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 5th November 2018, 01:08 PM   #681
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 868
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
You are ignoring the practical difficulties and practical points Segal was up against.
No, Segal ignored the FACT that no Judge in any case in the US would authorize the transport of thousands of pieces of evidence across the country for the defense to review. The defense was offered Lab Space in the Raleigh Research Triangle and access to the evidence there, but Bernie Segal decided to waste time trying to have the evidence shipped cross-country instead.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The fact is the MacDonald defense were never allowed to retest the forensic evidence
Untrue henri - they were offered space to test the evidence but Bernie Segal wasted weeks of time trying to get the evidence shipped across country. The FACT is that Bernie didn't really know what the evidence existed of, wasted time asking for what he KNEW wouldn't be granted, and only gave his experts a very short time-frame to test evidence. This left great amounts of the evidence unreviewed. PLUS, the testing that was done, was not scientifically valid.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
in case there had been errors or mistakes, or even properly identify the forensic evidence due to withholding of lab notes and poor markings and labels on the evidence.
OMG the lack of grammar here is really bad....

however, again that was Bernie Segal's fault that the evidence didn't all get reviewed. Not only that but it has been proven several times over that the lab notes were received by the defense. it is not the prosecutions responsibility to point out specific evidentiary items and the associate lab notes. that the defense didn't bother to review the evidence and paperwork associated with said evidence is the fault of the DEFENSE. The prosecution is not required to try the case for the defense, it is not required to make sure the defense reads the documentation, it is not required to provide evidence of motive....

Bernie Segal blew it! He should have waited for Court Martial...since he did not the evidence was able to be reviewed fully during the re-investigation and the case against inmate got stronger! Then the DNA results and BANG the cell door slammed shut forever!
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 5th November 2018, 01:11 PM   #682
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 868
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I don't know for certain if they were CIA psychiatrists or FBI psychiatrists. The fact is that the only psychiatric report on MacDonald which the very bad judge Dupree allowed was the prosecution psychiatric report, while the MacDonald psychiatric reports were banned and disallowed. Judge Dupree was biased and so is Judge Fox. The matter is discussed at this website:
Judge Dupree DID NOT ALLOW ANY PSYCHIATRIC TESTIMONY AT TRIAL. PERIOD. SINCE INMATE WAS NOT GOING FOR A PLEA OF NOT GUILTY BY REASON OF INSANITY THERE WAS NO POINT.

HOWEVER, both the defense and prosecution psychiatrists testimony was allowed at the Grand Jury....but that is irrelevant because the jury at trial was not repeat WAS NOT given any information of psychiatric testing or the results of such testing. 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 5th November 2018, 01:40 PM   #683
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,225
Two Can Play At That Game

Henrietta is not the only one who can rinse and repeat, but the main difference in my use of the old rinse and repeat is that the following narrative is based on documented fact. Unfortunately, Henrietta will not address any of the following facts nor will he or she stray from his or her fantasy world.

In a 1980 confession, Stoeckley claimed that Jeffrey MacDonald was beaten for eight full minutes in the living room, and that Colette was clubbed to death on the master bed by two unidentified people. Stoeckley added that one of the children remained asleep on the master bed as her mother was being beaten to death. In a 1982 confession, Stoeckley claimed that the cult planned on obtaining blood from Colette for ritualistic purposes and that she knew that one of the children was transported back to her own bed, even though she did not witness this event taking place.

The information that Stoeckley provided to Ted Gunderson was included in a 1984 appeal for a new trial. The government responded to this and other appeal issues in a 91-page report. In comparing audiotapes of Stoeckley's interviews with Gunderson to the typed transcripts, the government concluded that "it became apparent that these were not transcripts of recorded interviews but rather questions and answers which had been extracted from the tapes, arranged in a sequence designed to delete conflicting responses by Stoeckley and blended into a transcript like statement, which Stoeckley later initialed."

The government also states that during certain audiotapes, "Stoeckley had come perilously close to contradicting her previous whereabouts." The following note to his secretary made it clear that Gunderson was concerned about Stoeckley's disjointed statements.

"June, this is all we're going to record on this tape. I'm going back and try to pick up the mistakes that I made on the other tapes. So, in order to avoid confusion, that's the end of this tape. Don't type anything more off of it."

The following synopsis of Stoeckley was included in the 91-page report:

"What distinguishes Stoeckley's confession from the others is not only the factual details of the crime which she managed to weave into her narrative (not unlike the malingerer who learns the symptoms of obscure diseases), but also her complex motivations. These motivations include grandiose delusions of her medical and scholastic ability, a propensity for histrionics, a vicarious interest in police matters, and a bizarre conception of herself as a benevolent witch."

The Government also responded to a post-trial claim levied by the MacDonald defense team that Stoeckley's 1979 trial testimony was greatly effected by the "passage of time." The following is an excerpt from the Government's brief:

"Further, that if her lack of memory was due to the passage of time, it is just as likely that Stoeckley's memory lapsed during the four and half years appellant's various interlocutory appeals were pending. In any event the record is clear that appellant's didn't want Stoeckley as a live witness, what he wanted was her unavailable under rule 804 FRE. When the Government foiled this ploy by making her physically available, appellant sought the subterfuge of impeaching her by the use of her hearsay statements. However, it is clear from the record that the passage of time had nothing to do with the exclusion of Stoeckley's statements, but rather, they were excluded because the trial judge found them inherently untrustworthy and excluded them pursuant to 804 (b) (3) FR."

The defense made no mention of how Stoeckley's multiple medical difficulties may have altered her mental state. In the nine-year period leading up to her trial testimony, Stoeckley was diagnosed with hepatitis, she had a stroke, and she was diagnosed with Schizoid Personality Disorder.

In terms of her presence at the crime scene, there is not a shred of physical evidence linking Helena Stoeckley to the murders. In 1971, head hair and fingerprint exemplars were obtained from Stoeckley, and no match was found at the crime scene. In 2006, the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology released their DNA test results on 28 hair exhibits found at the crime scene. None of the exhibits matched the DNA profile of Helena Stoeckley. Stoeckley died in 1983 of pneumonia, brought on by cirrhosis of the liver.

Greg Mitchell

Mitchell was Stoeckley's boyfriend at the time of the murders. Stoeckley implicated Mitchell as being the ringleader of the Stoeckley group. In 1971, CID investigators Dick Mahon and William Ivory interviewed Mitchell, he denied any involvement in the murders, and he passed a CID-administered polygraph exam. The CID collected head hair and fingerprint exemplars from Mitchell, and no match was found at the crime scene. In 1981, the FBI questioned and cleared Mitchell as a suspect. In 2006, the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology released their DNA test results on 28 hair exhibits found at the crime scene. None of the exhibits matched the DNA profile of Greg Mitchell. Mitchell died in 1982 of cirrhosis of the liver.

