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 24th February 2021, 02:19 AM   #2401
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
This is what the wig expert Jerry Pollak said about saran in wigs in 1996. These North Carolina and Supreme Court judges should read this before they start agreeing with Judge Dupree. They are ll-informed. It looks like a mannequin or 'masquerade' wig to me:

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.c...ff-pollak.html

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 24th February 2021 at 02:23 AM.
Henri McPhee 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 24th February 2021, 02:46 AM   #2402
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
There is an interesting letter from Lucia Bartoli to Christina in 2005 on the internet. She seems to be one of several aggrieved ladies who fell out with MacDonald after he married Kathryn. The point is she was closely involved with the case at one time and she has some interesting opinions about it. It doesn't look as though an evidentiary hearing will end this nonsense as she seems to think:

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.c...toli-2005.html

"F) The AFIP was agreed to by the defense because originally the prosecution, it was known, would choose LAB CORP, but there were reports that that lab was "faulty" in certain ways. Thus a specific number of labs was agreed upon and the defense was allowed to choose it.

G) The judge waved the fee for DNA testing. Why? Because imagine if you or I were depending upon that to prove our innocence yet we didn't have the money for it... But it may be ONE of the reasons that the number of exhibits for DNA testing was restricted to 15. Judge Fox also noted for the attorneys that even if the results would be FAVORABLE to MacD., this would ONLY MEAN that he was not alone. So Fox was indeed very foxy.

H) ONLY an evidentiary hearing will END this nonsense. I should think that BOTH sides would desire that so that it would end.

I) Sadly, the gov't. is NOT comprised of honest, altruistic persons alone. There are corrupt, ambitious people there too. I know too many of those, including a couple of FBI special agents. I ask your audience to remember that the prosecutor and the judge are paid by the same side.

J) I do know other things about the case that I can reply to, but the important thing here, is that I did a specific job and that job got the client back into court. THAT was not an easy task. I did it for more than MacD. I did it to glean a new sort of sideline for myself and have obtained several assignments as an investigative researcher. I also kept the "game" alive because I was studying a new facet of this, much larger than I had thought possible. I also was searching for who the "mole" on the defense team could be. (I did find out and have kept that to myself and two other persons only)."

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 24th February 2021 at 02:49 AM.
Henri McPhee 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 24th February 2021, 10:16 AM   #2403
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
I still think Mrs Garcia might have been in possession of the MacDonald murders wig but it was disregarded by CID agents Ivory and Kearns either as a cover up for the American public, or because of corruption. The public and the House of Commons only understand straight lines. There was a rumor fairly recently that Mrs. Garcia's son might have been involved in the MacDonald murders and he seems to be one of about three Cathy Perry associates who were stabbed by her before she was taken to mental hospital.

I have discussed this matter on this forum in 2013 and I stand by this:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com....php?p=9443539
Henri McPhee 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 24th February 2021, 04:30 PM   #2404
GiSEQ
Student
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 45
Henri’s ability to regurgitate “I think”, “everyone’s corrupt”, “everyone’s lying”, “judges and attorneys all bad”, “the killer’s innocent” ad nauseam is boring.

Come back when you have actual facts admissible in a court of law.
GiSEQ 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 25th February 2021, 02:23 AM   #2405
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
Originally Posted by GiSEQ View Post
Henri’s ability to regurgitate “I think”, “everyone’s corrupt”, “everyone’s lying”, “judges and attorneys all bad”, “the killer’s innocent” ad nauseam is boring.

Come back when you have actual facts admissible in a court of law.
It's inadmissible in a court of law for witnesses to commit perjury and for judges to be corruptly biased as well as mistaken and unfair and allow a mistrial where the disclosure of exculpatory evidence is blatantly disregarded by the prosecution.

It may be boring for somebody who works for CNN and is only interested in soaps and quiz shows, or for somebody trying to overthrow democracy. Some people never watch the news on TV. The trouble is it's a serious matter for Jeffrey MacDonald.

It's not just me who has a low opinion of the administration of law in the MacDonald case. This is a quote from Helena Stoeckley's lawyer Leonard from the 2012 evidentiary hearing being cross-examined by a prosecution lawyer in which Leonard says MacDonald was screwed:

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.c...ranscripts.pdf

A. MR. LEONARD STATED THAT HE DIDN'T -- HE DID NOT KNOW IF
13 MACDONALD WAS GUILTY OR INNOCENT. HOWEVER, HE STATED THAT HE
14 DID NOT FEEL THE PROSECUTION -- THAT HE DID FEEL THAT THE
15 PROSECUTION DID NOT PROVE THEIR CASE. HE STATED HE THOUGHT
16 MACDONALD HAD BEEN SCREWED.
17 Q. OKAY. AND THAT'S THE STATEMENT I ASKED YOU ABOUT
18 EARLIER. DOES THAT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION AS TO WHETHER
19 YOU MADE THAT STATEMENT TO MR. MYERS?
20 A. I DON'T REMEMBER MAKING -- I REMEMBER TALKING TO MR.
21 MYERS. I DON'T REMEMBER TELLING HIM THAT I DID NOT KNOW IF
22 MACDONALD WAS GUILTY OR INNOCENT.
23 I DON'T REMEMBER EVER TELLING ANYBODY -- WELL, IT'S
24 VERY TRUE THAT I THOUGHT BECAUSE OF WHAT I TOLD YOU THAT
25 MACDONALD DID NOT HAVE -- I THOUGHT THAT MISTAKES WERE MADE IN
Case 3:75-cr-00026-F Document 322 Filed 11/21/12 Page 76 of 182
Leonard/Cross Page 1135
September 24, 2012
1 HIS DEFENSE THAT HAMPERED HIS DEFENSE SERIOUSLY AND THAT THE
2 JURY JUST WAS NOT RELATING TO MACDONALD.
3 AND SO IF I THINK THAT HE HAD BEEN SCREWED, I WOULD
4 HAVE THOUGHT THAT HE WOULD HAVE BEEN SCREWED BY HIS DEFENSE
5 TEAM.
6 YOU KNOW, I WASN'T REFERRING -- I WASN'T REFERRING
7 TO MISCONDUCT BY ANYBODY, BUT WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO WAS THAT
8 SERIOUS MISTAKES I THOUGHT WERE BEING MADE BY THE DEFENSE TEAM
9 IN TRYING TO COMMUNICATE JEFFREY MACDONALD'S POSITION AND IT
10 WAS INEFFECTIVE IN THAT RESPECT BECAUSE OF THE WAY THEY WENT
11 ABOUT HANDLING IT.
12 Q. ALL RIGHT. IN FACT, DO YOU SHARE THE OPINION HELD BY
13 MANY IN THE RALEIGH DEFENSE BAR THAT MACDONALD WOULD HAVE BEEN
14 ACQUITTED IF WADE SMITH HAD HANDLED THE ENTIRE CASE?
15 A. WELL, HE WOULD NOT HAVE HAD THAT DISABILITY, OKAY, SO HIS
16 CHANCES CERTAINLY WOULD HAVE BEEN GREATER, BUT I DON'T KNOW
17 WHAT THE GOVERNMENT'S EVIDENCE WAS AND I STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT
18 THE EVIDENCE WAS.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 25th February 2021 at 02:40 AM.
Henri McPhee 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 25th February 2021, 04:02 AM   #2406
GiSEQ
Student
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 45
Same BS

Henri you just proved my point.

