Is Jeffrey McDonald Guilty?

[rashomon]

Hello everyone. Haven't seen these posted so I thought I'd put them up - Youtube clips of the CBS special. It's incomplete and bitty but there's some worthwhile stuff in there, footage from the Dick Cavett show for example.

pt1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tF77VHJ_b2c

pt2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1fgqjEbxn8
Thanks so much for putting up those links, jamdog!!
I'm from Germany and have never seen the CBS special. The murderer's smug grin on the Dick Cavettt show was simply unbearable!! Seeing him
"sitting there grinning like the Cheshire Cat", as Colette's brother put it so well, made me shudder.
His affect was just wrong, Dick Cavett said. How very true!

While Cavett obviously smelled a rat at once, MacDonald was obviously able to fool B. Segal and Co. into believing he was innocent. And this despite all the overwhelming evidence against him. Just because he didn't look like Charles Manson but seeemed to be "a very likeable young man" (Segal), this swayed the scale for him and Wade Smith toward innocence?
"A likeable man like MacDonald can't have done this to is family". That was their whole defense strategy. No wonder the prosection had a field day with such a ridiculous defense.

jmo

[wind149]

I posted on another board my take on JM. I totally believe he killed his family and I think I know why. I think he did not want to be a family man and even back then, late 60-early' 70's your parents still expected you to get married and start on the nuclear family and become a insurance salesman or doctor, while wifey stays home and becomes June Cleaver. JM was an Army doctor where everything there is regimated and I believe that after a few years, JM wanted out, but divorce for the good doctor would have been out of the question, not to mention how it would look to the public. So, in order for him to be the swinging bachelor doctor who wanted to be seen with pretty young things on his arm, he had to get rid of his family and who better yet to blame it on? As I said before, the Manson murders were fresh on people's minds and everyone assumed that all hippies were drug addicted killers so it was so easy for JM to run the spin at first, it was believable, the handsome doctor appeared to be distraught of the loss of his family and what set him over the edge I think to kill Colette and the girls ,was Colette was pregnant again and he just could not walk out on his wife in that condition, he felt trapped, he did not want another child so he does the deed, blaming it on hippies and while the police had a few that could have been suspects, what they had was just JM's version of what they looked like and floppy hats were the rage back then ,and by the late 70's, early 80's, most of them had died by their own hands, or left the area. What sealed his fate though ,was his lifestyle after the murders. Swinging, cad about town, fancy boats, cars, ah the good life for JM. It was not lost on Freddy Kasob and bless that man's heart for having the tenacity until the day he died to get JM charged and convicted for the murders of his daughter and granddaughters. JM, I feel should have died in the chair 30 years ago, and every time he comes up for parole he is shot down and that is what should happen until the day he dies. His new wife, totally bamboozled by the charm and wit of the sociopath, is bound and determined to "clear" her hubby's name and set him free. Another victim of JM and the very system that allowed that dirtbag to marry again. And she looks eerily like Colette and to me it is obscene. He finds a woman that looks like his dead wife and personally, I think this woman is as dumb as a box of rocks and madly, deeply in love, and here again, why do these women that are death row groupies or the wife of a killer fall so hard for these ratbags? For the con, it is a way to do easy time, and for the woman ,she feels loved in the sense that he is all hers, no other woman will be able to have him, most times these winners have no self-esteem or say really obese and they fall like rocks for the loser, all thoughts evolve around the POS they just married who is on death row for raping and murdering a child, they buy the spin that he is innocent even though the truth is staring her right in the face, the only honeymoon they will ever have is in a visiting room, the most they can do is hold hands, but yet, these dumb women always are willing to do whatever they can to "redeem" "save" their POS, including murdering for them and blow their lives to hell in 4 seconds. JM's wife will have a long wait for her hubby to come home, and one woman when asked about the sex issue she claimed to have had enough sex in her life and the only thing she wanted was "George's" love, in the visiting room or the cards where he writes the I loves you forever bull**** and this scumbag is a baby killer and she gave her whole life up for. There always will be these pathetic women as well as the cons and JM is a master manipulator and luckily, the parole board is hip.

[rashomon]

I posted on another board my take on JM. I totally believe he killed his family and I think I know why. I think he did not want to be a family man and even back then, late 60-early' 70's your parents still expected you to get married and start on the nuclear family and become a insurance salesman or doctor, while wifey stays home and becomes June Cleaver. JM was an Army doctor where everything there is regimated and I believe that after a few years, JM wanted out, but divorce for the good doctor would have been out of the question, not to mention how it would look to the public. So, in order for him to be the swinging bachelor doctor who wanted to be seen with pretty young things on his arm, he had to get rid of his family and who better yet to blame it on? As I said before, the Manson murders were fresh on people's minds and everyone assumed that all hippies were drug addicted killers so it was so easy for JM to run the spin at first, it was believable, the handsome doctor appeared to be distraught of the loss of his family and what set him over the edge I think to kill Colette and the girls ,was Colette was pregnant again and he just could not walk out on his wife in that condition, he felt trapped, he did not want another child so he does the deed, blaming it on hippies and while the police had a few that could have been suspects, what they had was just JM's version of what they looked like and floppy hats were the rage back then ,and by the late 70's, early 80's, most of them had died by their own hands, or left the area. What sealed his fate though ,was his lifestyle after the murders. Swinging, cad about town, fancy boats, cars, ah the good life for JM.
I agree with your description of JMD's psychological make up, but don't think he originally planned to kill his family. But once the 'point of no return' had been reached for him, i. e. when he saw Colette and his older child lying almost deadly injured on the floor, the thought of this being an opportunity get rid of his whole family may very well have entered his mind.
So his youngest daughter Kristen probably not only had to die to fit his multiple intruders/overkill sceneario, but also because there was no place for her in the new life he was hoping to lead in the future.
The fact that he called the years 1972 and 1973 the "fun times" only completes the picture.
I'm convinced he has never felt an ounce of remorse over his abominable crime.

