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

Discussion in 'Past Trial Discussion Threads' started by hockeymom, Nov 2, 2003.

  1. hockeymom

    hockeymom New Member

    Messages:
    7,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Did anyone see LKL last night? He was in a Maryland prison with Jeff MacDonald. MacDonald is trying once again to get his conviction thrown out. When you watch him you can easily be convinced that he is innocent. He claims it was all a conspiracy and evidence that would exonerate him was hidden. He and his defense are now going with DNA evidence.Of course he claims this is being held up for some reason.It would be something if he actually was innocent.
    On the other hand, I keep thinking of Scott and how similar these 2 are,a big conspiracy,no history of violence,the drug crazed hippies vs the satanic cult worshippers,the inlaws who believed in them until they caught them in lies. It is all frightenly similar!
     
  2. Loading...


  3. tthoman

    tthoman Guest

    Yes I caught about half of that....also, I read that book written a few years ago....(can't recall the title)...
     
  4. Cypros

    Cypros New Member

    Messages:
    3,641
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I saw that show. It has been repeated several times over the past week or so. I was familiar with the story from the TV movie that came out many years ago in which he was made out to be very guilty. I must admit that in the LKL interview he was pretty convincing that he was innocent. He said that neighbors saw the hippies enter his home that night and that he would be freed on appeal if he could be granted one. Apparently, at one point, in an effort to appease the in-laws who were traumatized by the death of their daughter and granddaughters and that the killers were still free, Jeff told them that he had hunted them down and killed them. This was, of course, a lie and so when he was initially cleared and went on with his life, the in-laws learned of the lie and became suspicious of him. It was this lie -- he says -- that got him into trouble. I'd like to hear from the neighbors who saw the hippies.
     
  5. Nova

    Nova Active Member

    Messages:
    19,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Jeffrey MacDonald is absolutely, 100% guilty! I always think of him when people describe sociopaths who lie so convincingly because they have no conscience.

    But apparently it is also true that evidence was withheld at his trial and the government isn't in any hurry to run DNA tests that might appear to exonerate him.

    I, too, would like to hear what the neighbor says. There was a soldier at the time who said he saw a "hippy girl in a floppy hat" (MacDonald's description of one of the assailants) in the neighborhood - but that's a far cry from seeing a band of hippies enter MacDonald's house!

    There are some who believe MacDonald is guilty even IF there actually were some "hippies" at the house that night. No matter who was there, we are still left with babies and a housewife who were "overkilled" while a grown soldier (the trainer for the Army boxing team) was barely wounded during a "life-and-death" struggle with multiple assailants.
     
  6. Rachael

    Rachael Team Rachael

    Messages:
    1,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Give me a break. He is completely guilty. I have read this book also. There is no way hippies came into his house and killed his wife and kids and not him. Just like Darlie Router..we are supposed to believe all of these intruders came into their houses and killed innocent (I believe sleeping) children and left the parents alive.
     
  7. NaturalSelection

    NaturalSelection New Member

    Messages:
    119
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thanks for the thread. Like many of you, I couldn't help but think of Scott Peterson. Like Peterson, MacDonald's expressions of emotion are contrived and transparent. I'm generally skeptical of people who claim they can tell whether someone is lying because the studies show that we're much more confident in this area than we are correct. Only about 5% of people can do consistently better than chance. However, I think different rules apply here, and in the Peterson case as well, because these men are psychopaths (I believe this -- I might be wrong) and don't experience the full spectrum of emotions, making them emotionally retarded in a sense. In the LKL interview, MacDonald became "upset" several times, and "recovered" instantly each time. This jumped out at me, because emotions don't work that way. Like honest facial expressions (except for surprise), emotions fade in and fade out. I thought MacDonald looked ridiculous -- one instant nearly sobbing -- one second later championing his cause. I don't know much about this case, but when they talked about him telling his wife's stepfather that he and a few buddies "took care of" one of the killers, I was reminded of Peterson again. Only someone who is emotionally blunted could believe that this would get the man to move on with his life. Just like Scott saying that Laci was okay with the affair or at peace with it or whatever. DUMB. Emotions matter. Without them, we can't reason very well, because we can't assign a proper value to different behaviors or potential consequences. MacDonald shows that you can be smart in an academic sense but remarkably stupid in the sophisticated world of social interaction -- especially if you're a psychopath. I've had difficulty learning much about the case. Anyone know the State's best evidence against him? What cannot be explained away?
     
