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 29th September 2017, 02:50 AM   #3161
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,986
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
CLAIM: RESPONSE: You are not a forensic examiner, so your opinion is meaningless. Colette's pajama top was most certainly a part of the Pajama Top Theory. As I mentioned in a prior post, all of the holes in Colette's pajama top were perfectly round and the pathologist reported that her body was inert when stabbed with the ice pick.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
The jury and 4th Circuit judges were never informed that Murtagh had asked Glisson at the Army CID lab to attempt the pajama folding experiment, and she had reported it was impossible. It was more cover-up by Murtagh, like the fibers with no known source. Murtagh had no respect for the Brady law, and he thought he would never be caught or punished in a land which is supposed to be governed by law.

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

I hope this is short enough:

Quote:
Thornton also pointed out to the jurors that the prosecutors had not accounted for the holes made in Colette's own pink pajama top which lay between the blue pajama top and her bare chest. This garment, worn by the murder victim, amounts to a missing piece of a jigsaw. By not accounting for this garment the experiment, lacks any scientific validity
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2017, 04:55 PM   #3162
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 834
Living In A Dream World

CLAIM: The jury and 4th Circuit judges were never informed that Murtagh had asked Glisson at the Army CID lab to attempt the pajama folding experiment, and she had reported it was impossible.

RESPONSE: In 1970, Janice Glisson was a serologist and had just begun her training (e.g., Dillard Browning) on hair/fiber analysis. Not surprisingly, the prosecution decided to call hair/fiber experts Browning and Paul Stombaugh to the stand. Charges of a cover-up by Murtagh are simply a product of your prodigious imagination.

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

Thornton also pointed out to the jurors that the prosecutors had not accounted for the holes made in Colette's own pink pajama top which lay between the blue pajama top and her bare chest. This garment, worn by the murder victim, amounts to a missing piece of a jigsaw. By not accounting for this garment the experiment, lacks any scientific validity.

RESPONSE: Clearly, the author of this puff piece has no knowledge of the totality of the Pajama Top Theory. You have ignored my prior posts on this subject, but that will not make that data magically vanish into thin air.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 29th September 2017 at 04:58 PM.
JTF is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2017, 09:21 PM   #3163
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 834
Misconceptions

The two biggest misconceptions about this case are that inmate's "version of events never changed," and that if he stayed on the East Coast, the Kassabs and/or the CID would not have pursued him for the murder of Colette/Kimmie/Kristen.

In a number of instances, inmate's statements on 2/17 and 2/18/70, are quite different from the statements he made during the 4/6/70 CID interview. Examples include...

- One of his initial claims was that he was attacked by two black males and one white male.

- The number and severity of his wounds increased over time.

- The timeline of his movements after 'finding" Colette dead in the master bedroom also morphed over time. For example, he originally stated that he didn't walk deep into the kitchen area, but his story changed once he was told that his blood was found on the floor near the kitchen sink.

- This included an increase in the number of stops inside the apartment and the nature of those stops. For example, inmate told CID investigators that he washed his hands a 2nd time during his route inside 544 Castle Drive.

In terms of inmate's move to California, the CID's reinvestigation was already in motion before he moved to the West Coast, and Freddy Kassab was suspicious of his son in-law prior to inmate's move to California.

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 1st October 2017, 09:46 AM   #3164
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,986
You can't discuss this matter on a forum with tweets and soundbites without providing any references. That's too short and not profound enough.

The Army CID is idle and incompetent and the FBI made up the forensic evidence. If there was any blood in the kitchen it could be explained by contamination. The forensic investigation was botched, and the military police were making drinks in the kitchen with their hands and clothes and shoes covered in blood. The only inconsistency I have ever noticed was where he said that Stoeckely was wearing beige boots, and on another occasion white boots. As Byn keeps harping on year after year that could be explained by MacDonald's concussion. It affects memory. Newspaper reports are not always accurate, or legal evidence.

From the internet:

Quote:
"RebelWithaCause or anyone, Can you comment*on the interview with Newsday*reporter*John Cummings?"

Here was what JRM had to say about that interview*during his Grand Jury testimony:
*Q* Dr. MacDonald, I gave you a copy of the statement that was published by Robert Cummings.
A* John Cummings.
Q* John Cummings.* And I asked you to review it and inform us today whether there was anything that you felt that should be explained or modified so far as that statement is concerned.
A* The answer is essentially what I said yesterday.* This is not a statement under oath; it's a statement to a reporter for a news story.* And I think it should be viewed as such.* There are a lot of things in here that now, if I looked critically at it, aren't exactly correct.* But I don't see what relevancy that has.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 1st October 2017 at 09:54 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 2nd October 2017, 04:52 AM   #3165
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 834
Magical Mystery Tour

STATEMENT: You can't discuss this matter on a forum with tweets and soundbites without providing any references. That's too short and not profound enough.

RESPONSE: Ah, what?

CLAIM: The Army CID is idle and incompetent and the FBI made up the forensic evidence.

RESPONSE: Your opinion and/or fantasy narratives are meaningless.

CLAIM: If there was any blood in the kitchen it could be explained by contamination.