Bruce Fowler

Fowler was acquainted with Stoeckley, Mitchell, and Don Harris. In 1971, Dick Mahon and William Ivory interviewed Fowler, he denied any involvement in the murders, and he passed a CID-administered polygraph exam. The CID collected head hair and fingerprint exemplars from Fowler, and no match was found at the crime scene. In addition, Fowler had an alibi for his whereabouts on February 17, 1970. Stoeckley's roommate, Kathy Smith, told the CID that she was with Fowler at his trailer on Highway 59 until 7:00 a.m. In 1981, the FBI questioned and cleared Fowler as a suspect.

Don Harris

Harris was acquainted with Stoeckley and Mitchell. The CID obtained fingerprint exemplars from Harris and no match was found at the crime scene. In 1982, the FBI questioned and cleared Harris as a suspect. In 1983, Harris was interviewed by Fayetteville newspaper reporters Steve Huettel and Pat Reese, and he denied any involvement in the murders. Harris called Helena Stoeckley's confessions the "ravings of a madwoman." Harris also had an alibi for the morning of February 17, 1970. Stoeckley roommate Diane Cazares told the CID that Harris was with her at 1108 Clark Street until 5:00 a.m.

Dwight Smith

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

Allen Mazzerolle

Mazzerolle was dealing drugs in the Fayetteville area during the time of the murders and he was well acquainted with Helena Stoeckley. Mazzerolle was arrested on January 28, 1970 for possession and transportation of 539 doses of LSD. He remained in jail until March 10, 1970 making his presence at 544 Castle Drive on February 17th, a physical impossibility. Mazzerolle was questioned by the FBI in 1982 and cleared as a suspect. The FBI also obtained fingerprint exemplars from Mazzerolle and no match was found at the crime scene. In 1983, Mazzerolle was interviewed by Steve Huettel and Pat Reese, and he denied any involvement in the murders. Mazzerolle labeled Stoeckley's statements as "ridiculous," adding that Stoeckley was "the one who fingered me to the narcotics agents."

Cathy Perry

Perry was an acquaintance of Stoeckley's, but Stoeckley did not implicate her in the murders until the early 1980's. In 1971, CID investigators Mike Pickering and Jack Bennett interviewed Perry in Florida and she denied any involvement in the murders. The CID also obtained head hair and fingerprint exemplars from Perry, and no match was found at the crime scene. In 1971, Perry was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, and she had a history of severe drug use.

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

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 5th November 2018 at 01:43 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 6th November 2018, 09:24 AM   #684
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
From 1970-1997, the MacDonald defense team considered Smith to be the prime African-American intruder suspect. Smith lived in the same apartment complex as Pat Reese, he was questioned by the FBI in 1982, and subsequently cleared as a suspect. In 1983, Smith was interviewed by Steve Huettel and Pat Reese, and he denied any involvement in the murders.
I don't know anything about Steve Huettal, but both Pat Reese, who was a curmudgeonly Fayetteville Observer reporter and former drug addict, now deceased, and Dwight Smith were both interviewed by the North Carolina Bureau of Investigation the day after the MacDonald murders. This was to for them to be 'helping with enquiries' as the police say in the UK. The North Carolina Bureau of Investigation and Detective Beasley, and even the FBI were then quickly taken off of the case because the idle and incompetent Army CID said it was their jurisdiction. The FBI came back later and Hoover, the FBI boss at the time, was very much against that at the time.

There is a website which gives some background information to Pat Reese and, in my opinion, Pat Reese was up to his eyeballs in the local drugs scene and Helena Stoeckley group, and he had knowledge in relation to the crime:

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

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 6th November 2018 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 6th November 2018, 02:12 PM   #685
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,225
Your Opinion Is Worthless

HENRIETTA: As I predicted, you didn't address any of the facts in my previous post, and settled on rinsing/repeating your Pat Reese fantasy narrative. Speaking of the late, great Pat Reese...

Upon hearing the details of MacDonald's version of events, newspaper reporters were immediately skeptical of MacDonald's claims. Pat Reese would certainly have placed himself at the front of the skeptic's line. Reese was an investigative reporter for the Fayetteville Observer and he was acquainted with many of the individuals who would later become suspects in the MacDonald murders. One such suspect approached Reese just two days after the murders. Helena Stoeckley told Reese that she had no recollection of her whereabouts on February 17th as a result of her excessive drug use.

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

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

Last edited by JTF; 6th November 2018 at 02:19 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 7th November 2018, 09:52 AM   #686
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
Originally Posted by byn63 View Post
SO WHAT? We don't need you to bring even more irrelevant material to the board.....geez....
Former Detective Chief Inspector Clive Driscoll could be used to reinvestigate the MacDonald case if American detectives are not up to the job, with all their silly jurisdictions. It's not trial by TV, or by CBS, or the Fayetteville Observer, or trial by Joe McGinniss, or trial by Byn and JTF, or the foreman of the jury who was overheard to say he was going go convict the hell out of MacDonald before the trial started. The judges were in bed with the prosecution and rubber stampers and the prosecutors and FBI lab were dishonest. It was judicial corruption. It was not a fair trial.
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 November 2018, 10:15 AM   #687
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 868
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Former Detective Chief Inspector Clive Driscoll could be used to reinvestigate the MacDonald case if American detectives are not up to the job,
Good thing for us some damn fine AMERICAN investigators already did all the investigation necessary. Apparently you don't understand that inmate has already been investigated, tried, AND CONVICTED.


Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It's not trial by TV, or by CBS, or the Fayetteville Observer, or trial by Joe McGinniss, or trial by Byn and JTF, or the foreman of the jury who was overheard to say he was going go convict the hell out of MacDonald before the trial started.
It was NOT trial by TV or CBS. The Fayetteville Observer and Joe McGinniss did not try inmate although they both wrote some VERY GOOD material in relation to inmate and the vicious murders of Colette, Kimberley, Kristen, and unborn baby boy.

