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 11th May 2017, 05:16 AM   #2881
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 314
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
That was a lack of careful preparation by Segal. A few months before the MacDonald murders, Jeff MacDonald clobbered his brother Jay's drug dealer in New York. After the MacDonald murders Jeff Macdonald quite reasonably thought the murders might have been some sort of revenge attack involving Jay's pals, and connected to that. <snip of fecal matter>.
Interesting. I have never heard or read Jeffrey MacDonald suggest that four buddies (three buddies and one buddette) of his brother came down from NY on a 'revenge attack'. However, he did appropriate their descriptions. And did Jay give them Mac's address in NC or did Perry MacDonald do it?

I have heard and read about his temper though. Where he kills his wife and children because he lost control; thanks for supporting that point - that he loses it and clobbers people.....
desmirelle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th May 2017, 11:10 AM   #2882
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 533
Originally Posted by desmirelle View Post
Interesting. I have never heard or read Jeffrey MacDonald suggest that four buddies (three buddies and one buddette) of his brother came down from NY on a 'revenge attack'. However, he did appropriate their descriptions. And did Jay give them Mac's address in NC or did Perry MacDonald do it?

I have heard and read about his temper though. Where he kills his wife and children because he lost control; thanks for supporting that point - that he loses it and clobbers people.....
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 May 2017, 03:42 PM   #2883
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 815
Not Addressing The Issue

Only the landlord of MacFantasy Island could concoct a narrative involving a "grim" investigator, hippies seeking revenge and Segal's greatest triumph being cast in a negative light. The fact remains that MacDonald advocates have studiously avoided the FACT that prior to the murders, inmate was seen conversing with 4 individuals who matched the descriptions of the mythical hippie home invaders. If I really wanted to go for the knockout punch, I would focus on the FACT that inmate's mythical narrative involved at least 6 home invaders.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 11th May 2017 at 03:44 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 12th May 2017, 02:49 PM   #2884
ScottPletcher
Student
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 41
True, but MacD only directly saw four of them. Thus, he didn't need to provide a description of the other two "intruders".

It's interesting that MacD based his imagined "intruders" on real people, perhaps the better to keep the story straight later, by tying the phony story to real people?!
ScottPletcher 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 May 2017, 08:55 PM   #2885
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 314
Originally Posted by ScottPletcher View Post
True, but MacD only directly saw four of them. Thus, he didn't need to provide a description of the other two "intruders".

It's interesting that MacD based his imagined "intruders" on real people, perhaps the better to keep the story straight later, by tying the phony story to real people?!
I think JTF is basing six on Mac's claims that Colette was yelling "Jeff, Jeff, why are they doing this?" (Which implies at least two more intruders. As a frequent resident of army housing of that time, if she's been yelling THAT, the neighbors would have called the MPs and then joined the party.)

You've hit the nail on the head with the second thought - he used descriptions of people he'd seen so he had a 'real person' in mind for each of his mythical intruders.
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 May 2017, 06:08 AM   #2886
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 815
Serial Fabricators Have Difficulty Keeping Track Of Their Lies

Desmirelle is correct in assuming that I was applying inmate's use of the word "they" to increase the total number of mythical home invaders from 4 to 6. I would argue that inmate's claim that Kimmie was crying out "Daddy, Daddy, Daddy" and Colette was screaming "why are they doing this..." would equate with 7 mythical home invaders being inside 544 Castle Drive.

That number would make Stoeckley smile for the CID called this mythical band of hippie home invaders the Stoeckley Seven. The totality of inmate's hippie home invader claims leads to the inevitable conclusion that he combined the physical characteristics of the New York Four with the details of the Tate/Labianca murders contained in the Esquire Magazine article.

MacDonald advocates have long ignored the FACT that none of the print exemplars collected from members of both the NYF and the SS matched any of the 30 unsourced prints collected at the crime scene. They have also attempted to distance inmate from being the source of the bloody print found on the leading edge of the Esquire Magazine.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 13th May 2017 at 06:16 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 17th May 2017, 09:19 AM   #2887
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,895
McGinniss was most severe in his criticism of the MacDonald trial to Jeff MacDonald in private, and then he betrayed him with the Fatal Vision book by making false statements, just because he was in financial trouble, and he needed to write a best seller for the Bank of New England. That's being insincere and dishonest. I have every right to question his integrity and describe him as a drunken Irish son of a bitch.