RESPONSE: If? According to that pesky documented record, 5 drops of inmate's Type B blood were found near the kitchen sink. The drops were not the result of transfer, but the result of direct bleeding from a height of 20 inches.

CLAIM: The forensic investigation was botched, and the military police were making drinks in the kitchen with their hands and clothes and shoes covered in blood.

RESPONSE: Hate to break it to ya, but there were no bloody shoe or handprints found in the kitchen nor is there a single CID document that mentions investigators walking into the kitchen with bloody hands, clothes, or shoes.

CLAIM:The only inconsistency I have ever noticed was where he said that Stoeckely was wearing beige boots, and on another occasion white boots.

RESPONSE: The only inconsistency, eh? LOL. Care to respond to the following data?

http://www.themacdonaldcase.com/html/mmt.html

Last edited by JTF; 2nd October 2017 at 04:55 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 2nd October 2017, 05:04 AM   #3166
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 557
lather, rinse, repeat - the landlord of MacFantasy Island needs new material. It would be so nice if he ceased arguing debunked/disproven items.
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 October 2017, 08:40 AM   #3167
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,986
This is what a PROFESSIONAL thinks about all that from some kind of Zeta forum in 2008. Retired LEO:

Quote:
For some odd reason, the different justice systems in NC are all intermingled. It appears that if the public thinks your guilty, the judges all think your guilty in NC. Exculpatory evidence was hidden or tossed in a local trash bin. The detectives that handled this case remind me of Gotlieb and Himan, how bad is that. Not much has changed with the detective skills in NC, except they may have learned to make up bigger lies and are better at hiding evidence of innocence.

I have followed this case closely and found many missteps, I know that because I was responsible for some crime scenes, with a dead body or a rape victim. With a body, everyone entering or leaving the scene is logged in and out. The MacDonald case was pure magic for the prosecution, no evidence, just speculation. MP statements ignored, not investigated. None of the original responders were interviewed. This whole case was built with no clothe, just fabrications and speculation. Hopefully all you NC residents on this site never get accused of a crime, because in NC if you are accused you are guilty.
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 October 2017, 08:52 AM   #3168
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,597
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
This is what a PROFESSIONAL thinks about all that from some kind of Zeta forum in 2008. Retired LEO:
This retired LEO believes JM did it.

Now conduct a study based on what a 50/50 split indicates.
__________________
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2017, 08:33 PM   #3169
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 834
Timing

STATEMENT: This is what a PROFESSIONAL thinks about all that from some kind of Zeta forum in 2008. Retired LEO:

Several thoughts...

1) It is impossible to determine whether this person is who he/she says he/she is.

2) The post is filled with assumptions, hyperbole, and limited knowledge of the CID's original investigation and their massive reinvestigation.

3) When this poster states that the "MacDonald case was pure magic for the prosecution, no evidence, just speculation," he or she is basically admitting that he or she knows little about the prosecution's case at trial.

4) The landlord forgets that several PROFESSIONALS from both the CID and FBI testified to their analysis of evidentiary items that directly linked inmate to this crime.

5) I don't think it's a coincidence that this poster produced this nonsense shortly after Judge Fox denied inmate a new trial.

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 3rd October 2017, 04:21 AM   #3170
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 557
Let us not forget that inmate was not tried in the STATE COURT system, he was tried in the FEDERAL COURT. More proof, if it was needed, that this alleged LEO doesn't know a darn thing about THIS CASE.
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 4th October 2017, 02:14 AM   #3171
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,986
The judges are out of touch and out of touch with reality. They are very limited, and even biased, apart from three judges at the Supreme Court in 1981. This debate will still be going on when MacDonald is dead and gone. This is more from that Retired LEO on that Zeta MacDonald case forum in 2008:

Quote:
Yo Clowns, he is still a doctor, I have written to him in prison and he has responded, my brother has also written him and he does respond to all letters. Dr. MacDonald could have been released years ago, but would not admit to the crime or apologize for it. When the MP's arrived at his home that night they absolutely destroyed the crime scene. They had piss poor training, for that kind of crime. I believe that the Duke students would have been convicted in a Duirham courtroom, for a crime that never happened, it was a delusional female that would have convicted them. I thought that between the MacDonald case and the Duke case that law enforcement and prosecutors would be smarter and more up to date, I guess I was wrong. After all those years, it appears nothing has changed in NC?
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 4th October 2017, 03:39 AM   #3172
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 339
Point of Fact: You have not proven that your quoted random internet poster is, indeed, "retired LEO".

Point of Fact: The medical license for Jeffrey Macdonald was rescinded YEARS ago, he is not a doctor of medicine any longer. He's a guy with a degree in medicine - not the same thing.

Point of Fact: The MPs believed they were responding to a domestic violence situation, not a murder. BUT....in both situations, the primary concern is rendering aid, not preserving the scene. Had ALL members been deceased (as would have happened with your fantasy that Macdonald was knocked unconscious and unable to defend himself against your mythical attack which left no real injuries); they would have withdrawn at once. But since the murderer hadn't bothered to commit suicide, rendering aid was the proper course of action. So, once again, you're blaming law enforcement for doing its job.

Point of Observation: You, Henri McPhee, are the one who is "out of touch with reality" if you truly think your generalities of dishonesty simply because you disagree with a ruling are valid.

