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 July 2017, 09:06 AM   #2961
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 479
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There were about 71 people who were wrongly released from prison in the UK last year due to incorrect documentation.
So what? that is absolutely and positively irrelevant to the case in hand.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Mazerolle's documentation about his incarcerations were a fraud.
PROVE IT! The documentation is not and was not fraudulent. it is certified, corroborated, checked, and double checked to be accurate and correct.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
That is what Detective Beasley said publicly when he was alive. Mazerolle was out of prison on the night of the Macdonald murders and his so-called documentation was just to provide him with a cast iron alibi to fool journalists and the American public.
I never heard or read anything anywhere that Detective Beasley ever stated that the documentation was false.

HOWEVER, as I have stated to you numerous times in the past when PEB made the claims that Allen M was out of jail he was CONFABULATING. By the time of the Grand Jury and Trial of inmate PEB was seriously ill with the inorganic brain disorder with which he'd been diagnosed. He LIED but since it was not intentional it gets to be considered CONFABULATION.

Since you obviously have failed to grasp this very simple concept I will once again provide you with the definition of confabulate.

Confabulate:
{latin confabulari, confabulat-: com-, together + fabulari, to talk}
1. to talk informally: chat 2. Psychiatric To replace fact with fantasy in memory.

When one confabulates, they replace "missing" information in their memory with "fantasy" or "made up" data to fill in the blanks. Although it is unintentional it is also NOT TRUE.

PEB arrested Allen M. he was in jail the night of the murders and he was not released on bail until March 10, 1970. THIS IS FACT. 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 30th July 2017, 10:26 AM   #2962
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 760
Headline Porn

The landlord's only contribution to true crime discussion boards is his ability to concoct different forms of headline porn. The simple fact is that there is not a shred of sourced evidence that places Allen Mazzerolle at 544 Castle Drive.

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 31st July 2017, 09:07 AM   #2963
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,666
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
The landlord's only contribution to true crime discussion boards is his ability to concoct different forms of headline porn. The simple fact is that there is not a shred of sourced evidence that places Allen Mazzerolle at 544 Castle Drive.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
There is some background information to all this from the 1979 trial testimony of Detective Beasley. Helena showed him a blonde wig and floppy hat and talked about an ice pick:

BY MR. SMITH:
Q Mr. Beasley, have you examined that photograph, or whatever it is, before?
A Yes, sir.
Q When did you have a chance to look at it?
A I saw one in the newspaper like this.
Q Have you had an opportunity to examine that particular item in the past few days?
A Yes, sir; back in the interview room with Ms. Stoeckley and Mr. Segal.
Q All right, now, Mr. Beasley, I will ask you if you will to describe what this object is that you have examined?
A It is a picture of one of the suspects.
Q Is it a drawing?
A Drawing of one of the suspects.
Q Mr. Beasley, does that drawing portray fairly any individual that you ever saw with Helena Stoeckley?
A Yes, sir.
Q Do you know the name of that individual?
A Yes, sir.
Q What was his name?
A His last name was Mazerolle
Q Mazerolle?
A Yes, sir.
Q Do you know his first name?
A Yes, sir; I've got it here.
Q Would it refresh your recollection if I asked you if his name was Allen?
A That's it; Allen P. Mazerolle.
Q Allen Mazerolle?
A Yes, sir.

MR. SMITH: No further questions, Your Honor.

MR. BLACKBURN: Just a moment, Your Honor.
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 July 2017, 09:18 AM   #2964
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,666
Detective Beasley's opinion about Mazerolle as a suspect, and his forged incarcerations, and his description of him as a hard cookie is explained here. Detective Beasley had previously been given two awards for being the best detective in North Carolina:

http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_ma...sley_stmt.html
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 July 2017, 02:38 PM   #2965
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 252
BEFORE the inorganic brain disease, yeah, he was a very good detective. Nobody is disputing that at one time in his life he was good. But after.......nope, not good, his memory wasn't playing nice with him at all. That's one of the problems of the disease.
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 1st August 2017, 04:42 AM   #2966
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 479
henri apparently STILL did not read/comprehend my post so here is another attempt.

henri - PEB suffered from an inorganic brain disorder that left lesions on his brain and gaps in his memory. by the time of the trial, PEB could not remember a great many details especially in re: this case. He confabulated - in other words - he made up details that filled in the gaps in his memory. He (like anyone who confabulates) made up fictions that seemed to make sense (at least to him) but that doesn't make him correct. The documentation has been checked, re-checked, certified, corroborated and PROVEN to be valid and accurate. NOT forged NOT fabricated NOT fraudulent in any shape manner or form. Even the defense team does not argue such nonsense so why do you feel you can?

Once again:
HOWEVER, as I have stated to you numerous times in the past when PEB made the claims that Allen M was out of jail he was CONFABULATING. By the time of the Grand Jury and Trial of inmate PEB was seriously ill with the inorganic brain disorder with which he'd been diagnosed. He LIED but since it was not intentional it gets to be considered CONFABULATION.