This is part of what McGinniss told Jeff MacDonald in private:

That the blood experts were incompetent. The ruling by Judge Dupree to exclude the psychiatric testimony. The fingerprint person who was lifting the fingerprints that it was difficult to figure out made any sense. McGinniss expressed misgivings about the fiber evidence, and about the pajama top mock assault done by Brian Murtagh and James Blackburn in open court.

There was an interesting discussion in that McGinniss trial in 1987 about MacDonald's brother Jay, which proves that Jeff MacDonald was right to be suspicious after he had clobbered Jay's drug dealer in New York a few months before the MacDonald murders:

Quote:
Q. Did you ever use the term "Mafia" in letters to Mr. McGinniss about your brother?

A Yes

Q And what did you say about that?

A I said that he hung around with - I believe one of the terms I used was "Fringe-type people" and that he associated with a large group of Italians who hated certain restaurants in Brooklyn and that he liked to fancy himself as a hanger on.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 17th May 2017 at 09:24 AM.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2017, 10:45 AM   #2888
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 533
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
McGinniss was most severe in his criticism of the MacDonald trial to Jeff MacDonald in private, and then he betrayed him with the Fatal Vision book by making false statements,...
Point out a SUBSTANTIVE ERROR anywhere in Fatal Vision. Not your old "amphetamine psychosis" crap, which was presented as a personal theory not documented fact....a TRUE FACTUAL ERROR. You cannot do so because there is none.....

I chose to not include your ignorant and inappropriate comments about Joe M - I find them offensive and you should not be allowed to post such comments imho.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
This is part of what McGinniss told Jeff MacDonald in private:

That the blood experts were incompetent.
Prove it! Show me any competent, comprehensive, certifiable document that shows this to be true......not just some anonymous source or ignorant rant by the convicted murderer. PROVE IT!

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The ruling by Judge Dupree to exclude the psychiatric testimony.
incomplete thought here henri - but as has been shown to you on more than one occasion it has been proven that Judge Dupree was within his discretion to exclude psychiatric testimony. it was not relevant because inmate was not using an affirmative defense ie "temporary insanity" or "not guilty due to mental disease or defect". Yes the defense could have brought experts saying he wasn't the type to butcher his family and the government would have just as many who would say "he butchered his family and her is why".

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
McGinniss expressed misgivings about the fiber evidence, and about the pajama top mock assault done by Brian Murtagh and James Blackburn in open court.
Another "PROVE IT" comment is in order, but then again WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE IF JOE M HAD MISGIVINGS? Absolutely ZERO! The defense fiber experts agreed with the government on large portions of Stombaugh's testimony. The pj top "mock" assault just made a mockery of inmate's ridiculous statements. It proved that he could not have used the pj top as a shield against knife or ice pick thrusts without receiving an injury - and he didn't have any injury to his wrists or forearms.
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 19th May 2017, 07:08 AM   #2889
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,895
Dr. MacDonald's argument all along is that the jury at the MacDonald trial in 1979 never heard the evidence, and that he was cheated by Joe McGinniss. There were a lot of false statements in that Fatal Vision book.
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 19th May 2017, 01:12 PM   #2890
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,461
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Dr. MacDonald's argument all along is that the jury at the MacDonald trial in 1979 never heard the evidence, and that he was cheated by Joe McGinniss. There were a lot of false statements in that Fatal Vision book.
Mostly from the mouth of your man crush.
__________________
"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 20th May 2017, 02:42 AM   #2891
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,895
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Mostly from the mouth of your man crush.
That's Jeff MacDonald's opinion and he's not the only one who thinks that.

At that McGinniss trial in California in 1987 Jeff MacDonald said that he had written a book on Emergency Room Medicine. He was a brilliant doctor.

