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

[Bunny]

Today, the government filed its reply to the Oct. 17 Widenhouse response, re: supplemental briefings:

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

 

[Bunny]

I was doing some research this morning, and ran across an excerpt from the government's brief filed on Dec. 29, 1979, which seemed to me to be particularly germane to some of the things that have been going on recently in the MacDonald case:

From pages 135-136 of http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_macdonald/court/1979/1979-12-29_4thCircuit_EDNC_gov_brief.html

"Scientific evidence is admissible only if the principle upon which the evidence is based is 'sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field to which it belongs.' Frye v. United States, 54 App. D.C. 46, 293 F. 1013, 1014 (1923); United States v. Baller...However neither absolute certainty of result nor unanimity of scientific opinion are required for admissibility. For example, in United States v. Cyphers, 553 F.2d 1064 (7th Cir. 1977) cert. denied, 434 U.S. 843 (1978), an expert's opinion that human hairs found on items used in the robbery 'could have come' from the defendant was entitled to be admitted for whatever value the jury might give it. The Court explained that where a witness, properly qualified as an expert, bases his opinion on what he believes to be a reasonable scientific inference, his opinion should ordinarily be admitted subject to cross-examination concerning the propriety of the testing techniques used and the validity of conclusions drawn from his observations. In addition, the newness of a scientific technique does not alone render its results inadmissible, since 'every useful development must have its first day in Court.' United States v. Daller, supra, at 438; United States v. Brown, 557, F.2d 541 (6th Cir. 1977)."

 

[Bunny]

It looks like Mac's appeal to the Fourth Circuit has been officially opened, as of yesterday (Oct. 22):

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

I have to admit I'm a little confused, since the recent letter from the Fourth Circuit to the District Court says that the Fourth Circuit "will docket the appeal following disposition of the motion" (re: MacDonald's 59(e) motion). But as far as I can tell, Judge Fox hasn't filed that order yet.

 

[Murtagh21]

BUNNY: Interesting parallel between the current litigation and the issues brought forth in 1979. The defense is clearly hanging their hats on the FBI report with a focus on Paul Stombaugh. The reasons are many...

- Malone and Fram did not testify at the 1979 trial

- The evidentiary item linked to Malone in the FBI report has been litigated in memos, briefs, and at the 2012 evidentiary hearing

- The evidentiary item linked to Fram in the FBI report was litigated in memos, briefs, and at the 2012 evidentiary hearing

- Stombaugh testified at the 1974-1975 Grand Jury hearings and at the 1979 trial

- Stombaugh's forensic testimony at the 1979 trial was a key piece of the prosecution's case

The problem with focusing on Stombaugh is that none of the evidentary items linked to Stombaugh in the FBI report were sourced to a known intruder suspect. In addition, DNA test results of these evidentiary items either backed Stombaugh's conclusions or were unsourced. The FBI's references to the items in question are confusing, but it appears that they had issues with Stombaugh's use of the word "matched" in relation to conclusions drawn from hair comparisons. If Stombaugh had stated that certain hairs were "microscopically similar" to hair exemplars, the FBI would not have flagged him for "erroneous statements."

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[Murtagh21]

For those unfamiliar with the current legal machinations in this case, the following are the current options available to Judge Fox and the 4th Circuit Court.

If Judge Fox and the 4th Circuit Court deny inmate relief, his only option is to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Considering that this case has been before the Supreme Court 4 times, there is NO chance that they will hear it for a 5th time.

In terms of the other potential options...

- Judge Fox could grant inmate a new trial based on the 1996 DOJ Report and/or the 2013 FBI report

- Judge Fox could decide NOT to amend or alter his 7/22/14 decision, but ask for briefs to be filed on the FBI report

- The 4th Circuit Court could deny inmate's motion on additional DNA testing

- The 4th Circuit Court could grant inmate a COA and order briefs on the request for additional DNA testing

- The 4th Circuit Court could grant inmate a COA, order briefs on additional DNA testing, AND grant oral arguments on additional DNA testing

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[Bunny]

I noticed that Judge Fox filed an order today:

"MacDonald shall file his supplemental briefing within forty-five (45) days of the filing date of this order. The Government shall file its response within thirty (30) days of MacDonald's filing of his supplemental briefing. The court reserves ruling on the Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment pending the supplemental briefing."

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

I'll be anxious to see what nonsense...oops. sorry, I mean arguments...Widenhouse will come up with. Can't wait; should make for some great reading.

 

[Murtagh21]

BUNNY: Thanks for the update. As usual, Judge Fox is tough, but fair. The burden of proof is on innmate and, IMO, Gordie is going to take hyperbole to another level. His focus will be on Paul Stombaugh and he will claim that Stombaugh's "erroneous" statements regarding a SINGULAR hair invalidates the entirety of his trial testimony.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[Bunny]

Looks like the government has brought in a new attorney re: Mac's latest appeal on the additional DNA testing, but I still don't see any informal opening brief by MacDonald, which was due in the 4th Cir. by Nov. 17. At this point, I'm starting to wonder if he's going to file at all.