  8. azwriter

    azwriter Sister Mary Wanna

    Messages:
    4,217
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I too believe Jeff MacDonald is guilty.
    I've read the book, seen the movie, and have heard his interviews several times.
    One part of the evidence was the superficial wound he received. And lied about the extent of it afterwards.
    There was also some evidence about ice pick stab marks that went through his pajama top. There was proof the marks were in a pattern as if the top was wrapped around his hand. The top was found on his wife's body.
    What strikes me as the most damaging are his own words of the account.
    He says while he was fighting off some of the "hippies" in the living room, his wife was screaming "Jeff, Jeff, why are they doing this to me."
    His daughters, he claims were yelling "Daddy!" "Daddy!"
    Imagine this: "Jeff, Jeff why are YOU doing this to me?"
    And would his daughters call only for him? I think they would be yelling for Mommy.(He was rarely home and they were closer to mom) I think they called "Daddy!" Because he was the one hacking away at them.
    My guess, he and his wife were in an argument. She slapped at him and he took that board and hit her. Killing her. One of the daughters entered the room saw what happened, and he had to kill both daughters.
    Then being a doctor, he sliced himself, knowing where it would do the least harm, and BINGO he had a story.
     
    mrsselig likes this.
  9. philamena

    philamena Former Member

    Messages:
    7,766
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Natural Selection-
    Great post!
     
  10. rondata

    rondata CHAMPION

    Messages:
    53
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Have any of you read fatal justice?
     
  11. Rosebud

    Rosebud Inactive

    Messages:
    555
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The piece of evidence that gets to me is his p.j. top and the way the stab marks (ice pick?) line up. Also, why are his wounds so minor compared to his wife and the girls. I think he's convinced himself that he didn't do it. I think he has a lot in common with Scott. I did read Fatal Vision. The author had to retract parts of the book because he "embellished" some of it, but reading between the lines told me that Jeff boy is one sick puppy!
     
  12. rondata

    rondata CHAMPION

    Messages:
    53
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not fatal vision.. fatal justice. Another book.

    DId you know that McDonald successfully sued the author of fatal vision because of lies in it and won?

    I use to be convinced of his guilt. I am not so sure anymore.
     
  13. formyboys

    formyboys New Member

    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I too, rondata, am on the fence about MacDonald since reading Fatal Justice. The author, of Fatal Vision, if I am correct, is not convinced of his guilt. Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I remember reading (I believe) after MacDonald sued him. Feel free to correct me on this, b/c I could be wrong.

    Did y'all remember that MacDonald's wife was also pregnant when murdered?

    Also, there was another murder (I had the book on this, but need to research who, what, when) that was very similar to these murders that also happened at Fort Bragg to an officer's wife and his children while he was away at a school for the military.
     
  14. less0305

    less0305 The face is familiar, but I can't quite remember m

    Messages:
    4,250
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well, I refuse to watch LKL anymore BUT..... I have always believed and will always believe that Jeffrey MacDonald savagely slaughtered his family. But did anyone see the show on Friday night (I can NOT remember which news magazine show it was) about the murder of the woman and her two children with the last name Feeney? The husband/father was a high school teacher and he was gone to a teaching seminar 100 miles away and his wife and two children are murdered. I believe that guy was guilty too and he was found not guilty......by a jury who believed he did it, but didn't convict him. Man, he got away with murder!!! I am really hoping that isn't the case with Scott Peterson.
     
  15. CrimeWatcher

    CrimeWatcher Former Member

    Messages:
    1,638
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I am not familiar with the case, but am frustrated that evidence was withheld in the trial, and that pertinent DNA tests are not being run.

