture of Helena. He said she had a distinctive nose, he'd have remembered that nose. Years later when she was brought into court to testify he had no reaction to her presence at all.

So, he admitted Helena wasn't the alleged female intruder and his lack of reaction to her presence just solidified that the story was make believe....his over reaction to questions as simple as "how do you explain....." shows a consciousness of guilt.

Allen Mazerolle could not have been involved since he was in jail, where he lived then or where he lives now is of absolutely no importance. The fact that you cannot seem to grasp the simple concept of an air tight alibi has no importance either.
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
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 09:20 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, 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.