Since you obviously have failed to grasp this very simple concept I will once again provide you with the definition of confabulate.

Confabulate:
{latin confabulari, confabulat-: com-, together + fabulari, to talk}
1. to talk informally: chat 2. Psychiatric To replace fact with fantasy in memory.

When one confabulates, they replace "missing" information in their memory with "fantasy" or "made up" data to fill in the blanks. Although it is unintentional it is also NOT TRUE.

PEB arrested Allen M. he was in jail the night of the murders and he was not released on bail until March 10, 1970. THIS IS FACT. 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 1st August 2017, 08:16 AM   #2967
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,666
Originally Posted by desmirelle View Post
BEFORE the inorganic brain disease, yeah, he was a very good detective. Nobody is disputing that at one time in his life he was good. But after.......nope, not good, his memory wasn't playing nice with him at all. That's one of the problems of the disease.
Detective Beasley's daughter once posted on the internet that he had his wits about him up to and including the MacDonald trial in 1979, and that he knew what happened in the MacDonald murders, but he wasn't believed. I now can't find that posting. It seems to have been censored from the internet. She did mention that he came too close to the atom bomb explosion in Japan. His doctors agreed that was the cause of his later health problems.

The evidence against MacDonald is quite ludicrously unsatisfactory. MacDonald was screwed. The FBI and CID 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 2nd August 2017, 04:13 AM   #2968
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 479
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Detective Beasley's daughter once posted on the internet that he had his wits about him up to and including the MacDonald trial in 1979, and that he knew what happened in the MacDonald murders, but he wasn't believed.
It is no surprise that a loving daughter would make such a claim but it is irrelevant no matter where she made such a claim (if she ever did). HOWEVER, the comments that count are those of the Medical Doctors who testified or provided affidavits stating that PEB had an inorganic brain disorder, lesions on his brain, and he confabulated. THESE ARE FACTS. PEB was already forced to retire by the time of inmate's trial and he was already severely impaired by the illness with which he had been diagnosed. FACTS henri not opinion FACTS.

PEB was not believed because it was proven that he was confabulating during his testimony. IN OTHER WORDS HE LIED. I provided you with the definition of confabulation previously, apparently you still haven't read it. Please do so, it would help immensely if you at least TRIED to comprehend FACT.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I now can't find that posting. It seems to have been censored from the internet.
Nothing that was ever On-line can be totally wiped from the internet. It is more likely that like other such alleged comments/posts you claim to have read (and are the ONLY person to have seen it) it was imaginary. Just like the lies PEB told at trial. At least PEB had no malicious intent when he lied, that is why it is called confabulation.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The evidence against inmate is quite ludicrously unsatisfactory.
Only in your world henri. Here in the real world the evidence against inmate is overwhelming. He was convicted using only about 60% of the evidence available at the time. NOW if he was to get a new trial the DNA evidence alone would convict him.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
MacDonald was screwed.
IF inmate had not brutally and savagely slaughtered Colette, Kimberley, Kristen, and his unborn son he would have not been screwed. He screwed himself. If he had not told a bs story that was easy to see through, perhaps he'd have been less screwed. He cannot, even today, keep his mouth shut when he should.....that is one of the reasons he has landed in solitary a few times....that a stealing bagels from the commissary....
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 August 2017, 07:21 AM   #2969
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 760
Rinse And Repeat

Welcome to another installment of the rinse and repeat cognitive process of MacFantasy Island's lone resident. Prince Beasley's daughter must have forgotten the FACT that five years prior to the 1979 trial, her father was standing in the middle of an intersection, waving his arms and spouting bizarre statements to motorists. Shortly after this incident, his superiors asked him to resign and Beasley subsequently "retired" from the force.

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 August 2017, 10:20 AM   #2970
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 479
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
Welcome to another installment of the rinse and repeat cognitive process of MacFantasy Island's lone resident. Prince Beasley's daughter must have forgotten the FACT that five years prior to the 1979 trial, her father was standing in the middle of an intersection, waving his arms and spouting bizarre statements to motorists. Shortly after this incident, his superiors asked him to resign and Beasley subsequently "retired" from the force.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
Thanks JTF - I knew there was an intersection incident that preceeded his eventual "forced retirement" but couldn't remember the details!
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 6th August 2017, 08:39 AM   #2971
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,666
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
Welcome to another installment of the rinse and repeat cognitive process of MacFantasy Island's lone resident. Prince Beasley's daughter must have forgotten the FACT that five years prior to the 1979 trial, her father was standing in the middle of an intersection, waving his arms and spouting bizarre statements to motorists. Shortly after this incident, his superiors asked him to resign and Beasley subsequently "retired" from the force.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
I agree that Detective Beasley seems to have had a drink problem among his other health problems later on. There is some story that Beasley once dressed up as a witch when he went to interview one of the suspects, which did not go down well with the MacDonald lawyers at the time. He seems to have been replaced by the now deceased Shedlick. I think it's a pity because he knew what happened at the MacDonald murders, but he was not believed.