    This man may have some really bad character flaws, but unless all pertinent evidence is examined it is unfair to convict him of the crime.
     
  16. Sunnmoon

    Sunnmoon New Member

    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Each person in the MacDonald Family had a different blood type. I don't think Jeffrey counted on that. His story and the blood evidence didn't jive. It's what convicts him in my book, and I believe what convicted him in court.

    I also was at Ft. Bragg shortly after that happened and talked to some of the MP/MI personnel involved. One of these personnel and I did a test on a table that was in Jeffrey MacDonald's house that was on it's side. (This table is extremely top heavy). We pushed, rolled, kicked.....and everytime the table landed with the top side down. This table was entered into evidence pictures on it's side. The only way the table could have ended up on it's side was if someone placed it that way.

    He's guilty alright.

    The similarities between him and Scott Peterson are incredible. Both are very good looking, compulsive liars, womanizers, had pregnant wives that were the epitome of womanhood.

    Another similarity is that his daughter had wet the bed and theory has it he just lost control. I always thought he lost control just as possibly Patsy Ramsey lost control with JonBenet.


    HM??????? ya think he's not guilty? Why?:waitasec:

    The house remained just as it was for years after this, but quite some time later they burned the entire inside and contents and then refurbished. I still got the chills when I drove past the housing project at Ft. Bragg.
     
  17. tthoman

    tthoman Guest

    SUNNMOON: That is interesting....Yeah, I remember they did leave the scene alone for some long time.

    If I am not mistaken, the author of Fatal Vision stated he was hired to write about it because of the belief that MacDonald was innocent but as he investigated the case, he slowly became convinced MacDonald was guilty.
     
  18. formyboys

    formyboys New Member

    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    CrimeWatcher: I'm with you on this one. MacDonald didn't get a fair trial. I hope I don't get blasted for saying it, but if you only read and watched Fatal Vision and have not read Fatal Justice, then you would be convinced of his guilt. I read and re-read Fatal Justice, which is not light reading and that's why I had to re-read it.

    Also, tthoman, if you follow this link www.themacdonaldcase.org/macdonald_vs_mcguiness.html, you will see that the author of Fatal Vision was NOT so convinced of MacDonald's guilt, McQuiness, IMO, wrote this book just for the $$ and then after MacDonald sued him, the truth came out from even him.

    The MacDonald crime scene was never secured; pictures even prove this in the FJ book. People walked in and out of that crime scene turning things (ex. the flowerpot) back over...etc....

    Like I said, I hope I don't get blasted on this, but just check out www.themacdonaldcase.org.

    I, too, once believed he was guilty, I really cannot say that now, in fact, I should take back my former statement of "I'm on the fence," I don't believe that he killed his wife and daughters.

    As for Scott Peterson, well, that's a whole different story! In fact, I told my BF this weekend that it looked as if Scott wouldn't have actually (and excuse the expression) gotten his hands dirty in killing Laci and Conner; b/c he seemed like such a "preppy". Then I remembered the "Preppy Killer" and thought twice. I do know one thing though, here his lawyer has claimed he has evidence to exonerate Peterson and I tell you, if I was Scott and there was evidence to get me the heck out of jail, I'd have turned it over to the police by now! I know that things may be more confusing than just turning over what they have to the police...what do y'all think? I really believe Scott's guilty though.

    I've always wanted to discuss the MacDonald case, but couldn't find anyone interested until this morning. Maybe we can get our own "discussion" going on this and not on Laci's thread?!...maybe?:)
     
  19. formyboys

    formyboys New Member

    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  20. Sunnmoon

    Sunnmoon New Member

    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The MacDonald case is interesting. Would love to discuss it too.
     
  21. formyboys

    formyboys New Member

    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Sunnmoon: Are you military still? My ex-husband is military...we discussed this case a lot. Thanks for reading my post and not blasting me:)LOL! I know we don't agree, but you seem open-minded...if you find a way we can discuss the case on this forum, please let me know...I haven't been around that long and don't know how to go about doing that!

    If you wish, just email me and let me know! Thanks!
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice