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

[Murtagh21]

BK: Bernie was well paid by MacDonald for 12 years, he gained instant fame by representing MacDonald, and won several legal battles (e.g., Article 32 hearing, speedy trial issues in 1975 & 1980) during his stint in the MacDonald camp. Once Bernie told inmate that, "It's over, there's no way on God's Green Earth that you'll return to prison," inmate's subsequent return to prison in 1982, sealed Bernie's fate in regards to remaining inmate's lawyer.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[Murtagh21]

10/24/03 Larry King Interview with Jeffrey MacDonald

KING: Why, then, are you in prison?

MACDONALD: Because a very young, and I think scared and incompetent, CID agent by the name of William Ivory made a decision, and he told his boss that this was an Army matter...

COMMENTS: For years, the MacDonald camp claimed that Ivory was only 26 years old when he entered 544 Castle Drive, but Ivory was actually 30 years old. In the late 60's, Ivory served in Vietnam and he is currently hearing impaired due to the extreme shelling that occurred during his service. To claim that Ivory would be "scared" about entering a crime scene after serving in a war is beyond absurd.

The transcript of the 4/6/70 CID interview demonstrates that Ivory didn't hesitate to ask MacDonald the tough questions. In terms of competence, Ivory was elected to the CID Hall of Fame in 2007. In addition, why would Ivory's boss take the conclusions drawn by a "scared and incompetent" investigator at face value? Franz Grebner's independent conclusion just happened to mirror the conclusion of William Ivory.

KING: Where are the three people who confessed? I mean, why...

MACDONALD: One is living in Florida. She has been interviewed several times by the FBI.

KING: Did she recant the confession?

MACDONALD: She never recanted the confession.

COMMENTS: Not true. Cathy Perry recanted her bizarre confession 6 months after her interview with the FBI.

KING: How about the other two?

MACDONALD: The other two are dead. They died mysteriously in the 80's, both of them within two weeks of having been visited by the FBI.

COMMENTS: Neither death was mysterious. Helena Stoeckley and Greg Mitchell both died from complications resulting from excessive substance use. In terms of Mitchell, the FBI didn't visit him, he reached out to the FBI and denied any involvement in the murders.

KING: The prosecution's contention, then, is that you harmed yourself in order to pull this crime off. As a surgeon, you would know where to inflict yourself...

MACDONALD: Well, they changed their story. Sometimes they say Colette must have injured me.

COMMENTS: The CID, FBI, and DOJ never changed their story. All three presented a scenario where Colette defended herself with the Geneva Forge knife, she inflicted several superficial wounds to her husband's upper body and left arm, and that MacDonald later used a scalpel blade to self-inflict a wound to his upper chest.

KING: Now, another thing seems to--did you have affairs?

MACDONALD: Yes. I had what were then known as one-night stands. I was not proud of it. I never lied about it. They asked me and I told them.

COMMENTS: Not true. MacDonald lied about these affairs/one-night stands on numerous occasions. At the Grand Jury hearings, MacDonald flat-out denied having an ongoing sexual relationship with a woman, while confined to his quarters during the Article 32 hearing. This woman spoke at length with the CID about this affair, yet MacDonald denied that this affair occurred for almost a decade.

KING: Are you an optimist?

MACDONALD: I'm optimistic if the tests are done legitimately, yes. There is no way that those people were in that house and didn't leave evidence. And the government record shows the evidence. It shows wig fibers from Helena Stoeckley's wig. It shows brown hair in my wife's hand that was--secretly tried to match me.

Later in the interview...

MACDONALD: We had the wig hairs and we had black fibers that the Army found from her garments in that house.

COMMENTS: The MacDonald camp picked the AFIP labs to run DNA tests on 29 exemplars, so I would assume the defense team was confident that the testing would be "done legitimately." The three saran fibers found in Colette's hairbrush were never compared to any wig that Stoeckley MAY have owned, one of the fibers matched doll hair from the FBI's exemplar collection, and an additional fiber found in that same hairbrush matched material from Colette's fall.