[jamdog]

You're very welcome Rashomon. I'm quite new to this case, - first read about it a couple of months back on the Crime Library main site. I was a little uneasy with their position of MacDonald's innocence and so I read around some more. Rather like the ransom note condemning the Ramseys, the blood evidence condemns MacDonald. But the more I read about the case the more I realise how easily he could have got away with it were it not for the persistence and tenacity of Freddie Kassab and others.

[wind149]

Rashomon,
I gotta agree with you on a few points too! You believe I guess, that he snapped, killed Colette and the older girl, realized what he had done and had to kill the baby because even in his mind at that moment, who would believe that someone broke into house, stabbed him with an ice pick, stabbed Colette and the older girl, and yet, left the baby alive? You might be right, and I see you agree on his agendas, and I remember watching a crime show about him, and seeing pictures of him on his fancy boat, with a young thing next to him, his many trips to exotic places, his whole persona was coming off to me as a very selfish, all about me, and for someone whose whole family was butchered ,he sure was not looking too distraught in those pictures and then when he went on Dick Cavett and starts his spin on what happened that night I can just imagine what was going through Freddy's head and I remember I was about 11 and my Dad used to always tell me what was going on in the world, he called it Current Events, my uncle was there and he was a cop, and Dad says he did it and my uncle agreed with him and not long after that Dad tells me when I came home one night that he had been arrested. Then came the trial and the end of JM and his spin. All these years, and not one soul has ever come forward like the criminal element will always want to trade info to get out of the charges they are facing, and even within them, nothing. The reason? The person who did it sits in an 8x10 cell, still trying to run his spin and after watching the last show about him and listening to that poor dumb woman that believes in him, I can't help but be disgusted that in 2007, he still is the manipulating piece of crap he always has been. If he valued his freedom, he would have never killed his family and it is obscene to say the least ,to hear him whine about sitting in prison, an innocent man who blames his father-in-law for ruining HIS LIFE! I hope he rots in there till the day he dies and I hope that wife of his wakes up and does not spend every dime she has trying to prove his innocence. He will sit there and gladly let her do it and I hope the parole board is hip to his games.

[icedtea4me]

Hi tsky!

Good points, all!

I especially like your observation of Colette asking "Why" (while being assaulted and killed by some stranger) instead of screaming a statement more along the lines of "They're killing me.....or HELP ME, Jeffrey!"

Exactly! She's being attacked by total strangers and her husband in another room and all she's going to cry out is "Jeff! Why are they doing this to me?"? Tsky is right on the money with Colette crying out for Jeff to help her (had this been an actual attack by strangers, which it wasn't.)


-Tea

[KTScarlettOkity]

Hey all, Im new to this message board and wanted to share some thoughts. Part of my job requires analyzing the statements of people. Content analysis consists of looking at a persons statement and discover what they are really saying. I was looking at the Article 32 transcripts and read JM's testimony from start to finish and its amazing how his language, demeanor and grammar all change when discussing the murders. He uses terms over and over, such as "you know", that indicate deception. The following website is a statement analysis of JM's statement by Mark McClish which breaks down JM's statement by paragraph. Hope you all find it interesting. http://www.statementanalysis.com/macdonald/

Tim

That statement analysis was VERY interesting!

[audpaud]

Today, 06:13 PM
Freshwater
Administrator Join Date: May 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 2,413

. . . Many of you also know that in the new year I will have a new home and every single member here is welcome with open arms. I am moving on to a place where the site itself is being built to serve our community and it is a site that will be built by and for the members . . .



Wondering if there will be a Jeffrey MacDonald Forum at the new site?:confused: I've just read that crimelibrary has been given a "stay."

[bailezra]

Just a test message to see if the site is still working, post 12/31.

[SaraSidle]

I am still here

[SaraSidle]

I am still here

bump

[Bobbi2]

bump
I am still here too! Anything new in this case?

[runswithsissors]

First of all, let me start by saying, McDonald was, is and will always be guilty. The only way anyone can think he isn't is to ignore the evidence or want so desperately for him to be innocent. Helena Stoeckly was a sad, sad addict who so wanted to be someone and the McDonald case gave her her 15 minutes, and McDonald was only too happy to use het delusions against to try and save his own ass.

The account of the murders would be almost funny if it wasn't such a sad event. Hippies walking around in the middle of the night with a candle chanting "Acid is groovy kill the pigs" and looking for some "pigs" to kill? This isn't the way something like that would happen. It's the way a straight person trying to think like a hppie would have imagined it.

I grew up in the 60s and 70s and, in my ypunger years, took my share of acid. Although I do not condone acid, I will say that acid doesn't make you want to go out and kill people, and if you tried you'd probably end up in a heap on the street somewhere laughing your ass off.

"Acid is groovy?" Give me a break! Even by 1970 groovy wasn't cool to say anymore. The establishment had taken a liking to it which made it very uncool.

All of the physical evidence in the case points to McDonald. The only evidence that points elsewhere is "he says she says" crap.

[brianlion]

I don't either. I too believe that evidence of molestation would have shown up on the autopsy.

Mac was home alone with the children that night. He had ample opportunity to molest Kimmy before Colette returned from her class.

I think his defiance over the prosecution's bed wetting theory indicates that's what caused the initial fight in the MB that night. His insistence, despite evidence to the contrary, that it was Kris who wet the bed that night. Something caused it to escalate into a physical fight. I believe it was something that Colette had never done before, she either hit him or pushed him while he was yelling at her and that caused him to lose all control.

As always just my opinion.
I totally agree with the theory that the bed wetting triggered a argument. I don't think this was the first time they argued over his side of the bed being wet. It was proved by tests that the oldest child wet the bed, not the youngest, as Mcdonald claimed. Another rung in the ladder to prove he is a pathological liar. I also believe that Collete, tired from being awakened, pregnant with their third child, after a long day in class, did hit Mcdonald. She became incensed because- I believe Mcdonald probably was rough with the child for again wetting the bed. Collette became enraged over how rough he was with the child. Probably a couple of smacks to the head with a hairbrush or whatever. That was where he got the bruises on his forehead. She may have brought up his cheating during the argument. He took a couple of hard smacks to the head, got his handy 4 X 4, and beat her with it. The little girl, either by accident or intentional, got hit as well. Her brain matter was found on the bedroom door over hang.

