Is Jeffrey McDonald Guilty?

[cami]

Jeffrey MacDonald has applied for parole. Although stating over the years he is totally innocent and would never apply for parole as he will not show remorse for something he didn't do! Harump, I wonder what's changed. Could it be the new wife!


http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/01/17/je....ap/index.html

[NY-EVE]

I'VE STUDIED THIS FOR YEARS ....AND I PRAY HE GETS OUT
WHAT AN INJUSTICE TO THIS MAN .......LET HIM LIVE ..WHAT LITTLE LIFE HE HAS LEFT ....I'M CONVINCED HE'S NOT GUILTY

TAKE IT EASY ON ME PEOPLE ...I'M NEW

[chatwuann]

If there was any evidence that Jeffrey McDonald was wrongly convicted it would have come up by now. I think he did kill his wife and 2 daughters. The slashes in his shirt and the cuts on his body didn't match up and they would have if he were wearing the shirt at the time he was supposed to have been stabbed by his attacker. I'll have to read the book. I think Jeffrey McDonald doesn't deserve to get out on parole. AAJMO

armchair detective/trucrmbuf

[chatwuann]

Originally posted by Toth
A great deal of such evidence has indeed come up by now! May I suggest Fatal Justice rather than Fatal Vision.

Thanks for the info Toth. I'll have to read Fatal Justice. LE should look into further if the possibility exists that Jeffrey McDonald may be innocent after all. It has happened before. AAJMO

armchair detective/trucrmbuf

[Icculus]

Sure, alot of people have been falsely convicted. However, Jeffrey MacDonald is NOT one of them. This brutal baby/wife killer is where he belongs. It's only too bad his state didn't support the DP. But he was given 3 consecutive life sentences to assure he never got out, and thank God for that. This parole thing is a joke. He is NEVER getting out.

And Fatal Justice is a piece of trash IMO. It's Jeffery MacDonald's ego-fantasy trip. Read Fatal Vision or Scales of Justice for a truer perspective on this horrifying case.

JMO of course.

Originally posted by NY-EVE
I'VE STUDIED THIS FOR YEARS ....AND I PRAY HE GETS OUT
WHAT AN INJUSTICE TO THIS MAN .......LET HIM LIVE ..WHAT LITTLE LIFE HE HAS LEFT ....I'M CONVINCED HE'S NOT GUILTY

TAKE IT EASY ON ME PEOPLE ...I'M NEW

______________________________________
Hello Newbie,

Keep studying...read Fatal Vision...especially the part about the blood typing. Justice has been served, and MacDonald will spend the rest of his miserable, pitiful, life in prison.

Welcome to the boards!

Designer

<<Location: Canada
Posts: 177
Fatal Vision killer applies for parole
Jeffrey MacDonald has applied for parole. Although stating over the years he is totally innocent and would never apply for parole as he will not show remorse for something he didn't do! Harump, I wonder what's changed. Could it be the new wife!>>

Why does the penal system allow such. Is it to keep the prisoners under control so they can marry and have 'inhouse sexual' visits... Why dont' they just turn them loose and let them have all the sex they want, then kill that wife..and go back to prison again ---- you know.... the revolving door policy!!!!

[Star Diva]

Were there ever conclusions about the DNA samples submitted sometime ago for analysis. I heard there were samples at the crime scene that had never been tested as well as a long blonde hair from a wig.

I read Fatal Vision years ago when it first came out - I must say it was one of those can't put it down reads. I was totally convinced thereafter that MacDonald did it.

I'm still not convinced that he didn't do it - but like Scott Peterson much was made of MacDonald's infidelities and other proclivities, which unfortunately takes the focus away from what is really at issue - did he murder his pregnant wife and two children.

I can accept that he may have killed his wife in a fit of anger and that he may even have killed his oldest daughter accidentally, but it is really hard to imagine that he then went to his youngest child's room and cold-blooded murdered her thinking she'd be a witness. I just don't know.

[Icculus]

It may be hard to believe, Star Diva, but it IS horrifyingly true.

There's never a straight answer about the DNA sampling, because there's nothing really there to exonerate him, but the MacDonald camp keeps refering to it anyway. Because really, what else can they say when questioned about his "innocence"? "Oh, I just don't think he could have done it." ? Factually, his guilt cannot be denied. Character testimonials and irrevelant, non-existent DNA cannot erase the mountain of factual evidence which covers Jeffery MacDonald in his inescapable GUILT.

Jeffery MacDonald--brutal, remoreseless, wife & baby killer/narcisistsic egomaniac

JMO, of course

[cami]

Originally posted by Star Diva
[B]Were there ever conclusions about the DNA samples submitted sometime ago for analysis. I heard there were samples at the crime scene that had never been tested as well as a long blonde hair from a wig. [B]

Actually, there were three "synthetic" hairs made of saran. All three have different chemical compositions. As well, wigs were not made of saran in 1970, but doll hair was.

So, unless three of the intruders MacDonald described were wearing wigs, then it's doll hair not wig hair. It's not even worthy of debate.

MacDonald is indeed guilty of these crimes. He will not be granted parole that's for sure.

Fatal Justice is MacDonald's case as he would wish it to be.

[cami]

Originally posted by chatwuann


Thanks for the info Toth. I'll have to read Fatal Justice. LE should look into further if the possibility exists that Jeffrey McDonald may be innocent after all. It has happened before. AAJMO

armchair detective/trucrmbuf

Fatal Justice is a piece of trash. It's MacDonald's fantasy of the case. The authors not once contacted the lead investigator, Peter Kearns, of the 1971 reinvestigation although he lived a few short miles from author Bost. There was lots of contact with convict Macdonald though.

MacDonald is a psychopath with narcissistic and histrionic personalty disorders. He'll never keep his name out of the public forum and he'll go to his grave swearing he is innocent.

[cami]

Originally posted by Star Diva
I can accept that he may have killed his wife in a fit of anger and that he may even have killed his oldest daughter accidentally, but it is really hard to imagine that he then went to his youngest child's room and cold-blooded murdered her thinking she'd be a witness. I just don't know.

I don't think he killed the baby because she was a witness. I think it was self-preservation. He had to make it look as if a band of intruders, a la Manson and the girls, committed the crime once he decided to go that way. He could have turned himself in for a domestic dispute and assault if it was only Colette but once Kimberly went down and there was no saving her, I think he decided it was all or nothing. JMO

[Icculus]

There is not only evidence of intruders but evidence as to their identity

Care to elaborate on this fictitious statement? I know of NO evidence of an intruder. The only "identities" you speak of have no knowledge to suggest they were there, only what the rest of the public knew. In fact, their "statements" do not match the crime scene. Nor does any evidence found point to ANYONE other than JEFFREY MACDONALD.

Man, does he have you snowed. Wake up and stop supporting this brutal double-murderer and his riddiculous "hippies on acid" story.

JMO, but of course

[Windy_Nights]

Can I subjest a website that has a lot of info on this subject. Its a website belonging to Christina Masewicz author of Scales of Justice: The Jeffrey MacDonald Story. She has spent years researching this case and in the beginning I believe she also thought JM was innocent it was not until later that she came to realise he was indeed guilty in her opinion. I to share her belief that he killed his family. The evidence speaks for itself. This is of course IMO.

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/

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

[cami]

Originally posted by Toth
There is not only evidence of intruders but evidence as to their identity.

What evidence Toth? Would you elaborate on that. MacDonald said exactly the same thing yesterday on the Today Show but when his lawyer was asked to elaborate, he said "we are not here to discuss evidence"

Why is MacDonald applying for parole if there is evidence of intruders. Wouldn't he be applying for a new trial based on exculpatory dna evidence?

Read all the books then all the web sites... including Jeffry Mcdonalds site... Look closely at the things the Army kept out, and at some witnesses. Then form your own opinion. I've been a member of the boards only since Nov. When I came in on the Peterson case. I don't post unless I feel strongly on a subject.. The McDonald case I have followed since it happened.. and no I don't think he did it. There are enough inconsistancies to make me feel this way, I have read and reread and I still think there is strong evidence that he didn't do it. But Peterson.. Guilty as charged... my own humble opinion that I am entitled to, just as anyone else here is entitled to theirs. Thank you for letting me speak...Cyndi

[Lobsters]

If you REALLY want to know who committed this crime, you only have to stop and take a look at the blood evidence.

The blood evidence PROVES that no one but MacDonald committed this crime.

What a shame for him too (sarcasm intended), that ironically enough, all 4 of the family members had different blood types. So it was more than easy to see who had bled where. And THAT is MurderMac's downfall. It CANNOT be explained.

It's absolutely preposterous to think that 4 hippie intruders who were supposedly high and in a murder frenzy would actually take the time to MOVE bodies around the house. WHICH DEFINATELY DID HAPPEN BY THE BLOOD EVIDENCE.

Collette was beaten and bled in Kristen's room. And then she was moved back to the master bedroom in the comforter and sheet from the master bedroom bed.

Kimberly was hit and bled in the entryway of the master bedroom. Her blood is there. So obiviously, she too, was moved.


WHY??????? Why would 4 frenzied hippies do that? It doesn't make any sense.


The person who committed this crime is where he belongs and I hope he ROTS there.

[Windy_Nights]

The person who committed this crime is where he belongs and I hope he ROTS there.

Thank you I agree

[cami]

Collette was beaten and bled in Kristen's room. And then she was moved back to the master bedroom in the comforter and sheet from the master bedroom bed.

MacDonald says he never touched that sheet yet there are bloody transfer stains from the cuff of his pajama jacket and his bare shoulder on that sheet.

You are so right, the blood does not lie. It has no stake, no horse in the race, it is what it is and it points directly to MacDonald as the killer.

Originally posted by cami


MacDonald says he never touched that sheet yet there are bloody transfer stains from the cuff of his pajama jacket and his bare shoulder on that sheet.

You are so right, the blood does not lie. It has no stake, no horse in the race, it is what it is and it points directly to MacDonald as the killer.

___________________________

Cami, Thank you for concise and well-stated posts! I have spent so much time on this case, I know it by heart and get so frustrated by people who think JM is innocent. As you said, if nothing else, the blood trail proves his guilt.

He will never be free!

[Lobsters]

Originally posted by cami


MacDonald says he never touched that sheet yet there are bloody transfer stains from the cuff of his pajama jacket and his bare shoulder on that sheet.

You are so right, the blood does not lie. It has no stake, no horse in the race, it is what it is and it points directly to MacDonald as the killer.

Yep, Exactly.

[cami]

Originally posted by Designer

___________________________

Cami, Thank you for concise and well-stated posts! I have spent so much time on this case, I know it by heart and get so frustrated by people who think JM is innocent. As you said, if nothing else, the blood trail proves his guilt.

He will never be free!

you're welcome. Are you a member of our c&j discussion? I too have studied this case for years. I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that MacDonald committed these murders so I don't get as frustrated anymore. he won't get out that's for sure. he is not willing to ever express one shred of remorse and could care less that his family was murdered. It's all about him, always.

[Grins]

=Did JM claim he slept on the couch because the youngest had wet his side of the bed?
If so, were the sheets ever tested for urine?

=If 3 men and 1 woman were attacking JM, who was attacking the rest of the family?

=JM says he was hit by the 'bat' repeatedly on the head; were there serious head wounds found? A fractured skull?

=Did he have any defensive wounds?
How does he have trouble getting out of the afghan which covered him? Mine falls off on its own.



=did he pass 2 of 3 polygraph tests?

[forensicpsy]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cami


you're welcome. Are you a member of our c&j discussion? I too have studied this case for years. I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that MacDonald committed these murders so I don't get as frustrated anymore. he won't get out that's for sure. he is not willing to ever express one shred of remorse and could care less that his family was murdered. It's all about him, always. [/QUOTE

I've always felt that JM is somehow addicted to proving that he is innocent. (which I don't believe he is.)

He seems to get a rush...or some kind of "high" when he discusses it. Frankly, the way he goes on and on and on.....it makes me nausious to listen to him whine.

[NY-EVE]

boy,,,,i'm really outnumbered here........i think he is innocent
why did the army suppress so much evidense ??
and what about the army mp who saw helena stoekly on the street corner the night of the murders ,, just standing in the rain?? and what about the candle wax that was tested and proved to NOT be from any candle in the house ??
i too can go on and on with questions .......a person who is guilty and has somthing to hide does'nt want people investigating ...he has begged for it .......ok people i'm just wanting a friendly discussion ......lets debate and not be mean.....