Beasley did interview Greg Mitchell's wife in about 1981 who categorically denied Mitchell was involved.

People Magazine is a bit more skeptical about Mitchell:

Quote:
Greg Mitchell, too, repeatedly confessed up until his death in June 1982. Ann Sutton Cannady, who ran a rehab facility for drug addicts in Fayetteville in 1971, said Mitchell was briefly a patient there. Sutton*claimed she saw Mitchell running out of a farmhouse owned by the rehab facility, on which the words,*“I killed MacDonald’s wife and children,” were written on a wall in red paint.

Long after MacDonald’s 1979 conviction, three of Mitchell’s friends contacted Kathryn MacDonald saying he had confessed to them as well. Those three people gave affidavits that are now part of MacDonald’s*appeal.
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 August 2017, 07:57 AM   #2972
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,666
I fully appreciate that some people are definitely bad, and bad through and through, with no good in them at all. Jeff MacDonald is not one of those people. He was a brilliant and caring emergency room doctor.
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 August 2017, 09:51 AM   #2973
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 252
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I fully appreciate that some people are definitely bad, and bad through and through, with no good in them at all. Jeff MacDonald is not one of those people. He was a brilliant and caring emergency room doctor.
Who just happened to lose his temper big-time one night and slaughtered his wife, unborn son, and two daughters beserker-style, then tucked Kimmy into bed, carried Colette from Kris' room back to the master bedroom, put Kris back under covers - all to support his lies about intruders. I lived in army housing in that era. Strange voice chanting ANYTHING at 0200 hours wakes up EVERYBODY with a connecting wall/floor/ceiling.

Nobody here is disputing Mac's medical skills (in 1970's), Henri. We've got issues with the fact he slaughtered his family in February 1971. He was a good doctor. Totally sucked as a human being, faithful husband and attentive father bits of his life - which were much more important than his emergency room skills.

Last edited by desmirelle; 7th August 2017 at 09:55 AM.
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 7th August 2017, 06:31 PM   #2974
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 760
Details

The landlord of MacFantasy Island has never cared much for the details of this case. Beasley was NEVER hired by MacDonald as a private investigator, so he wasn't in a position to be "replaced" by Shedlick. The first investigator hired by MacDonald was Ted Gunderson and he wasn't replaced by Shedlick. That duty fell to a retired NY City homicide detective who investigated the case for several months in early 1984. He reported back to inmate that he could not help him because all of the data he collected pointed to his guilt. Inmate then hired Shedlick who was more than happy to bang square pegs into round evidentiary holes.

Shedlick put forth theories (e.g., Gurney Theory, Blue Bedsheet allegedly placed over Colette's body) that couldn't stand up to the slightest scrutiny. Beasley eventually came around to the FACT that MacDonald was guilty of murdering his family. In 1991, he expressed to reporter Pat Reese that he no longer believed that Stoeckley was involved in the murders. Shortly after Pat's two-part article on Beasley was published, Fred Bost threatened to sue Beasley, but it proved to be a hollow threat. Beasley was a big part of Bost's work of fiction (e.g., Fatal Justice) and he was concerned that his work on the case would be discredited by Beasley's change of heart.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 7th August 2017 at 06:43 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 8th August 2017, 03:37 AM   #2975
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,666
Detective Beasley was used as a sub-contractor by Gunderson. Beasley once said publicly that the next logical step would be to interview the Stoeckley group suspects, which would include Mazerolle. That New York detective JTF mentions before Shedlick was a lousy detective who didn't do a complete investigation. Pat Reese was a curmudgeonly former drug addict local journalist who was involved in the local drugs scene. The North Carolina Bureau of Investigation interviewed Pat Reese, and suspect Dwight Smith, who lived in the same apartment block about two days after the MacDonald murders as persons of interest.

By the time Pat Reese interviewed Beasley for that newspaper article in 1991 Beasley was long gone with senile dementia. It was not all that long before Beasley died. Helena Stoeckley was the last thing on his mind at the time, who had died about ten years previously.

Fred Post and Potter did a good job telling Jeff MacDonald's side of the story in their book Fatal Justice as journalists, but it's a pity they didn't have the detective skills to outfox the Stoeckley group, and the corrupt and biased judicial system in North Carolina.
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 August 2017, 04:36 AM   #2976
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 479
to anyone NEW to the board and just reading things - please ignore post #2975 - it is so beyond ridiculously untrue that I cannot justify my time replying directly.
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 8th August 2017, 06:34 AM   #2977
Ygraine
New Blood
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 7
Has anybody seen my eyes? After reading those last posts by the Landlord of MacFantasy Island I rolled my eyes so hard, they fell out of my head.
Ygraine 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 August 2017, 09:08 AM   #2978
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,666
Originally Posted by Ygraine View Post
Has anybody seen my eyes? After reading those last posts by the Landlord of MacFantasy Island I rolled my eyes so hard, they fell out of my head.
It's no good being a hysterical and emotional woman of the district visitor type. You need to investigate the facts and evidence. Fred Bost got it right.