By the way, Iíve been following this case since 1983.
GiSEQ 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 25th February 2021, 01:39 PM   #2407
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
Anyone else enjoy the irony of the landlord accusing all and sundry of "drunkenness" while simultaneously insisting that the testimony of the most drug and alcohol dependent person in the case be granted credibility?
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"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 26th February 2021, 12:38 AM   #2408
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,507
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Anyone else enjoy the irony of the landlord accusing all and sundry of "drunkenness" while simultaneously insisting that the testimony of the most drug and alcohol dependent person in the case be granted credibility?
The landlord is the King of Irony, and Helena Stoeckley is one of his main subjects. Stoeckley's drug intake was so prodigious that she died at the age of 30 on her couch as her infant son was crawling around on the floor under his crib. The only consistent story she gave about this case was that she had no memory of her whereabouts on 2/17/70 due to her excessive use of multiple substances. She provided this story to newspaper reporter Pat Reese two days after the murders, and repeated it several times to investigators and under oath at the 1979 trial. The landlord, however, has chosen to ignore these pesky details and has embraced selected bits from Stoeckley's various accounts of being inside 544 Castle Drive. Considering that there is not a shred of evidence DEFINITVELY linking her to the crime scene, the landlord offers her confessions and unsourced household debris as proof that she was present at 544 Castle Drive on 2/17/70. Classic weak sauce.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 26th February 2021 at 12:46 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 26th February 2021, 01:17 AM   #2409
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
The landlord is the King of Irony, and Helena Stoeckley is one of his main subjects. Stoeckley's drug intake was so prodigious that she died at the age of 30 on her couch as her infant son was crawling around on the floor under his crib. The only consistent story she gave about this case was that she had no memory of her whereabouts on 2/17/70 due to her excessive use of multiple substances.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
Helena Stoeckley was as guilty as hell. She said she couldn't remember to CID agents where she was that night because of drugs. The trouble is those drugs don't cause a loss of memory.. There should have been a first-class trial judge in Nroth Carolina who didn't suffer from an astonishing lack of vision. People used to say on the NacDonald forums that Helena appeared on TV with Detective Beasley shortly before her death and said she was going to blow the lid off of Fort Bragg. That may not have gone down too well with the North Carolina judges.

There is a fair and just website about all this updated in June 2020:

https://patri-x.com/dr-jeffrey-macdo...govt-cover-up/

"Stoeckley died in 1983, post-trial, allegedly of natural causes. She died at home, purportedly of a liver disease and pneumonia, but it was a sudden death, inconsistent with liver disease or pneumonia in a 32 year old person. She was home alone with her baby and it was her custom to seek help when she was ill since she was a very attentive mother to her son. She did not seek help at this time but she had previously expressed to her friend and an investigator that she was ready to tell something that she knew was going to be a “major bombshell” about the MacDonald case. She had hesitated to do so before because she had asked for immunity and it had been denied. (Interestingly, a resident of Stoeckley’s apartment building had seen two clean-cut men in suits who had asked for Stoeckley and hung around for about two days immediately prior to her death. A forensic pathologist was present at her autopsy, and if, in fact, Stoeckley had been the victim of foul play, it was undetectable on autopsy."

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 26th February 2021 at 01:22 AM.
Henri McPhee 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 27th February 2021, 09:49 AM   #2410
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
There is a 2020 website by a Fayetteville Observer journalist which basically boils down to the 'profound' fact that some people are convinced MacDonald is guilty and others think he is innocent, and that it was a long time ago.

There is an interesting bit on that website in which instructor crime scene investigators now use the MacDonald case as an example of how not to do it. I have mentioned this before now on other MacDonald forums and been told at the time that it doesn't happen. North Carolina judges should have taken this into consideration before they jumped to conclusions about the case:

https://stories.usatodaynetwork.com/...donaldmurders/

"The MacDonald case provided a harsh lesson for the military about preservation of crime scenes, said Kelvin Culbreth, a local Cumulus Media radio executive who grew up in Fayetteville. In 1984, Culbreth joined the Army and went to military police school in Alabama.

One of the most important jobs of an MP is to preserve a crime scene to protect the evidence for the investigators, Culbreth said. His instructors had a training room modeled after the MacDonald home, he said, and they used the MacDonald case as a scenario and example of what not to do.

“There was just so many things, so many things that contaminated that crime scene,” he said."

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 27th February 2021 at 09:50 AM.
Henri McPhee 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 28th February 2021, 03:41 PM   #2411
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,507
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There is a 2020 website by a Fayetteville Observer journalist which basically boils down to the 'profound' fact that some people are convinced MacDonald is guilty and others think he is innocent, and that it was a long time ago.

There is an interesting bit on that website in which instructor crime scene investigators now use the MacDonald case as an example of how not to do it. I have mentioned this before now on other MacDonald forums and been told at the time that it doesn't happen. North Carolina judges should have taken this into consideration before they jumped to conclusions about the case:

https://stories.usatodaynetwork.com/...donaldmurders/

"The MacDonald case provided a harsh lesson for the military about preservation of crime scenes, said Kelvin Culbreth, a local Cumulus Media radio executive who grew up in Fayetteville. In 1984, Culbreth joined the Army and went to military police school in Alabama.

One of the most important jobs of an MP is to preserve a crime scene to protect the evidence for the investigators, Culbreth said. His instructors had a training room modeled after the MacDonald home, he said, and they used the MacDonald case as a scenario and example of what not to do.

“There was just so many things, so many things that contaminated that crime scene,” he said."
In order to avoid addressing the mass of inculpatory evidence in this case, inmate's advocates rely on old chestnuts to propel their debunked claims. Kelvin clearly has no idea that in their 1980's literature, the FBI used the living room at 544 Castle Drive as an example of a staged crime scene. Kelvin also doesn't understand that the MP's first duty was to preserve life, so the crime scene contamination argument is steeped in hyperbole. Compared to several other high profile murder cases, the crime scene preservation in this case was top notch. There is also no evidence of crime scene contamination in the 3 bedrooms, the bathroom, and the kitchen. The only salient argument for crime scene contamination in this case was in the living room.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 28th February 2021 at 03:45 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 1st March 2021, 02:40 AM   #2412
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
These North Carolina judges refer to each other as brethren as though they are in some kind of religious order. I hope they are not being bribed by the mob for being too close to the drugs trade. Judge King supported by Judge Motz seems as bad as Judge Fox who remarked at the 2012 hearing that Judge Dupree was the trial judge and it would take him six months to become thoroughly familiar with the case.