There is some background to all this at :

http://www.sfgate.com/books/article/...is-3042069.php

Quote:
"The army said the crime scene was well protected. It was not," say the authors. "They said it was competently searched. It was not. They said they could prove the scene was staged by MacDonald. They did not. They said neighbors saw and heard nothing that night. Not true. The army and the government said nothing was found to support the presence of intruders at the scene. That was false. And, now that we know about the hair in Colette's hand, the bloody syringe, the multiple bloody gloves, the piece of skin, the wig hair, and the black wool fibers, this was the cruelest lie of all."
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 05:30 AM   #2892
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 314
[quote=Henri McPhee;11847157]That's Jeff MacDonald's opinion and he's not the only one who thinks that.

At that McGinniss trial in California in 1987 Jeff MacDonald said that he had written a book on Emergency Room Medicine. He was a brilliant doctor.

<SNIP>

[quote]

It might interest to you, Henri, that MacDonald's abilities as an ER doctor are not in question here. No one has denied his medical abilities prior to his arrest and trial.

MacDonald, of course, thinks he's brilliant. He thought he was smarter than anyone, including the police - and the reluctance of the military for more bad publicity when Segal overplayed his cards - allowed him to convince himself he had no guilty because the Article 32 hearing determined there wasn't enough of a case against him. He found out the long arm of the law is a saying for a reason, because he finally was brought to justice.

You have not - probably because you CANNOT - give us any errors other than unsubstantiated claims that involve evidence you CANNOT cite.

Last edited by desmirelle; 20th May 2017 at 05:31 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 20th May 2017, 08:38 AM   #2893
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,895
[quote=desmirelle;11847229]
Quote:
You have not - probably because you CANNOT - give us any errors other than unsubstantiated claims that involve evidence you CANNOT cite.
All this was discussed in detail at the McGinniss trial in 1987. MacDonald said when he was cross-examined at the McGinniss trial that when the Fatal Vision and TV movie came out that his private investigators were diverted from talking to, and investigating the guilty men and women in the MacDonald murders, into trying to correct the false statements in the Fatal Vision book for the court of public opinion.

There was all that stuff and nonsense in the Fatal Vision book about MacDonald supposedly clobbering a naughty boy on a boat trip once, and a lot of gossip about a proposed boxing trip to Russia which didn't prove anything, and detailed discussion in the book about MacDonald's sex life. None of that is admissible in court under the rules of evidence and procedure, and it was never mentioned at the MacDonald trial. It was a character assassination.

It was suggested at one stage that Gunderson should write a book about the MacDonald case, which would have been fairer, and which could be used by MacDonald to pay for Gunderson's fees. It was also suggested that MacDonald himself could write a book about the case, which I think was a good idea. It was better than McGinniss, who was a cheat and a liar, and who had no principles. It was partly Segal's fault for allowing himself to be conned by McGinniss.

It's obviously unfair and the MacDonald case is a serous injustice. All of the McGinniss false statements are still implicitly believed on that biased MacDonald yuku forum, including the rubbish that MacDonald is supposed to be a sociopath.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 20th May 2017 at 08:58 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 20th May 2017, 09:05 AM   #2894
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 314
[quote=Henri McPhee;11847415]
Originally Posted by desmirelle View Post

All this was discussed in detail at the McGinniss trial in 1987. MacDonald said when he was cross-examined at the McGinniss trial that when the Fatal Vision and TV movie came out that his private investigators were diverted from talking to, and investigating the guilty men and women in the MacDonald murders, into trying to correct the false statements in the Fatal Vision book for the court of public opinion.

There was all that stuff and nonsense in the Fatal Vision book about MacDonald supposedly clobbering a naughty boy on a boat trip once, and a lot of gossip about a proposed boxing trip to Russia which didn't prove anything, and detailed discussion in the book about MacDonald's sex life. None of that is admissible in court under the rules of evidence and procedure, and it was never mentioned at the MacDonald trial. It was a character assassination.

It's obviously unfair and the MacDonald case is a serous injustice. All of the McGinniss false statements are still implicitly believed on that biased MacDonald yuku forum, including the rubbish that MacDonald is supposed to be a sociopath.
You've not read "Fatal Vision" or you would know that the person who most brought up Mac's sex life was.....MAC. Seriously, read the "Jeffrey" portions of FV.