Point of Observation from personal experience: Had Macdonald gone to a general court-martial in 1970, he would have gotten a relatively light sentence - the only time I've seen a life imprisonment was when both spouses were soldiers (and the perp was also in a gang); most killers of wife/children did less than a decade until the 1990's - when the attitude in the military changed on domestic violence.

Last edited by desmirelle; 4th October 2017 at 03:42 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 4th October 2017, 07:59 AM   #3173
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,986
Originally Posted by desmirelle View Post
Point of Observation from personal experience: Had Macdonald gone to a general court-martial in 1970, he would have gotten a relatively light sentence - the only time I've seen a life imprisonment was when both spouses were soldiers (and the perp was also in a gang); most killers of wife/children did less than a decade until the 1990's - when the attitude in the military changed on domestic violence.
I think you may be right on a point of law that if the case had gone on to a general court-martial in 1970 that MacDonald would have been found not guilty as charged, and he would then not have had re-investigations and the Army CID and FBI and Kassab and Judge Dupree and Judge Fox and a biased jury on his back in the following years. That would have been double jeopardy, which does not apply on just the Article 32 proceedings, but does apply to a court-martial.

Segal tried to avoid a trial after the grand jury under the same sort of double jeopardy rule, and the speedy trial rule, but he was overruled by the silly fools in the Supreme Court, who were under pressure from Murtagh and Judge Dupree.
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 4th October 2017, 09:52 AM   #3174
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 557
Point of Observation from personal experience: Had Macdonald gone to a general court-martial in 1970, he would have gotten a relatively light sentence - the only time I've seen a life imprisonment was when both spouses were soldiers (and the perp was also in a gang); most killers of wife/children did less than a decade until the 1990's - when the attitude in the military changed on domestic violence.

the above from desi's post DOES NOT SAY that inmate would have gotten off. it says that he'd have probably gotten a light sentence because at THAT time frame the military attitude was "if we'd wanted you to have a wife and family we would have issued them to you". Getting a relatively light sentence is not the same thing as getting away with murder. Inmate slaughtered his family and make no mistake he is where he belongs since the death penalty was not an option. There was no jeopardy (double or otherwise) attached to the Grand Jury or trial. Thankfully for the VICTIMS in this case there was a very wise and honorable Judge who strove to keep the trial fair and excelled at that, there was a prosecutor who took his position as VICTIM advocate seriously and meticulously and studiously made sure every single piece of evidence/testimony used at trial was above reproach. The trial was one of the first to ever use a jury coordinator to help select and seat a jury and Bernie Segal was the one to hire such....the jury coordinator helped Bernie voir dire and seat the best jury possible and thankfully they took the responsibility and duty to be fair and impartial and to judge only on the evidence and testimony present seriously, so much so that several jurors admitted that they were looking for ANYTHING that would have allowed them to vote "not guilty" but every single sourced piece of evidence presented pointed to inmate as the sole criminal actor in these horrific murders and they did what was the right, reasonable, responsible, and intelligent thing and voted guilty x3.

Last edited by byn63; 4th October 2017 at 09:54 AM. Reason: typo-incomplete sentence.
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 4th October 2017, 10:50 AM   #3175
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 339
I'm so proud of you, byn! You even remembered the logic for it! Go, girl!

Actually, if Segal had saved all that thunder he used at the Article 32 hearing for the court martial, it's a distinct possibility Macdonald would have been acquitted. So, there's almost no end to Segal's incompetence in this case.
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 5th October 2017, 09:03 PM   #3176
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,379
So....

5 years after this thread started and decades after the murder the defense still claims that crazed hippies came to the house without wepons, managed to easily overcome a Green Beret but not kill him, brutally murder all the other family members with objects found in the house, leave absolutely zero evidence of them ever being there despite the struggles and brutality of the murders....all while a girl with them chants like Hollywood central castings idea of what a hippy would say?

.....sure....
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker is 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 October 2017, 01:22 PM   #3177
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 834
Fantasy Narrative

KB: Yup, and these same drug-crazed hippie home invaders not only ignore the prodigious stash of drugs/syringes in the residence, they ignore inmate's inert body and inflict post-mortum damage on Colette, Kimmie, and Kristen.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 6th October 2017 at 01:23 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 October 2017, 09:56 AM   #3178
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 339
JTF: do not forget that after doing all this, they put Colette back into the Master bedroom and tucked both girls into their own beds.
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 9th October 2017, 03:03 AM   #3179
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,986
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
So....

5 years after this thread started and decades after the murder the defense still claims that crazed hippies came to the house without wepons, managed to easily overcome a Green Beret but not kill him, brutally murder all the other family members with objects found in the house, leave absolutely zero evidence of them ever being there despite the struggles and brutality of the murders....all while a girl with them chants like Hollywood central castings idea of what a hippy would say?

.....sure....
There is no firm evidence that any bodies were moved apart from made up and fabricated and manufactured evidence by FBI hair and fiber men. MacDonald was screwed.

The intruders came into the house equipped with ice picks and knives and possibly wearing surgical gloves because Helena Stoeckley worked in a hospital at the time. MacDonald put up a strong fight, but he was hit on the head, possibly with a baseball bat by a hard cookie black man, probably Dwight Smith. The intruders left behind unsourced fibers. What do you expect them to leave. Their identity cards? Stoeckley was chanting gibberish holding a candle which was nothing to do with Hollywood castings.

It was a poor investigation. Numerous confessions by the real culprits were rejected and ignored. That was clearly erroneous. The forensics were illegally withheld from the defense. By law people are put in prison, or executed, based on facts and evidence, not on beliefs and opinions and con artist lawyers and tabloid journalists.
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 October 2017, 06:22 AM   #3180
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 557
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There is no firm evidence that any bodies were moved apart from made up and fabricated and manufactured evidence by FBI hair and fiber men.
There is plenty of evidence that bodies were moved. Let us stick with the 2 easiest examples:

- 6" full thickeness soaking stain (Type AB) of Kimberley's blood and brain serum on the master bedroom carpet near the closet.
*in order for blood to seep through the carpet, the underlayment, and padding and get to the floor boards Kimberley had to lay there for quite some time.
*Kimberley was found tucked into her bed
*Kimberley's blood type left a trail from the master bedroom back to her room; the type of drop and positions clearly show she'd been transported from the master bedroom to her bed.
*fibers from inmate's pj top were found IN Kimberley's bedding

- Type A blood splattered above the bed in Kristen's room and Type A blood on Kristen's bedding.
*also 3 bloody footprints EXITING Kristen's room made in Type A blood by inmate's feet
*bloody footprints showed that inmate was carrying something of significant weight when he made the bloody footprints
*no other Type A blood on the floor of Kristen's room
*Colette was found on the floor of the master bedroom.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The intruders came into the house equipped with ice picks and knives and possibly wearing surgical gloves because Helena Stoeckley worked in a hospital at the time.
Helena Stoeckley did not work in a hospital. The knives, ice pick and the club plus surgical gloves all came from the household. Even the defense doesn't try to fly this ridiculous nonsensical argument.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
....put up a strong fight, but he was hit on the head, possibly with a baseball bat by a hard cookie black man, probably Dwight Smith.
Dwight Smith was not involved in the murders he was investigated FULLY and has been cleared of any possible involvement. Inmate fought with Colette and he brutalized and killed her and then made up a nonsensical story to try and cover up his actions. He was not hit in the head and he was not rendered unconscious. YOU have been told plenty of times, and it is not impossible to check the FACTS yourself......it is not possible to be rendered unconscious and then remember the blow that caused it. it is not possible to have detailed memory of the events leading up to the loss of consciousness. inmate's story is medically impossible. The person who put up a strong fight was Colette. You can tell SHE was the fighter because both her arms were broken, her face was badly battered - unrecognizable.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The intruders left behind unsourced fibers. What do you expect them to leave. Their identity cards? Stoeckley was chanting gibberish holding a candle which was nothing to do with Hollywood castings.
Unsourced fibers are forensically useless. IF there had been intruders they'd have left some sign of themselves. Possibly their id cards could have been left, but they'd have left some hairs, some fibers, some fingerprints - something that could be sourced. No way there were 7 intruders in that house and left nothing of themselves. Stoeckley and Greg Mitchell were the only two remaining viable suspects (even the defense admitted that) at the time of the DNA testing. NONE of the exhibits matched Stoeckley or Mitchell because they were not there.....none of the people Helena said were there were there.....which is not at all surprising considering that her confessions (and recantations) never matched the evidence nor did they match inmate's story. Clear indication that she lied.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It was a poor investigation.
This case has been more thoroughly investigated than most. The re-investigation alone lasted over 2 years and encompasses many many volumes of material. But most importantly, the DNA evidence clinched what the trial already proved. Inmate butchered his family, brutally and savagely and then tried to get out of being punished for his actions. He is a base coward, a narcissistic sociopathic bastard.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Numerous confessions by the real culprits were rejected and ignored.
Helena's confessions and recantations were thoroughly investigated. Her stories didn't match the evidence and they didn't match inmate's tales either. She was a sad, pathetic drug addict. She had a penchant for telling tall tales. Like many other sick, lonely, drugged out, and/or crazy people she inserted herself into the story. She wasn't there - which if you count the number of times she was asked - she gave "I can't help you, I wasn't there" as her answer more than twice as often as she gave her false confessions that were easily disproven.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The forensics were illegally withheld from the defense.
No evidence, forensic or otherwise were withheld from the defense. The defense didn't review all the evidence but that was because they wasted months on trying to get the government to allow the evidence to be shipped across the country. that wasn't going to happen and it was perfectly legal to insist that the evidence be reviewed in North Carolina where it was securely stored. The government offered the defense laboratory space for their review of the evidence. The fact that they waited so long to take advantage is not the fault of the government. Also, it would not have made a difference because the evidence clearly shows that inmate killed his family. period.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
By law people are put in prison, or executed, based on facts and evidence, not on beliefs and opinions and con artist lawyers and tabloid journalists.
Exactly, henri. that is why inmate is in prison. the evidence showed that he was guilty. you are the only one who discusses this case using opinion. the rest of us use facts.

too bad that inmate hired a con artist lawyer like Segal.
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 October 2017, 10:29 AM   #3181
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,379
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There is no firm evidence that any bodies were moved apart from made up and fabricated and manufactured evidence by FBI hair and fiber men. MacDonald was screwed.
a) Not what I said, but you are wrong anyway.
b) No evidence of yoru claim.