I agree with this opinion from 2012:

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/lies...t3355-s30.html

"Plus Sydney, I also read that the judge Dupree, was a kind of racist guy against Jews and made a lot of his ruling against the defense because of Bernard Segal, who was a rich Philadelphia lawyer. Wade Smith was brought in to be a local southern lawyer. Basically it came down to a Jewish lawyer, from Phila, a New York City doc, against the NC criminal justice system. This was a federal system, but it was still a NC Carolina jury and a North Carolina resident and judge, before becoming a federal judge."

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 1st March 2021 at 03:21 AM.
Henri McPhee 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 1st March 2021, 03:00 AM   #2413
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
Compared to several other high profile murder cases, the crime scene preservation in this case was top notch. There is also no evidence of crime scene contamination in the 3 bedrooms, the bathroom, and the kitchen. The only salient argument for crime scene contamination in this case was in the living room.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
I can't quite see how JTF can possibly say that the crime scene preservation was top notch. Some say it was not as bad as some people make out but it was dangerous for MacDonald with very inexperienced forensic technicians making decisions about things like the pajama pocket and the black wool fibers with no known source.

I have read Segal's closing speech at the trial again and I now think he spoke sense about things like MacDonald murders crime scene preservation though it was still turgid and above the heads and too academic with regard to an average jury. I don't think they knew what he was talking about.

Dr. Neal was the on call doctor who was called to the crime scene to officially declare death at the scene. This is from the 1979 MacDonald trial with Dr. Neal being cross-examined by Wade Smith:

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

Q Now, I take it, Dr. Neal, that you made no effort to replace hands and arms that you lifted in your examination in the place where you first found them?
A No, sir; I didn't.
Q And you made no effort to replace bed clothing that you had to move from the children in the place you originally found them?
A No, sir.
Q And you made no effort to replace body clothing in the place you originally found them?
A That is correct.
Q And you made no effort to replace the blue pajama top to its original location?
A That is correct.
Q And you made no effort to replace the white towel in its original location?
A That is correct, sir.
Q And you made no effort to replace the bodies in their original location?
A That is correct.
Q And you made no effort to avoid transferring blood from one body to another?
A That is correct.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 1st March 2021 at 03:23 AM.
Henri McPhee 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 1st March 2021, 09:48 AM   #2414
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
I still don't think Judge Dupree was an impartial judge or that the MacDonald case jury were impartial. It could be something to do with North Carolina's Confederate past. There was a funny business when it was disclosed that Dupree's former son-in-aw proctor ws actively involved in trying to secure MacDonald's prosecution and he was married to Dupree's daughter. Dupree categorically denied it in an affidavit about 1984.

This is from an article about judicial conduct in North Carolina and should have applied to the MacDonald case:

https://www.nccourts.gov/assets/inli...xsED4HVrFt7dRj

C. Disqualification.
(1) On motion of any party, a judge should disqualify himself/herself
in a proceeding in which the judge's impartiality may reasonably be questioned,
including but not limited to instances where:
(a) The judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a
party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning
the proceedings;
(b) The judge served as lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a
lawyer with whom the judge previously practiced law served during such
association as a lawyer concerning the matter, or the judge or such
lawyer has been a material witness concerning it;
(c) The judge knows that he/she, individually or as a fiduciary,
or the judge's spouse or minor child residing in the judge's household,
has a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party
to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be substantially
affected by the outcome of the proceeding;
(d) The judge or the judge's spouse, or a person within the third
degree of relationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person:
(i) Is a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, or
trustee of a party;
(ii) Is acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;
(iii) Is known by the judge to have an interest that could be
substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;
(iv) Is to the judge's knowledge likely to be a material
witness in the proceeding.
6
(2) A judge should inform himself/herself about the judge's personal
and fiduciary financial interests, and make a reasonable effort to inform
himself/herself about the personal financial interests of the judge's spouse and
minor children residing in the judge's household.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 1st March 2021 at 09:50 AM.
Henri McPhee 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 1st March 2021, 10:50 AM   #2415
ScottPletcher
Scholar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 97
For the sake of argument, I'll concede that the crime scene was poorly preserved. Then the q becomes: was is so poorly preserved that crucial evidence was destroyed and/or made unavailable? No. IF there had been intruders, there still would have been more direct evidence of them, especially at least SIX intruders as claimed by inmate: he saw 4 people while his wife was simultaneously screaming "Why are they doing this?", meaning there had to be at least six intruders.

Take a look at the crime scene photos of the house. It looks overall very placid, not like SIX (or more) maniacal killers were running amok in it.
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 1st March 2021, 03:41 PM   #2416
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,507
Fuzzy Math

Padding the numbers has always been a significant part of the hyperbolic rhetoric put forth by inmate and his advocates. Two prime examples are the number and severity of inmate's wounds, and the number of Army staff members that were inside 544 Castle Drive in early morning hours of 2/17/70. The number and listing of wounds on Jeffrey MacDonald's body was not consistent, so I will only list the wounds that were catalogued by a majority of the physicians who examined him at Womack Hospital.

Inmate sustained bruising over the left eye beneath the hairline, a superficial stab wound of the upper left arm, and a superficial stab wound of the left bicep. He also received a superficial laceration of the left index finger and a superficial stab wound to the left abdomen in the form of an upside down "V." Several small puncture-type wounds were present on the upper left chest. None of the wounds required suturing. A neat and clean stab wound, one-centimeter in length, was located between two ribs on the right side of his chest and resulted in a collapse of the right lung. At best, inmate had about 15 stab/puncture wounds on his body, but only 2 of his wounds were deemed to be penetrating type wounds.

Inmate initially claimed that he had 17 stab wounds on his body and as time wore on, the number and severity of his wounds gradually increased. Bernie Segal used this padding system when describing the number of Army personnel that were present at the crime scene. Segal initially claimed there were 22 Army personnel inside 544 Castle Drive and he eventually padded that number to 26. Unlike the CID's numbers (e.g., 10-12 Army personnel), Segal never actually listed the names of all 22 or 26 Army personnel that were "herding inside the crime scene like circus elephants." Why include names when you can just throw out a big number?