[lucielle]

Originally posted by NY-EVE
boy,,,,i'm really outnumbered here........i think he is innocent
why did the army suppress so much evidense ??
and what about the army mp who saw helena stoekly on the street corner the night of the murders ,, just standing in the rain?? and what about the candle wax that was tested and proved to NOT be from any candle in the house ??
i too can go on and on with questions .......a person who is guilty and has somthing to hide does'nt want people investigating ...he has begged for it .......ok people i'm just wanting a friendly discussion ......lets debate and not be mean.....

1) What evidence did the Army supress? Some of the elements of the criem scene were not handled the way they should have been. I.E. ; coffee table was set upright; too many people in the home. But that in no way takes away from the mountain of blood evidence that convicted MacDonald.

2) The officer you are speaking of never said he saw Helena Stoekley on that street corner. He said he saw a girl in a floppy hat. That is all. Even if it WERE her, there is no evidence tying her to the crime scene---nor is there evidence of any of her "accomplices" at the crime scene.



Actually, many who are guilty want to help with the investigation. Why? To figure out what the cops know, how much they may know. Also to seem like they are cooperating.....

If there were 4 crazed drugged up hippies in MacDonalds home, there would have been evidence of those people in that house. There was not. There was also no blood in the living room where MacDonald said he fought for his life. None whatsoever. There was really no evidence of a struggle in the LR, either. The room that had the most evidence of struggle was the bedroom. There was also evidence that COlette was moved from 1 room to another adn Kimberly was also moved. WHy would drug crazed hippies move their victims? To make their story fit? The bodies would have fallen where they lay. Also, why did the drugged out hippies not actually TAKE any of the drugs MacDonald had in one of the closets in the home? The closet was open, the drugs were there to see? Why would drug adicts not take the onel thing they would have come for? (That is the equivalent of saying that a bank robber would leave the bank without the money.) The whole crime scene was obvioulsy staged and iMO if all 4 of those family members did not have different blood types, ut would be harder to prove.

The you can throw in the fact that MacDoanld was not even barely knocked, while his wife & two baby daughters were literally slaughtered! I mean, c'mon. That is just common sense! Why not finish him off? Even if the rest of it made sense, why not brutally stab him multiple times? WHy not club him in the head multiple times? Why not even stab him? These are drug crazed hippies in the throws of homocidal mania, right? Why would they stop?





The correct man is in jail. He will NEVER admit it. NEVER. He is always goin to be "waiting for that piece of evidence that will exonerate him." Any day now, any day. He has said the same thing for the last 30 years and I am sure he will say the same thing while he sits in jail.

[cami]

Originally posted by Grins
=Did JM claim he slept on the couch because the youngest had wet his side of the bed?
If so, were the sheets ever tested for urine?

=If 3 men and 1 woman were attacking JM, who was attacking the rest of the family?

=JM says he was hit by the 'bat' repeatedly on the head; were there serious head wounds found? A fractured skull?

=Did he have any defensive wounds?
How does he have trouble getting out of the afghan which covered him? Mine falls off on its own.



=did he pass 2 of 3 polygraph tests?

Yes, the sheets were tested for urine and found to be from someone with Blood Type A or AB. The youngest daughter's blood type was 0. Colette was A and Kimberly the eldest child was AB. So, unless the mother, Colette wet the bed, the urine is from his eldest daughter and not the youngest as he claimed.

Good question, at least two other people would have had to be in that tiny apt and at the same time he says he was being attacked, the weapons were being used on his wife and daughter so they would have had to have two sets of weapons and since all the weapons came from the home, how likely is that.

No, he had no serious head wounds, just two bruises, one whih

No, he had no defense wounds. None on his wrists or forearms.

No, he failed two of three polys. The first two were private, one by Reid and one by Backster, and the third was given after he had been in jail for quite some time.

[cami]

Originally posted by NY-EVE
boy,,,,i'm really outnumbered here........i think he is innocent
why did the army suppress so much evidense ??
and what about the army mp who saw helena stoekly on the street corner the night of the murders ,, just standing in the rain?? and what about the candle wax that was tested and proved to NOT be from any candle in the house ??
i too can go on and on with questions .......a person who is guilty and has somthing to hide does'nt want people investigating ...he has begged for it .......ok people i'm just wanting a friendly discussion ......lets debate and not be mean.....

