• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: Jeffrey MacDonald did it. He really did. Part II

BStrong

Penultimate Amazing
Joined
Jun 14, 2011
Messages
13,087
Location
San Francisco
Continued from here.
As is usual, the split point is arbitrary and posters are free to quote from the previous thread.
Posted By: Agatha






That's a load of bollocks, if you pardon my French. The matter is explained at this website, and it was demolished by MacDonald lawyer Gary Bostwick at the McGinniss trial in 1987:

http://dingeengoete.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/dr-jeffrey-macdonald.html

Your man crush wasn't drug free.

Long before there was any serious issues with amphetamines in the general population, amphetamines were commonly available in the military, even as late as when I was in 74-80.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2016/04/the-drugs-that-built-a-super-soldier/477183/

One of the "perks" of being a military physician was the nearly uncontrolled availability of controlled substance pharmaceuticals. The uncontested fact is that your man crush had a ******** of pharmaceuticals in hand in his home.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
One of the "perks" of being a military physician was the nearly uncontrolled availability of controlled substance pharmaceuticals. The uncontested fact is that your man crush had a ******** of pharmaceuticals in hand in his home.

The matter of diet pills in the MacDonald case is explained at this website. It was another invention by Kassab.:

https://www.sfgate.com/books/article/IS-JEFFREY-MACDONALD-INNOCENT-Despite-his-3042069.php

Their debunking is helped along by an unlikely source: McGinniss himself, responding under oath to a civil lawsuit filed by MacDonald alleging fraud and breach of contract pertaining to "Fatal Vision." When asked whether he believed the theory advanced in his book -- that diet pills caused a psychotic snap in MacDonald -- McGinniss explained that he had to give his readers more than a "rehash" of the trial, the authors write. He then replied: "I'm not convinced that it actually happened."
 
Cognitive Sheep

The Eskatrol issue is another example of the landlord being unable to think for himself. He simply hears or sees an advocacy piece for inmate and his thought process is set in stone. He clearly doesn't consider the distinct possibility that the authors of said pieces have not taken the time to read the documented record. At the Article 32 hearing, inmate admits that he has used Amphetamines, he repeats this admission on the very 1st page of his case journal, and it is a medical fact that Amphetamine use can cause a rage reaction. As if the landlord needed a reminder, this case is a classic example of a rage killing.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
In the Joe McGinniss Fatal Vision book, somewhere in the 600s pages, he wrote that the Army CID lab at Ford Gordon was not capable of detecting amphetamines, and that supposedly was why the amphetamine psychosis theory without facts was never detected. That is patently untrue. No traces of amphetamines were ever found in MacDonald's body. It was manufactured evidence, and a strange delusion by Kassab, which McGinniss swallowed, like Kassab's theory without facts that there had been child abuse of the two little girls by MacDonald. There was never a shred of medical evidence, or any other evidence to back that up, and only a very bad judge would believe it.
 
Once again henri is ignoring FACT.
Fact 1: The CID was NOT the one who would have tested for drug use, that is the provenance of the HOSPITAL.
Fact 2: There WAS NOT a test available to identify amphetamines use by a person at the time the testing would have been done.
Fact 3: INMATE HIMSELF ADMITTED THAT HE'D BEEN TAKING THE ESKATROL. IT WAS THE VERY FIRST ITEM LISTED ON HIS 'NOTES' FOR HIS LAWYERS. THE LIST OF THINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW.
Fact 4: Joe M said amphetamine psychosis was HIS theory YEARS AFTER inmate was convicted. It was NOT a part of the trial, it had NOTHING to do with his rightful convictions, and it was part of an epilogue of FV reprint several years AFTER inmate's conviction (FV was first published 4 years after conviction and the epilogue was in a reprint done a few years later - JTF probably knows the exact dates).
 
McGinniss was looking for a motive for Jeff MacDonald for his publisher and he came up with some lame theory that MacDonald seemed to be agitated about the death of his family, according to Dr. Bronstein at the military hospital, which 'could be' due to amphetamines from diet pills. That was after talking personally to MacDonald about the "pseudo-science" of Stombaugh of the FBI. That is something only a bad judge would believe. McGinniss was a con artist.
 
Once again HENRI is ignoring FACTS.

FACT #1 - INMATE HIMSELF ADMITTED TO USING AMPHETAMINES. IT WAS THE VERY FIRST ITEM ON HIS HANDWRITTEN "THINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW" LIST FOR HIS LAWYERS.

FACT #2 - Fatal Vision had already been published at least 4 years prior to Joe McG adding the epilogue where he postulated the POSSIBLE amphetamine psychosis theory.

FACT # 3 - Dr. Bronstein stated under oath that he had medicated inmate HEAVILY with enough meds that he should have been down for the count but inmate never got even so much as sleepy.

The FACT that Joe McG said himself it was a THEORY seems to be lost on henri as is the FACT that the theory and its being postulated HAD ABSOLUTELY NO IMPACT ON INMATE'S CONVICTION. INMATE WAS CONVICTED ON THE EVIDENCE. Fatal Vision was not published for the first time until FOUR YEARS after inmate's conviction and the amphetamine theory was not postulated for another couple of years. I know henri hates it when we insist on clouding the issues with FACTS, but the FACTS show that inmate brutally and savagely slaughtered his family like the coward that he is, he has yet to admit it.
 
In the Joe McGinniss Fatal Vision book, somewhere in the 600s pages, he wrote that the Army CID lab at Ford Gordon was not capable of detecting amphetamines, and that supposedly was why the amphetamine psychosis theory without facts was never detected. That is patently untrue. No traces of amphetamines were ever found in MacDonald's body. It was manufactured evidence, and a strange delusion by Kassab, which McGinniss swallowed, like Kassab's theory without facts that there had been child abuse of the two little girls by MacDonald. There was never a shred of medical evidence, or any other evidence to back that up, and only a very bad judge would believe it.

Wait, are you calling your man crush a liar? Because he's the one who brought up amphetamines and wrote that he was taking them, had lost some weight taking them.
 
Role Model

Considering that inmate is a serial fabricator, it makes sense that his fellow con artists would use similar tactics to defend his, ahem, innocence. The landlord is unable to produce a single piece of SOURCED exculpatory evidence, so he jumps to case issues that have NOTHING to do with the evidence that led to conviction of his role model.

After a brief mention of inmate's amphetamine use at the Article 32 hearing, the issue NEVER came up again at either the Grand Jury Hearing or at the 1979 trial. It's important to remember that inmate was indicted AND convicted of murdering his family without a single mention of his admitted use of amphetamines.

Shortly after inmate was returned (e.g., Spring of 1982) to his concrete domicile, McGinniss was provided access to inmate's written notes and guess what inmate wrote about on the FIRST PAGE of those notes? Yup, his potential ingestion of Eskatrol.

The interesting thing about this discovery is that it is unlikely that Joe knew about inmate's testimony at the Article 32 hearing. If he was aware of inmate's admission, he most certainly would have included it in Fatal Vision.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
 
Last edited:
All that stuff about diet pills was something MacDonald provided to his lawyers early on, and it was in confidence, as is normal. It was not something MacDonald intended to be published in a book or newspaper to be used as so-called evidence against him.

There was some legal waffle about diet pills and amphetamines and amphetamine psychosis at the McGinniss trial in 1987:

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/html/1-1987-mcginniss3-081.html
 
All that stuff about diet pills was something MacDonald provided to his lawyers early on, and it was in confidence, as is normal. It was not something MacDonald intended to be published in a book or newspaper to be used as so-called evidence against him.

<snip of henri waffle >

Uh, guess again. Jeffrey Macdonald himself gave that information to Joe for use in the book, which was published literally years after the trial. So, whine all you want, but your man crush is the one who made his amphetamine usage available for publication in a book Macdonald wanted published (at the time).
 
The Fourth Circuit Court is taking too damned long to render its decision....
 
Jeff MacDonald is innocent. He is only in prison because of very bad judges, like Judge Dupree and Judge Fox, who were clearly in error and the poor quality of journalists in America. It looks as though the original MacDonald case thread on this forum will now vanish into oblivion so that the public can remain in sheer ignorance of the facts. It's a subtle form of censorship, like any mention of Rhodesia.
 
Jeff MacDonald is innocent. He is only in prison because of very bad judges, like Judge Dupree and Judge Fox, who were clearly in error and the poor quality of journalists in America. It looks as though the original MacDonald case thread on this forum will now vanish into oblivion so that the public can remain in sheer ignorance of the facts. It's a subtle form of censorship, like any mention of Rhodesia.

MacDonald was properly convicted in a court of law by a jury of his peers. He has been allowed to appeal his conviction more than anyone else has. He has gone up to the Supreme Court and failed.

Rhodesia can be mentioned at any time, except as a nation it has not existed for over 30 years and has less relevance to modern life than your opinion on the MacDonald trial.
 
Jeff MacDonald is innocent. He is only in prison because of very bad judges, like Judge Dupree and Judge Fox, who were clearly in error and the poor quality of journalists in America. It looks as though the original MacDonald case thread on this forum will now vanish into oblivion so that the public can remain in sheer ignorance of the facts. It's a subtle form of censorship, like any mention of Rhodesia.


The original thread is linked to right at the top of this page. It was closed and a new thread opened due to its length. You can find it by clicking right here.
 
McGinnis's theory was well chosen

McGinnis's theory was well chosen: it matched the facts of the case and was logical and reasonable. I think that's one of the main reasons inmate was so upset about it, because McG had uncovered the truth, providing the missing element the prosecution couldn't. Inmate -- narcissist that he was -- thought that no one would be able to see past his various lies and ruses.
 
McGinnis's theory was well chosen: it matched the facts of the case and was logical and reasonable. I think that's one of the main reasons inmate was so upset about it, because McG had uncovered the truth, providing the missing element the prosecution couldn't. Inmate -- narcissist that he was -- thought that no one would be able to see past his various lies and ruses.

I flatly disagree. The MacDonald lawyer, Gary Bostwick said the McGinniss book Fatal Vision was truly outrageous. This is what MacDonald himself thought about it all:

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/html/mac-civil-trial.html
 
Of course, certain people (including inmate) will believe that just because inmate or one of his PAID advocates say "poo-poo" to something it should be taken as fact. The PROBLEM with this is that the EVIDENCE AND FACTS back up the veracity of Fatal Vision. The FACT that the book was not published until 4 years after inmate was convicted always seems to escape the few misguided (giving benefit of the doubt) believers in inmate. It also seems to escape their attention that the amphetamine psychosis theory (which fits the evidence and facts) wasn't brought out until at least 2 years AFTER Fatal Vision was published. Like the ostrich, macolites are forever sticking their heads in the sand.....or like little kids that don't want to hear something they won't like they stick their fingers in their ears and say "na-na-na-na-na-na-na" as loud as they can manage.
 

Back
Top Bottom