In the end, the CID probably deserves a C- grade for crime scene preservation and an A- grade for evidence collection. As I mentioned in a prior post, there are several other high profile murder cases (e.g., Tate/Labianca murders come to mind) that deserve D's and F's for crime scene preservation and/or evidence collection.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 1st March 2021 at 03:45 PM.
JTF is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2021, 02:05 AM   #2417
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
Originally Posted by ScottPletcher View Post
For the sake of argument, I'll concede that the crime scene was poorly preserved. Then the q becomes: was is so poorly preserved that crucial evidence was destroyed and/or made unavailable? No. IF there had been intruders, there still would have been more direct evidence of them, especially at least SIX intruders as claimed by inmate: he saw 4 people while his wife was simultaneously screaming "Why are they doing this?", meaning there had to be at least six intruders.

Take a look at the crime scene photos of the house. It looks overall very placid, not like SIX (or more) maniacal killers were running amok in it.
They were very careful not to leave any forensic evidence or clues behind and any evidence that was left behind at the crime scene, like the blonde synthetic hair, or the black wool fibers with no known source was disregarded by bad police work. The fingerprint and DNA collection was a poor investigation and they were probably wearing surgical gloves at the time.In some of these murder cases there are no forensics at all. It doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Henri McPhee 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 2nd March 2021, 02:51 AM   #2418
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
Originally Posted by JTF View Post

Inmate sustained bruising over the left eye beneath the hairline, a superficial stab wound of the upper left arm, and a superficial stab wound of the left bicep. He also received a superficial laceration of the left index finger and a superficial stab wound to the left abdomen in the form of an upside down "V." Several small puncture-type wounds were present on the upper left chest. None of the wounds required suturing. A neat and clean stab wound, one-centimeter in length, was located between two ribs on the right side of his chest and resulted in a collapse of the right lung. At best, inmate had about 15 stab/puncture wounds on his body, but only 2 of his wounds were deemed to be penetrating type wounds.

Inmate initially claimed that he had 17 stab wounds on his body and as time wore on, the number and severity of his wounds gradually increased.
https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
MacDonald has been quoted as saying his treatment at the hospital was "sloppy" and he is a qualified emergency doctor. His injuries were never photographed until many weeks after the crime due to bad police work which gave the wrong impression as several of the wounds had healed by then.

I am not medically qualified, but as a layman I am a bit surprised that MacDonald was never treated for the possibility of a fractured skull. That can cause brain damage. CID agent Pruett has been quoted as saying that MacDonald was suffering from concussion at the time. Nowadays concussion is regarded much more seriously.

This is what Ken Adachi thinks about it:

http://mirrors.wordsforgood.org/educ...A27may07.shtml

"Jeff WAS seriously injured that night, unlike the LIE which Kearns, Ivory, Murtaugh, and Blackburn repeat OVER AND OVER again that MacDonald was "barely scratched". Read Fatal Justice by Potter and Bost and you will learn the TRUE facts concerning his injuries sustained that night. They were recorded at the hospital where he was treated. They include SEVENTEEN STAB wounds and 3 blunt force traumas to the head. One of those stab wounds punctured and collapsed his right lung (which was re-inflated later that morning at the hospital). He passed our more than one time that night due to the severity of the blows to his head. I would like to see how you would respond if you were stabbed 17 times, suffered a collapsed lung, and clubbed on the head with a baseball bat 3 times and then be told by others that you seemed so "relatively OK"."

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 2nd March 2021 at 02:52 AM.
Henri McPhee 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 2nd March 2021, 10:12 AM   #2419
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,507
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
MacDonald has been quoted as saying his treatment at the hospital was "sloppy" and he is a qualified emergency doctor. His injuries were never photographed until many weeks after the crime due to bad police work which gave the wrong impression as several of the wounds had healed by then.

I am not medically qualified, but as a layman I am a bit surprised that MacDonald was never treated for the possibility of a fractured skull. That can cause brain damage. CID agent Pruett has been quoted as saying that MacDonald was suffering from concussion at the time. Nowadays concussion is regarded much more seriously.

This is what Ken Adachi thinks about it:

http://mirrors.wordsforgood.org/educ...A27may07.shtml

"Jeff WAS seriously injured that night, unlike the LIE which Kearns, Ivory, Murtaugh, and Blackburn repeat OVER AND OVER again that MacDonald was "barely scratched". Read Fatal Justice by Potter and Bost and you will learn the TRUE facts concerning his injuries sustained that night. They were recorded at the hospital where he was treated. They include SEVENTEEN STAB wounds and 3 blunt force traumas to the head. One of those stab wounds punctured and collapsed his right lung (which was re-inflated later that morning at the hospital). He passed our more than one time that night due to the severity of the blows to his head. I would like to see how you would respond if you were stabbed 17 times, suffered a collapsed lung, and clubbed on the head with a baseball bat 3 times and then be told by others that you seemed so "relatively OK"."
Anyone who supports ALL of the mythical narratives put forth by Ted Gunderson, should be relegated to standing on a street corner and pontificating about the end times. Adachi's opinions/claims about ANY subject are beyond worthless. In terms of his claim that inmate was seriously hurt, well... As I mentioned in my prior post, the number and listing of wounds on Jeffrey MacDonald's body was not consistent, so Adachi/Bost decided it was ok to conflate the observations of the Womack physicians in order to pad the number/severity of inmate's mostly superficial injuries.

What was consistent about the examinations of inmate's injuries was that all of the Womack physicians agreed that inmate was NOT seriously hurt. Adachi ignores the fact that inmate's vital signs were normal, not 1 of his wounds required sutures, and if his lung didn't require re-inflation, he would have been discharged home a day after he murdered his family. Adachi apparently never read Colette's autopsy report for the pathologist gave the opinion that if Colette had somehow survived, she would have been "cosmetically disfigured." Inmate, on the other hand, was unmarked from the midpoint of his forehead to the bottom portion of his neck.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 2nd March 2021 at 10:18 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 3rd March 2021, 02:28 AM   #2420
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
What was consistent about the examinations of inmate's injuries was that all of the Womack physicians agreed that inmate was NOT seriously hurt. Adachi ignores the fact that inmate's vital signs were normal, not 1 of his wounds required sutures, and if his lung didn't require re-inflation, he would have been discharged home a day after he murdered his family. Adachi apparently never read Colette's autopsy report for the pathologist gave the opinion that if Colette had somehow survived, she would have been "cosmetically disfigured." Inmate, on the other hand, was unmarked from the midpoint of his forehead to the bottom portion of his neck.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
I agree that MacDonald's injuries were not as serious as Colette or the two little girls but I still maintain he was in shock and concussed and he should have been checked for a fractured skull.