[brianlion]

N-Eve
What convinces you is is innocent? I'd like to give you a few reasons in the coming days why I am convinced he is guilty, if that is O-K?

[brianlion]

I'm glad a few of you have brought up Macdonald appearing on the Dick Cavett Show. I also think is was obscene that, a few months after butchering his wife and two innocent daughters, he comes on to a national talk show. I've read the transcripts of that evening. He enters the show to applause and music!:cuss: Can you imagine, he ruthlessly kills his family, and ends the year doing a talk show, sitting on the couch in a suit and tie like a celebrity. He's chatting with Cavette like he's Bob Hope. It was surreal reading about that evening. But, that show was one of the final straws for Freddie Kassab, who saw MacDonald sitting there like the cat who swallowed the canary. He was determined after seeing him on TV to aggressively help convict this guy.

[toddyb]

I've followed this case for many years, since the mini-series was on television way back when.
For a long time, I wanted to believe him.
I listened to his story and didn't really take the time to dwell on the real evidence in this case.
Now, however, the truth has become very clear.
His story was a quickly thought up lie that was designed to cover up his psychotic rampage.
None of his blood found on the couch where he claims to have been attacked?
None in the hallway where he says he laid after being ko'd by these drug crazed hippies?
Kimberlys urine on her parents bed, not Kristens like MacDonald said?
Her blood and brain serum in the doorway of the master bedroom, but her body in her own bed???
Colettes blood in the girls bedroom?
Jeff hears his wife screaming, yet at the same time all of the weapons used to kill her were being used on HIM in the living room?
Drugged out nutjobs take the time to wipe their fingerprints off of the murder weapons and leave them in the backyard?
No forced entry? How lucky those hippies were to find the backdoor unlocked.
His wife and daughters slaughtered, but MacDonalds only serious wound was a neat incision?
Kimberly wet the bed and Jeff got po'd. Maybe he yelled at her or even roughed her up a bit. Collette became angry and an agrument started. Maybe he slapped her first and then she grapped the brush and drilled him, or maybe she hit him first. Either way, I'm sure that's how it all started. There was no reason for him to lie about Kimberly wetting the bed unless it was significant in terms of what happened that night. Why a nearly six foot tall, 180 pound Green Beret would pick up a wooden board to wield against his much smaller, pregnant wife, I have no idea. Chalk it up to unbridled rage. He claims to have heard Kimberly yelling, "daddy, daddy, daddy", so I'm assuming she really did that, but it was in an attempt to get him to stop beating her mother. He was probably afraid the neighbors would have heard her, so he had to go with it. I'd like to think he hit Kimberly in the head as an accident, but I doubt it. He obviously came unhinged and was out of control. When he had calmed back down, things had gone beyond the point of no return. So he then remembers the story he read in a magazine about the Manson family murders, and decides that's the way to go. But killing little Kristen like that? He wasn't in a rage by then. It was a cold blooded act of self preservation.
I know I'm not saying anything here that many others haven't already, but after many years of wanting to believe he was innocent, I'm just posting the conclusion I've finally reached. Jeffrey MacDonald may have been a good guy before that night, and to a lesser extent afterwards (the big exception being to continue lying about what really happened), but for those few minutes that it took to kill his own family, he was a monster.

[wind149]

He is as guilty as sin and has been since that night. The girls and his wife are butchered and he has a neat and tidy chest wound and who but a doctor could injure himself where he won't do any vital damage to himself??? And I agree! The Manson group did not bother to wipe fingerprints or bloody footprints when they went on their rampage and they were all tripping on acid and to hear him talk, they were all drug crazed hippies that came into the home that night. Keep in mind this was the early 70's where hippies, because of the Manson group, everyone considered them to be drug crazed thugs out to murder people in their beds so I think he figured he could use that spin and he would be believed. His motive was clear to me. He felt tied down, Colette was pregnant again, and I think he wanted to be the wild and crazy single doctor playing the ladies as he thought of himself as a player and not a father and husband. He wanted the good life, sailing around with a blond in a bikini, and he figured that LE would buy his crap story and for awhile he was getting away with it till his father-in-law Freddie Kasab saw him on the Dick Cavett show describing his injuries and Freddie knew he only had a superficial wound and it was far from life threatening and started to think that something was wrong. It took awhile before LE figured everything out and he was tried and convicted and should remain behind bars for the rest of his life. He also has a new victim, some dumb woman married him who eerily looks like Colette and has spent her life savings trying to get him exonerated or a new trial and I got news for her, it ain't gonna happen.

[toddyb]

I really don't think he planned it out, though.
Sure, his need to be free might have played some role in what happened that night, but I believe it all started over an argument about Kim wetting the bed. From there it probably became about a lot of things, like his cheating on Collete and whatever else was going on. Any married person knows that a disagreement can start about one thing, but quickly become about lots of other stuff. I also don't discount McGinnises theory about MacDonalds amphetamine use. Even too much caffeine can make someone irritable. If Jeff MacDonald had been overusing a stimulant in order to lose weight, that definitely could have been a factor in what happened. Surely if he had planned this all out in advance and in a calm state of mind, he would have thought about some things a little more. He left way too many holes and didn't think about things like the investigators being able to use blood analysis to find out who had bled where, not to mention them not finding any blood where he claimed to have been assaulted. The scary thing is that if he had taken just a little more time to think things through, he might have gotten away with it. If Jeffrey MacDonald wants any kind of redemption, he shouldn't be relying on the long shot of a new trial and an acquittal. He should instead admit to what he did and stop blaming a fictional group of drugged up hippies. That wouldn't absolve him of his actions, but it would be a step in the right direction. He isn't getting any younger, after all. Not too many shopping days until Christmas, if you get what I mean.

[toddyb]

Bump.
So nobody posts about this case anymore?

[brianlion]

I posted some comments, but got a strange comment from silly sara sidle that she thought it was enough writing about this case and she had had enough, so I cooled it for a while. But this guy is so disgusting, that I want every decent human being of Earth to read about this guy. All of us who have studied Jeffrey MacDonald can add insight to the case. I still study cases like the Lincoln assassination, Lizzie Bordan, and JFK , so interesting, and never grow old or out of style.

[toddyb]

There was a time when I acutally bought his b.s, but I was a lot younger then and didn't bother to really look at the evidence. What I'd like to know is how he's managed to fool so many people into thinking he's innocent. Anyone who has half a brain in their head and spends just a little time looking at the case shouldn't have any doubts whatsoever. His guilt is obvious.

[JTF]

Hey, everyone. Check out the new additions on my website. The additions can be found in the AND MORE and MIDNIGHT THOUGHTS section(s) of my website. Enjoy.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[brianlion]

:flamemad:A young surgeon falls asleep on the couch, while his family is asleep in their respective bedrooms. The doctor's wife is pregnant. The doctor awakens in the middle of the night to find a intruder. The young doctor grapples with the intruder, and the intruder knocks the doctor unconscious. He awakens to find his wife brutally murdered. When the authorities arrive they find the wife severely beaten and stabbed, but the doctor has relatively minor wounds. Also, detectives conclude that the crime scenes have been staged, and the doctor's wounds "self-inflicted". The trial ends with a conviction of second degree murder. During the trial, it is brought out the many affairs the good doctor has had, even though the doctor tearfully denies the accusations. The good doctor spends his entire life proclaiming his evidence, and gives a picture of his attacker that the D.A.'s office described as sounding made up. Sound familiar? I am describing, not the Jeffrey MacDonald murder, but the Sam Sheppard story, which occurred in July of 1954. Even though the story MacDonald made up, with his silly recollection of a group of drugged crazed hippies on a killing spree is incredible, it is not the original. Sam Sheppard, by sheer coincidence died on April 6, 1970- the very day Jeffrey MacDonald was first read his rights, and told his story to CID investigators.:rose:

[emptyheart]

I think Jeffrey Mcdonald should have been executed for the sheer brutality he exhibited in the murders of his wife and kids. Just my opinion. But he is guilty as can be, and all of the fantasies his supporters throw out there can't change the fact he's guilty, period.

[Parker]

I think Jeffrey Mcdonald should have been executed for the sheer brutality he exhibited in the murders of his wife and kids. Just my opinion. But he is guilty as can be, and all of the fantasies his supporters throw out there can't change the fact he's guilty, period.

Hi. I read about McDonald years ago, on a bus, when I was going skiing.

I thought he was innocent. But then I read Fatal Justice (I think it's called) and I don't know. Have you ever read the book?

[brianlion]

:(MacDonald is someone who actually believes his own lies. This psychosis (or whatever you want to call it), is not new to humans. People who commit crimes have lied about it since the beginning of time. The more defensive he becomes when challenged, the more evident it becomes he is promoting or believing his lies. Shakespear said it well, "Me thinks he doth protest too much." Individuals who have truly lost a loved one would be saying how much they miss their loved one, and that they don't even care what happens to themselves. Not this guy. He is more concerned with his situation. We must also remember that repetion does not guarentee reality. Just because MacDonald repeats the same silly tale year after year, it doesn't justify the facts. The greatest defense we have against lies is to be grounded to the true evidence. "Therefore, dear friends, since you already know this, be on your guard, so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position." (1st Peter 3:17, NIV:read:)

[JTF]

Parker: Fatal Justice is a complete mess. Not only is it a boring read, it's filled with half-truths, distortions of the documented record, and outright falsehoods. The following link addresses most of the dubious claims levied in Fatal Justice.

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

JTF

[JTF]

Parker: MacDonald also played a role in deciding the nature of the book's content. In essence, the authors of Fatal Justice provided a psychopath with a forum for his ridiculous fairy tales involving drug-crazed home invaders who don't steal any drugs, slaughter two little girls and a pregnant woman, and leave the focus of their home invasion very much alive.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[Parker]

Parker: MacDonald also played a role in deciding the nature of the book's content. In essence, the authors of Fatal Justice provided a psychopath with a forum for his ridiculous fairy tales involving drug-crazed home invaders who don't steal any drugs, slaughter two little girls and a pregnant woman, and leave the focus of their home invasion very much alive.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

Well know, I have to disagree with you on that. I though Joe MgInnis did a first class job.

[brianlion]

Parker: Fatal Justice is a complete mess. Not only is it a boring read, it's filled with half-truths, distortions of the documented record, and outright falsehoods. The following link addresses most of the dubious claims levied in Fatal Justice.

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

JTF
JTF:
I am in complete agreement. It's interesting to me that most of us discussing the MacDonald crime, study and see things that the initial army investigation did not, or refused to see. For this case to originally be recommended to be dropped, is criminal in itself.

[JTF]

Parker: Joe McGinniss wrote the true crime masterpiece Fatal Vision whereas Fatal Justice was written by Fred Bost and Jerry Allen Potter. Fatal Justice presents the laughable argument that Jeffrey MacDonald is a tortured innocent.

Brianlion: CID Chemist Janice Glisson told me that by the time of the Article 32 hearings, the forensic work had still not been completed. Once Bernie Segal realized this, he went full speed ahead knowing that a good portion of the Army's forensic case would never be heard by Colonel Rock. By the time of the Grand Jury hearings, the Government had all of their forensic eggs in one basket.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[emptyheart]

Hi. I read about McDonald years ago, on a bus, when I was going skiing.

I thought he was innocent. But then I read Fatal Justice (I think it's called) and I don't know. Have you ever read the book?