There is some background information to this Pat Reese and Smitty business on the internet. The local journalist Pat Reese was up to his eyeballs in the Stoeckley group drug scene.

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

Quote:
4. 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.

7. After the MacDonald murders, he "heard" information from some unrecalled person that maybe Stoeckley was involved in the MacDonald murders or had knowledge of the murders and in fact had made some statements to this effect, but he discounted the veracity of her story because she was a "scatterbrain" who was always attempting to gain attention by acting in an unusual manner.
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 August 2017, 11:38 AM   #2979
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 479
Originally Posted by Ygraine View Post
Has anybody seen my eyes? After reading those last posts by the Landlord of MacFantasy Island I rolled my eyes so hard, they fell out of my head.
that happened to me a few times, I've trained my eyes to come back when I call them! I'm sure you will locate your eyes soon! Don't feel bad for your reaction either, it is a normal and sane response to the inanities!
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 8th August 2017, 03:31 PM   #2980
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 760
Alternate Reality

I guess when you counsel individuals with substance abuse issues, you're automatically "up to your eyeballs" in the nefarious aspects of that world. Pat's main line of work was cultivating a legendary career as an investigative reporter and he covered the MacDonald case from stem to stern. He was convinced that inmate was guilty and that Stoeckley was a serial fabricator.

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 9th August 2017, 01:52 AM   #2981
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,666
The point is that any good and astute detective would say hello hello hello to himself after interviewing Dwight Smith and Pat Reese about the Macdonald murders, and not be absurdly credulous about it all like the FBI and JTF.
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 9th August 2017, 03:39 AM   #2982
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 479
The point is that Pat Reese was a damned good reporter, he was able to review the FACTS and connect the dots correctly. Unlike certain people who connect the dots in a fashion so cattywumpus that the FACTS get ignored, logic goes out the window, sane and rational thought is regarded as irrelevant and insane/inane stances on the case keep getting reposted as if the 500th time the nonsense is posted will make it suddenly credible! lol, doesn't work that way, but someone certainly keeps trying to make it so....
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 9th August 2017, 05:41 AM   #2983
Ygraine
New Blood
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 7
The only hysterical and emotional woman I've noticed on this board is you - especially the hysterical part, although I doubt that we share the same definition of hysterical. My definition refers to the highly amusing and outrageously funny aspect of the word.
Perhaps when you finally decide to look at the facts and stop repeating the same things over and over, you will come to the same conclusions that the rest of the sane world has - your man crush did it.
Ygraine 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 9th August 2017, 09:21 AM   #2984
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,666
Originally Posted by Ygraine View Post
The only hysterical and emotional woman I've noticed on this board is you - especially the hysterical part, although I doubt that we share the same definition of hysterical. My definition refers to the highly amusing and outrageously funny aspect of the word.
Perhaps when you finally decide to look at the facts and stop repeating the same things over and over, you will come to the same conclusions that the rest of the sane world has - your man crush did it.
I'm not gay and I don't have a man crush on MacDonald. I have never met the man. I just think the MacDonald case is a gross miscarriage of justice. As I have said before, I would stop posting on the internet immediately if Byn or Bunny or JTF came up with any real proof. I agree with Helena Stoeckley's lawyer Leonard, who has said publicly that the prosecution never proved its case and that MacDonald was screwed.

The curmudgeonly Pat Reese socialised with the Stoeckley group before the MacDonald murders even though he was supposed to be a 'saintly' local reporter. He didn't do much investigating, as JTF thinks. He only tried to put the blame on MacDonald in his local paper articles.

There is some background information about Pat Reese when he was once interviewed by that 'genius' detective from the Army CID, Kearns, who thought you could retest a urine stain after ninety weeks:

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

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 9th August 2017 at 09:25 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 9th August 2017, 09:31 AM   #2985
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 479
henri - we have ALL provided you with DEFINITIVE, CORROBORATED, CERTIFIED, ACTUAL, LEGAL PROOF that inmate is guilty. Not just beyond a reasonable doubt, but beyond ALL doubt. The problem is that YOU have UNREASONABLE DOUBT AND A SUPER MAN-CRUSH ON INMATE. Denial of FACT and stomping your feet and insisting that untrue things are useful is petty and childish. Just because you do not want to BELIEVE something to be true DOES NOT MEAN that it is not true.

