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

New Posts

Ran across this tonight. Can't believe there will be yet another show about this.

'A Wilderness of Error' Trailer Revisits the Jeffrey MacDonald Triple-Murder Case 40 Years Later (Video)

FX has set a premiere date for the docuseries "A Wilderness of Error," based on the book of the same name by Errol Morris.

The series from producers Marc Smerling and Jason Blum, producers of HBO's "The Jinx" dives into the story of Army surgeon Jeffrey MacDonald, who was sent to prison for killing his family amid a storm of swirling narratives. Per FX, the series "challenges our very ability to find the truth all the while overshadowing a chilling possibility: MacDonald may be an innocent man."
 
McDonald has lived his entire life believing his own lies. He has a convincing story, that is compelling because he is a manipulative psychopath who is seductive and charismatic with his tale of woe.

Not buying the ticket for this ride.
 
Steft50 said:
Ran across this tonight. Can't believe there will be yet another show about this.

'A Wilderness of Error' Trailer Revisits the Jeffrey MacDonald Triple-Murder Case 40 Years Later (Video)

FX has set a premiere date for the docuseries "A Wilderness of Error," based on the book of the same name by Errol Morris.

The series from producers Marc Smerling and Jason Blum, producers of HBO's "The Jinx" dives into the story of Army surgeon Jeffrey MacDonald, who was sent to prison for killing his family amid a storm of swirling narratives. Per FX, the series "challenges our very ability to find the truth all the while overshadowing a chilling possibility: MacDonald may be an innocent man."
Click to expand...

from the link:

Prior to the series premiere, Smerling will also launch a companion podcast, "Morally (In)Defensible," with Sony Music Entertainment. The podcast follows the story of journalist Joe McGinniss in the writing of his smash best seller "Fatal Vision," also about the MacDonald murders.
 
the defence put forward the fact there was candle wax in the home that could not be traced to any candles in the home,

yet the investigators let the trash be taken and didn't search it , the said remains of candles could therefore have been disposed of then or weeks previously, the candle wax doesnt prove intruders were there.
 
Blanche said:
the defence put forward the fact there was candle wax in the home that could not be traced to any candles in the home,

yet the investigators let the trash be taken and didn't search it , the said remains of candles could therefore have been disposed of then or weeks previously, the candle wax doesnt prove intruders were there.
Click to expand...

Yes, and someone also threw away MacDonald's PJ bottoms. Collette did use candles though and there were some unidentified prints that could not be traced to anybody. All this says is that Collette wasn't the neatest housekeeper and that there was botched handling of evidence during the investigation. But DNA testing was done for Stockley, and Mitchell at the crime scene for follow up and there was no match. The unidentified prints could have come from guests who visited the MacDonald's home.

Satch
 
In my opinion this man should be allowed to some new DNA tests.
I mean we have new technologies now.
He could be innocent who knows? In 1970 nobody was able to testing DNA
 
Waller said:
In my opinion this man should be allowed to some new DNA tests.
I mean we have new technologies now.
He could be innocent who knows? In 1970 nobody was able to testing DNA
Click to expand...

Hi Waller,

I also used to think that McDonald was innocent. Actually followed this case for about forty years and write papers from both prosecution and defense viewpoints! The biggest problems with his innocence are:

1.) There is too much inconsistency with McDonald's statements and what was found at the crime scene.

2.) MacDonald's stuttering and stammering during all of those early interviews show that he is hiding something. "This guy throws a hell of a punch" when describing the alleged attack on him. I mean, who says something like that?

3.) He goes on Dick Cavett and only talks about the botched investigation, does not once even mention the "intruders" until Cavett prompts him.

4.) The jury said that McDonald's own demeanor on the stand and strong arrogance hurt him, terribly.

5.) That living room is too neat to make his story believable.

6.) Where did Helena and her friends get these candles and when did they light them if you believe his intruder story? It was raining outside at the time, and the candle wick would have been wet, making the candle impossible to light
.
7.) If a flashlight was used, and intruders were there, how did they know the dark house so well, and knowing exactly that MacDonald would be on the couch, and the kids in their beds upon entering?

