NC - MacDonald family murders at Fort Bragg, 1970 - Jeffrey MacDonald innocent?

[Armchair14]

According to someone on another forum who has made a study of this case, JM doesn’t deny that the house was dark when the MPs arrived, only that due to the traumatic nature of the events he has no memory as to why the house should have been dark. He used this same rationalization when confronted with other seeming inconsistencies between his version of events and the evidence.

Here is my take on the dark house aspect. Just about everyone who believes JM is guilty as sin does not think that this was premeditated prior to that night. It was rage set off by some argument, perhaps his wife bringing up his infidelity, maybe even threatening divorce. His anger was augmented by overworking, lack of sleep and perhaps amphetamine usage. Therefore, after the event he was in crisis mode, having to think fast. As intelligent as he is, this inevitably left the door open to mistakes with his story due to haste.

He concocted the story about the Manson-like intruders, complete with the candles as a light source as all within were supposedly asleep and therefore the house dark. In his frenzied mind, he didn’t think that when the MPs arrived, it would be logical for at least some lights to be on as he would have turned them on after regaining consciousness and assessing the situation before passing out again (in line with his story). Rather, he was (unclearly) thinking that the house should be dark to buttress his intruders in the midst of the night story.

Since JM was feigning complete innocence, he had to tell the MPs something, and this inevitably led to such slipups due to the hastily improvised scenario.

 

[Madeleine74]

He would have been much better off if he claimed he didn't remember, rather than try to concoct details about the crime that night. Of course nothing he could say or not say would counter the physical evidence that nailed him (his pajama fibers under Collette's body, the 42 holes in the pajama top, the glove fiber and pajama fibers near where he wrote "pig" on the headboard). This crime doesn't require "believing" or "not believing" MacDonald because the physical evidence nails him any which way. There is no innocent explanation of his pajama fibers being found where they were found, and all the other evidence and the blood trail tells the real story.

But still...for pure argument's sake, he should have said nothing.

 

[Nova]

He would have been much better off if he claimed he didn't remember, rather than try to concoct details about the crime that night. Of course nothing he could say or not say would counter the physical evidence that nailed him (his pajama fibers under Collette's body, the 42 holes in the pajama top, the glove fiber and pajama fibers near where he wrote "pig" on the headboard). This crime doesn't require "believing" or "not believing" MacDonald because the physical evidence nails him any which way. There is no innocent explanation of his pajama fibers being found where they were found, and all the other evidence and the blood trail tells the real story.

But still...for pure argument's sake, he should have said nothing.

Perhaps, but with little to no evidence of intruders, without his story, he would have had no defense at all.

And the story was good enough to avoid an indictment from the Army CID, for whom it was intended. I suspect Dr. M never expected he would someday have to face a federal prosecutor and a civilian jury.

(This is just an observation. I agree with you that the story he told ultimately did him no favors.)

 

[Nova]

Thank You !
I lived in Berkeley California in the 60's and 70's. I was not only surrounded by Hippies, I was one myself. Believe me, savagery and murder were the last things on our minds. lol

I trust you know I have always respected you, katy, even if we sometimes disagree. But thanks to that post, you have risen even higher in my eyes!

 

[believe09]

An insight regarding this case recently occurred to me after years of following it. It must have been brought up by others, assuming the facts of the case (at least in this regard) as recounted in Fatal Vision are accurate.

Dr. MacDonald maintained that after struggling with the alleged assailants he blacked out and when he came to he immediately went to check on his family, attempting mouth-to-mouth resuscitation to his wife in their bedroom (after his regaining consciousness in the living room). According to Fatal Vision, when the MPs arrived the house was completely dark and they turned on the lights. If MacDonald’s account was true, after coming to wouldn’t one think that the first thing he would have done is turned on the lights, certainly in the bedroom while assessing his wife’s condition and then ministering to her? And before calling for help?

If these facts are true, then this pretty much dispels even the thinnest lingering doubt I might have entertained to now. Has this been brought up before? If so, Does MacDonald offer any explanation as why he would have stumbled around in the dark without even switching on a single light before (according to him) passing out yet again before the MPs arrived?

Good point raised-the lighting has always been an issue. The rooms were too dark to see the occupants of the beds-that was the big weakness in the discussion of Kristy's death and also MacDonald seeing the blood bubbling from Colette's chest.

 

[Cracka*Jaxx]

And yes, the home invaders come in and attack the most vulnerable members of the family first, leaving the fit army doctor asleep on the couch until he is roused.

I wonder if he wishes he could go back and revise his version of events that he is now forced to stick with ....

BBM.

Oh, I'm sure he does! lol. I can see how his initial story seemed to make sense to the MP's. But when you look closer, like his father-in-law and the prosecutor did, there are holes- serious ones.

JM is exactly where he belongs, and I'm so happy he got a life sentence instead of the death penalty. He is intelligent enough to be angry at himself, and miserable every single day that he looks past the prison walls and realizes he'll live in a cage for the rest of his life. He'll never own his own home, or have a family again, or feel the sand on a beach, or go swimming, or drive a car and so much more.