Quote:
The intruders came into the house equipped with ice picks and knives and possibly wearing surgical gloves because Helena Stoeckley worked in a hospital at the time.
a) No evidence the weapons were from outside the house. Lots of evidence they were in the house.
b) Gloves are not magic. You will leave physical evidence. Have you ever tried using surgical gloves? Do you know how easily they tear?!

Quote:
MacDonald put up a strong fight, but he was hit on the head, possibly with a baseball bat by a hard cookie black man, probably Dwight Smith.
And yet while the wife and children are horribly mutilated the 'murderous hippies' they ignore the largest threat in the room: and adult male Green Beret.

Quote:
The intruders left behind unsourced fibers.
Unsourced fibers by definition are unsourced and not evidence of anything.

Quote:
What do you expect them to leave. Their identity cards?
I'd expect 3-4 drug crazed to not exactly be scrupulous in their antics. Look at the phsyical evidence left at the Tate-Labianca murders, and compare it. Given that your only explanation is 'they wore gloves' and referring to a tiny, tiny number of fibers I would laugh at you even with my minimal levle of forensic evidence knowledge. A real forensic scientist would laugh his lungs out at your claims.

Quote:
Stoeckley was chanting gibberish holding a candle which was nothing to do with Hollywood castings.
a) Stoeckley wasn't chanting anything, she wasn't there. Maybe she was chanting that night at home or something but I don't think that matters.

b) "Acid is Groovy, Kill the Pigs" - is what I'd expect some 'square' thinks murderous hippies would chant having read about the Tate-Labianca murders and seen hollywood movies.

Quote:
It was a poor investigation. Numerous confessions by the real culprits were rejected and ignored. That was clearly erroneous. The forensics were illegally withheld from the defense. By law people are put in prison, or executed, based on facts and evidence, not on beliefs and opinions and con artist lawyers and tabloid journalists.
Blah, blah, blah. Still nothing at all to support your 'murderous hippies' narrative. Again you claim that magic hippies, wearing magic, invincible evidence stopping gloves came to the house without weapons, barely did anything to MacDonald but decided to brutally murder & mutiliate his wife and children.

Sure.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker is 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 October 2017, 03:02 AM   #3182
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,986
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
a) a) No evidence the weapons were from outside the house. Lots of evidence they were in the house.
b) Gloves are not magic. You will leave physical evidence. Have you ever tried using surgical gloves? Do you know how easily they tear?!
Can't you get it into your thick head that some of these definitely bad murderers with an evil kink try to pin the blame on others by leaving them alive at a crime scene? The murderer Sells, who was executed in Texas in about 2014, boasted before he died that there were several people in prison now which were the result of his own many murders.

There is a bit about the weapons being from outside the house at this website which does not seem to link to this forum:

Quote:
Despite extensive efforts, neither knife found was traced to the MacDonald house.

The CID thought they had a witness, a baby sitter who had seen the bent, dull Geneva Forge Knife in the MacDonald apartment, but she was misunderstood. Her mother accused the CID of trying to manipulate her.
At the Army Article 32 hearing, when the baby sitter testified, the prosecution didn't question her about the weapons. Later when the CID interviewed her again she denied ever seeing knives, the club or ice pick in the MacDonald house.

At the Grand Jury investigation she testified that she had not seen the Geneva Forge knife, but the Old Hickory knife. On the stand however, she surprised the prosecutor when she refused to confirm seeing the knife. Later that day, she took the stand to claim she did now remember using an ice pick in the MacDonald home.

Five years later she again told the same story to the trial jury.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 11th October 2017 at 03:10 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 October 2017, 03:16 AM   #3183
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,986
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
a) b) Gloves are not magic. You will leave physical evidence. Have you ever tried using surgical gloves? Do you know how easily they tear?!
Dr. Guinn at the 1979 trial testified that the glove fragment found did not come from MacDonald surgical gloves:

R E D I R E C T E X A M I N A T I O N 3:50 p.m.

BY MR. SMITH:
Q Dr. Guinn, the name "Perry-brand" or "Perry-Pure" latex gloves as has been used by Mr. Murtagh, do you know which was Perry-Pure rubber glove samples -- that is, exemplar or evidence?
A Those were the exemplar samples and were stated to be from that particular -- they came out of the packages and they had that brand name on them; yes.
Q All right, it was stated to you then that the --
A (Interposing) The evidence ones, I, have no idea, obviously, what brand they are.
Q All right, sir. Were you informed as to where in the MacDonald household the Perry-Pure rubber gloves came from?
A I was informed they were found in packages stored somewhere in the kitchen of the house.
Q Were you informed as to where the evidence samples were found in the MacDonald household?
A They were found, I believe, in the master bedroom.
Q So, as far as you knew, you were comparing pieces of material found in the master bedroom with pieces of material found in the kitchen -- all of which came from the MacDonald household; is that correct?
A That is correct. [/quote]
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 October 2017, 04:18 AM   #3184
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 557
The testimony does not at all say that the torn glove fragments and the gloves found in the kitchen came from different sources. In other testimony it was shown definitively that the surgical gloves came from the same source, in other words were of the same chemical composition and came from the same "manufacturing run". HOWEVER none of your comments about the gloves addresses the FACT that kookbreaker is correct - surgical gloves do not magically keep one from leaving evidence behind AND they tear/rip easily.
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 October 2017, 04:23 AM   #3185
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 557
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Can't you get it into your thick head that some of these definitely bad murderers with an evil kink try to pin the blame on others by leaving them alive at a crime scene?
who are you to call someone else on this board thick-headed? you are the one who chooses to ignore the FACTS and the EVIDENCE and believe that you can argue with your unsupported and unsubstantiated opinion.