A similar scenario occurred with the dark woolen fibers found at the crime scene. Those fibers were never compared to garments worn by Stoeckley, MacDonald discarded most of the family clothing items in December 1970, and photographs/home movies prove that Colette/children owned dark woolen hats and clothing. The brown hair found clutched in Colette's left hand matched the DNA profile of Jeffrey MacDonald.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[Bunny]

Gordon Widenhouse (MacDonald's attorney) has filed a Notice of Appeal in the district court, intending to appeal Judge Fox's denial of MacDonald’s motion to vacate, which was entered on July 24, 2014,

http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_macdonald/uploads/uploads.html

Let's hope Widenhouse will actually file a brief for this appeal. Mac's last appeal, filed Oct. 22, 2014, for additional DNA testing, didn't go so well, since his attorney William Palmer only asked for repeated delays, and ended up withdrawing and never filing a brief at all. MacDonald still has another four days to file a brief on that appeal, but at this point, no attorney seems to be willing to handle that for him, so I'll be surprised if any brief on the DNA testing is actually filed.

 

[Cracka*Jaxx]

Put it on the shelf, MacDonald, put it on the shelf.

Exactly. It's been nearly 50 years since the murders. When do the ridiculous appeals stop?

 

[Madeleine74]

He's been in prison for 36 years now. He was free for about 10 years before he was finally tried in federal court and convicted in 1979.

He'll stop when either of the following occurs first:

- The highest court he can appeal to denies his appeal.

- He dies

 

[Murtagh21]

Inmate has until 7/24/15 to file a brief on the request for additional DNA tests. He can either take it upon himself to construct the brief or find a pro bono attorney to construct the brief for him. If a brief is not filed by 7/24/15, the DNA issue will be dropped for the time being. In terms of the 2255, Gordie remains inmate's attorney of record, but he has a few obstacles to overcome. Judge Fox has denied inmate a COA on the 2255, so Gordie has to convince the 4th Circuit Court to allow him to construct and file a brief on this issue. If the 4th Circuit concurs with Judge Fox, the ballgame is over in regards to the 2255. If the 4th Circuit allows Gordie to file an appellate brief, the 4th Circuit will either schedule oral arguments or they will concur with Judge Fox's 5/18/15 decision to deny inmate relief. If the latter scenario occurs, the ballgame is over in regards to the 2255.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[Murtagh21]

The 4th Circuit has agreed with the government that the Court should deny MacDonald's latest request for more time to file his opening brief on his appeal for additional DNA testing, and an order was filed to that effect today. I guess that seven times (e.g., 7 separate extension requests) is a charm. This legal circus has reached the point where it's not even entertaining anymore. The defense is sticking its chin out and daring the government to take a swipe. Well, the government finally did accept the invitation, and they are saying that enough is enough. There is only so many times you can play dumb and even this particular 4th Circuit Court has its limits.

Incredibly, at the same time, the Court gives MacDonald another three weeks to file, stating that his appeal will be dismissed at 5:00 p.m. on Sept. 14 unless Mac's brief is received. If the 4th Circuit grants another extension, they will reveal themselves as bargain basement hypocrites. For example, in their 2011 decision to remand the case to Judge Fox, they argued that the 2244 was NOT a part and parcel of the 2255. Considering that the documented record clearly demonstrates that the IPA and 2255 are SEPARATE issues, granting an 8th extension would be further proof that this Circuit Court has a specific agenda.

http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_ma...s/uploads.html

 

[Murtagh21]

The 4th Circuit has agreed with the government that the Court should deny MacDonald's latest request for more time to file his opening brief on his appeal for additional DNA testing, and an order was filed to that effect today. I guess that seven times (e.g., 7 separate extension requests) is a charm. This legal circus has reached the point where it's not even entertaining anymore. The defense is sticking its chin out and daring the government to take a swipe. Well, the government finally did accept the invitation, and they are saying that enough is enough. There is only so many times you can play dumb and even this particular 4th Circuit Court has its limits.