Maybe we should make a list of all the things he missed out on and then send it to him. He would sure deserve getting salt rubbed into his wounds.

 

[Nova]

I think this, perhaps more than anything, convinced me of Dr. M's guilt. From the link provided above:

Two days prior to the murders, Mildred Kassab spoke with Colette on the telephone and Colette told her that she was not doing very well and was upset because her husband was going to be out of the country (on a trip to Russia with the Army boxing team) when their third child was due to be born. She told her mother that she would "like to come home."
<<>>
On August 22, 1979, MacDonald's mother, Dorothy testified at trial that with regard to the alleged trip to Russia, "Well, Colette was upset because it would mean a separation again."
<<>>
SSG Sherriedale Morgan, coach of the Fort Bragg boxing team gave a written statement regarding his association with Jeffrey MacDonald. He stated that there was never any information given to Jeffrey MacDonald that the team would be going to Russia for matches and he does not know how Jeffrey MacDonald obtained such information.

While there was no rampage of homicidal hippies in 1970, there certainly was a cold war between the U.S. and Russia. A trip by the Army boxing team to the Soviet Union would have been front-page news, especially in the military newspaper produced on a large Army base.

So this wasn't just a lie by Dr. M to his wife, it was a stupid lie, as Colette was certain to learn the truth eventually. To me, this has always been prime evidence that MacDonald was spiraling out of control (or was drugging himself to the point of recklessness).

(IIRC, McGinnis believes Dr. M planned to visit his NYC girl friend while Colette was giving birth, but I can't recall whether there is evidence for this or it is just speculation.)

 

[Madeleine74]

Good points, Nova. He sure did tell some whoppers.

I was convinced of his guilt based on where the blood evidence was found as well as the holes in his PJ top matching the 21 stab wounds in his wife's chest. That was "game over" for me.

 

[hollyjokers]

When Freddy Kassab was putting the facts together for himself, he had the investigators meet him at the apartment both during the day and after dark. In the dark, he could not make out facial features of the two investigators or make any determination such as race or Seargent stripes on a jacket. I'm not sure if they had the tv on in the background for the test. I think MacDonald may have added that detail to his story later. But even television glare would not be enough to allow him to see into the girls' bedrooms.

 

[borndem]

Yes indeed, hollyjokers -- the night-time test -- which, IMO, was essential for the investigators to experience first-hand -- it should have been obvious that no one, not even a young "perfect" doctor and Green Beret, could have seen even the long blonde hair, but Sgt's stripes and a white- and black-persons faces?? Even with the TV on, and with perhaps the very dim light of a streetlight coming through the curtained or blinds-closed window -- what a pile of er, um, lies. And he did think better about it a bit later with the TV comment.... Seeing down the hall -- hah!

And when you stand up after being knocked unconscious (another crock) and suspect that something is wrong, wouldn't you turn on a light or two?

Not bad on the spur of the moment, especially for this arrogant narcissist to two "dumb" army (probably) non-coms, but lies always come home to roost and to haunt you....:jail:

Full of it, just full of it.

:twocents:

 

[Nova]

Good points, Nova. He sure did tell some whoppers.

I was convinced of his guilt based on where the blood evidence was found as well as the holes in his PJ top matching the 21 stab wounds in his wife's chest. That was "game over" for me.

Thank you. I know you weren't correcting me, but of course the physical evidence was equally important to my personal judgment of Dr. M.

What I should have said is that the Russia lie was the thing that most convinced me Dr. M was capable of the crimes. We've all told untruths, but it takes a sociopath to believe he can get away with a lie of that magnitude.

 

[Madeleine74]

Thank you. I know you weren't correcting me, but of course the physical evidence was equally important to my personal judgment of Dr. M.

What I should have said is that the Russia lie was the thing that most convinced me Dr. M was capable of the crimes. We've all told untruths, but it takes a sociopath to believe he can get away with a lie of that magnitude.

Oh I agree his lies sunk him too. And he lied all throughout the investigation. One has to ask, if a POI sees fit to lie at the most important time they need to be brutally honest (during a murder investigation of a spouse and family), then how can one ever trust or believe what they say about anything? There is no reason to lie about what transpired if you're innocent of the crime and you're being looked at as a potential suspect.

 

[Nova]

Oh I agree his lies sunk him too. And he lied all throughout the investigation. One has to ask, if a POI sees fit to lie at the most important time they need to be brutally honest (during a murder investigation of a spouse and family), then how can one ever trust or believe what they say about anything? There is no reason to lie about what transpired if you're innocent of the crime and you're being looked at as a potential suspect.

Madeleine, I want to be clear that I did not for a moment think you were nit-picking my post. It was I who realized my sentence was overly broad.

And I agree about the lies. I know everyone--yes, everyone--lies under one circumstance or another. But if a loving husband and father lies about strangers murdering his family, I can only conclude he is guilty.