Hi, nice to meet you:). Yes I read the book and have seen the evidence from the murder trial. Joe Mcginnes [ I think thats the right author]believed Macdonald was innocent when he first started the book. When he got closer into the evidence and Macdonald's own words and behavior he then turned and believed he was guilty. Macdonald got angry and sued or tried to sue him. Anyone who would believe a bunch of hippies on acid could do this and not leave any evidence is living in a fairy world. I have known quite a few hippies in my life and if they are high they are lucky to be able to get off of a couch let alone commit the murders of a woman and kids while the dad slept soundly on the couch. If someone is gonna do something like this they sure as heck aren't gonna let the biggest person sleep while they do it. Not to mention the physical evidence. His supporters ramble on and on but he's full blown guilty.

[brianlion]

JTF:
I appreciate your insights and contributions. I would love to be able to ask the authors of "Fatal Justice" this: If MacDonald is innocent, how do you explain Kimberly's massive blood loss on the carpet of the master bedroom, and her brain serum on the door overhang, and her lifeless body found tucked in her bed? Obviously the band of hippies would not kill her, and carry her to bed. I haven't read "Fatal Justice" because I find their premise disgusting. Do Bost and Potter mention this scenerio in their book? And how do they explain it. Or do they proclaim MacDonald's innocence by ignoring it?

[JTF]

Brianlion: I spoke to Fred Bost on the phone in 1999 on two separate occasions. The following is information culled from our discussions and the information contained in Fatal Justice.

1) Bost believes that Kimmie entered the master bedroom after hearing her mother fighting with "intruders." He feels that one of the intruders hit Kimmie with either the club or a baseball bat as she entered the room.

2) Bost has never offered his opinion as to the mountain of evidence indicating Kimmie was transported from the master bedroom in the blue bedsheet and placed back in her bed.

3) In my opinion, Bost knows that a scenario involving drug-crazed home invaders picking up Kimmie in a sheet that was stripped from the master bed and transporting her back to her room is utterly ridiculous. Bost simply doesn't address the forensics indicating that MacDonald was the person who carried Kimmie back to her room. The MacDonald camp has never been able to escape the FACT that Kimmie's blood was found on MacDonald's pajama top.

Bost and Potter attempt to explain the proliferation of pajama fibers found in the 3 bedrooms as coming from a rip in the crotch area of MacDonald's pajama bottoms. They stay silent regarding the issue of pajama fibers being found UNDER the bedcovers of the MacDonald children. Bost and Potter know that MacDonald has insisted that he NEVER got on either bed, so their evidentiary arguments fail the common sense sniff test.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[brianlion]

Great stuff, I appreciate your follow up on my comments and questions. It is interesting to me how the MacDonald murder mirrored in a lot of ways the OJ Simpson murder. The defense in both cases tried to blame the lab, citing collection contamination etc. And blaming the investigators, saying they have it out for OJ (or MacDonald). According to both defense teams, they couldn't get the real killers, so they framed MacDonald (and Simpson). Total hog wash, of course. Defense lawyers need to come up with something better, because that line about conspiracy and finding a fall guy has been used up.

[JTF]

Brianlion: A good example of attacking the investigation as opposed to the evidence collected at the crime scene is the MacDonald camp's treatment of CID Investigator William Ivory. They've trashed him from Day One, but...

1) Ivory may have been an inexperienced investigator in regards to homicide cases, but he was not a Johnny Come Lately to law enforcement. Ivory was already well schooled in the world of narcotics distribution and worked undercover on several drug cases.

2) The MacDonald camp was/is so sloppy in their case presentations that they frequently list Ivory as being 26 at the time of the murders when, in point of fact, he was 30 years old.

3) There has never been a shred of proof presented by the MacDonald camp that Ivory did not collect evidentary items at the crime scene in a professional manner.

4) Ivory's work in the MacDonald case was impressive enough to garner a spot on Peter Kearns' CID reinvestigation team.

5) William Ivory was inducted into the CID Hall of Fame in 2007.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[brianlion]

I'm sure most of you read that the apartment where Jeffrey MacDonald killed his wife and two young daughters was demolished by a crew on March 14 of this year, to make room for new buildings. Also, the apartment at 544 Castle Drive became too much of a tourist attraction. I was actually thinking of making the 8 hour drive to North Carolina this year to view the building. The article, and several follow up stories of the crime can be viewed at wral.com/news/local/story. There is also some interesting video updates on this link.:seeya:

[brianlion]

JTF:
I'm glad you have some inside information, so to speak, where you have spoken to some of the principles in this investigation. The real thorn in the flesh for MacDonald was the fact that all four individuals in the apartment had a different blood type. I'm sure that MacDonald was cursing his bad luck over that. For MacDonald's story of outside attackers to work, we must believe that the intruders came in with rubber gloves on, covered shoes, and completely naked, to leave no finger or shoe prints, and no threads as evidence. And they had to hope they could find weapons to use in the attack in the home.
One story line that has piqued my interest this week is that the C.O.'s wife may have received a phone call around 3 am on the morning on the murders. She stated that she was very sleepy, and didn't quite recognize the male caller on the other line. There is some speculation that it may have been MacDonald calling to confess to the C.O. There was also discussion that the C.O.'s phone number was written on the club. Interesting sidebar to the story.

[JTF]

Brianlion: I agree that the blood evidence in this case sunk MacDonald. It provided a virtual forensic map at 544 Castle Drive involving the locations/movements of each resident, footprint evidence, and fabric/non-fabric impression evidence. In terms of the phone call that Joan Kane received around 3:20 a.m. on 2/17/70, common sense dictates that Jeffrey MacDonald was the "unknown male" who spoke with Mrs. Kane.

1) The Kane's phone number was written in pencil on the murder club.

2) Rumors were floating around Fort Bragg that MacDonald was having an affair with Mrs. Kane and that he broke off the relationship shortly before the murders.