Incredibly, at the same time, the Court gives MacDonald another three weeks to file, stating that his appeal will be dismissed at 5:00 p.m. on Sept. 14 unless Mac's brief is received. If the 4th Circuit grants another extension, they will reveal themselves as bargain basement hypocrites. For example, in their 2011 decision to remand the case to Judge Fox, they argued that the 2244 was NOT a part and parcel of the 2255. Considering that the documented record clearly demonstrates that the IPA and 2255 are SEPARATE issues, granting an 8th extension would be further proof that this Circuit Court has a specific agenda.

http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_ma...s/uploads.html

 

[katydid23]

I hope they continue to deny this creeps requests.

:denied: :denied: :denied:

 

[Murtagh21]

Since 2009, this 4th Circuit Court has...

- Allowed Barry Scheck and the IP to file an Amici Curiae brief on behalf of inmate

- Individual(s) who file an Amici brief cannot be former/current lawyers or advocates for the defendant, yet the 4th Circuit ignored this black and white distinction in the MacDonald case

- Although inmate was not a client of the IP, Scheck served as his DNA consultant, and was inmate's lead attorney at the 1999 DNA protocol hearing before Judge Fox

- At the 2010 oral arguments session and in their 2011 decision to remand the case to Judge Fox, the 4th Circuit turned a blind eye to the relationship between the 2244 and 2255

- The government pointed out that the "two provisions are virtually identical in every material respect." This included evidence that is time-barred, integral to previously litigated claims, and contained in separate stand alone claims for which a PFA is required under Section 2255

- Inmate did not file a PFA on the DNA issues nor did the 4th Circuit require him to do so

- The 4th Circuit has granted 7 extensions in regards to filing a brief on the IPA

- In the past two extensions, the Court has threatened to dismiss the appeal if a brief was not filed on time

- No brief has been filed, yet despite their tough talk, the 4th Circuit has given inmate 3 weeks to find a lawyer to construct a brief on the IPA

IMO, this timeline demonstrates that the 4th Circuit has a clear agenda. This agenda involves giving inmate every opportunity to garner a new trial. Despite their ongoing bias, the chances that inmate achieves "their" goal is extremely slim. The 4th Circuit asked Judge Fox to decide on the merits of the issues at hand, he followed their "evidence as a whole" roadmap to a tee, and inmate was denied relief. That SHOULD end this legal circus.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[Madeleine74]

So, will the 4th circuit continue to bend over backwards and allow MacD to do whatever he asks, to try and 'force' Judge Fox into giving MacD a new trial? It seems like that's their end game. This could continue as long as MacD is alive and files motions and appeals.

 

[Murtagh21]

The following are examples of the relationship between the 2244 and 2255.

1) Commentary by the 2nd Circuit Court in 1997

In the absence of...specification, it is logical to assume that Congress intended to refer to all of the subsections of 2244, dealing with the authorization of second and successive motions.

2) Commentary by the 5th Circuit Court in 2001

Although the legislative history is silent as to the extent of 2244's incorporation into 2255, we...can find no intent to treat federal and state prisoners differently.

3) Commentary by the 7th Circuit Court in 2002

Although 2244 refers to 2254 rather than 2255, we have held that the cross-reference to 2244 in 2255, is equally applicable to 2255 motions.

4) 5th Edition of Federal Habeas Corpus Practice and Procedure 2005

Section 2255 appears to adopt the same procedure for Section 2255 cases as it applies to successive state-prisoner habeas corpus petitioners under 2244.

What the defense did was rely upon a singular paragraph in the 2255 in order to argue that Judge Fox failed to review inmate's gatekeeping motion in light of "evidence as a whole." In 2009, the government argued that, "if those assumptions concerning the applicability of 2244 (b) 2 to gatekeeping motions filed under Section 2255 are correct, the preclusions against the entertainment of previously presented and dismissed claims contained in (b) 1 of the same subsection must also govern such petitions." Unfortunately, the 4th Circuit allowed inmate to play by his own rules (e.g., not filing a PFA, ignoring the 2244), and that led to the 2012 evidentiary hearing.