(Yes, I've heard the theory that Dr. M was selling drugs out of his kitchen, but I don't buy it. The neighbors lived too close, Colette would have said something to her mother about so much traffic, and the MacDonalds were all on an army base, not Main Street. And even if the "killer hippies" had come for drugs, Dr. M could have denied that part while still identifying them for the police.)

 

[Satch]

ITA, rashomon. I think JM was tired & wired, and coming to bed & finding his side wet from Kimberley's (not Kristy's -- the urine test pointed to it being Kim's) urine really pizzed him off.

He may have yanked Kimmy out of the bed, or said he was gonna spank her for it, etc., and Collette tried to stop him; he hit Collette, and she then went into the utility room to find a weapon or to get away from him and found the club; she took the club and hit JR in the forehead which put him into a red-hot rage; he got the club from her and started on Collette; either he then hit Kim, or she got in the way or tried to stop her Daddy from hitting Mommy, and she got hit with it -- hard. And then it was on... I don't think Collette had a chance to hit him again, at all, after that first lick she delivered to his forehead. He became a murdering machine.

Yes,

I presented this theory in my prosecution view of the case. I think the bedwetting scenario was enough to make McDonald angry, not enough to get into a rage.....yet. However, I think that when he and Collete started fighting in the Master Bedroom, Collette could have either:

1.) Hit him with the club
2.) Thrown that hairbrush at him OR
3.) Stabbed him with that knife found on the floor. You know the one that Jeff made a big deal about pulling the knife from Collete's chest, when the investigation showed it had not been in her chest?

What do you all think about the significance of the knife on the floor?

I think in Jeff's mind of self absorbing, narcissistic arrogance, the "Ultimate humiliation of getting hit by a woman." THAT is what enraged him, and that's when things escalated and he couldn't stop.

Collete courageously fought back against Jeff, and that enraged him enough to kill.

Satch

 

[Nova]

Frankly, Satch, I'm not comfortable with a theory that makes Colette the instigator of the violence unless we have a lot more proof. I know you don't mean to say she deserved to be killed, but your theory does tend to deflect some of the blame onto the victim.

None of which is to say I can prove your theory is wrong. But if some people find Dr. MacDonald an unlikely murderer, I say Mrs. MacDonald was even less likely to strike out with a knife or a club. (Hairbrush, maybe, because that would be more an expression of frustration than an intent to injure.)

 

[Satch]

Frankly, Satch, I'm not comfortable with a theory that makes Colette the instigator of the violence unless we have a lot more proof. I know you don't mean to say she deserved to be killed, but your theory does tend to deflect some of the blame onto the victim.

None of which is to say I can prove your theory is wrong. But if some people find Dr. MacDonald an unlikely murderer, I say Mrs. MacDonald was even less likely to strike out with a knife or a club. (Hairbrush, maybe, because that would be more an expression of frustration than an intent to injure.)

Hi Nova,

Sorry, I did not intend in any way to insinuate Collete as an instigator of the violence. I am just not sure if the bed-wetting was enough on its own to set Jeff off. It could have been. However, from what I remember about FVand forgive me if some of my facts don't jive well, as it's been years since I read it. I read both FV and FJ and several documents on the case.

I seem to recall that Collette did tell her Child Psychology class about Kimmy's bed-wetting and I think she had talked to Jeff about what do about it. I don't remember Jeff's response to it. But I think in FV there was a theory that Jeff could have even gotten PO about Collette discussing personal issues of her family with the psych class. I recall Jeff in FV said (and this could just be another one of his lies) "She said she told her Psych class about it, and I (Jeff) asked, "and what did the professor say?"

If someone can find more details of this in FV, that would be great! I am only going from memory and I don't want to give out false information.

I remember reading somewhere online about the case that Kimmy once told her bus driver, "My Daddy's mean." And to this day, I have always wanted to find out more information as to the exchange between Kim and the bus driver. I have every reason to believe that what Kim said is absolutely true. But to say this to her bus driver? Really interesting.

Yes, Jeff could have been abusive to Collette and the children before that horrible night early morning of February 16-17th, 1970. Even something like Jeff demanding that Collette change the sheets could have escalated very quickly from anger to rage. I don't think this was premeditated, Something (or a combination of somethings) set Jeff off that night.

Satch

 

[Marilynilpa]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01/03/does-jeffrey-macdonald-belong-in-jail.html

 

[believe09]

Yes, he belongs in jail. When will his 15 minutes be up I wonder?

 

[twall]

New e-book by Joe McGinniss titled "Final Vision: The Last Word on Jeffrey MacDonald" available at Amazon for $2.99.

Final Vision: The Last Word on Jeffrey MacDonald (Kindle Single): Joe McGinniss: Amazon.com: Kindle Store

 

[Madeleine74]

Since none of us were there and MacDonald isn't talking about what really happened that night, there is no way to know what transpired. I'm not comfortable speculating and coming up with scenarios that could have occurred. Whatever happened set things in motion and it doesn't really matter because the end result was the destruction of a wife and 2 little girls.