3) Mrs. Kane was clearly miffed that MacDonald was "cleared" at the Article 32 hearings, telling CID agents that his lawyers must have used "legal trickery."

4) MacDonald was having an affiar with Colonel Kingston's wife, so why wouldn't he do the same with Colonel Kane's wife?

5) What are the odds that Mrs. Kane gets a phone call from a male during the same time period when a male "friend" of hers is about to call dispatch to report that his family has been murdered?

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[toddyb]

The Kanes phone number was written on the club used to murder the McDonald family?
Wow.
I've never heard that before.

[JTF]

Todd: During the Grand Jury hearings, Victor Woerheide asked MacDonald about the Kane's number being present on the club. MacDonald denied any knowledge of the number being written on the club and denied calling the Kane residence on February 17, 1970. As I've stated in the past, it simply defies common sense that an unknown male JUST HAPPENS to call the C.O. of a soldier twenty minutes prior to that soldier calling Fort Bragg dispatch to report that his family has been brutally murdered.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[toddyb]

JTF: It's been years since I read Fatal Vision. I didn't know that number was written on the murder club. Did they determine whose handwriting it was?
No way would a group of hippies have brought a club into the MacDonald house that just happened to have the Kanes phone number on it. Why did MacDonald put it there, though? He must have been going over a lot of different plans after killing his family. The suitcase indicates he was thinking of skedaddling, and the phone call (assuming it was him) might have been him either asking for help in getting away with this or an attempt to confess.

[JTF]

Todd: The phone call to Mrs. Kane was discovered during the CID reinvestigation. McGinniss never mentioned the Kane interview in Fatal Vision nor did he include MacDonald's Grand Jury testimony regarding the phone number on the club. The Kane's number was written in pencil on the club, but the writing was so faint that the author could not be determined. IMO, after MacDonald staged the crime scene, he called Mrs. Kane to let her know that his family had been murdered. Considering that he reached out to her, their relationship clearly extended beyond mere friendship.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[Linda5]

He's so guilty! I read Fatal Vision and read through a lot of websites online about him and that sad night. He did it. And he knows he did it. There's just no re-writing his first statements to the investigators.

[JTF]

The Government's response to the motion filed by the Innocence Project is now on Christina's website and not surprisingly, the Government systematically destroys the defense motion. The response covers the following...

1) The motion was not filed in a timely manner.

2) MacDonald is already well represented, so this motion does not jibe with the spirit of the Amici Curiae.

3) Considering that Barry Scheck, Harvey Silverglate, Andrew Good, and Phil Cormier have represented MacDonald in the past, this motion cannot be presented as a document fashioned by a newly interested 3rd party.

4) The documented record does not state that the unsourced pubic hair found under Colette's body or the unsourced hair fragment found on Kristen's person showed evidence of being forcibly removed.

5) Judge Fox would not have granted MacDonald his freedom if his decision was to accept the merits of the defense team's DNA motion. Why? The Government argues that the DNA test results bolster their original case against MacDonald. The example they use is the limb hair found in Colette's left hand that matched the DNA profile of Jeffrey MacDonald.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[JTF]

A mere two days after the Government filed their opposition to the Amici Curiae, the 4th Circuit Court granted the defense motion. Being a layman, I'm not quite sure how significant this decision is in the grand scheme of things, but it always irritates me whenever the MacDonald camp gets thrown a legal bone. In essence, the 4th Circuit Court has provided hope and mercy to an individual who gave neither to 3 innocent victims.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[JTF]

In 1992, oral arguments were made before the 4th Circuit Court regarding unsourced fibers found at the crime scene and charges that the prosecution deliberately witheld accompanying lab notes. MacDonald's lawyers were basically arguing for an evidentiary hearing on these matters, but the 4th Circuit Court subsequently denied the defense motion for a hearing. I'm assuming that if any or all of Judge Fox's rulings are overturned by the 4th Circuit Court, a similar situation will occur. The 4th Circuit Court would hear oral arguments on the Britt and/or DNA issues and decide whether an evidentiary hearing was in order.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[JTF]

My recent research on the 4th Circuit Court and their history with the MacDonald case leads me to the following conclusions.

1) Their decisions regarding the defense motions will come rather quickly. The 4th Circuit Court is regarded as the most "efficient" circuit, taking an average of about 7 months to resolve appellate motions.

2) If the 4th Circuit overturns any or all of Judge Fox's decisions, oral arguments for a potential evidentiary hearing would be held in Virginia.

3) All 3 of the appellate judges who heard the case in 1992 are now deceased. Considering that the current 4th Circuit bench is made up of Clinton and Bush appointees, I don't see an ideological advantage for either side during oral arguments.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[toddyb]

So is there a possibility he could actually get a new trial?

[JTF]

Toddyb: The odds are extremely slim for MacDonald to garner a new trial, but it is possible. What would have to happen is that the 4th Circuit Court would have to...

1) Overturn at least one of Judge Fox's rulings on the Britt and/or DNA issue.

2) The defense would then have to convince the 3 appellate judges during oral arguments that the evidence merits an evidentiary hearing.

3) The defense would then have to convince the 3 appellate judges during an evidentiary hearing that the evidence merits a new trial.

So, MacDonald still has several legal hurdles to jump over before he can pop the champagne.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[JTF]

In speaking with people with knowledge of the legal system, there are additional scenarios relating to the Amici Curiae motion.

1) The government most likely will respond to the merits of both the original appellate motion and the Amici Curiae by May 13th.

2) The 4th Circuit Court could rule that Judge Fox would decide on the merits of the DNA test results and/or the claims of Jimmy Britt.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[JTF]

In regards to the legal aspects of this case, the following is a list of things that could occur in the future.

1) The 4th Circuit Court could overturn at least one of Judge Fox's rulings on the Britt and/or DNA issue.

2) The defense would then have to convince the 3 appellate judges during oral arguments that the evidence merits an evidentiary hearing.

3) The defense would then have to convince the 3 appellate judges during an evidentiary hearing that the evidence merits a new trial.