However, and more to the point, if a bunch of drugged out hippies HAD invaded the home it would be obvious, for the following reasons and more:

(1) hippies would have left the bodies where the fell
(2) hippies would not have left the syringes and drugs behind in the closet.
(3) they would have come armed
(4) they would have left EVIDENCE of their existence
(5) they would have brutalized EVERYONE in the apartment.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There is a bit about the weapons being from outside the house at this website which does not seem to link to this forum:
the EVIDENCE has long ago proven that the weapons came from INSIDE THE APARTMENT. Just because you don't like the FACTS doesn't mean you are allowed to ignore them.
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 October 2017, 08:15 AM   #3186
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,986
Originally Posted by byn63 View Post
(1) hippies would have left the bodies where the fell
(2) hippies would not have left the syringes and drugs behind in the closet.
(3) they would have come armed
(4) they would have left EVIDENCE of their existence
(5) they would have brutalized EVERYONE in the apartment.


the EVIDENCE has long ago proven that the weapons came from INSIDE THE APARTMENT. Just because you don't like the FACTS doesn't mean you are allowed to ignore them.
There is no EVIDENCE that the weapons came from inside the apartment. apart from perjury by Colette's mother and the babysitter at the 1979 trial.

The intruders were never short of syringes and drugs, and they didn't need any of Dr, MacDonald's medical supplies. The intruders did come armed. Stoeckley laughed and joked at Detective Beasley later on while she was waving an ice pick at him. There were fibers with no explanation around the mouth and biceps of Colette and on the wooden club murder weapon. That's suspicious and it can't be disregarded by saying it's household debris, or JTF saying the black wool fibers were of different chemical composition.

There is some legal waffle abut all this at this website. I can't guarantee the accuracy of this website but it makes sense to me:

http://www.dvusd.org/cms/lib011/AZ01...0MacDonald.pdf

Quote:
The Weapons

The heavy, splintery stick, used as a club, belonged to the MacDonald household, without a doubt. But there are questions as to if it was kept indoors or outside. Colette used it in the backyard when she painted Kimberlyís bed.
The club, knife and ice pick, initially found in the yard, were handled so poorly by CID investigators, the investigators actually returned the weapons to the yard, for photographs during a staged, second "official finding" according to overwhelming evidence.

Under oath, Military Policemen testified the weapons were first discovered and reported at 5:00 am. However, the weapons were not photographed, at that time, as they should have been. A medicís statement suggests the weapons evidence was carelessly handled. The Fort Bragg CID leader gave confirming testimony that he was shown the weapons at 5 am. Yet, under oath, the 2 lead detectives swore the weapons were found shortly before 7 am, at first light. Records prove that neither the Medic nor the Military Policemen, who testified they saw the weapons at 5:00 am, were at the murder scene when lead investigators insist the weapons were found. How is this possible?

Another mystery is the knife MacDonald pulled out of his wifeís chest and threw on the floor in the bedroom. No finger prints were found on the knife. MacDonaldís prints should have been on the knife
.
Three witnesses saw the bloody knife next to the dresser.
CID Chief Grebner and MPís Mica and Trevere documented they saw blood on the knife blade and handle. Trevere told the Grand Jury there was blood on the knife.

Yet CID lab techs reported only a minuscule trace of blood on the blade and none on the handle. Clearly, someone had to wipe the knife clean, but why?
MacDonald had already been taken to the hospital, yet almost all of the blood disappeared.
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 October 2017, 09:18 AM   #3187
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 339
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
<snip of out and out lie>

The intruders were never short of syringes and drugs, and they didn't need any of Dr, MacDonald's medical supplies. <snip of delusional ranting>

<snip of nonsense>
No drug addict leaves syringes and drugs. It's part and parcel of being an addict. They don't "need" the drugs they're addicted to, for that matter, except to avoid withdrawal. Obviously, you have never known an addict. I have, my friend's daughter. They would have taken not only the drugs and syringes, they would have ransacked the house for valuables to sell, even with the bodies lying around. They'd have pulled Colette's wedding ring off her body. You show a remarkable lack of understanding of criminal behavior with your drivel about the intruders and your defense of Macdonald.
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 October 2017, 02:16 AM   #3188
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,986
Originally Posted by desmirelle View Post
You show a remarkable lack of understanding of criminal behavior with your drivel about the intruders and your defense of Macdonald.
That's just your opinion. It isn't facts or evidence.

Part of the trouble is that the MacDonald defense arguments went over the heads of any average jury, as in the prosecution arguments of the OJ case, and particularly a jury with biases, and where the exculpatory evidence was deliberately covered up by the prosecution.