I reckon that Mazerolle and his pals in the mob had the dastardly plan of making MacDonald unconscious while they murdered the others in the MacDonald family. The perfect murders would then be for the CID and FBI to blame MacDonald for the murders and disbelieve Helena Stoeckley and Greg Mitchell and bribe Judge Dupree for his personal bias. The Press would not be much help and a jury would very likely be wrong. I think that's exactly what happened. The real culprits could then categorically deny they were involved.

There is a reasonably comprehensive website about the injuries in the MacDonald murders presented by the CID. I was interested to read there that MacDonald was supposed to have surmised there were two men of color at the crime scene. Frankly, I think it was incompetent to lose, or destroy, the pajama bottoms which may have had blood or pajama fibers on them, and which may have been helpful to MacDonald's defense:

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.c...-injuries.html

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 3rd March 2021 at 02:31 AM.
Henri McPhee 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 4th March 2021, 11:48 AM   #2421
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
They were very careful not to leave any forensic evidence or clues behind and any evidence that was left behind at the crime scene, like the blonde synthetic hair, or the black wool fibers with no known source was disregarded by bad police work. The fingerprint and DNA collection was a poor investigation and they were probably wearing surgical gloves at the time.In some of these murder cases there are no forensics at all. It doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Not consistent w/ inmates' "drug crazed hippies" ********.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"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 5th March 2021, 01:57 AM   #2422
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Not consistent w/ inmates' "drug crazed hippies" ********.
It's mainly people who believe MacDonald is guilty, and newspapers, despite the evidence who talk about drug crazed hippies. MacDonald may have mentioned once or twice that they were dressed like hippies. The matter was discussed in an old MacDonald forum from 1998:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.true...m/4Bno6NpJe5kJ


Oct 17, 1998, 8:00:00 AM
to
> rmtl: You say you live in the Fayetteville/Fort Bragg area. Do people in
> Fayetteville who believe that MacDonald is innocent, also believe that the
> black man who supposedly swung a bat at a mail carrier and lived or hung
around
> in the trailer park with the Stoeckley crowd is the same black man who was in
> MacDonald's home and was involved in the murders of MacDonald's wife and
> MacDonald's two little girls?

Not many people in Fayetteville believe MacDonald is innocent. But there are
several witnesses who saw this black man on several occasions. I don't know
where those people are now. I personally believe it is the same man that was
in the MacDonald home.

> Was it ever determined if the black man who swung the bat at the mail
> carrier also lived in that trailer park?

I don't know that it has been "determined" but Detective Beasley who did a
raid on the trailer park in question said that a black man who often wore a
field jacket and hung around Helena's crowd lived there along with a couple
of white males. Other witnesses also say that a black man who often wore an
army field jacket lived in that trailer park on Murchison Road.

> Do you happen to know the names of some of the people, especially men,
> who were considered to be part of the Stoeckley crowd, besides Greg Mitchell,
> Stoeckley's boyfriend at the time?

Don Harris , Ray Cazeras, Cathy Perry, Pam Kriwanek, Robert Wallack, Larry
Cook, Diane Cazeras, Thomas Vincent Brown, Bruce Fowler, and Kathy Smith is
all I can think of right now."

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 5th March 2021 at 02:03 AM.
Henri McPhee 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 5th March 2021, 12:54 PM   #2423
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It's mainly people who believe MacDonald is guilty, and newspapers, despite the evidence who talk about drug crazed hippies. MacDonald may have mentioned once or twice that they were dressed like hippies.
So your mancrush was lying about "Acid is Groovy, kill the pigs" because if that isn't drug crazed I don't know what is.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"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 5th March 2021, 12:55 PM   #2424
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,507
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It's mainly people who believe MacDonald is guilty, and newspapers, despite the evidence who talk about drug crazed hippies. MacDonald may have mentioned once or twice that they were dressed like hippies. The matter was discussed in an old MacDonald forum from 1998:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.true...m/4Bno6NpJe5kJ


Oct 17, 1998, 8:00:00 AM
to
> rmtl: You say you live in the Fayetteville/Fort Bragg area. Do people in
> Fayetteville who believe that MacDonald is innocent, also believe that the
> black man who supposedly swung a bat at a mail carrier and lived or hung
around
> in the trailer park with the Stoeckley crowd is the same black man who was in
> MacDonald's home and was involved in the murders of MacDonald's wife and
> MacDonald's two little girls?

Not many people in Fayetteville believe MacDonald is innocent. But there are
several witnesses who saw this black man on several occasions. I don't know
where those people are now. I personally believe it is the same man that was
in the MacDonald home.

> Was it ever determined if the black man who swung the bat at the mail
> carrier also lived in that trailer park?

I don't know that it has been "determined" but Detective Beasley who did a
raid on the trailer park in question said that a black man who often wore a
field jacket and hung around Helena's crowd lived there along with a couple
of white males. Other witnesses also say that a black man who often wore an
army field jacket lived in that trailer park on Murchison Road.

> Do you happen to know the names of some of the people, especially men,
> who were considered to be part of the Stoeckley crowd, besides Greg Mitchell,
> Stoeckley's boyfriend at the time?

Don Harris , Ray Cazeras, Cathy Perry, Pam Kriwanek, Robert Wallack, Larry
Cook, Diane Cazeras, Thomas Vincent Brown, Bruce Fowler, and Kathy Smith is
all I can think of right now."
This is just a case of adding more red herrings to the hippie home invader junk pile. Don Harris and Bruce Fowler were cleared as suspects and the rest of the individuals on this list were NEVER considered suspects in this case. I'm also skeptical of this posters motivations for he or she has to know that Dwight Smith was quickly identified as being the black male in this narrative. I'm assuming this poster played dumb with the identity of the "man that was in the MacDonald home," due to Smith being cleared as a suspect in this case.

https://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 5th March 2021, 03:27 PM   #2425
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,507
It's Important To Note

It's important to note that the CID cleared Harris and Fowler in 1971, the FBI cleared Harris in 1981, and Smith in 1982.

https://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 6th March 2021, 03:19 AM   #2426
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
So your mancrush was lying about "Acid is Groovy, kill the pigs" because if that isn't drug crazed I don't know what is.
It was the newspapers who described the intruders as hippies. MacDonald just described what he saw and heard. I think the people who consider MacDonald guilty are the same sort of people who regard Burke as guilty in the JonBenet Ramsey case. It's a lack of a judicial attitude.

There was an interesting murder investigation by Scotland Yard murder squad on British TV about a New Zealand young woman who was murdered in London in 2007. What interested me is that there were at least two suspects who were arrested in the initial investigation before the real culprit was found. They didn't just jump to conclusions as in the MacDonald case.