Byn and JTF do not pretend to try inmate, which would be ridiculous since he has already been tried and CONVICTED.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The judges were in bed with the prosecution and rubber stampers and the prosecutors and FBI lab were dishonest.
No they were not.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It was judicial corruption.
No judicial corruption.....inmate has been heard before the courts more than any other murderer in US Jurisprudence. your man crush has been found guilty and proven such over and over and over and over again. too bad - stamping your feet and throwing fits is not going to change that FACT.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It was not a fair trial.
The Courts have found differently.

your UK Case is still completely irrelevant and does not belong on this forum. PERIOD

Last edited by byn63; 7th November 2018 at 10:16 AM. Reason: something to add
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 7th November 2018, 01:58 PM   #688
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,225
Living In A Dream World

Henrietta's tangential postings are in stark contrast to the laser focus of everyone who helped to put inmate in his concrete bunker. It started with Franz Grebner, William Ivory, and Robert Shaw making inmate squirm in his seat and cry like a petulant child. Peter Kearns and Jack Pruett proved that inmate was a serial cheater, liar, and mass murderer. Freddy Kassab's persistence resulted in inmate making up stories about killing a mythical home invader and later having to face the Grand Jury. Brian Murtagh and James Blackburn did a marvelous job of convincing a jury that inmate should spend the rest of his life in prison.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 7th November 2018 at 02:01 PM.
JTF is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2018, 08:08 PM   #689
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 481
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
You are ignoring the practical difficulties and practical points Segal was up against. The fact is the MacDonald defense were never allowed to retest the forensic evidence in case there had been errors or mistakes, or even properly identify the forensic evidence due to withholding of lab notes and poor markings and labels on the evidence. The problem is discussed in general in this scholarly article on the internet:
Challenge: Name one thing related to the highlighted sentence that wasn't generated by Segal and/or his staff (under his direction).

Point of fact: your "scholarly" article" fails to address precisely how it applies to the Macdonald case, as it so general, Ted Bundy could have used it.

Personal request: Would you stick to the Family Annihilator Jeffrey Macdonald and stop referencing cases with no relevance?
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 November 2018, 03:53 AM   #690
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
It's no good being narrow-minded about all this. There are similarities between difficult murders around the world and forensic labs can learn from each other. The world does not revolve around Fayetteville.

I suppose MacDonald and even Segal could be faulted for being complacent about the grave peril MacDonald was in from false evidence and dishonest prosecutors and biased judges in the 1970's. I expect Segal was also involved with other cases at the time as well. Frankly, I don't think MacDonald wanted to spend large sums of money which might land him in ruin in trying to prove his innocence then. It was only when he was wrongly put beyond bars that he splashed out on his own professional criminal investigators, and also then made a great effort to have the forensic evidence retested.

Now he seems to have run out of money for any of that. Shedlick who has since died seems to have been the last MacDonald criminal professional investigator, and his lawyers now may be working pro bono, or having their legal fees paid by the MacDonald Defense Fund.

This is an example of the lack of careful preparation Dr. Thonton was up against for the 1979 trial in one of his affidavits:

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.c...jthornton.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 8th November 2018, 06:27 AM   #691
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 868
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It's no good being narrow-minded about all this.
You realize it is no good being narrow-minded yet you continue to do so post after post after post.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There are similarities between difficult murders around the world and forensic labs can learn from each other.
similarities there may be BUT similar and identical they are not. this forum is about the brutal vicious slaughter of Colette, Kimberley, Kristen, and unborn son by the man who should have protected them. Other cases, especially those from the UK are irrelevant.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The world does not revolve around Fayetteville.
No, it does not but a HUGE portion of this case does......

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I suppose MacDonald and even Segal could be faulted for being complacent about the grave peril MacDonald was in from false evidence and dishonest prosecutors and biased judges in the 1970's.
inmate was in grave peril because he slaughtered his family in a vicious and brutally savage manner then tried to cover it up with a baloney story mimicking the Manson Family murders. Since there was no false evidence, dishonest prosecutors, or biased Judges involved in this case inmate was not in peril from anything like that....

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I expect Segal was also involved with other cases at the time as well.
perhaps he was but it is irrelevant.....

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Frankly, I don't think MacDonald wanted to spend large sums of money which might land him in ruin in trying to prove his innocence then.
Your right, inmate didn't want to spend large amounts of money because he was sure he was such much smarter than everyone else that he'd get away the his crimes. Too bad for inmate, he is not as smart as he thinks he is and several extremely intelligent men (and women) working together proved inmate guilty.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It was only when he was wrongly put beyond bars that he splashed out on his own professional criminal investigators,
he was not wrongfully convicted but yes, he did hire private investigators after his conviction.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
and also then made a great effort to have the forensic evidence retested.
JTF I leave this comment to you for reply......

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Now he seems to have run out of money for any of that.
Boo hoo! Sell the houses in California.....of course, it won't help he is not getting out of prison as he is guilty as sin.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Shedlick who has since died seems to have been the last MacDonald criminal professional investigator,
Yes Shedlick was one of the investigators that inmate hired. Sadly it is Shedlick's fault that certain macolites cling to the AM was out on bail fallacy. Shedlick requested the bail documents for AM and the man who was arrested with him. When the package arrived he did not open it or read it until much later.....he ASSUMED that both men were bailed out at the same time. Later, he received another package containing the bail records for AM and realized that he was incorrect about when AM was released.....HE ADMITTED HE WAS WRONG AND THAT AM COULD NOT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED but certain troll type macolites refuse to accept the truth. (not surprising as they never accept the truth about anything)

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
and his lawyers now may be working pro bono, or having their legal fees paid by the MacDonald Defense Fund.
Pro Bono is the most likely as there is no money in the defense fund unless you have recently made a donation.....
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 November 2018, 10:57 AM   #692
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,121
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
snippy

I suppose MacDonald and even Segal could be faulted for being complacent about the grave peril MacDonald was in from false evidence and dishonest prosecutors and biased judges in the 1970's.

snip
A fair and just observer would note that inmate's peril was that their lies would be discovered, which is exactly what happened.
__________________
"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 8th November 2018, 01:06 PM   #693
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,225
Closing Your Eyes, Covering Your Ears

HENRIETTA: You just can't help yourself, can you? Nine years before inmate hired Ted Gunderson, then supporter Freddy Kassab was seeking out investigators to assist his son in-law. Look Magazine agreed to investigate this case and Kassab called inmate to express the "good" news. Kassab recorded this phone call and inmate clearly had no interest in this potential investigation.

He subsequently told Kassab that any further investigative inquiries would be handled by Bernie Segal. Kassab was so angered by this response that he hung up the phone. A few months later, inmate called Kassab and claimed he killed one of the hippie home invaders. The content of both phone calls are included in the true crime masterpiece Fatal Vision, but you already knew that, didn't you?

In his 1998 Vanity Fair article on this case, Robert Sam Anson pointed out that prior to Shedlick being hired, inmate hired an unnamed New York City private investigator. After a few months of investigation, this investigator processed with inmate that he could no longer be of assistance. Why? Well, because all of the information he had collected pointed towards inmate's guilt.