What evidence did the Army suppress? I'm still trying to find out what it is and I have been researching this case for years. Because they had unsourced black fibres and three synthetic strands of hair, that's hardly supressed evidence, it's unsourced and not exculpatory.

No, MP Mica did not see Helena Stockely standing on a street corner that night. He saw a woman wearing a floppy hat and a raincoat.

I love the candle wax. Colette MacDonald loved to burn candles as evidenced by the unused candles found in the apt. What do you do when candles burn down? Throw them out? The candle wax was old and some of it contained household debris. Some of it was found on the washer and appeared to match birthday party candles, pink and white. The candle wax was from three different candles and some of it matched drippings on a wine bottle. No candlewax fresh or old was found on the living room floor or the hallway stairs where Macdonald places the woman with the candle. So, unless Helena was carrying three different candles, one in a wine bottle, the candlewax was in the apt long before the murders.

When has MacDonald begged for an investigation? No one has been the appeals courts or the SC more than Macdonald. All appeals have failed, he has nothing left except to apply for parole and he's done that now. What does that say about this dna testing? Yes, he has claimed he is innocent for 35 years but the blood evidence alone says he is lying. He killed his wife and two baby daughters, no one else did.

[cami]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by forensicpsy

Originally posted by cami


you're welcome. Are you a member of our c&j discussion? I too have studied this case for years. I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that MacDonald committed these murders so I don't get as frustrated anymore. he won't get out that's for sure. he is not willing to ever express one shred of remorse and could care less that his family was murdered. It's all about him, always. [/QUOTE

I've always felt that JM is somehow addicted to proving that he is innocent. (which I don't believe he is.)

He seems to get a rush...or some kind of "high" when he discusses it. Frankly, the way he goes on and on and on.....it makes me nausious to listen to him whine.

Yeah it could be labelled Histrionic Personality Disorder. No one but Mac is responsible for where he is today. He won't learn, his big mouth does it every time.

[cami]

Originally posted by Toth
I'd like to hear more about this "candle wax".

Was it determined to be fresh or did it appear to be fresh?

Its certainly an indication of presence of another person: they brought the candle perhaps but they certainly took it away, so they had to have been there.

I sure can't see someone having a sudden impulse to kill his wife and kids and then being real subtle about some candle.

No the candle wax was not fresh and some of it contained household debris. No candle wax, fresh or otherwise, found where he says the woman holding the candle was standing. Obviously, Colette liked to burn candles as evidenced by the drippings found on the wine bottle.

Hi Cami! I have joined the c&j board and am just waiting for my membership to be approved. I was going to post on that board, but saw that you also post here. I am in agreement with you about Jeffery MacDonald. The first time I ever heard anything at all about this case was when I was 8 or 9, the TV movie came on and my Grandma watched it. I watched it with her. When I got older I started to read about it. Then when we got stationed at Ft. Bragg, I went to the library there and looked up old newspaper articles, my husband was so worried about me, thought I was a bit obessed...lol! My husband is in Special Forces, the reason for the move to Bragg was so he could go through the SF course. Anyway, sorry for rambling, for many years I thought MacDonald was innocent. Then the whole DNA thing just convinced me otherwise. I think it was more about hoping he was innocent and that his wife and children didn't see their husband and father doing those things to them. The evidence is overwhelming and once I opened my eyes, it blew me away. So I just thought I would say Hello and tell you how I feel about this case. I hope to join you all soon over on the c&j board!

ArmyWife

[cjwebb]

Originally posted by cami


Yes, the sheets were tested for urine and found to be from someone with Blood Type A or AB. The youngest daughter's blood type was 0. Colette was A and Kimberly the eldest child was AB. So, unless the mother, Colette wet the bed, the urine is from his eldest daughter and not the youngest as he claimed.

Good question, at least two other people would have had to be in that tiny apt and at the same time he says he was being attacked, the weapons were being used on his wife and daughter so they would have had to have two sets of weapons and since all the weapons came from the home, how likely is that.

No, he had no serious head wounds, just two bruises, one whih

No, he had no defense wounds. None on his wrists or forearms.

No, he failed two of three polys. The first two were private, one by Reid and one by Backster, and the third was given after he had been in jail for quite some time.

Thanks cami.