It was too technical for a jury. They didn't understand what was going on, and they didn't want to know what was going on. It was also too technical for the 4th Circuit judges, and most of the Supreme Court judges. The 4th Circuit judges need to get a thorough grasp of the subject of the MacDonald case and not just be rubber stampers as in the past. The MacDonald prosecution understood the concept of simple minds and how to con them with manufactured evidence, and disregarding leads and suspects.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2017, 05:02 AM   #3189
Border Reiver
Philosopher
 
Border Reiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,093
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
That's just your opinion. It isn't facts or evidence.
Like much of what you say.

However, desmirelle is correct - you do show a poor understanding of how people actually behave, particularly criminals.

Quote:
Part of the trouble is that the MacDonald defense arguments went over the heads of any average jury, as in the prosecution arguments of the OJ case, and particularly a jury with biases, and where the exculpatory evidence was deliberately covered up by the prosecution.
There was no cover-up of exculpatory evidence. You simiply choose to ignore the inculpatory evidence - and the lack of evidence for Macdonald's story.

Quote:
It was too technical for a jury. They didn't understand what was going on, and they didn't want to know what was going on. It was also too technical for the 4th Circuit judges, and most of the Supreme Court judges. The 4th Circuit judges need to get a thorough grasp of the subject of the MacDonald case and not just be rubber stampers as in the past. The MacDonald prosecution understood the concept of simple minds and how to con them with manufactured evidence, and disregarding leads and suspects.
If by disregarding leads you mean examining the statements of these suspects and determining that:

a. The individual was in jail the night of the murder; or
b. The suspect's testimony clearly establishes them as an unreliable witness; and
c. There was an absence of physical evidence corroborating the presence of these witnesses.
__________________
Questions, comments, queries, bitches, complaints, rude gestures and/or remarks?
Border Reiver is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2017, 02:12 AM   #3190
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,986
There is no inculpatory evidence against MacDonald, apart from the fact that he was in the apartment when it happened. You don't investigate a horrible murder with tunnel vision, and just decide who did it, and then 'find' the evidence after. You do a complete investigation which never happened in the MacDonald case. I still think that Mazerolle and Dwight Smith, and others who may still be alive, are as guilty as hell.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2017, 04:39 AM   #3191
Border Reiver
Philosopher
 
Border Reiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,093
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There is no inculpatory evidence against MacDonald, apart from the fact that he was in the apartment when it happened. You don't investigate a horrible murder with tunnel vision, and just decide who did it, and then 'find' the evidence after. You do a complete investigation which never happened in the MacDonald case. I still think that Mazerolle and Dwight Smith, and others who may still be alive, are as guilty as hell.
Dude, Mazerolle has been proven to have been in jail the day of the murders. YOU have a better chance of being the killer then he does.

There were over one thousand pieces of evidence presented at trial - and their presentation resulted in a conviction - that makes ALL of the evidence presented "inculpatory". Your personal disbelief does not make that go away.
__________________
Questions, comments, queries, bitches, complaints, rude gestures and/or remarks?
Border Reiver is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2017, 04:59 AM   #3192
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 557
Originally Posted by Border Reiver View Post
Dude, Mazerolle has been proven to have been in jail the day of the murders. YOU have a better chance of being the killer then he does.

There were over one thousand pieces of evidence presented at trial - and their presentation resulted in a conviction - that makes ALL of the evidence presented "inculpatory". Your personal disbelief does not make that go away.
I bet you had the biggest urge to add: "this is a recording.....BEEP!" to the end of your post.
byn63 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2017, 08:26 AM   #3193
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,986
Originally Posted by Border Reiver View Post
Dude, Mazerolle has been proven to have been in jail the day of the murders. YOU have a better chance of being the killer then he does.

There were over one thousand pieces of evidence presented at trial - and their presentation resulted in a conviction - that makes ALL of the evidence presented "inculpatory". Your personal disbelief does not make that go away.
There may have been a thousand pieces of evidence, but none of it was inculpatory, or even relevant. It was mostly a lot of stuff about where the blood was found, which shocked the simple -minded jury and 4th Circuit judges.

The thing that convicted MacDonald was Stombaugh's manufactured evidence about fabric impressions supposedly, and wrongly, proving moving of bodies, and with Shirley Green the conceptually unsound pajama folding experiment, and a juror saying that that there were no pajama fibers in the living room or where he fell, which is patently untrue. Then Blackburn in his closing argument saying there were pajama fibers on the wooden club murder weapon, which is also patently untrue. Shaw thought Colette murdered one of the little girls which is ludicrously unsatisfactory.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2017, 09:03 AM   #3194
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,986
Originally Posted by Border Reiver View Post
Dude, Mazerolle has been proven to have been in jail the day of the murders. YOU have a better chance of being the killer then he does.
Detective Beasley thought Mazerolle was out of jail on the night of the MacDonald murders. I think this is exactly what happened.