The boxing trip MACDONALD kept on about? A lie from Mac himself. Nobody else said the army boxing team was going to Russia that summer, only New York (or maybe Jersey), where Mac's old girlfriend lived. Hmmmm, your wife has two difficult pregnancies, by your statement you narrowly saved her life by recognizing a serious problem no one saw AND YOU LIE TO YOUR WIFE THAT YOU'LL BE OUT OF THE COUNTRY AND OUT OF CONTACT DURING THE THIRD BIRTH? Your man crush is special sort of slime.

Also, hate to bring FACTS again, but the lawsuit against McGinnis (from which you cannot cite significant fault), was civil and your boyfriend whining about his criminal trial during it doesn't make it fact, it makes it Loser MacDonald's anger about getting held accountable for his February 1970 actions (the slaughter of his wife and children, as you seem to have forgotten who the victims were).

The only injustice left is that Mac is still stealing oxygen from the rest of us.
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 21st May 2017, 11:09 AM   #2895
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 815
Critical Thought Results In One Conclusion

It's important to note that Ted Gunderson was not the first private investigator hired by MacDonald. In the Fall of 1980, inmate hired a retired New York City homicide detective to look into several aspects of the case.

A few months later, the investigator processed with inmate that he would be of no use to him for "all signs" pointed to MacDonald's guilt. Inmate then hired Ted Gunderson and we all know how that train wreck turned out.

It comes as no surprise that neither the 1987 civil jury nor readers of Fatal Justice were made aware of this initial hire by inmate. This scenario mirrors the negative reactions put forth by James Osterburg and Judith Bunker.

It seems that whenever someone looks at this case with a critical eye, they come to the same conclusion. Jeffrey MacDonald murdered his wife and two children.

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 22nd May 2017, 07:54 AM   #2896
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 533
I am still waiting for henri to point out a SUBSTANTIVE error in Fatal Vision. I know he cannot because none exist, but still......come on henri put up or shut up!
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 22nd May 2017, 08:06 AM   #2897
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,895
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
It's important to note that Ted Gunderson was not the first private investigator hired by MacDonald. In the Fall of 1980, inmate hired a retired New York City homicide detective to look into several aspects of the case.

A few months later, the investigator processed with inmate that he would be of no use to him for "all signs" pointed to MacDonald's guilt. Inmate then hired Ted Gunderson and we all know how that train wreck turned out.

It comes as no surprise that neither the 1987 civil jury nor readers of Fatal Justice were made aware of this initial hire by inmate. This scenario mirrors the negative reactions put forth by James Osterburg and Judith Bunker.

It seems that whenever someone looks at this case with a critical eye, they come to the same conclusion. Jeffrey MacDonald murdered his wife and two children.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
This matter of MacDonald hiring private investigators was discussed at length at the McGinniss lawsuit case in California in 1987. The original private investigator was fired, or resigned, and replaced by Shedlick, who was also a former New York cop, and who did some excellent work when he was alive talking to Cathy Perry, and getting affidavits that three different witnesses had overheard the foreman of the jury saying he was going to convict the hell out of MacDonald before the trial even started.

Then MacDonald seems to have also hired Gunderson, who was a former senior FBI man in California, and Detective Beasley, whose daughter has written in the past that her father knew what happened in the MacDonald murders, but he wasn't believed.

James Osterburg was a former New York fingerprint expert who testified at trial that he was "totally mystified" that 50 fingerprints had been lost, as well as other aspects of the fingerprint investigation. Like Stombaugh of the FBI, Osterburg was not qualified to testify, or pontificate, about the blood evidence, or fabric impressions, or the pajama folding experiment. Judith Bunker has been proved in other cases to be an incompetent blood expert.

The trouble is the American police are not able to solve difficult murders, or to do complete investigations. Half-suspicions and jumping to conclusions by rookie detectives are all very well but they need to be backed up by supporting evidence. It's the same with the British and Portuguese police with regard to the abduction of Madeleine McCann, and people being swindled out of their savings by internet fraud.