How do I get to the c&j board?
u kin pm me if ya will

Interesting that JM said in the Hospital he heard, "Jeffrey, why are they doing this to me?" and "Daddy, Daddy, Daddy."
Could he have feared someone heard, "Jeffrey, why are YOU doing this to me?"?

[cjwebb]

Excuse my
...but can A and B parents have an O child?

[lucielle]

Originally posted by cjwebb
Excuse my
...but can A and B parents have an O child?

I know they obvioulsy can since MacDonald & Colette did.......I don't think that blood type is determined by your parents, though.......hmmmmmm

[cami]

Originally posted by cjwebb
Excuse my
...but can A and B parents have an O child?

Yes, the genes in your cells control the blood group you process and the child gets a blood-group gene from the mother and one from the father. Both parents would have to have the 0 gene as well as either A or B in order to pass it on. It's rare but not impossible. I have it in my own family. I'm a B, my sister is A, my brother is AB, another brother is AB RHnegative, two of my sisters are 0. We all have the same parents.

[cami]

Originally posted by cjwebb
Thanks cami.

How do I get to the c&j board?
u kin pm me if ya will

Interesting that JM said in the Hospital he heard, "Jeffrey, why are they doing this to me?" and "Daddy, Daddy, Daddy."
Could he have feared someone heard, "Jeffrey, why are YOU doing this to me?"?

will do! Yeah, I think it's because he just couldn't block that out. There is a witness who heard a woman screaming and two children crying but that's about it for the "sound" witnesses. Makes you wonder how four of more strangers could have conducted these killings in silence and without leaving any trace evidence they were there. Pretty savvy drug addicts and according to MacDonald they had all ingested five different drugs that night. Wonder they could walk with that much narcotic and/or oppiates in them.

[cami]

Originally posted by cjwebb
Thanks cami.

How do I get to the c&j board?
u kin pm me if ya will

Interesting that JM said in the Hospital he heard, "Jeffrey, why are they doing this to me?" and "Daddy, Daddy, Daddy."
Could he have feared someone heard, "Jeffrey, why are YOU doing this to me?"?

tried to pm you but your mailbox is full.

here's the link anyway

http://p216.ezboard.com/bcrimeandjustice13552

You will need to register.

[cami]

Originally posted by ArmyWife
Hi Cami! I have joined the c&j board and am just waiting for my membership to be approved. I was going to post on that board, but saw that you also post here. I am in agreement with you about Jeffery MacDonald. The first time I ever heard anything at all about this case was when I was 8 or 9, the TV movie came on and my Grandma watched it. I watched it with her. When I got older I started to read about it. Then when we got stationed at Ft. Bragg, I went to the library there and looked up old newspaper articles, my husband was so worried about me, thought I was a bit obessed...lol! My husband is in Special Forces, the reason for the move to Bragg was so he could go through the SF course. Anyway, sorry for rambling, for many years I thought MacDonald was innocent. Then the whole DNA thing just convinced me otherwise. I think it was more about hoping he was innocent and that his wife and children didn't see their husband and father doing those things to them. The evidence is overwhelming and once I opened my eyes, it blew me away. So I just thought I would say Hello and tell you how I feel about this case. I hope to join you all soon over on the c&j board!

ArmyWife

Hey AW, how are you..... Yes, the obsession never stops. The husbands and wives of us on c&j think we are nuts, we've even had them involved in our pajama top experiments, LOL.

I don't any of us, certainly not me, wants to believe he did it and that his children suffered in that way, but we know it happens, it happens all the time. It's shocking and it's sad but it happens.

I think you will like the posters on c&j, they are a very knowledgable group and now that Christina's site is up and running, the transcripts and court documents are there for easy access, the lab reports are all there for those who want to research. I am still making my way through the Article 32 testimonies. What a treasure.

Army doctor who killed wife and daughters delays parole hearing

http://courttv.com/news/2005/0210/armydoctor_ap.html

[lucielle]

Originally posted by ArmyWife
Army doctor who killed wife and daughters delays parole hearing

http://courttv.com/news/2005/0210/armydoctor_ap.html

"It didn't seem like it was going to be doable by the date we were scheduled for, so he decided to just wait," she said from her home in Laurel, a Washington suburb.

The man has had 25 years to prepare for his parole hearing and has been saying for years how he has the piece of evidence that will exonerate him---yet NOW he says he needs more time!

Please.