I agree with this assessment of the MacDonald case:

https://patri-x.com/dr-jeffrey-macdo...vt-cover-up/2/

"The “evidence” convicting him in 1979 was simply “forensic” evidence of a confusing nature that did no more than place him in his own home on the night of the murders. There is no evidence that says he committed murder — and there is voluminous evidence that points to the guilt of Helena Stoeckley, Greg Mitchell and their co-assailants. Yet, as of this date, Dr. MacDonald remains in federal prison, a victim of injustice of the worst sort.

Additional evidence was recently developed that further corroborates Dr. MacDonald’s innocence. This evidence was presented in the U.S. District Court. Judge Dupree ruled in favor of the government. The decision was then appealed to the Fourth Circuit. They also ruled in favor of the government. An effort will be made to appeal this decision to the U.S. Supreme Court."

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 6th March 2021 at 03:23 AM.
Henri McPhee 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 6th March 2021, 12:21 PM   #2427
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,507
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It was the newspapers who described the intruders as hippies. MacDonald just described what he saw and heard. I think the people who consider MacDonald guilty are the same sort of people who regard Burke as guilty in the JonBenet Ramsey case. It's a lack of a judicial attitude.

There was an interesting murder investigation by Scotland Yard murder squad on British TV about a New Zealand young woman who was murdered in London in 2007. What interested me is that there were at least two suspects who were arrested in the initial investigation before the real culprit was found. They didn't just jump to conclusions as in the MacDonald case.

I agree with this assessment of the MacDonald case:

https://patri-x.com/dr-jeffrey-macdo...vt-cover-up/2/

"The “evidence” convicting him in 1979 was simply “forensic” evidence of a confusing nature that did no more than place him in his own home on the night of the murders. There is no evidence that says he committed murder — and there is voluminous evidence that points to the guilt of Helena Stoeckley, Greg Mitchell and their co-assailants. Yet, as of this date, Dr. MacDonald remains in federal prison, a victim of injustice of the worst sort.

Additional evidence was recently developed that further corroborates Dr. MacDonald’s innocence. This evidence was presented in the U.S. District Court. Judge Dupree ruled in favor of the government. The decision was then appealed to the Fourth Circuit. They also ruled in favor of the government. An effort will be made to appeal this decision to the U.S. Supreme Court."
The only individuals confused by the over 1,000 inculpatory evidentiary items presented at trial and the inculpatory DNA test results, were those enamored with conspiracy theories and/or inmate's Golden Boy persona.

https://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 6th March 2021, 05:01 PM   #2428
Pacal
Graduate Poster
 
Pacal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,171
Henri is very amusing. He postulates that the "real" killers in the MacDonald case were incredibly cunning and deliberately managed to leave not only leave no evidence but manage to make the crime scene implicate MacDonald. Yet the people accused of said crime were then a bunch of drugged out losers. Hardly incredibly skilled, cunning hitmen.

Helena is said by Henri to be a cunning liar who deliberately sabotaged her testimony in favour of MacDonald in order to avoid a murder charge. Yet the evidence is overwhelming that she was a burnt out junkie with severe emotional / mental issues who at the times of the murders spent much of her time being stoned out of her head. Yet she is supposed to be this cunning liar at the same time?

Of course these incredibly cunning hitmen would take someone like Helena on hit?! Yep so believable?! And of course these hitmen would not take any weapons but would hope to find the tools to carry out the murders in the MacDonald household?!

Wow!! What a clever bunch of hitmen?! (snark)

Of course if Helena was lying about what happened in the MacDonald residence that night, in order to protect her ass just why should, without corroboration, should any of her off the wall testimony be accepted at all! And of course the people Helena named just do not fit the cunning hitman persona at all but instead fit the loser stoner profile.

Doesn't Henri realize that all this lessens the value of Helena's testimony?
Pacal 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 March 2021, 11:26 PM   #2429
GiSEQ
Student
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 45
He did it!!

ďSomeone in that house wearing his pyjama top, with his blood type, with his footprints, killed those people. Everything thatís come out since then hasnít really contradicted the physical evidence of the case.Ē*
GiSEQ 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 March 2021, 03:17 AM   #2430
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
Originally Posted by GiSEQ View Post
“Someone in that house wearing his pyjama top, with his blood type, with his footprints, killed those people. Everything that’s come out since then hasn’t really contradicted the physical evidence of the case.”*
It does annoy me that people can make landings on Mars and do brain surgery and hedge fund managers can make $300 million a year, and yet professional criminal investigators and first-class trial judges seem incapable of solving the MacDonald murders. It could be something to do with stupidity and corruption.

MacDonald doesn't know for sure in which room Colette was murdered or if she was transported dead in a bed sheet. It's pure speculation and surmising, or even guesswork, and it's the same with footprints. Listen to the evidence.

There is a violent prejudice anti-Mac forum on the internet full of ignorant comments. There was one sensible comment which said witnesses perjured themselves as a matter of course and another from a poster who used to think MacDonald was innocent but now thinks him guilty because of the forensics:

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/th....89604/page-79

"Guys,

If any of you have not seen the BBC documentary on the Jeffrey MacDonald case, "False Witness" you can watch it here on You Tube:

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...0E2A&FORM=VIRE

It presents both sides of the case, but in the end it does not take away from the forensic evidence that proves MacDonald's guilt. Maybe if he would have messed up that living room more? Who knows. Some good background though and very well researched. To this day though, I have always had thoughts about Jimmy Friar and that phone call, and I had forgotten that a witness said that some hippie-like people had approach Collette the night of her college class. BUT there's just not enough there to make MacDonald innocent."

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 7th March 2021 at 03:24 AM.
Henri McPhee 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 7th March 2021, 11:35 AM   #2431
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
There is an interesting website which questions the blood evidence in the MacDonald case which MacDonald can't explain. It's known technically as reasonable doubt. Forensic fraud or incompetency could be one explanation. I never knew Judge Dupree refused to allow the hypnosis interview of MacDonald to be presented to the court. Perhaps it's inadmissible under the American Federal Rules of Evidence?

https://jbrwdi.forumotion.com/t2249-...ually-innocent

"It is possible that some of the blood came from a source other than one of the family members.

"Investigators also questioned why Colette's blood was found in Kristen's room, although all three victims were found in separate rooms, suggesting they had been attacked separately. Moreover, although blood evidence indicated Kimberley had been attacked as she entered the master bedroom, investigators questioned why home intruders would bother to carry her back to her bedroom to continue their attack.[54]

without DNA testing there's no evidence that it was Colette's blood was found in Kristen's room, only a blood type consistent with Colette's blood."

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 7th March 2021 at 11:49 AM.
Henri McPhee 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 7th March 2021, 12:06 PM   #2432
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
Originally Posted by GiSEQ View Post
“Someone in that house wearing his pyjama top, with his blood type, with his footprints, killed those people. Everything that’s come out since then hasn’t really contradicted the physical evidence of the case.”*
I don't think footprints are any proof of MacDonald guilt. The matter was discussed at the MacDonald trial with CID lab man Medlin and Bernie Segal:

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

Q Let us read every single word at the bottom there so no one misunderstands what people were signing. If I may follow with you, please, Mr. Medlin.
A "The foot impressing appearing on Exhibit D-215 matches in general shape, outline, and size the record footprint of Captain J. MacDonald; however, due to the absence of individual ridge characteristics in the photograph taken of this exhibit, a positive identification could not be made by the examiner."
Q And it is signed Hilyard O. Medlin; is that right?
A Yes, sir.
Q And underneath that is Mr. Hannah's signature?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, you told us yesterday that the problem was that no other examiner ever saw the same things that you did; is that right?
A That is right, sir.
Q You thought you might have been able to show them what you saw if the photographs had turned out better; is that right?
A They would have seen what I saw, sir.
Q You were aware at the time that you were working on that footprint that it was going to be difficult to get a photograph; weren't you?
A Most photographs are; yes, sir.
Q Most photographs are what?
A Most photographs taken under those conditions are.
Q You mean taken with the wrong equipment and the wrong lighting --

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 7th March 2021 at 12:08 PM.
Henri McPhee 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 7th March 2021, 02:15 PM   #2433
GiSEQ
Student
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 45
He still did it!!

Itís amazing that in an extremely bloody crime scene extending through 3 to 4 rooms in the house, there is only one bloody footprint (that McMurderer admitted was probably his).

And now, in response, Henri will cut and paste his usual baseless hearsay from the internet........
GiSEQ 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 March 2021, 08:37 PM   #2434
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,507
Originally Posted by GiSEQ View Post
It’s amazing that in an extremely bloody crime scene extending through 3 to 4 rooms in the house, there is only one bloody footprint (that McMurderer admitted was probably his).

And now, in response, Henri will cut and paste his usual baseless hearsay from the internet........
There were 2 bloody footprints found exiting Kristen's room, and another bloody footprint found in the hallway just outside her room. The only footprint with enough characteristics to source to a specific individual was formed in Colette's Type A blood. Hilyard Medlin was able to source that bloody footprint to inmate's left foot. No bloody shoeprints were found in any of the 3 bedrooms, the kitchen, and/or the bathroom. The only logical explanation for the formation/location of the 3 bloody footprints is that inmate stepped on Colette's bloody body or the bloody bedsheet, and subsequently carried her out of Kristen's room in the bloody bedding.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 7th March 2021 at 08:43 PM.
JTF is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2021, 02:36 AM   #2435
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
There were 2 bloody footprints found exiting Kristen's room, and another bloody footprint found in the hallway just outside her room. The only footprint with enough characteristics to source to a specific individual was formed in Colette's Type A blood. Hilyard Medlin was able to source that bloody footprint to inmate's left foot. No bloody shoeprints were found in any of the 3 bedrooms, the kitchen, and/or the bathroom. The only logical explanation for the formation/location of the 3 bloody footprints is that inmate stepped on Colette's bloody body or the bloody bedsheet, and subsequently carried her out of Kristen's room in the bloody bedding.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
The footprint evidence and blood evidence is confusing. The funny thing is MacDonald never denied that it could be his footprint. It doesn't prove his guilt.

There was supposed to be some Colette type blood on the walls and ceiling in Kristen's room and Kim's blood on the pajama top. That still doesn't prove MacDonald did it or that he personally carried any bodies. Chamberlain was very inexperienced and the blood typing was never checked for mistakes. Dr. Neal caused blood contamination when he examined the bodies, and contamination could have been caused by dripping blood.

Stombaugh's theory was that Colette hit MacDonald with a hairbrush then MacDonald fetched the wooden club murder weapon and the knives from the kitchen. Can you believe it?

There is a bit of forensic evidence about a footprint at this website:

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

Fifteen latent fingerprints, two latent palm prints,
and one latent footprint have been identified as fingerprints,
palm prints, and a foot impression of Colette S. MacDonald
as follows:

One footprint, exhibit 1x1
Two fingerprints, exhibit 2x2
One fingerprint, exhibit 2x6
One palm print, exhibit 3x13
Two fingerprints, exhibit 3x22 and 23
Two fingerprints, exhibit 3x24
Two fingerprints, exhibit 3x25

(Continued on next page)

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 8th March 2021 at 02:41 AM.
Henri McPhee 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 8th March 2021, 04:08 AM   #2436
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,507
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The footprint evidence and blood evidence is confusing. The funny thing is MacDonald never denied that it could be his footprint. It doesn't prove his guilt.

There was supposed to be some Colette type blood on the walls and ceiling in Kristen's room and Kim's blood on the pajama top. That still doesn't prove MacDonald did it or that he personally carried any bodies. Chamberlain was very inexperienced and the blood typing was never checked for mistakes. Dr. Neal caused blood contamination when he examined the bodies, and contamination could have been caused by dripping blood.

Stombaugh's theory was that Colette hit MacDonald with a hairbrush then MacDonald fetched the wooden club murder weapon and the knives from the kitchen. Can you believe it?

There is a bit of forensic evidence about a footprint at this website:

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

Fifteen latent fingerprints, two latent palm prints,
and one latent footprint have been identified as fingerprints,
palm prints, and a foot impression of Colette S. MacDonald
as follows:

One footprint, exhibit 1x1
Two fingerprints, exhibit 2x2
One fingerprint, exhibit 2x6
One palm print, exhibit 3x13
Two fingerprints, exhibit 3x22 and 23
Two fingerprints, exhibit 3x24
Two fingerprints, exhibit 3x25

(Continued on next page)
The bloody footprint evidence demonstrates that inmate's feet were free of blood when he entered Kristen's room, his feet were contaminated with Colette's blood when he was in Kristen's room, and he walked out of Kristen's room with Colette's blood on the bottoms of his feet. Inmate's defense team knew how bad this looked for their client, so they ducked and dodged the issue during the 1979 trial. It got even worse when Ray Shedlick embarrassed himself by concocting the laughable Gurney Theory. This innocent explanation for inmate's bloody footprints exiting Kristen's room defied physics and ignored inmate's own testimony about getting off the gurney, and bumping into a stereo in KIMMIE'S room.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Last edited by JTF; 8th March 2021 at 04:10 AM.
JTF is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2021, 09:50 AM   #2437
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
The bloody footprint evidence demonstrates that inmate's feet were free of blood when he entered Kristen's room, his feet were contaminated with Colette's blood when he was in Kristen's room, and he walked out of Kristen's room with Colette's blood on the bottoms of his feet.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
The evidence does not support this. The CID lab people were making it up as usual. I agree it is confusing. It's unfair to ask MacDonald why there is blood on the walls and pajama-like fibers on the murder weapon when he has no idea why or how that is supposed to have happened. Perhaps it's magic, like the hair in Colette's left hand?