In terms of having the evidence "retested" after he was convicted of murdering his family, well, he did have it retested. In 1990, the FBI analyzed several hair and fiber exhibits in this case and in 2006, the AFIP completed DNA testing on 29 evidentiary exhibits. None of the hairs, fibers, or DNA exhibits were definitively sourced to a member of the Stoeckley Seven.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 8th November 2018 at 01:09 PM.
JTF is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2018, 03:18 AM   #694
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
In his 1998 Vanity Fair article on this case, Robert Sam Anson pointed out that prior to Shedlick being hired, inmate hired an unnamed New York City private investigator. After a few months of investigation, this investigator processed with inmate that he could no longer be of assistance. Why? Well, because all of the information he had collected pointed towards inmate's guilt.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
What Kassab said, or Vanity Fair said, is not evidence. Kassab was going off his head at the time. He was listening to CID agent Kearns and Kassab's wife, Colette's mother, perjured herself as a matter of course at the 1979 trial. What was the name of this unnamed private investigator? Was he involved in bad police work as well? CBS think Burke did it in the JonBenet Ramsey case and Fox News think Patsy did it in the same case! JTF needs to start eliciting information and the truth, and stop making it up. The Army CID and FBI lab and very bad judges and the foreman of the jury and 'fake news' journalists are not to be trusted. There needs to be facts and not opinions or manufactured 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 9th November 2018, 05:18 AM   #695
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 868
GEEZ, henri(etta) just has to be ridiculous and ignore FACT related to the case under discussion and by continuing to bring up unrelated irrelevant cases.

FACTS - over 1,100 pieces of evidence were presented at trial via 28 witnesses both lay and expert.

Freddy Kassab arranged for investigative journalists from LOOK Magazine to investigate this case and inmate shut it down. Why? because he didn't have a hope in hell of controlling the situation and there would be no way LOOK would write a "tortured innocent" article if the facts were as we know them to be.....the lady from PEOPLE found out what happens when you write and publish articles without fact checking....the backlash was intense and it cost her the job!
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 November 2018, 06:40 AM   #696
AnimalFriendly
Scholar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 119
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
(piffle snipped) Kassab's wife, Colette's mother, perjured herself as a matter of course at the 1979 trial.

(more piffle snipped)
Really? hmmmm.....Please refresh my memory as to what perjury charges were filed against her in 1979.
AnimalFriendly 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 November 2018, 10:02 AM   #697
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
Colette's mother falsely testified at the 1979 trial that there was an icepick in the MacDonald apartment when previously she had denied that was the case. The babysitter Kalin also lied about the icepick matter when she admitted that she had told the FBI in 1970 that here was no icepick at the the apartment. At the Grand Jury and trial after talking to Murtagh, or being bribed by Murtagh, she testified that there was an icepick in the apartment.

Wade Smith closely cross-examined the babysitter about that matter at the trial. I could quote you the details but for some reason the Jeffrey MacDonald information website is out of action at the moment. I hope that's not permanent. Topix forum seems to have totally packed up for months for some unknown reason.

Helena Stoeckley lied like a trooper as well. Her lawyer Leonard explained that at the 2012 evidentiary hearing.
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 November 2018, 10:14 AM   #698
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
This is what I have previously posted on this forum about Helena Stoeckley being a liar and telling her lawyer, Leonard the truth, but I now can't find the exact reference. It's just I agree with it:

Quote:
What Stoeckley told Leonard in 1979, while the MacDonald trial was in progress, has this ambit of trustworthiness. The importance of her statement to Leonard that she was in the house when the murders occurred
can hardly be overstated. In the words of the government’s own witnesses, Joe. McGinniss, it would have been the “holy grail” for the defense. (Htp. 987) It would be eyewitness evidence, a firsthand account, of intruders. If the jury had heard those three words, the circumstantial evidence of intruders that was existing at trial, even before that circumstantial evidence was augmented by other evidence that has been amassed in the intervening years that is within the ambit of the “evidence as a whole.”
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 November 2018, 07:52 PM   #699
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,225
Henrietta's Con Game

The bad news for this forum is that Henrietta continues to troll on several threads (e.g., MacDonald, Routier, Ramsey), but there is good news to share. For the most part, forum members have been in concert in regards to calling out Henrietta for his or her lame attempts to advocate for psychopaths.

On each thread, Henrietta embraces conspiracy theories and hearsay testimony, while purposely ignoring most of the concrete evidence that pointed towards the most logical perp. Even though Henrietta will continue to rinse and repeat prior talking points, it's important to continually put her or him on notice.

This is all a game to Henrietta and he or she enjoys every minute of it. Engaging in a healthy discussion about the facts of each case does not interest Henrietta, because doing so does not elicit the kind of response that he or she is seeking. Henrietta's lone goal is tick off those who adhere to critical thought.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 9th November 2018 at 07:54 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 9th November 2018, 08:16 PM   #700
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,225
Still Waiting

HENRIETTA: Still waiting on that evidentiary item that was sourced to a member of the Stoeckley Seven. You can jump around the Kassab issue until you pass out from exhaustion, but the simple fact of the matter is that Freddy recorded most of inmate's lies on audio tape. Your favorite child killer had to admit to a Grand Jury that he lied about killing one of the mythical hippie home invaders, but even that admission contained another lie.

Three months prior to telling Kassab this monster lie, he told family friend Bob Stern the same story. To this day, inmate claims that he made up this story to appease Kassab, but we now know that he had concocted this same lie months before the infamous phone call to the Kassab residence. Inmate was such a prodigious liar that even he couldn't keep track of his lies.

Speaking of Bob Stern, inmate had a sexual relationship with Stern's ex-wife, his teenage daughter, and he threatened to crush his 10 year old son's head against a dock in the early 80's. Inmate has admitted to having a sexual relationship with Bob Stern's ex-wife, but he has attempted to minimize the nature of his physical threats towards Danny Stern, calling the incident "rough horseplay."

This kind of stuff is simply icing on a 1,000 pound evidentiary cake. The inculpatory DNA test results are the big, fat candle placed on top of the cake. Inmate is not simply guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, he is guilty beyond ALL doubt.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 9th November 2018 at 08:20 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 November 2018, 03:19 AM   #701
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
HENRIETTA: Still waiting on that evidentiary item that was sourced to a member of the Stoeckley Seven. You can jump around the Kassab issue until you pass out from exhaustion, but the simple fact of the matter is that Freddy recorded most of inmate's lies on audio tape. Your favorite child killer had to admit to a Grand Jury that he lied about killing one of the mythical hippie home invaders, but even that admission contained another lie.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
This is MacDonald's side of the story about that Kassab matter and I believe him:

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0310/24/lkl.00.html

Quote:
KING: Because of an appearance on Dick Cavett or because you told him you'd taken care of -- give me -- what happened between you and your father-in-law?

MACDONALD: Well, there are two versions. There's one that is documented in facts and records, and that is that when I moved to California, his wife, my mother-in-law, and my father-in-law threatened me. They said, You're abandoning us. You're abandoning the family. I said, Look, the tragedy has destroyed me and my life. I've lost Colette, Kim and Kris forever. I'm going to try to rebuild my life. They said, If you move to California, you will live to regret it. You're abandoning us. I said, I'm not -- this is in front of witnesses. There's other people who were at this meeting. But what Mr. Kassab said...

KING: That was his name?

MACDONALD: That was his name. Alfred and Mildred Kassab were my in-laws.

KING: They're both gone now.

MACDONALD: They're both gone, and they have passed away in the '90s. What they said years later was that a lie that I did, in fact, tell Alfred, tell Freddy, which he knew at the time wasn't really true -- he said that is what changed his view of me. It's not true...

KING: Not the Dick Cavett interview?

MACDONALD: Not the Dick Cavett interview. He also claims, years later, that the Dick Cavett interview was a surprise to him. In fact, Freddy Kassab helped set up the Dick Cavett interview. Allard Lowenstein, congressman from New York...

KING: Famous.

MACDONALD: ... and Alfred Kassab set up my interview on Dick Cavett. Years later, when Freddy changed his tack on this case and had become his...

KING: Obsessed with you.

MACDONALD: ... obsessed, and obsessed with publicity and being in front of the case -- and, very important you understand this, he was wined and dined very carefully by the CID agents.

KING: Why did they want you?

MACDONALD: I don't know that they wanted me, at first. I think once the investigation started, it becomes a team effort. I don't have major conspiracies in my head. I think it's...

KING: You don't?

MACDONALD: ... very simple. No. I think a bad cop made bad decisions that morning. Then they put me through the Article 32. Then I accused them on the Dick Cavett show of committing perjury under oath, which they did do.

KING: Your mistake was telling your father-in-law that you had the killers taken care of, right, to get him off your back? Is that correct?

MACDONALD: I did say that to him. What I was trying to do was give Mildred and Freddy a little closure. They had...

KING: No, I understand.

MACDONALD: ... shut up their house. They had turned off the lights, literally. They had a life-sized doll dressed in clothes from the kids. And I was trying to give them -- I said, Freddy, look, some of the Green Berets I know and I found this guy. We took care of it. And it was a really bad decision. I shouldn't have said that. But that is not what changed Alfred, Kassab.

KING: We'll be right back with Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald. We're going to talk about that DNA appeal, talk about his marriage. He's married now. Lots more to come. Don't go away.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 10th November 2018 at 03:22 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 10th November 2018, 05:00 AM   #702
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,225
A Psychopath's Word Is Worthless

HENRIETTA: Still waiting on that evidentiary item that was definitively sourced to a member of the Stoeckley Seven. Your belief in MacDonald's word is nothing new, and you've never come close to addressing the vast differences between his absurd story and the inculpatory nature of the physical evidence. In regards to inmate's claims on Larry King Live.

- Freddy was still a supporter of inmate when inmate made the infamous phone call. Ergo, inmate's claim that Freddy "knew at the time" that his hippie killing story "wasn't really true," is just another fabrication.

- The first time that inmate admitted that he concocted this story was before the Grand Jury in 1974. This clearly demonstrates that back in 1971, inmate thought he pulled the wool over Freddy's eyes.

- Freddy never stated that he was surprised that inmate appeared on the Dick Cavett Show. The context of Kassab's surprise AND disgust was in reference to inmate's performance on the show.

- Inmate leaves out the fact that during a recorded phone conversation, Allard Lowenstein told Freddy Kassab that inmate "will say anything to anybody." This reminds me of a certain poster on this thread.

- Inmate was trying to get Freddy off his back. Bringing closure to the Kassab's was the last thing on his mind.

Despite inmate's penchant for making fecal matter up, it pales in comparison to the 1,000 pieces of evidence presented at trial and the inculpatory DNA test results.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 10th November 2018 at 05:04 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 10th November 2018, 10:16 AM   #703
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
What one thousand pieces of evidence? One thousand pieces of opinions more like. The evidence that was presented to the court under the Federal Rules of Evidence was quite ludicrously unsatisfactory. The Army CID couldn't detect a barking dog nuisance. If they had been good and astute detectives they would have DNA tested the clothing of the real culprits long ago, or at least kept that clothing in storage before it could be destroyed.

The 4th Circuit judges did report a bit of sense on the case in 1980 in a lengthy ruling before the corrupt judge Dupree and Murtagh and Joe McGinniss managed to get at them later on:

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal...32/258/218171/

Quote:
We, therefore, remand the case to the district court with directions to set aside its judgment, vacate the sentences, and dismiss the indictment.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 10th November 2018 at 10:20 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 10th November 2018, 01:54 PM   #704
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,225
Playing Dumb

HENRIETTA: I guess you decided to tap into the "me no nothing" portion of your persona? In the real world, the prosecution presented OVER 1,000 pieces of evidence at the 1979 trial, and this evidence was strong enough to convince a jury to convict inmate in less than 7 hours. This same evidence was also strong enough to keep inmate in prison for 37 of the past 39 years. Oh, still waiting on that evidentiary item that was sourced to a member of Stoeckley Seven.

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 10th November 2018, 02:06 PM   #705
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 481
Henri(etta):

Damn near everyone who owned a freezer owned an icepick in the late sixties/early seventies. No automatic defrosters and the freezer generated ice you had to chip away to get what you wanted. The babysitter and Mildred did not lie, your man crush did to cover up the fact that the icepick was HIS.
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 November 2018, 03:11 AM   #706
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,225
Ron Harrison

Piggybacking on Desmirelle's post, Henrietta has a history of tapping into his or her "me no nothing" persona whenever he or she brings up the ice pick issue. This persona consistently ignores the FACT that in 1971, Ron Harrison admitted to the CID that inmate was looking for an ice pick in his residence 3 months prior to the murders. Harrison repeated this claim to the Grand Jury in 1974. Harrison was one of inmate's closest friends at Fort Bragg and inmate admitted to the CID that they discussed the details of an article in the Esquire Magazine found under the living room table. The reason that the prosecution didn't call Harrison as a trial witness was due to the fact that he didn't actually see the ice pick in the MacDonald residence.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 11th November 2018 at 03:13 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 11th November 2018, 03:33 AM   #707
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
Originally Posted by desmirelle View Post
Henri(etta):

Damn near everyone who owned a freezer owned an icepick in the late sixties/early seventies. No automatic defrosters and the freezer generated ice you had to chip away to get what you wanted. The babysitter and Mildred did not lie, your man crush did to cover up the fact that the icepick was HIS.
The story as I have always understood it is that MacDonald always thought he owned an ice pick but it seemed to have got lost in the removal from Cleveland, or wherever it was, to the Fort Bragg/Fayetteville apartment. There was some sort of a family party prior to the MacDonald murders involving family friend Ron Harrison in which Ron Harrison and MacDonald went to search for an ice pick but they couldn't find one. Ron Harrison did testify about this matter at the Grand Jury in 1975, but unfortunately the Jeffrey MacDonald information website is out of action at the moment so I can't provide details. It could be that Murtagh and Judge Fox are now covering up the evidence so that the public and 4th Circuit judges and journalists are now kept in the dark.

This is some of the garbage JTF has posted about the matter in the past. Murtagh got the babysitter Kalin and Colette's mother to perjure themselves about it in the courtroom and Ron Harrison was never called to testify about it to the jury in 1979. It's crucial evidence and the truth should have been elicited :

Quote:
PS: Harrison was considered a loose cannon and even MacDonald was sometimes nervous around him. Harrison was a classic Type A personality who reveled in telling stories about how he killed people in combat. Although his testimony at the Grand Jury hearings helped the prosecution, his unpredictability forced them to use Mildred Kassab and Pamala Kalin at trial. Murtagh/Blackburn felt that Kassab/Kalin would be better witnesses in regards to placing the ice pick at 544 Castle Drive.
http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
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 November 2018, 03:40 AM   #708
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
Ron Harrison explained himself about not finding any ice pick in the MacDonald apartment at this website. It casts very real doubts about whether there actually was an ice pick in the MacDonald apartment at the time of the MacDonald murders. It's just about legible:

http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_ma..._harrison.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 11th November 2018, 11:06 AM   #709
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,225
Touching A Nerve

HENRIETTA: Still waiting on that evidentiary item that was definitively sourced to a member of the Stoeckley Seven. Garbage, eh? It appears that I've touched a nerve. The source of that garbage (e.g., Harrison considered a loose cannon) was your favorite child killer. Whoops. In regards to Harrison's admission that inmate was looking for an ice pick, logic dictates that inmate wouldn't be looking for an ice pick in his residence if he didn't own one.

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 November 2018, 12:59 PM   #710
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 481
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The story as I have always understood it (snipped the rest of the crap)

The story as you have always understood it has never had anything to do with the facts of the case, McPhee. That Macdonald's best friend testified that Mac was looking for the ice pick meant the ice pick existed and Macdonald knew he (macdonald) owned one and it was present in the home. This testimony was then backed up by two others who had seen/used the ice pick. There was an ice pick in the Macdonald quarters, three witnesses (one of whom was your man crush's buddy) testified at differing times during the long, drawn-out process of getting Jeffrey Macdonald convicted for slaughtering his pregnant wife Colette, and daughters Kim and Kris.
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 12th November 2018, 03:29 AM   #711
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
The point is that the babysitter Kalin Cochran and Colette's mother were both coached by Murtagh to provide false evidence in court about an ice pick when there was never any real evidence or proof that there ever was an ice pick in the MacDonald apartment. That's a serious matter for MacDonald. I believe Ron Harrison was telling the truth and that Murtagh was never able to coach Ron Harrison to lie about the matter. That's why he was never called to testify at the trial, but only at the Grand Jury.

The matter was discussed with the babysitter at the MacDonald trial with Wade Smith. The babysitter's answers were not at all satisfactory whatever Dupree thought about the matter at an appeal. Crime Archives still seems to be on the internet but I can't copy their transcript. The FBI and Justice Department and Judge Fox will be trying to close down this forum at this rate because they don't want the truth to come out as they seem to have done with Topix Forum and the old A&E forum and the Jeffrey MacDonald information website:

http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_ma...in_pamela.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 12th November 2018, 10:26 AM   #712
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
There is a website on the internet about the MacDonald case which is an extraordinary mixture of inventions and untruths and opinions but some of it is relevant and may even be true:

http://mileswmathis.com/fatal.pdf

Quote:
The judge of the MacDonald trial, Franklin Dupree, was the father-in-law of James Proctor, the Assistant US Attorney who prosecuted the case after the Army officially dropped it. That isn't even legal, since it indicates an obvious conflict of interest. Proctor and Dupree came out of the same law firm. And, as it turns out, Proctor was also military, being a Captain in the Reserves. Also unbelievable is that this same Judge Dupree presided at the grand jury, presided at the trial itself, and heard the appeals at the district level. That is also illegal, since a judge can't decide the appeal of his own trial, for obvious reasons. He would be appealing to himself—judging his own actions. On page 35, Gunderson tells us that “Dupree ruled that he didn't make any mistakes”. You have got to be kidding me. They actually published that sentence in a book?

Just below that, Potter asks the question,
Why would Gunderson put himself out on the edge for a child killer, if the detective didn't sincerely believe there was something terribly wrong with the conviction? He was setting himself against his own outfit, the FBI, and aligning himself with a cruel, sick individual. Why would Gunderson do this for a case that didn't appear to have a chance in hell of being overturned?

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 12th November 2018 at 10:30 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 12th November 2018, 02:05 PM   #713
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 481
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There is a website on the internet about the MacDonald case which is an extraordinary mixture of inventions and untruths and opinions
Much like your posts, which - I suspect - is part of it's appeal for you. I noted that the fact that Proctor and Dupree were NOT related at the time Dupree took the case is ignored (the lack of "former" in front of "son-in-law"). Again.

And Potter is obviously asking a rhetorical question, since Gunderson never met a conspiracy theory he didn't immediately fall in love and adopt.
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 12th November 2018, 02:15 PM   #714
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,225
Red Herrings

HENRIETTA: Still waiting on that evidentiary item that was definitively sourced to a member of the Stoeckley Seven. There are several reasons why inmate's advocates tend to skirt around the inculpatory nature of the physical evidence in this case. This inculpatory evidence (e.g., DNA, fibers, blood, bloody and non-bloody fabric impressions, bloody footprints) forces advocates to focus on side issues and red herrings. This includes Proctor's role in this case, Stoeckley's credibility or lack thereof, and the alleged railroading of inmate by the CID, FBI, and DOJ.

In essence, inmate's advocates are consistently trying to bang square evidentiary pegs into round evidentiary holes. They present a hodge podge of issues with no common thread. It's a logistical mess, but they have no choice but to get down and dirty. In terms of Gunderson putting "himself out on the edge for a child killer," it comes down to money. Inmate paid him a handsome sum for his investigative work, but their professional relationship ended when Gunderson asked inmate for more cash in order to extend his failed investigation. This case started Gunderson on a downward spiral that destroyed his reputation and turned him into a conspiracy nut.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 12th November 2018 at 02:22 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 14th November 2018, 09:39 AM   #715
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
It was corrupt judges.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2018, 09:56 AM   #716
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,121
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It was corrupt judges.
Even if the judges were "corrupt," that fact wouldn't preclude inmate from murdering his family, which is what he did.