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

 

[Murtagh21]

Here is some information on Jennifer P. May-Parker.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennife...cod_May-Parker

 

[Bunny]

Kathryn and Jeffrey MacDonald have moved to extend time for filing the brief on his latest appeal, claiming that Mac was under "communication restrictions" (solitary, maybe?) and that he hasn't been able to find a lawyer yet. The 4th Circuit granted the motion, but didn't give him as much time as he'd asked for, so now his informal opening brief is due Dec. 26.

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

 

[Murtagh21]

Inmate's website has been down for the past week and it appears that it may be down for good. In the past decade, whenever you Googled "Jeffrey MacDonald," the first thing listed was inmate's website. I just Googled "Jeffrey MacDonald" and the site is no longer listed.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[Noirdame79]

Jeffrey MacDonald is guilty as sin. The blood evidence and now DNA evidence proves his guilt. Helena Stoeckley and Greg Mitchell have been cleared, as nothing of them was found inside the Castle Drive residence.

MacDonald showed zero interest in finding the killers, because he is the killer. He couldn't wait to get away from Fort Bragg and start the swinging bachelor lifestyle he had always wanted. As his former father-in-law, Freddy Kassab stated, the intruders that night in February 1970 were Colette, Kimberley, Kristen and the unborn baby boy.

Let him rot.

 

[Murtagh21]

It appears that Kathryn was unable to find a pro bono lawyer to file an appellate motion regarding inmate's request for additional DNA testing. The 4th Circuit's 12/26/14 deadline to file that motion has come and gone, yet nothing but cricket noises from the MacDonald camp. In addition, inmate's website has now been relegated to a defense fund site. No more bogus case "facts," distorted DNA timelines, and links to articles constructed by MacDonald advocates.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[Wagara]

All of this is so sad.

 

[STANDREID]

Coming up on the 45th next month.

 

[Murtagh21]

The next legal matter will involve Gordon Widenhouse filing an appeal of Judge Fox's 7/24/14 decision on 1/6/15. The government then has 30 days to respond to Gordie's ball of hyperbole.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[Bunny]

The defense's memorandum in support of altering or amending judgment (and renewing its request for a COA) has been filed, containing pretty much what some of us expected. The renewed attempts to discredit Malone, Stombaugh and Fram were a given, but I doubt they'll be persuasive enough to get Judge Fox to amend/alter his judgment.

Maybe I'm missing something here, but I also think this memorandum was very weak in addressing the "evidence as a whole." Widenhouse brings up candle wax, Stoeckley's clothing and her "confessions" to her mother and her attorney, the Jimmy Friar phone call, and a few other such things (again!), but of course ignores damaging evidence such as the rubber gloves, the bloody footprints, the bloody impressions on the bathmat, the bedding evidence, MacDonald's own demonstrations of consciousness of guilt, etc.

Bottom line is that I don't think this 26-page pile of garbage is worth the paper it's written on, and I'll be looking forward to seeing the Government response tearing it apart.

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

 

[Murtagh21]

BUNNY: I agree. This document is filled with hyperbole, supposition, and b.s. Gordie spent little time discussing the actual content of the FBI report, he failed to point out that the Malone hair was discussed at length at the 2012 evidentiary hearing, and that Malone concluded that the source of the hair was Jeffrey, not Kimberley MacDonald. Predictably, Gordie focused on the Stombaugh hair in an attempt to discredit the entirety of his trial testimony. Gordie even uses information in a book (e.g., Fatal Justice) as "proof" that Stombaugh's Pajama Top Theory was invalid. The FACT is that the government presented over 1,100 evidentiary items at trial and 35 years later, the FBI took issue with the analysis of only ONE of those items (e.g., the Stombaugh hair). The burden of proof is on inmate and that burden is "extraordinarily high." The information in the FBI report is akin to a needle in a massive evidentiary haystack and that information doesn't help inmate meet that burden in any way, shape, or form.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[Murtagh21]

After months of being off-line, it appears that Kathryn has been able to pay her website fees, so inmate's site is back on the Web. The only changes to the website involves a list of the "major" players in this case and Kathryn's slanted observations of their impact on this case. I also noticed that for the 1st time in recent memory, neither the Fayetteville Observer nor the Charlotte Observer covered a brief submitted by the defense. Gordie's ego must have taken a beating, but that's what happens when your last ditch effort to obtain a new trial is a measly 26 pages long.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

This case is one that intrigues me. I believe he is guilty. I have from the first time I was exposed to this case. I don't know how anyone can think that he is not guilty.