4) The government may have to respond to the merits of the original appellate motion and the Amici Curiae by May 13th. Since the government is the Adverse Party in this scenario, they don't require a request from the 4th Circuit Court in order to respond to the original appellate motion and the Amici Curiae.

5) The 4th Circuit Court could order that Judge Fox would decide on the merits of the DNA test results and/or the claims of Jimmy Britt.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[kaye floyd]

will we ever know the truth of what really happened:

:(

[JTF]

Kaye: The only thing we don't know about this case is Jeffrey MacDonald's motive(s) for murdering his family. We can speculate on his motives, but until he confesses to his henious act, we'll never really know. Considering the fact that he is a psychopath and isn't sweating away on death row, it's unlikely that he will ever admit to his guilt.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[JTF]

The following is my e-mail to the Innocence Project.

I shouldn’t have been surprised at Jeffrey MacDonald’s ability to con another lawyer into believing his fanciful tales of hippie intruders and government conspiracies, but…

What exactly possessed the Innocence Project to advocate for this convicted family murderer? If the reason is the DNA evidence, well, you should all lower your heads in shame. Jeffrey MacDonald’s DNA profile matched a limb hair found clutched in Colette MacDonald’s left hand, a body hair found on the multi-colored bedspread used to transport Colette MacDonald to the master bedroom, and a body hair found on top of Kristen MacDonald’s bed. The most significant DNA test result was the hair found in Colette’s hand. The DEFENSE labeled this hair the “mystery hair” and for the past two decades has stated that the presence of a wooden splinter from the murder club found in Colette’s left hand indicated that the wielder of the club was the source of the limb hair. That is one of the few points where the defense got it right.

Does any staff member at the Innocence Project know that not one of the 28 hair exhibits matched the DNA profile of a known intruder suspect? Do any of you know that the government introduced over 1,000 evidentiary items at the 1979 trial and that was only about 60 percent of their case file? Are any of you aware of the FACT that every single piece of SOURCED trace evidence was linked to Jeffrey MacDonald? This included blood evidence, fabric and non-fabric impressions, fiber evidence, footprint evidence, and hair evidence. No matter how the Innocence Project attempts to spin it, not a single piece of trace evidence was sourced to a known intruder suspect.

This is an open and shut case. Jeffrey MacDonald’s story is ridiculous, all of the significant pieces of trace evidence points to him as a vicious murderer, and the credibility of the Innocence Project has been forever damaged by their affiliation with this convicted killer.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[brianlion]

Motive can be a conscious or unconscious act. All we can do is speculate. I believe, like many others, that MacDonald reacted to Collette's actions. He probably forcibly pulled Kimberly from the bed because she had wet his side of the bed. Collette, angered by his verbal and physical abuse, came at him, and hit him in the forehead with a hairbrush. No one was going to usurp Macdonald's authority. He smacked her back. Why it so highly escalated is anyone's guess. Since Macdonald will not come clean and man up, we have to give educated guesses. She stabbed him with a paring knife, basically. He lost it, so much so that he probably doesn't even recall all that he did. He was that enraged. That is one reason it is so easy for him to fabricate things and fill in the blanks so easily. He was wild with anger and pent up frustrations. The diet pills and long hours on the job made him unstable, and Collette's actions just fueled the fire.

[toddyb]

I think there had to be more to MacDonalds actions that night than just the external circumstances or some need to dominate. He obviously has to have a serious flaw in his personality that was brought to the surface by whatever happened between Collete, Kimberly, and himself. The majority of his actions that night were the result of blind rage. Maybe I need to believe what he did was the result of some underlying mental illness. I just don't think a mentally healthy person would do what he did even if they were tired, using strong diet pills, and got into an agrument with their spouse.

[JTF]

The government submitted their reply brief to the 4th Circuit Court on 8/21/09. As a whole, the government's brief demonstrates how goofy the original defense brief was, but...

1) The government may have been hindered by the court ordered page limits of the respective legal briefs. For example, the government went into great detail disputing the claims of Stoeckley and Gunderson in their 1984 appellate brief. That brief did not have a page limit and if memory serves, it was almost 90 pages in length.

2) The government may have decided to take the "high road" in reference to Jimmy Britt's character flaws. I noticed that they did the same with Mrs. Stoeckley. They made no mention of the fact that the information in her affidavit contradicts ALL of her prior statements to the press.

3) The government points out that in their attempts to expand the record, the defense hindered their case. The government clearly wanted to streamline their arguments to the 4th Circuit Court. By mixing and matching unrelated issues, the defense team did themselves no favors. I love the line by the government about how the MacDonald case is the "paradigm" for repetitious legal machinations.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[wind149]

JTF, my hat is off to you, you clearly did your homework and did not blindly write to the IP and give your two cents, you researched everything you could regarding this loser and I commend you for it. This man murdered his entire family IMO, because he felt trapped and wanted to be the playboy doctor and with a family he could not obtain this and Colette laid the bomb on him that she was pregnant again and he planned it, that much I am sure of. Now as we know, the Manson murders were still fresh in people's minds, and people were scared to death of hippies thinking that all of them were surely mass murderers. So he decides to concoct this story and thinks that it will be plausible to the MP's and the local police. He commits these horrible murders and it is overkill at that, multiple stab wounds in all of them and then superficially stabs himself because as a doctor he would know where to wound and not kill and then tells this tale of hippies and a woman in a floppy hat telling him that acid is groovy and death to pigs?? Almost verbatim what the Manson crew said and wrote in blood and why did not anyone pick up on this right off???