Your man crush is a nasty piece of work.
__________________
"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 14th November 2018, 10:12 AM   #717
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Even if the judges were "corrupt," that fact wouldn't preclude inmate from murdering his family, which is what he did.

Your man crush is a nasty piece of work.
MacDonald is a damn good chap. It seems to be quite easy to get away with murder in America and then blame it all on somebody who is completely innocent. The juries in America seem to be like a lot of ten year olds. There needs to be some good murder investigators on these difficult 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 14th November 2018, 02:17 PM   #718
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,225
No Shame

HENRIETTA: You have no shame. The "damn good chap" you refer to inflicted the following injuries to a pregnant woman and two small children.

Colette MacDonald sustained severe blunt trauma injuries to her head and arms. She was struck at least six times in the head with a blunt object, resulting in lacerations to her right temple, left temple, forehead, and on top of her head. All of these lacerations were deep enough to expose bone.
She also received two blows under her chin resulting in extensive bruising to the left front chin area and the right front chin area.

There was a small fracture in the midline portion of Colette's skull. The blunt trauma injuries to Colette's arms were defensive-type wounds. Colette's right wrist was fractured and the inner aspect of her upper arm bore an extensive bruise and a superficial abrasion. The fingers and hand of her right arm had extensive black and blue marks associated with abrasions. Her left arm was also fractured in two places.

Colette sustained nine deep knife wounds at the front of her neck, seven deep knife wounds to her chest, and 21 puncture wounds to her chest area. Colette's chest also bore a pattern bruise which indicated she had been struck at arm's length by a bayonet-type thrust with the end of a blunt object.

Kimberley MacDonald was struck at least three times in the head with a blunt object. The first blow resulted in her blood being spattered on the door frame leading to the master bedroom. Kimberley's right cheek, right ear, and right mastoid area had overlapping black and blue marks and irregular abrasions.

Her right eye was recessed and she had a fractured nose which was deviated to the right. Her left cheekbone was fractured and a piece of the cheekbone was protruding through the skin. Kimberley's skull showed multiple fractures and the dome portion of her skull was fractured through its entire thickness, and slightly dislocated. Eight to 10 deep knife wounds were found on the right side of her neck.

Kristen MacDonald sustained 12 gaping knife wounds to her upper back, four wounds to the chest, and one wound to the neck. Two of the wounds to her back penetrated her heart, causing massive internal bleeding. Fifteen shallow puncture wounds were found in her chest as well as multiple cuts on both of her hands.

There was a through-and-through laceration of the skin involving the middle of the right ring finger. This laceration was deep enough to expose bone and the index finger of the right hand revealed a triangular flap of skin.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 14th November 2018 at 02:19 PM.
JTF is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 03:18 AM   #719
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,582
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
HENRIETTA: You have no shame. The "damn good chap" you refer to inflicted the following injuries to a pregnant woman and two small children.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
That's strained logic. You are ASSUMING that he did it and ignoring the rules of evidence and procedure and disregarding leads and suspects. For one thing if any bodies were moved by a faint possibility, as Helena Stoeckley may have suggested once, there isn't a shred of evidence they were moved by MacDonald.

This sort of thing was mentioned in an old book called English Justice by a police court solicitor published in 1932:

Quote:
A man who is convicted, even though guilty, merely on suspicion without having the case against him proved, will cherish resentment even more bitterly than will an innocent man. Those who hear the trial and don't know him to be guilty, will be satisfied that there has been a miscarriage of justice and will lose the confidence in our courts which is essential to security. Worst of all, the admission of irregularities into the trial of a guilty man will infallibly lead to similar things taking place when innocent men come before the Court.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 09:28 AM   #720
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,225
Inferences

HENRIETTA: I assume nothing, but the combined work of the CID, FBI, and DOJ does allow me to infer the following.

In the early morning hours of February 17, 1970, Colette and Jeffrey MacDonald get into a heated argument in the master bedroom. The verbal confrontation escalates and MacDonald punches Colette in the face. Colette grabs a hairbrush and uses it to strike her husband over the left eye. The area over MacDonald's left eye begins to bruise and swell. Colette then touches her bloody face with her hand, unaware that her husband's anger was about to turn into blind rage. Instinctively, she reaches out and grabs her husband's pajama top by the yoke or front portion of the top and as they grapple, some of the blood from Colette's face spatters on her husband's pajama top.

Colette pulls straight down on the front portion of the pajama top as her husband spins to his right resulting in a 72-inch tear down the left front seam and left sleeve. This tearing action bisects four stains on the pajama top formed in Colette's blood. The stains are located on the left front seam, left shoulder, left sleeve, and left cuff. In the process of pulling down the left front seam of the pajama top, Colette's bloody hand comes in direct contact with the pocket resulting in her blood being found on the face of the pocket in six locations before the pocket was torn from the garment. During this grappling phase, Colette has also managed to use her left hand to rip out a hair from her husband's exposed left arm.

Once the tearing of the top is complete, dozens of fibers from the left front seam and left sleeve fall to the carpet in the master bedroom. The pocket from the pajama top is completely dislodged from the garment and falls on to the upturned portion of a throw rug. The shifting of Colette's and MacDonald's feet during this "death dance" causes eight throw rug fibers and seven pajama fibers to become entangled under the throw rug.

MacDonald hits Colette in the face a second time in order to free himself from her grasp. He grabs a wooden club that was holding up a corner portion of the master bed footboard and thrusts one end of the club into Colette's chest. This thrusting motion formed a large pattern bruise on his wife's chest.

Kimberley entered the master bedroom and her father immediately turned and hit his daughter with the club on the left side of her face. This savage blow resulted in Kimberley's blood being spattered on the master bedroom door frame and she immediately falls to the floor near the entrance to the master bedroom. Blood from Kimberley's broken nose and a gaping wound on her shattered left cheekbone forms a six-inch circle of blood near the entrance to the master bedroom.

Colette obtained the Geneva Forge knife and slashed her husband's abdomen resulting in an upside down "V" laceration. MacDonald retaliated with two brutal blows with the club to Colette's head. One blow struck Colette on the left temple and the other on the right temple. Both blows tore her skin down to the bone and spattered her blood inside the closet, on the carpet near the footboard of the master bed, and on top of the master bed. Colette was knocked unconscious by these two blows and she came to rest on the master bedroom floor between the closet and the footboard.

MacDonald assumes that his wife and daughter are dead or near death. He strips the blue bedsheet and the multi-colored bedspread from the master bed, and 22 fibers from his torn pajama top disperse on to the bottom sheet. He picks up Kimberley in the blue bedsheet and begins to carry her back to her bedroom. The direct contact between MacDonald and Kimberley results in a transfer of Kimberley's blood to MacDonald's pajama top, and to the blue bedsheet. As he transports Kimberley in the bedsheet, her blood drips on to the hallway floor.