Perhaps if you stopped arguing nonsense that even the defense doesn't believe to be true you could take the time to understand the EVIDENCE.
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 9th August 2017, 09:35 AM   #2986
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 479
OH and by the way henri - IF the prosecution had not proven its case then inmate would not be an inmate. SINCE HE WAS CONVICTED THE PROSECUTION OBVIOUSLY PROVED ITS CASE. SINCE THE CONVICTION HAS BEEN AFFIRMED THE CASE HAS BEEN PROVEN AGAIN. AND AGAIN. You don't become a convict if the prosecution doesn't prove its case - it is called acquittal. INMATE WAS CONVICTED.
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 9th August 2017, 02:25 PM   #2987
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 760
Alternate Reality Part Deux

The landlord can run from the documented record, but he can't hide. Pat Reese did far more than "socialize" with a few members of the "Stoeckley Seven." He provided them with substance abuse counseling in a group setting. Considering your stated opinion that Fred Bost "got it right," it is humorous that you label Dwight Smith as a murderer when Bost dismissed him outright as a viable suspect.

Bost's reasoning was that Smith did not match either description (e.g., inmate's descriptions) of the mythical black male intruder. The landlord also ignores the FACT that Smith's prints were not found at the crime scene and the defense thought so little of Smith as a suspect, they did not request a DNA sample be obtained and/or tested at the AFIP. For whatever reason, the landlord doesn't seem to care that he is at odds with the rest of MacDonald's dwindling support system.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 9th August 2017 at 02:28 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 August 2017, 02:54 AM   #2988
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,666
Originally Posted by byn63 View Post
OH and by the way henri - IF the prosecution had not proven its case then inmate would not be an inmate. SINCE HE WAS CONVICTED THE PROSECUTION OBVIOUSLY PROVED ITS CASE. SINCE THE CONVICTION HAS BEEN AFFIRMED THE CASE HAS BEEN PROVEN AGAIN. AND AGAIN. You don't become a convict if the prosecution doesn't prove its case - it is called acquittal. INMATE WAS CONVICTED.
Innocent people sometimes get convicted. That's why there are appeals. Dwight Smith and Pat Reese were never properly, or thoroughly, investigated because Gunderson was only interested in Helena Stoeckley. They were interviewed by the North Carolina Bureau of Investigation shortly after the murders where they categorically denied everything. Dwight Smith said he couldn't remember where he was a couple of nights before the murders. That's suspicious. The Army CID and FBI were only trying to convict MacDonald with false evidence. MacDonald lawyers are not detectives and neither were Fred Bost and Potter, or other journalists.

It was never an impartial judge and jury as it should have been. MacDonald private investigator Shedlick had affidavits from three different witnesses that the foreman of the jury said he was going to convict the hell out of MacDonald before the trial even started. Judge Dupree and Judge Fox were in bed with the prosecution, for whatever reason.

The matter is discussed at this website:

http://www.crimetraveller.org/2017/0...ue-of-the-case

Quote:
Further corroboration of Stoeckley’s involvement came from Jerry Leonard. Judge Dupree himself had chosen Leonard to be the court-appointed attorney for Helena Stoeckley. In A Wilderness of Error-The Trials of Jeffrey MacDonald, Morris writes, that when the two were alone, Stoeckley confided to Leonard the complete scenario of what had allegedly transpired on the night of the murders. This was the first time in nine years she had done so. She said that:

“She was a member of a cult with a core group of followers. One night one member of the group had raised the issue of Dr. MacDonald’s discriminatory treatment toward drug addicted veterans. MacDonald was one of the doctors involved in a treatment and counselling program. He had a hard stance and often refused to give methadone to heroin users. This member of the cult talked the group into going to the MacDonald residence to confront and intimidate him over his treatment. Consequently, they went to the house that night. But things got out of hand and the people she was with committed the murders.”

Author, Errol Morris, contends that Stoeckley’s confessions to Leonard are credible. He states they were, “detailed and given to an officer of the court and under the protection of attorney-client privilege.” Stoeckley had always said, that she would tell the truth, if she was offered immunity from prosecution. Morris believes Jeffrey MacDonald would never have gone to prison if Stoeckley’s testimony had been heard by the jurors and not ruled inadmissible as 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 10th August 2017, 04:03 AM   #2989
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 479
Sometimes innocent people get convicted BUT IN THIS CASE A GUILTY PERSON WAS CONVICTED. The Honorable Judge Dupree was a fair and impartial jurist, and if it had not been for him Bernie Segal's antics would have made an even worse impression on the jury. The jury was also impartial, it was one of the first times that a jury consultant was used and the model is still commonly used today. The juror questionaires make is easier for lawyers to determine the best jury composition.

the landlord of MacFantasy Island has never taken the time to examine the FACTS of the case. he believes that he can claim something is inaccurate and that will make it so....but that is not how it works in the real world. The blood trail, the fibers and threads, the splinters, the DNA evidence all shows that inmate slaughtered his family. It really is that simple.