His own father in law is his biggest supporter and comforter and it isn't until he catches an episode of the Dick Cavett show where McDonald is spinning the tale of how he almost died from his wound and really plays that up and Freddie is thinking what the hell is going on?? The seeds of doubt are planted that night as far as he is concerned and JM gets out of the army and moves to sunny CA where he is playing the part of big shot surgeon and all the ladies are draped all over his boat and his fantasies have come true and here comes Freddie full bore to blow that illusion wide open, but it still takes years before he is finally arrested, charged with three counts of murder and receives a life sentence and he is exactly where he needs to be and I don't think anyone has to worry that he will ever get out of prison, time has not healed wounds and Collette's brother stays right on this in honor of his poor father who up until he died made damm sure JM would never get out of prison and I commend him for this, his tenacity when no one would listen to him and it looked like JM was going to get away with murder, he never wavered.

What is eerie too is how much his new wife looks like Collette and he has her totally fooled, hook, line and sinker and she believes with all her heart that he is innocent and has spent her life savings trying to get him a new trial to no avail however, and she of course is supporting him financially as well and you look at her and you see a 50 something woman who is classy looking CA gal and is intelligent and you have to wonder what made her so desperate to fall in love with a scumbag who slaughtered his entire family because he was not happy playing hubby and Daddy and I listened to her one night on a 48 hours show and she speaks lovingly about him and I wanted to hurl!!! She looks like she could be married to someone like Paul Newman and she chooses a POS that stood over his sleeping children and stabbed them to death. He stood over his pregnant wife and stabbed her and his baby to death and then tried to blame it on people that did not exist and she loves this scumbag why??

And on that same show, he was running his same spin and the years behind bars have taken a toll on him, he does not remotely resemble the handsome swinging doctor he was till Freddie put an end to that!! Had DNA been around back then, the outcome would have been the same and probably more so, the hair in Collette's hand that is his and not some woman's in a floppy hat and the fiber evidence you speak of is compelling enough to keep him behind bars, he is never going to be paroled and ironically the hippies who started the panic over hippies will never be paroled either and awhile back it looked like Susan Atkins might get paroled for medical reasons and there were the usual bleeding hearts on her side just because she had a leg amputated and the other is paralyzed and I read on Fox some where one stupid woman who is advocating for her, whined to the parole board for them to show MERCY AND COMPASSION and this for a woman who stood over a pregnant woman too with a knife and as Sharon Tate begs her to spare her life and her baby's this disgusting b!tch tells her that she has no mercy for her and stabs her multiple times???

No JM and those scumbags can die behind prison walls, they took lives and they should have forfeited theirs but the death penalty was abolished in 1972, but Thank God some states have it and NOW CA has it again, and their sentences were commuted to life and that is what it should be LIFE without parole. SO I think CA girl there needs to forget about ever having a life with him, thanks to folks like you, who are determined that he remain in prison and are adamant about it and not afraid to put your tenacity to pen and paper and a keyboard and I think you are a great person and you can put my name on any petition or letter anytime as I second the motion, keep that scumbag and those others locked up till they go out in a pine box.

[JTF]

Wind: Thank you for your kind words. CID investigators Franz Grebner, Robert Shaw, and William Ivory knew within a matter of hours that MacDonald's story didn't wash. They witnessed first hand the brutality inflicted upon Colette, Kristen, and Kimmie. When they found out that MacDonald was not seriously injured, Grebner's first thoughts were, "He's either lying or he's the biggest pu#$y in the world." The combined efforts of the CID, FBI, and Freddy Kassab finally brought forth some justice for the real victims in this case. The mask of a psychopath can only remain intact for so long. The DNA test results merely enhance what we already knew.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

[wind149]

What do you make of his wife?? I think she got caught up in his game, women seemed to really dig this loser, and you know some women, they think they can "save" the man, but what kind of marriage could one have, when your hubby is behind bars for life, as I do feel as you, that he will never make parole, this case was heinous even by today's standards where heinous crimes occur every day, and it involved children and parole boards are not apt to parole someone who kills children and if he does ever go up, I will be writing to the board as I have done many times and the majority of the people I supported I do not even know, but one thing I will have to do for myself should he still be alive then, is to show up to a prison to protest the parole of a scumbag who raped me and 100 plus kids and he has been in prison since 1975 and his earliest parole date is 2019 when he will be 86 years old. Since this POS is still alive, I kept hoping he would die from cancer or some other painful disease, but no, he has been sucking up tax dollars for 35 years, but I take comfort that he does not have it good behind bars and spent the majority of his life in PC, locked down 23/7 as that is what you get when you are a "snapper" VT's slang for sex offender, when he first went in, so many inmates wanted a piece of him, it wasn't funny.

Now he was a counselor/head master at a private school which was a hell hole to begin with and my parents stuck me there and he raped me the first night I was there. He is an arrogant little prick and it gave me great pleasure to watch his face when the jury was in. As kids got up to testify, he would sit there, looking bored, thinking the jury can't possibly believe all of us because of him being such "a well respected member of the community" and when the jury came back with many counts of guilty, he freaked out!! He called us names and screamed he had been "framed" and he was taken into custody, bail was revoked and you could see the fear in his face and I actually smiled at him, the same kinda of smile he used to give us kids before he raped us!! He got several 15-life sentences all to run consecutive and has not seen freedom since and over the years I would contact the prison to make sure he was still there and every time they would tell that he wasn't going anywhere!! Now this scumbag here might as well facts, even if he were to ever receive a new trial, now the DA and the experts could factor in DNA evidence and the outcome would be the same, but knowing how arrogant this prick is too, he will still continue to try to run his spin, and no one but his dumb "trophy wife" believes it and I am willing to bet that even if she were to see for herself the evidence such as the DNA evidence of hair and fibers, she still would not believe it as she is hooked on this guy and for the life of me I can't figure out why. She is not like some of those sick puppy women like the one married to Richard Ramirez who marry these maggots for the publicity and get to lord it over the other sick freaks, she appears to be intelligent and beautiful and surely can do a hell of a lot better than a man sitting in a prison for murdering his family??? And the heinous way he did it does not even scare her?? And how old is he now, late 60's??? Not exactly a catch???

[taylor69]

Of course MacDonald's guilty.... it was an over kill, experts have proven that when family members are beaten so savagely its up close and personal, and the victims knew their attacker......