The good news is that the government dominated the hearing to the point where the defense relied on 2nd and 3rd hand hearsay testimony. Gordie didn't call a single forensics expert to the stand, the totality of his rebuttal to the trial evidence fixated on crime scene contamination, and he was forced to use closing arguments as his lone means of presenting the DNA evidence. IMO, the 4th Circuit will do their best to find loopholes in Judge Fox's decision(s) to deny relief, but I believe his strategy of allowing EVERYTHING at the evidentiary hearing will keep inmate in prison.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[Murtagh21]

It is important to note that Judge Fox DID address the Britt issue in light of the evidence as a whole. In his 2008 decision to deny inmate the right to file a successive 2255 petition, Judge Fox stated that, "MacDonald has not demonstrated that the Britt affidavit, taken as true and accurate on its face and viewed in light of the evidence as a whole, could establish by clear and convincing evidence that, but for constitutional error, no reasonable factfinder would have found MacDonald guilty of the murder of his wife and daughters."

In essence, MacDonald placed all of his hopes on the 4th Circuit Court allowing him to piggyback the DNA test results to the Britt issue, AND to all previously litigated issues in this case. The defense knew that they could file a PFA for a merits-based decision on the DNA test results, but they wanted to avoid that process because the test results were more inculpatory than exculpatory. Even Kathryn MacDonald was surprised when the 4th Circuit bought their arguments, stating that the 4th Circuit's decision was "unprecedented."

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[Satch]

Followed this case for years,

Wrote papers from both prosecution and defense viewpoints. Now believe MacDonald is guilty of the crimes. No evidence of outside intruders was ever found. There was some unknown and unmatched hair and blood fibers that were not traceable. However, that doesn't place intruders in the home. My take is that the living room was always too neat for McDonald's story to be believable. Back when I thought MacDonald was innocent I had read Fatal Justice after reading Fatal Vision.

While I felt all the evidence was not presented that should have been admitted I do believe that judge Dupree was heavily biased in favor of the prosecution. However, having said that, what turned me toward guilt over the years was approximately 50 statements made by McDonald over the years, that are a direct contradiction to the evidence in the case.

Wow! Just looked and the list is still here:

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

I think the forensic evidence coinciding with MacDonald's own statements hurt him in this trial and all the appeals through the years. How could four people fight in that small living room, and fit in about a four foot space between the couch and that overturned coffee table? How could Jeff see what they were doing? How could the woman holding a candle, Helena Stockely or anybody for that matter be able to light a candle as it was raining outside at the time and the wick would have been wet?

These intruders would have had to have the presence of mind, high on drugs, to walk through a darkened house, find things, be able to fight. Yet MacDonald only suffers small wounds compared to his family, who is butchered to death in their bedrooms. Yet, if MacDonald's story were true, at least one of the assailants would likely be so severely injured if not dead. Fatal Justice talked about seeing someone with blood on their hands at a Dunkin Donuts. Forgive me, as it has been years since I read it, and cannot recall who that was.

However, even if that witness account was true, you would expect those intruders to be far more hurt, if not killed. A medically trained Green Barret would certainly harm those alleged assailants very severely. But there was almost no blood in the living room where this life and death fight supposedly occurred. And even if MacDonald's story were true, those intruders, how did they get in? And they never state a reason for being there. Even McDonald just says they chanted, "Acid is Groovy, Kill the Pigs." MacDonald could have even claimed that the stated a motive for being there at the time.

In later interviews he said they wanted drugs and to rough him up to get them. But as Fred Kassab said, the evidence showed the supply closet in the living room was open, but there was never any evidence that they took anything from the closet. There is debate as to a missing bloody syringe. There were needles in the closet along with medical supplies. Yet, the intruders never touched the closet!

My question is, what time do most of you place the attack by McDonald on the family? I say about 2:30am. The horror probably lasted for about ten minutes or less, making it 2:40am at its conclusion. Macdonald probably took about another twenty minutes to contemplate what he had done. I think he snapped because Kim wet the bed. He and Collete got into a huge fight about changing the sheets. One thing lead to another. Collette may have questioned his affairs and threatened to leave him. I think she hit MacDonald with that hair brush, bruising his forehead and that is where he snapped.