MacDonald places Kimberley in her bed and begins to adjust her body in a sleeping position. During this adjustment process, 14 fibers from his torn pajama top fall on top of her bed, a single pajama fiber is moved under her pillow, and a twenty-inch yarn from his pajama top falls on top of that same pillow. MacDonald then obtains the club and strikes Kimberley with two brutal blows on the right side of her face. Cast-off blood from both Colette and Kimberley is sprayed on the wall, and Kimberley's blood is spattered on to the ceiling. He then covers Kimberley's body with her blanket and bedcovers.

MacDonald decides to go into the kitchen area to retrieve the Old Hickory knife. He paces in the kitchen, leaving behind minute traces of blood on top of the kitchen stove, south kitchen wall, northwest corner of the kitchen wall, on top of the stove, and on the refrigerator door handle. He also leaves minute traces of blood on a pair of oven mitts and a pair of dish gloves.

MacDonald walks into Kristen's room and stabs her in the chest as she lay in her bed. Kristen thrusts her hands out to defend herself, resulting in a fiber from her father's pajama top being lodged under her fingernail and several knife cuts on her hands. MacDonald then grabs Kristen by the collar portion of her pajama top and pulls her face down towards the edge of her bed. He stabs her in the back 12 times with such force that two of the stab wounds penetrate her heart. He places his daughter back into a sleeping postion on her bed, two fibers from his torn pajama top fall within her body outline, and he subsequently places the top sheet over a portion of her body.

MacDonald decides to launder the blue bedsheet in the kitchen. As he enters the dining room, he hears Colette stagger into Kristen's room and he drops the bedsheet on to the dining room floor. Colette briefly touches Kristen's body, transferring small traces of Kristen's blood to her hands. MacDonald enters Kristen's room with club in hand. Colette turns to face her husband and he hits her under the chin with the club. The force of the blow lifts Colette off of her feet and propels her over Kristen's inert body. Colette lands in a semi-seated position in the left hand corner of Kristen's bed near the headboard. Colette places her arms in front of her face in an attempt to ward off the overhand blows from the club. Colette's arms are shattered and she receives two more vicious blows to her head. One of the blows fractures her skull. Cast-off blood from Colette is sprayed on the wall, her upper body slumps forward, and she bleeds directly on Kristen's bottom sheet.

He rests the club on Kristen's green bedspread and Kimberley's blood transfers from the club to the bedspread. MacDonald then goes into the living room to read the Esquire magazine article on the Manson murders. He leaves a bloody smudge on the leading edge of the magazine as he begins leafing through the article. MacDonald puts his glasses on to read the article, he transfers a small amount of Kristen's blood to his glasses, and then tosses the glasses under the window after he is through with the article. MacDonald then stacks some magazines and children's games on the living room floor. He places the Esquire magazine under a box containing a child's game, and tips the living room coffee table on its side. The coffee table ends up resting on top of that box.

MacDonald picks up the blue bedsheet from the dining room floor, blood on the bedsheet from Colette and Kimberley leaves smudge marks on the floor, and MacDonald retrieves the multi-colored bedspread from the master bedroom. MacDonald places the multi-colored bedspread on the floor in Kristen's room and goes back to the kitchen to obtain surgeon's gloves and an ice pick. The surgeon's gloves are located under the sink and in the process of bending down to open the sink cabinet, blood from MacDonald's abdominal wound drips on to the kitchen floor. He also leaves a minute trace of blood on the inside of the sink cabinet.

MacDonald lifts Colette's body off of Kristen's bed, blood from Colette's body drips on to the sheet covering Kristen's body at hip level, and he places his wife face down on the multi-colored bedspread. He then places the blue bedsheet over her back, rolls her body slightly, and picks her up in the bedsheet in a cradle position. The bedsheet and bedspread both contain massive direct bleeding stains from Colette. Blood from MacDonald's and Colette's pajama cuffs form bloody fabric impressions on the blue bedsheet. MacDonald also leaves two bloody handprint impressions, a chin impression, and a bare left shoulder impression on the bedsheet.

In addition to the bloody fabric and non-fabric impressions on the blue bedsheet, MacDonald has transferred a bloody head hair from Kimberley and a bloody head hair from Colette to the multi-colored bedspread. Colette's bloody head hair was entwined with a fiber from MacDonald's pajama top, indicating direct contact. A forcibly removed body hair from Colette was also found on the blue bedsheet. In the process of transporting Colette's body, MacDonald steps on a corner portion of the bedspread which contaminates his feet with Colette's blood. He then forms three bloody footprints as he exits Kristen's room with Colette's body.

MacDonald places Colette on the master bedroom floor, and one of the surgeon's gloves that he is wearing begins to come apart. He has unknowingly set his wife's body down on top of 24 pajama fibers. Once he has Colette in a supine position, he sets the bedsheet aside and obtains the club. He raises the club over his head, cast-off blood from the club spatters on the ceiling, and MacDonald strikes Colette with a blow that lands just above her hairline. He sets the club down on the carpet and two pajama seam threads from his pajama top adhere to the club in Colette's blood. The seam threads were located near the upturned throw rug in the master bedroom.

MacDonald goes into Kimberley's room with the Old Hickory knife and repeatedly stabs her in the neck. He then takes the ice pick into Kristen's room and inflicts multiple wounds on his daughter's dead body. MacDonald picks up the multi-colored bedspread from Kristen's floor and brings it to the master bedroom. He balls up the bedsheet with the bedspread and a piece of surgeon's glove mixes in with the bedding. MacDonald stabs Colette in the chest and neck with the Old Hickory knife, places his pajama top over Colette's chest, and stabs her 21 times through his pajama top with the ice pick. He bends down to place a Hilton Hotel bathmat over Colette's abdomen, creating a small tear in the crotch of his pajama bottoms, and he wipes the ice pick and Old Hickory knife on the bathmat.

MacDonald walks to the back door with weapons in hand, tosses the club a few feet from the door, and tosses the ice pick and Old Hickory knife under a bush. He goes back into the master bedroom, uses the surgeon's glove on his right hand to write the word PIG on the headboard of the master bed, and a fiber from his pajama bottoms falls to the floor near the headboard. He flushes the remaining portions of the surgeon's gloves down the toilet, places a suitcase near the right hand corner of the master bed footboard, and obtains a disposable scalpel blade from the hallway closet. He leaves traces of his blood on the face of the hallway closet door and proceeds to go into the bathroom.

MacDonald then stabs himself in the right side of his chest with the scalpel blade resulting in his blood dripping on to the front and right side of the bathroom sink. He takes some time to gather himself both mentally and physically before calling for assistance. MacDonald's phone calls were logged at 3:40 a.m. and 3:42 a.m.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 15th November 2018 at 09:29 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
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 10:43 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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

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