Juries always start with an assumption, perhaps reasonably, that the prisoner in the dock is probably guilty. That's why an innocent person needs a skilful advocate to defend them in court, and an impartial judge and jury.
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 22nd May 2017, 08:38 AM   #2898
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,895
Originally Posted by byn63 View Post
I am still waiting for henri to point out a SUBSTANTIVE error in Fatal Vision. I know he cannot because none exist, but still......come on henri put up or shut up!
The substantive errors in Fatal Vision were discussed at length at that 1987 McGinniss lawsuit case, which MacDonald won. The transcripts of that case are still in the depths of that MacDonald information website if you ever bothered to read them. I now can't get any of them to link with this forum.

There is some background waffle about this at this website which also doesn't seem to link:

Quote:
WTF!!!

Who the hell wrote this article, government prosecutor Brian Murtagh??? This article is seriously biased, and needs a complete NPOV rewrite from top to bottom. The website www.crimelibrary.com, which Wikipedia frequently uses as a reliable source of information on crime cases, has a very complete picture of the case, and numerous news articles can be found with quick google searches.

There is no mention of the fact that Joe McGinniss's book "Fatal Vision" has been pretty much proven to be a complete fabrication and act of fraud on McGinniss's part, and the entire article literally sounds like it is speaking with the POV of the (very biased) prosecution. In particular, the article presents "facts" that have not only never been proven, but for which there was never any credible evidence in the first place. There is no mention of the obvious coverups of the Army investigators in the 1970s, of the mishandling of evidence by government officials in the 1980s, and of the FBI's refusal to turn over evidence to the defense team, including materials that can be tested for DNA evidence.

Jeeze... I hate sounding like a conspiracy nut...*;-) but here is a case of very possible judicial impropriety on a massive scale, and the article needs to better reflect this fact. I'll try some editing of it over the next few days, but I don't have as much time to devote to WP as I used to.*
func(talk) 04:50, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 22nd May 2017 at 08:41 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 22nd May 2017, 10:25 AM   #2899
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 533
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The substantive errors in Fatal Vision were discussed at length at that 1987 McGinniss lawsuit case,
No they were not because no substantive errors have ever been found... Now get with the program and answer the question. henri - YOU are challenged to point out a singled SUBSTANTIVE error in Fatal Vision. The usual bs comments you make about the amphetamine psychosis don't count because it was presented as a personal theory and only a personal theory. THE FACTS henri, now put up or shut up.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
which MacDonald won.
No henri, inmate didn't really win. the trial resulted in a hung jury because of 1 lone person who disagreed with the rest and ridiculous jury instructions that would not allow the jury to consider the rest of the questions until they met agreement on the first. thus, mistrial was declared and the INSURANCE company for the Publisher decided to make a settlement because it was less costly than a new trial.

I can see where inmate would claim a victory but even that limited scope of a claim is inaccurate and inmate ended up hurting himself. Since inmate sued despite signing a waiver that stated he would not sue no matter what the book contained, he lost his rights to the residual payments he'd been receiving. Then Mildred K won a wrongful death lawsuit against inmate using the Son of Sam law and she received a substantial portion of the settlement for wrongful death. the inmate's mother and his rotating band of lawyers got a huge chunk and inmate got almost nothing. FACT.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The transcripts of that case are still in the depths of that MacDonald information website if you ever bothered to read them.
roflmao! I HAVE read the transcripts of the Civil Suit several times. Since I know there have been no substantive errors found in Fatal Vision I don't see a need to read it again. Now, back to the challenge......name 1 substantive error in Fatal Vision henri. it is way past time for you to put up or shut up.
byn63 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 03:41 AM   #2900
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,895
Originally Posted by byn63 View Post

roflmao! I HAVE read the transcripts of the Civil Suit several times. Since I know there have been no substantive errors found in Fatal Vision I don't see a need to read it again. Now, back to the challenge......name 1 substantive error in Fatal Vision henri. it is way past time for you to put up or shut up.
It might be worth your while to read the Civil Suit again. This can be found at:

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.c...mcginniss.html

In the JonBenet Ramsey case the Ramsey parents wrote a book called the Death of Innocence to give their side of the story for the court of public opinion. In the Madeleine McCann case, I think Kate McCann has also written a book about that case after receiving death threats on the internet from biased people. In a way MacDonald could have written an informative book about his case, but he was wrongly advised not to do so by Segal. The Potter and Bost Fatal Justice book was written in 1994, but by that time it was too late, and biased 'brick wall' Judge Fox was then entrenched in control of the case.