The horror ends at about 3am. Jeff takes the time to write on the headboard the word "Pig", overturn the coffee table, horrifyingly go back and stab his family more to make it look like and intruder attack. Goes to the living room. Picks up the Esquire Magazine with the story of the Manson Murders, overturns the coffee table, rehearses his story and calls the MP's at 3:40am.

What do you think of that timeline?

Satch

 

[Murtagh21]

SATCH: It's tough to calculate when inmate went on his rampage, but IMO, his rage reaction was a combination of several factors.

- Inmate was ingesting Eskatrol in the weeks leading up to the murders

- One of the possible side affects of taking Eskatrol is a rage-induced psychosis

- Colette confined in her sister in-law that her husband was "screwing around"

- Colette contacted her mother and asked whether she and the kids could come for a visit

- Investigators found a suitcase at the right corner portion of the master bed footboard

- Colette's blood was found under and around the suitcase, but no blood was found on the suitcase

- The blood evidence proves that the suitcase was placed at that location after all the blood was shed

- CID investigators observed that a drawer to Colette's dresser was opened slightly

- Despite inmate's assertions to the contrary, the source of the urine stain on the master bed was Kimmie, not Kristen

In terms of a murder timeline, the following is a link to my timeline.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com/html/timeline.html

 

[STANDREID]

"Acid is groovy-kill the pigs" This guy is very poor at fictional dialogue.

 

[Satch]

Was the Eskatrol theory not proven? I know this was in Fatal Vision. I recall Fatal Justice said that when MacDonald sued McGinnis that Joe testified that he wasn't sure about that

All the other items above that Murtagh 21 points out have been verified as correct.

Satch

 

[katydid23]

"Acid is groovy-kill the pigs" This guy is very poor at fictional dialogue.

Hahahahahahaha..I was thinking the exact same thing. I grew up in Berkeley and was there in the 60's and 70's. Nobody talked like that. We loved ACID but would never say Acid is Groovy. LOL

Maybe they'd say It's a trip, It's far out, It'll blow your mind...but " Acid is Groovy... NO, LOL"

 

[Satch]

SATCH: It's tough to calculate when inmate went on his rampage, but IMO, his rage reaction was a combination of several factors.

- Inmate was ingesting Eskatrol in the weeks leading up to the murders

- One of the possible side affects of taking Eskatrol is a rage-induced psychosis

- Colette confined in her sister in-law that her husband was "screwing around"

- Colette contacted her mother and asked whether she and the kids could come for a visit

- Investigators found a suitcase at the right corner portion of the master bed footboard

- Colette's blood was found under and around the suitcase, but no blood was found on the suitcase

- The blood evidence proves that the suitcase was placed at that location after all the blood was shed

- CID investigators observed that a drawer to Colette's dresser was opened slightly

- Despite inmate's assertions to the contrary, the source of the urine stain on the master bed was Kimmie, not Kristen

In terms of a murder timeline, the following is a link to my timeline.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com/html/timeline.html

It sounds like Fred Bost now believes that McDonald is guilty. I wonder if this is true what made him change his mind? Possibly same as me that the physical evidence, while some does not match known content, does not prove the existence of outside intruders in the MacDonald home:

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com/html/conversations_bost.html

Satch

 

[Murtagh21]

SATCH: Unfortunately, Fred never wavered from his mantra that inmate was railroaded by the CID. In 1999, he told me that it was likely that the broken, bloody limb hair found clutched in Colette's left hand would match the DNA profile of Greg Mitchell. Despite the AFIP's 2006 DNA test results linking that hair to Jeffrey MacDonald, Fred continued to believe that Stoeckley/Mitchell were inside 544 Castle Drive on 2/17/70. A year before his death, Fred attended the oral arguments session before the 4th Circuit Court. He sat on the "MacDonald side" of the court room and was taking notes throughout the session. IMO, Fred had reached a point where undiluted fact could not replace blind faith. His point of view in Fatal Justice had painted him in a corner and he didn't have the courage to let the facts speak for themselves.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com