The matter was discussed at the 1979 trial by Segal and Ivory:

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

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Did you see his feet?
A No, I did not.
Q Did you tell Mr. Connolly to check Dr. MacDonald's feet to see whether he had any blood on it?
A No, I did not.
Q You didn't find out whether there was any blood, or what types there were, on his feet?
A No, I did not.
Q Was there any reason why that was not done?
A At the time, the body was being rolled out -- excuse me, the person of Dr. MacDonald was being rolled out -- I had no idea he would become a suspect in this case.
Q But you know there were bloody footprints on the floor?
A Not at that particular time.
Q You had observed them many times before Dr. MacDonald was moved out; is that right?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION, Your Honor. This witness has testified that when he saw MacDonald for the first time, he had not yet gone to the back part of the house.

MR. SEGAL: That's up to the witness, Your Honor, to tell us if that is what happened. The Government's counsel is testifying in place of answers to cross-examination.

THE COURT: Well, I will interpose the court's objection to Mr. Blackburn's comment and to yours, and ask the jury not to consider them, and let you proceed with your next question.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Let me put this question to you, Mr. Ivory. When you observed bloody footprints on the floor of the MacDonald house, did you call to Womack Army Hospital and say, "Are there blood spots, or any kind of blood on Dr. MacDonald's foot and if there are, I don't want anything done with them until they can be checked for type."

THE COURT: Objection SUSTAINED. I think the testimony of the witness covers that point already. Go ahead.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 8th March 2021 at 10:39 AM.
Henri McPhee 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 8th March 2021, 10:28 AM   #2438
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
It got even worse when Ray Shedlick embarrassed himself by concocting the laughable Gurney Theory. This innocent explanation for inmate's bloody footprints exiting Kristen's room defied physics and ignored inmate's own testimony about getting off the gurney, and bumping into a stereo in KIMMIE'S room.

https://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
It looks like Christina has done some recent research about the forensic evidence which includes the footprint.

It looks to me as though MacDonald might have stepped on a bloodstain on the floor as he was being taken to hospital almost in shock on a gurney. It's a plausible theory for me and i don't think it's conclusive evidence of anything. I was interested to read Shaw confessed to 18 military policeman mulling about the crime scene before Ivory arrived!

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.c...rt-study3.html

"Note: Translation of the above document as I read it to be
The parts located in the circled areas above are in bold and underlined

Art 32
testimony
of Shaw on
7/23/70

Q Now you stated that you were present at the time the pictures were taken and you were present at the time Doctor Neal examined the body. Is that correct? What was the time interval between those two events, if you can remember?
A Well, some of the pictures, particularly those that depict the floor at the entrance to the room were taken prior to Neal's arrival. As we entered the bedroom, I heard Ivory say --

MR. SEGAL: Objected to.

A As we entered the room --

CPT BEALE: The objection is sustained.

A As we entered the room, Neal was asked to wait for a moment while another picture was taken.
Q Now, let me again hand you what was marked as Government Exhibit 53. When was the first time that you saw that exhibit or that portion of the house?

A When I first walked down the hallway and stood at the doorway of that room.

Q What does that picture depict -- what did it depict to you at the time you initially saw it?

A A footprint of a naked human foot in reddish-brown liquid of some kind.

Q What was the condition of that reddish-brown liquid?

A It was glistening; I would say it was coagulating."

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 8th March 2021 at 10:30 AM.
Henri McPhee 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 8th March 2021, 12:25 PM   #2439
Spiff
New Blood
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 7
Well Henri, your boy has now applied for "compassionate release" from prison. I guess the whole "I won't apply for release unless I walk out an innocent man" has been tossed out the window!
Spiff 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 March 2021, 02:03 AM   #2440
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 4,025
Originally Posted by Spiff View Post
Well Henri, your boy has now applied for "compassionate release" from prison. I guess the whole "I won't apply for release unless I walk out an innocent man" has been tossed out the window!
I don't think I would like to have to appeal to the tender mercies of North Carolina corrupt judges. They are only interested in legal procedure rather than actual innocence. It's why Assange and Prince Andrew are in such deep trouble. Those corrupt judges should be furthering the interests of the people rather than just being interested in making money. Sending an innocent man to prison for the rest of his life is a shocking crime.

I still think it was obviously unfair for prosecutors to ask MacDonald to explain things like the pajama-like fibers on the murder weapon, and the pajama pocket, and other manufactured evidence, like perhaps footprints in court. It was nothing to do with him. CID agent Shaw denied the Army CID were involved in perjury but he testified that MacDonald awoke to find intruders in the apartment. That was obviously an untrue invention, or serious mistake by Shaw.

The matter has been researched by Christina from the Article 32 in 1970 which I have never seen before. Shaw being cross-examined:

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.c...rt-study3.html

Q: Then would you tell me please, if you have any information regarding the fact that the CID agents gave possible perjured testimony or did in fact give perjured testimony at any time during this investigation?

A: I am convinced that at no time did any CID Agent perjury himself in this case. I personally did not.

Q: At any time during your observation of the conduct of this investigation did you observe or did you perform any acts that could be identified as being grossly negligent in your investigative activities?

A: I did not.

Q: Did you observe anyone else being grossly negligent in the conduct of this investigative activity?

A: I saw investigative actions conducted that I feel as a more experienced investigator, I might have handled differently. But when you speak of being grossly negligent, no, I saw nothing that was grossly negligent which implies that someone is being deliberately improper. I didn't see any of that, no.

Q: Did you see any acts of incompetence? What are you getting at? Would you please answer the question?

Note from Christina Masewicz: In my opinion, the "What are you getting at?" is in response and should be as an answer, with the "Please answer the question as another question.

A: Well, yes, I will. I saw, I was made aware, that prior to the arrival of Mr. Ivory, who was the first investigator on the scene, there were approximately 18 military policemen who went thru the quarters. This, I think, is incompetent on the part of each military policeman involved and on the part of the military police duty officer who was at the scene.

Q: Would you furnish me a complete description of how you obtained this information, how long it went on and who, if you know were the 18 military policemen who went through and what you meant by going through prior to the arrival of Investigator Ivory?

A: This information was was developed from CPT SOMERS' and CPT THOMPSON's interview of LT PAULK, SP4 MICA, and other military policemen who they interviewed. They informed me that through interviewing the military policemen on the scene as to "who specially did you see in the house," they developed 15 to 18 names of MP'S"

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 9th March 2021 at 02:15 AM.
Henri McPhee 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
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 08:23 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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

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