This is part of what MacDonald thinks about McGinniss:

Quote:
In my view, the real issue was extremely simple: was "Fatal Vision" a novel, or was it non-fiction, as McG claimed it to be? And, was I the monster portrayed by McG? It was my strong belief that for any good to come out of the civil trial, I had to prove "F.V." was a novel, and I had to prove McG created his monster out of whole cloth, to fulfill some need in McG himself, as well as to sell books and television movies.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 03:46 AM   #2901
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 533
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It might be worth your while to read the Civil Suit again.
IT MIGHT BE WORTH YOUR WHILE TO READ IT and ACTUALLY ATTEMPT TO COMPREHEND IT!

Once again, I challenge YOU to point out a single SUBSTANTIVE ERROR in Fatal Vision. You cannot do it because there are none. The Civil Suit was settled not won by inmate nor lost by Joe M. Nothing in the transcripts of that trial expose any substantive errors in Fatal Vision because there are not any to expose.

Seriously henri - put up or shut up! Point out the SUBSTANTIVE ERRORS you claim are in Fatal Vision.....you know as well as I do that you cannot because they don't exist.....
byn63 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 01:19 PM   #2902
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 815
MacDonald Camp Hypocrites

Hypocrites seem to gather around the MacDonald camp fire whenever the topic of Fatal Vision comes up. Advocates scream from the rooftops in regards to the handful of errors contained in McGinniss' true crime masterpiece, yet skulk away whenever the light shines brightly on the mess that is Fatal Justice.

As the Landlord of MacFantasy Island and other advocates know, there is an average of 1 half-truth, factual distortion and/or outright falsehood every 3rd page of this ball of toilet paper. In many instances, the same half-truth, distortion and/or lie is repeated several times over.

In 2007, the government bolstered the amateur research on FJ by disputing ALL of the factual claims leveled in this work of fiction. The content of their response briefs mirrored the conclusions rendered by several MacDonald case researchers.

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 29th May 2017, 02:22 AM   #2903
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,895
The American media are not much help. This is part of what Dr MacDonald once wrote about the American media in his case. Fred Bost and Potter were journalists and they had right judgment with regard to the MacDonald case:

Quote:
"Having now viewed the 10/14/98 "American Justice" segment on my case, I feel compelled to offer several comments. First, I applaud you for an attempt to be fair, to allow both sides, as it were, to be heard. The case is convoluted and lengthy and I understand it is impossible to tell the entire story in one hour, never mind addressing the particular concerns of so many participants.

However, I would be less than candid and truthful if I did not point out several items that appear especially relevant to establishing the truth of the case:

...
http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/html/mac-ae.html

Edited by Loss Leader:  Edited for Rule 4

Last edited by Loss Leader; 29th May 2017 at 08:32 AM.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th May 2017, 07:53 AM   #2904
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 314
Wow! Jeff MacDonald promoting the idea that he's innocent....how......normal for this murdering scumbag unfaithful husband, rotten father and adult human male who sends bodily secretions through the mail.
desmirelle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th May 2017, 03:39 AM   #2905
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,895
The MacDonald case consisted of keystone cops and keystone 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 30th May 2017, 06:05 AM   #2906
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,461
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The MacDonald case consisted of keystone cops and keystone judges.
And a guilty defendant.
__________________
"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 30th May 2017, 04:15 PM   #2907
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 815
Psychopath's Logic

Inmate's letter/retort to the American Justice program is a case study in how a psychopath deciphers concrete data. His repetitive themes (e.g., evidence tampering, suppression, and exculpatory evidence) ignore the FACT that PRIOR to writing that letter, the 4th Circuit Court concluded that the arguments regarding evidence tampering/suppression lacked merit. In addition, the claims of exculpatory evidence were deemed "specious" by this same Court.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 30th May 2017 at 04:19 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 30th May 2017, 06:20 PM   #2908
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,461
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
Inmate's letter/retort to the American Justice program is a case study in how a psychopath deciphers concrete data. His repetitive themes (e.g., evidence tampering, suppression, and exculpatory evidence) ignore the FACT that PRIOR to writing that letter, the 4th Circuit Court concluded that the arguments regarding evidence tampering/suppression lacked merit. In addition, the claims of exculpatory evidence were deemed "specious" by this same Court.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
And you can sum up HP's continuing series of posts with pretty much the same verbiage.