Quote:
I know Mazorelle was not in jail 2/16-17/70 because I arrested him in January 1970 and recall that the trial was set for Mazorelle the day of 2/17/70. If Mazorelle had been in Jail that date (2/16-17/70) he would have been available for trial on 2/17/70, and I would have appeared in court as a witness. John De Carter of the Sheriff's office was with me in the arrest of Rizzo and Mazorelle and he would have also had to appear in court 2/17/70. I specifically recall that I did not appear in court on any case at the Cumberland County Court House on 2/17/70. I was on the street all day looking for suspects on the MacDonald murders.

I don't recall that Mazorelle was out on bail, but I believe he was, or he would have appeared 1n court 2/17/70. Since he didn't appear I believe he jumped ba1l, which means a bench warrant would have been issued for him. I recall he was subsequently arrested in Waycross Georgia for burglary, but I have been informed through my sources in law enforcement that the Waycross arrest records are also missing.
Edited by Agatha:  Trimmed for rule 4. Will you please remember to limit your copypasta to a MAXIMUM of two paragraphs, and provide a link

Last edited by Agatha; 14th October 2017 at 05:09 AM.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2017, 09:19 AM   #3195
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 339
I don't recall that Mazorelle was out on bail, PEB quote

So......your entire premise is flushed right down the ol' toilet, right then and there....Beasley is saying he doesn't know. He THINKS he was, but HE DOESN'T KNOW.

Of course, there are all sorts of reason why trials don't take place when they're originally scheduled.....or the sufferer of inorganic brain disease (Beasley) was 'improvising' because his brain wasn't working right when he vomited the above.

And that brings me back to: Helena also said she watched her lover (your man crush, Macdonald) kill his family. Why do you cherry pick from her confessions? I mean, that one is at least (apart from any evidence she was in the quarters) supported by the evidence.....
desmirelle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2017, 06:54 PM   #3196
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 834
Hilarious

CLAIM: There may have been a thousand pieces of evidence, but none of it was inculpatory, or even relevant.

RESPONSE: There is no debate here. The prosecution presented over 1,000 evidentiary items at trial. The jury determined that this mass of evidence inculpated inmate. The only thing that lacks relevance is your penchant for rinsing and repeating previously debunked claims.

CLAIM: It was mostly a lot of stuff about where the blood was found, which shocked the simple -minded jury and 4th Circuit judges.

RESPONSE: Ah, no. Simple-Minded, eh? Pot, meet kettle.

CLAIM: The thing that convicted MacDonald was Stombaugh's manufactured evidence about fabric impressions.

RESPONSE: If one were to follow your bouncing ball of contradictions, your boy John Thornton must have been "in on it" with Stombaugh for he agreed with Stombaugh's conclusions regarding bloody fabric impressions found on 3 areas of the blue bedsheet.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 13th October 2017 at 06:56 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 October 2017, 03:28 AM   #3197
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,986
I agree that Helena didn't always tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. That doesn't mean she should have been disregarded and ignored as some kind of fruitloop.

The crooked prosecutor Blackburn with his 'will to win' at any cost attitude said that Dr. Thornton wanted to examine the forensics in California, and the prosecution and Judge Dupree would never allow that unless he obtained a court order. Blackburn blamed MacDonald for having a slack attorney and never raising the matter. That isn't true because MacDonald did raise the matter at the 1992 appeal, and Judge Dupree just replied that he thought Segal was an astute lawyer.

There is more about Blackburn's attitude to the MacDonald case in an interview at :

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

Quote:
SIDE TWO OF TAPE ONE

Jim B: The upshot of it is people are not perfect. People in law enforcement, and this is the scary thing, if you're going into law enforcement to watch out for.

RR: I've seen some scary things.

Jim B: If it ... you think that (garbled) people these crimes, if we want it to be that way so therefore you do something to make it be that way. I think that ... you can't do that ... you cannot do that. Did that happen in the MacDonald case? I don't know.

RR: So that's why my big argument ... You know the justice system is to make America a safer place and have justice for all.

Edited by Agatha:  Trimmed for rule 4

Last edited by Agatha; 14th October 2017 at 05:14 AM.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2017, 05:16 AM   #3198
Agatha
Winking at the Moon
Moderator
 
Agatha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 12,059
Mod WarningWill all participants of this thread please ensure that they limit their copy&paste to a maximum of two paragraphs, and to provide a link to the source material.

Will all participants also endeavour to use the quote function correctly.
Posted By:Agatha
__________________
Not to put too fine a point on it, say I'm the only bee in your bonnet. Make a little birdhouse in your soul.

Vodka kills salmonella and all other enemies of freedom for sure - Nationalcosmopolitan
Agatha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2017, 01:24 PM   #3199
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,597
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There is no firm evidence that any bodies were moved apart from made up and fabricated and manufactured evidence by FBI hair and fiber men. MacDonald was screwed.

snipped other nonsense
It was good enough to convict your murdering man crush.

Justice was served.

Inmate is exactly where he should be. No screwing involved.
__________________
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.

"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 October 2017, 01:29 PM   #3200
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,597
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I agree that Helena didn't always tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. That doesn't mean she should have been disregarded and ignored as some kind of fruitloop.

snipped additional nonsense
It's exactly what it means in the courtroom or in an investigation. Sources are judged by credibility - the term "reliable source: exists for a reason. Someone who can not be depended on to tell the truth can not be relied upon as a source.
__________________
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.

"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
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 02:22 AM.
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.