Helena's stories have NEVER matched the evidence NOR have the EVER matched inmate's version of events. There has NEVER been one single solitary piece of evidence that could be linked to Helena found at the crime scene. Helena was a known liar and teller of tall tales (including one where she claimed to have "stood watch" with an MP) and she was always looking for "daddy figures" in her life. IF one of these men asked her to admit to something, she was going to do so......that doesn't make any or her nonsensical confessions TRUTH.
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 August 2017, 08:33 AM   #2990
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,666
Originally Posted by byn63 View Post
Helena's stories have NEVER matched the evidence NOR have the EVER matched inmate's version of events. There has NEVER been one single solitary piece of evidence that could be linked to Helena found at the crime scene. Helena was a known liar and teller of tall tales (including one where she claimed to have "stood watch" with an MP) and she was always looking for "daddy figures" in her life. IF one of these men asked her to admit to something, she was going to do so......that doesn't make any or her nonsensical confessions TRUTH.
Helena confessed to her own mother a couple of times. Her mother's affidavit is on the internet. Her mother said Greg Mitchell did it with one other, probably Mazerolle. There is some evidence, or at least strong suspicion besides her numerous confessions, that Helena was at the crime scene in the wrong number phone call to MacDonald's apartment in the middle of the night from Jimmy Friar asking for a Richard MacDonald. Helena began laughing and hung up. Helena admitted that phone call, but Segal never called Friar as a witness because he was a bad character maddened by drink. That was a mistake. I think it could have raised some eyebrows with the jury, except for the biased foreman of the jury.

I agree with what one person has said on the internet in 2012:

Quote:
Their case was based entirely on crime scene evidence but the management of the crime scene was badly botched and they tenaciously resisted giving defense experts meaningful access to the evidence and have continued to resist further testing of the evidence - all of which suggests a lack of confidence in the merits of their case and a dogged resistance to having it scrutinized.

The judge was completely biased against the defense, the defense lawyer was negligent, and the prosecutor was subsequently disciplined for misconduct in another case. This is a case of a manifestly unfair trial violating not only the Constitution but also fundamental fairness. He should definitely get a new trial ASAP.
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 August 2017, 09:21 AM   #2991
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 479
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Helena confessed to her own mother a couple of times. Her mother's affidavit is on the internet.
No henri, she DID NOT. Don't you pay attention to ANYTHING that is FACT? That affidavit was the result of Helena's younger brother's try for 15 minutes of fame (infamy). He had is seriously ill, near death, totally blind mother sign a blank sheet of paper and SMQ filled in the blank pages with a story that was full of BS. Helena Sr. was interviewed at the time of the trial and several other times and stated quite clearly that Helena would say anything that Daddy Beasley asked her to say. IT HAS BEEN PROVEN BEYOND ALL DOUBT THAT HELENA WAS NOT AT THE CRIME SCENE AND DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE MURDERS.

NONE of Helena's confessions matched the evidence NOR did they ever match inmate's story of what he alleged happened AND there is not a single piece of evidence of Helena being at that apartment EVER.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Her mother said Greg Mitchell did it with one other, probably Mazerolle.
BULL. Besides the fact that there is no evidence to suggest Greg Mitchell was involved in the crimes, and the FACT that he took and passed a polygraph in which he stated he was not involved. Helena Sr's alleged affidavit is a piece of fiction. The format is improper and as one lawyer I know put it, "I would NEVER submit an affidavit so improperly prepared". The signature is supposed to be on the same page as at least "some of the testimony". LOOK at the affidavit - you can see plainly that the signature was done on a blank sheet of paper. SMQ and little Stoeckely (whatever his name is/was) should be ASHAMED of the way that they used/treated that seriously ill elderly woman.

Oh, and as you have been told ad nauseum Allan M WAS IN JAIL THE NIGHT OF THE MURDERS AND COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED. just because you do not like a FACT does not make it any less A FACT.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There is some evidence, or at least strong suspicion besides her numerous confessions, that Helena was at the crime scene
No there is NO EVIDENCE AT ALL that Helena was EVER in that apartment.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
in the wrong number phone call to MacDonald's apartment in the middle of the night from Jimmy Friar asking for a Richard MacDonald.
that phone call NEVER HAPPENED. It was made up, a fake, pretend, make believe, A LIE. Choose your term but they all are accurate. IF such a phone call HAD happened the defense would have used it.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
That was a mistake. I think it could have raised some eyebrows with the jury,
Actually it would have been a mistake if they'd attempted to use the claims of Friar at trial, because the government would have proven beyond all doubt that the phone call NEVER HAPPENED. PERIOD

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
except for the biased foreman of the jury.
The foreman of the jury was not biased. He was an honest man. I cannot believe the ridiculousness of the claims that you keep espousing. You must really really love that man-crush of yours to keep spewing forth nonsense that even the defense doesn't claim. You DO REALIZE that inmate would be embarrassed beyond belief if he knew that your claims (as weird and untrue and totally bizarre as they are) are the only ones in his defense?
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 August 2017, 02:35 AM   #2992
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,666
Originally Posted by byn63 View Post
No henri, she DID NOT. Don't you pay attention to ANYTHING that is FACT? That affidavit was the result of Helena's younger brother's try for 15 minutes of fame (infamy). He had is seriously ill, near death, totally blind mother sign a blank sheet of paper and SMQ filled in the blank pages with a story that was full of BS. Helena Sr. was interviewed at the time of the trial and several other times and stated quite clearly that Helena would say anything that Daddy Beasley asked her to say. IT HAS BEEN PROVEN BEYOND ALL DOUBT THAT HELENA WAS NOT AT THE CRIME SCENE AND DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE MURDERS.
You can't just come on to the internet and say that in your opinion an affidavit is false without hard evidence and facts to back it up. I agree that Helena's brother did not get on well with his sister. There are reports of family rows. There can be no doubt at all that Helena's brother, and Helena's mother, however elderly she was at the time, both believed Jeff MacDonald is innocent and that Helena was involved in the MacDonald murders.