Did HP learn this from his man crush or was delusional thinking a preexisting condition?
__________________
"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 31st May 2017, 07:35 AM   #2909
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,895
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
Inmate's letter/retort to the American Justice program is a case study in how a psychopath deciphers concrete data. His repetitive themes (e.g., evidence tampering, suppression, and exculpatory evidence) ignore the FACT that PRIOR to writing that letter, the 4th Circuit Court concluded that the arguments regarding evidence tampering/suppression lacked merit. In addition, the claims of exculpatory evidence were deemed "specious" by this same Court.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
It's not specious if you are innocent.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2017, 07:58 AM   #2910
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,461
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It's not specious if you are innocent.
Which disqualifies your man crush.
__________________
"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 1st June 2017, 08:47 AM   #2911
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 533
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It's not specious if you are innocent.
Which is exactly the point the court made; inmate is guilty thus his arguments are specious.

In other words henri:

It IS SPECIOUS when you are GUILTY.
byn63 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th June 2017, 08:47 PM   #2912
JTF
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 815
Guilty Beyond All Doubt

This case is a prime example of how even educated human beings will purposely squash critical thought in favor of their own personal feelings (e.g., heart over mind). Unlike several other high profile murder cases, this case carries no REAL controversy. The physical evidence in this case demonstrates that Jeffrey MacDonald is not only guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, he is guilty beyond ALL doubt.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
JTF is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2017, 03:11 AM   #2913
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 533
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
This case is a prime example of how even educated human beings will purposely squash critical thought in favor of their own personal feelings (e.g., heart over mind). Unlike several other high profile murder cases, this case carries no REAL controversy. The physical evidence in this case demonstrates that Jeffrey MacDonald is not only guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, he is guilty beyond ALL doubt.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
EXACTLY!
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 June 2017, 02:10 AM   #2914
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,895
There was an interesting murder case on one of those American true crime channels yesterday in which a young woman was murdered in a small police department area, which is similar in a way to the MacDonald case. The case remained unsolved for four years. Then a murderer was caught at another police department area for another murder, and he confessed to the original murder, and five other murders, and he then committed suicide in prison.

The point is that the original detective in charge of the investigation said on TV that most murders involve friends or family or are drug related. That's jumping to conclusions and not being able to see further than your nose.
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 June 2017, 01:55 PM   #2915
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 314
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
<snip> That's jumping to conclusions and not being able to see further than your nose.
Support this assertion. WITH FACTS. I dare you.
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 June 2017, 03:36 AM   #2916
byn63
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 533
Originally Posted by desmirelle View Post
Support this assertion. WITH FACTS. I dare you.
desi you're funny! you KNOW henri doesn't do FACTS!

Last edited by byn63; 12th June 2017 at 03:37 AM. Reason: typo
byn63 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2017, 10:42 AM   #2917
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 314
He might surprise us.......
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 15th June 2017, 01:57 AM   #2918
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,895
Take nothing on appearances, take everything on the evidence. There is no better rule.
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 June 2017, 02:38 AM   #2919
Border Reiver
Philosopher
 
Border Reiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,068
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Take nothing on appearances, take everything on the evidence. There is no better rule.


In which case MacDonald is guilty.
__________________
Questions, comments, queries, bitches, complaints, rude gestures and/or remarks?
Border Reiver is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2017, 10:22 AM   #2920
desmirelle
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 314
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Take nothing on appearances, take everything on the evidence. There is no better rule.
Then follow it, dude. You just believe every word that falls out of your man crush's mouth and ignore all the evidence with the specious defense of "they" hid evidence without providing proof.

Or is this a case of "Do as I say and not as I do?" Because I've yet to see you take any of the evidence against your idol mac seriously.
desmirelle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:58 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.