Helena's mother's affidavit can be seen here:

http://themacdonaldcase.org/Images/H..._Affidavit.pdf

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 11th August 2017 at 02:43 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 11th August 2017, 04:25 AM   #2993
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 479
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
You can't just come on to the internet and say that in your opinion an affidavit is false without hard evidence and facts to back it up.
henri - first - you have a LOT of nerve to claim that I or anyone else on this board post opinion without evidence or fact. Look in the mirror - that is what YOU do. What I do is base my comments on facts and evidence.

I can come on the internet and say that the affidavit is false and/or fraudulent. Especially since I supported my comments by providing information given to me by a lawyer that follows this case and 3 other lawyers who don't but also looked at the affidavit. It doesn't take a genius to SEE that poor elderly sick woman was asked to sign a blank sheet of paper.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I agree that Helena's brother did not get on well with his sister. There are reports of family rows.
Helena's little brother would not have had much time in her company since he was very young when the murders occurred. I don't doubt that there were family fights especially when Helena lived at home. She was a drugged out hippie with a penchant for telling tall tales (liar liar pants on fire). She would do and say anything that Daddy Beasley wanted her to say. Her little brother wanted his 15 minutes of fame....what he got was infamy. The affidavit was not believed because it was improperly formatted and obviously created without facts.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There can be no doubt at all that Helena's brother, and Helena's mother, however elderly she was at the time, both believed inmate is innocent and that Helena was involved in the MacDonald murders.
There is plenty of evidence to support the FACT that Helena Sr. DID NOT BELIEVE Helena was involved in the murders. The CONTEMPORARY RECORDS provide plenty of evidence to show that Helena Sr knew her daughter well, knew she lied when she claimed to participate, knew she lied about a great many things, knew that she would say anything that Prince E Beasley asked her to say.

IF Helena had been involved there would be evidence to support this but there is not any sourced evidence that points to anyone other than inmate was there that night. You have his bloody footprint exiting Kristen's room, you have the hair found clutched in Colette's hand that is a 100% DNA match to inmate, you have his lies about pulling a knife out of Colette's chest, you have his bloody pj fibers in Kimmie's bed, you have his lies about attempting to resuscitate his family, you have the threads and fibers in every room but the one he claimed to have used his pj top as a shield AND the pocket with Colette's blood on it in the MB and not where he claimed the pj was torn, and Colette's blood on the top BEFORE it was torn. Then there is also the 2 minutes that he claimed to have done all sorts of heroic things when there was not enough time to have done them, the surgical gloves, the blood trail, the splinters, the fibers UNDER Colette's body, all the weapons coming from inside the house......
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 August 2017, 08:39 AM   #2994
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,666
Originally Posted by byn63 View Post
I can come on the internet and say that the affidavit is false and/or fraudulent. Especially since I supported my comments by providing information given to me by a lawyer that follows this case and 3 other lawyers who don't but also looked at the affidavit. It doesn't take a genius to SEE that poor elderly sick woman was asked to sign a blank sheet of paper.
There was some story that Helena once told her brother that she knew some people who could do him in. There is another story that the FBI told Helena and her mother to keep their mouths shut about the MacDonald murders.

There was nothing wrong with Helena's mother's affidavit, whatever the beliefs and opinions of Byn's lawyer pals are about the matter. There is background information about this at:

http://www.themacdonaldcase.org/Imag...Supplement.pdf

Quote:
5. On March 31, 2007, Gene Stoeckley and Kathryn MacDonald traveled to Fayetteville,
North Carolina to visit Helena Stoeckley (senior), the mother of the deceased Helena
Stoeckley, at the mother’s residence in the Haymount Rehabilitation and Nursing Center.
6. Mrs. Stoeckley (senior), voluntarily, and without prompting, proceeded to describe two
separate incidents in detail during which her daughter, Helena Stoeckley, confessed to her
that she was in the MacDonald house the night of the murders, and provided details of the
incident.
7. Mrs. Stoeckley (senior), moreover, indicated that her daughter had said that she was
afraid to tell the truth at the trial because she was afraid of the prosecutor.
8. After hearing Mrs. Stoeckley (senior) divulge these confessions made by her daughter,
Kathryn MacDonald inquired as to whether Mrs. Stoeckley would sign an affidavit. Mrs.
Stoeckley (senior) agreed to do so, and also agreed to meet with the applicant’s counsel,
Hart Miles, Esq., for the purpose of producing an affidavit.
9. Mr. Miles and Laura Redd, his paralegal (who is also a notary public), traveled to
Fayetteville that night to meet with Mrs. Stoeckley, Gene Stoeckley, and Kathryn
MacDonald.
10. Once Mr. Miles and Mrs. Redd arrived, they were introduced to Mrs. Stoeckley (senior)
who indicated that she was willing to sign an affidavit as to the confessions of her
daughter.
11. An affidavit was drafted in the Haymount Rehabilitation and Nursing Center and printed
out there on one of the facility’s printers.
12. Gene Stoeckley reviewed the affidavit with his mother (who is legally blind) for accuracy
by reading it to her. She requested a few changes be made to the original draft and those
changes were made. She then, in front of Gene Stoeckley, Kathryn MacDonald, Laura
Redd, Hart Miles, and a nurse technician Grady Peterson, signed the affidavit.
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 August 2017, 09:51 AM   #2995
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 252
Henri -

Since you believe Helena's account of the evening was so up front, why don't you believe she and your man crush were doing the 'horizontal tango' (as my uncle called it)? There is just as much evidence of that as there is of her presence in the Macdonald quarters that horrific night in February 1970. And it gives motivation for the killing beyond your beau's bad temper.
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 August 2017, 10:06 AM   #2996
byn63
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 479
there is a great deal wrong with Helena Sr affidavit. Not just the obvious FACT that she signed a blank sheet of paper and the "testimony" was typed in after the fact either. There is also the improper format just one point of which is that there is NO TESTIMONY on the page with the signature. It doesn't take a genius to see these glaring problems.

Helena Jr may have said any number of things to her brother, that just further proves my point that she was a drugged out hippie with a penchant for telling tall tales. IF you are so determined to believe her confessions and not believe her recantations then how come you don't believe that she and inmate were doing the horizontal tango? Not to mention the FACT that NONE of Helena's multiple confessions matched the evidence NOR did they match inmate's version of the events of that awful night.

THE FACT is that EVERY SINGLE SOURCED EVIDENTIARY ITEM CAN BE LINKED TO INMATE AS THE SOLE PERP. PERIOD. FACT Henri not your inane lather rinse repeat arguments. PROOF henri not your opinions...
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 August 2017, 05:55 PM   #2997
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 760
Same Old You Know

In typical fashion, the landlord studiously ignored my prior post, and deflected the pesky documented record by mixing and matching unrelated issues. He can hop around the record all he likes, but it is not going to magically go away. There is a reason why the 1979 trial verdict has stood the test of time. One thousand inculpatory evidentiary items will garner a conviction 99.9 percent of the time.

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 11th August 2017, 05:57 PM   #2998
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 760
Same Old You Know What

In typical fashion, the landlord studiously ignored my prior post, and deflected the pesky documented record by mixing and matching unrelated issues. He can hop around the record all he likes, but it is not going to magically go away. There is a reason why the 1979 trial verdict has stood the test of time. One thousand inculpatory evidentiary items will garner a conviction 99.9 percent of the time.

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 12th August 2017, 02:33 AM   #2999
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,666
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
In typical fashion, the landlord studiously ignored my prior post, and deflected the pesky documented record by mixing and matching unrelated issues. He can hop around the record all he likes, but it is not going to magically go away. There is a reason why the 1979 trial verdict has stood the test of time. One thousand inculpatory evidentiary items will garner a conviction 99.9 percent of the time.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
That's a load of bollocks again from JTF. That's a lie to say there were one thousand inculpatory items. There are a thousand items in every murder case, only a few of which are relevant.

Just because Fred Bost thought that Smitty, or Dwight Smith, was not involved is not firm evidence. That's just an opinion and belief from Fred Bost. Fred Bost was never a hard detective, even though he talked a lot of sense about the MacDonald case when he was alive.

Any average Joe would say hello hello hello to himself if he read this statement from Dwight Smith, who I think along with Mazerolle is still alive. Can you not recall where you were two nights before you may have been interviewed by the North Carolina Bureau of Investigation? That's ridiculous and suspicious.:

Quote:
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.
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 August 2017, 09:15 AM   #3000
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 252
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
<snip of fecal matter>


Any average Joe would say hello hello hello to himself if he read this statement from Dwight Smith, who I think along with Mazerolle is still alive. Can you not recall where you were two nights before you may have been interviewed by the North Carolina Bureau of Investigation? That's ridiculous and suspicious.:
You are seriously promoting the idea that a drug user will remember things while high? And that the man (dismissed by your literary hero Bost) was involved in the murders as well?

I know a woman (girl, then) who was a heavy user. She couldn't tell you where she was, what she was doing at the time she was doing it, much less a day or two later. You appear to have led a sheltered life, away from the reality of what recreational drug use truly does.

Last edited by desmirelle; 12th August 2017 at 09:17 AM.
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
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 11:35 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.