8.) On drugs or not, who is stupid enough to enter the home of a medically trained Green Barret, his pregnant wife, and three little girls thinking that they are going to win a fight against him?

9.) Why were none of these intruders not even injured in the slightest during the alleged struggle? Prosecutor Jim Blackburn said that "If MacDonald's story were true, one of those people (at least) would be dead from him fighting with them during the struggle." I say, maybe not dead, but at least very badly injured.

10.) How are all these people able to fight in such a small space in that living room? There was only about 4-6 feet between the couch and the coffee table where all of this took place.

11.) Look at the magazines, newspapers, neatly stacked underneath the overturned table. If there was a fight in the living room, the living room would look like the slaughter house that was found in the bedrooms, where the evidence shows all the fighting and horror took place.

Satch
 
Satch said:
Hi Waller,

I also used to think that McDonald was innocent. Actually followed this case for about forty years and write papers from both prosecution and defense viewpoints! The biggest problems with his innocence are:

1.) There is too much inconsistency with McDonald's statements and what was found at the crime scene.

2.) MacDonald's stuttering and stammering during all of those early interviews show that he is hiding something. "This guy throws a hell of a punch" when describing the alleged attack on him. I mean, who says something like that?

3.) He goes on Dick Cavett and only talks about the botched investigation, does not once even mention the "intruders" until Cavett prompts him.

4.) The jury said that McDonald's own demeanor on the stand and strong arrogance hurt him, terribly.

5.) That living room is too neat to make his story believable.

6.) Where did Helena and her friends get these candles and when did they light them if you believe his intruder story? It was raining outside at the time, and the candle wick would have been wet, making the candle impossible to light
.
7.) If a flashlight was used, and intruders were there, how did they know the dark house so well, and knowing exactly that MacDonald would be on the couch, and the kids in their beds upon entering?

8.) On drugs or not, who is stupid enough to enter the home of a medically trained Green Barret, his pregnant wife, and three little girls thinking that they are going to win a fight against him?

9.) Why were none of these intruders not even injured in the slightest during the alleged struggle? Prosecutor Jim Blackburn said that "If MacDonald's story were true, one of those people (at least) would be dead from him fighting with them during the struggle." I say, maybe not dead, but at least very badly injured.

10.) How are all these people able to fight in such a small space in that living room? There was only about 4-6 feet between the couch and the coffee table where all of this took place.

11.) Look at the magazines, newspapers, neatly stacked underneath the overturned table. If there was a fight in the living room, the living room would look like the slaughter house that was found in the bedrooms, where the evidence shows all the fighting and horror took place.

Satch
Click to expand...
This is a great summary of the damning evidence against him. Another I would add is the discrepancy in brutal violence directed at the murder victims and the injuried he received. In my experience as a true crime buff, when everyone else is the victim of a tremendous level of violence and the one person who magically got away isn't, that doesn't add up.

If he were fighting back against multiple intruders like he claimed he was, he would have been roughed up way more. I've posted this comparison before on here, but I always think about the Manson case in which the murderers specifically said that Frykowski fought them hard, and the violence he sustained bears that out because it took a lot of effort to subdue him. The only people Macdonald "fought" that night were his own wife and children as he murdered them.
 
Satch said:
Hi Waller,

I also used to think that McDonald was innocent. Actually followed this case for about forty years and write papers from both prosecution and defense viewpoints! The biggest problems with his innocence are:

1.) There is too much inconsistency with McDonald's statements and what was found at the crime scene.

2.) MacDonald's stuttering and stammering during all of those early interviews show that he is hiding something. "This guy throws a hell of a punch" when describing the alleged attack on him. I mean, who says something like that?

3.) He goes on Dick Cavett and only talks about the botched investigation, does not once even mention the "intruders" until Cavett prompts him.

4.) The jury said that McDonald's own demeanor on the stand and strong arrogance hurt him, terribly.

5.) That living room is too neat to make his story believable.

6.) Where did Helena and her friends get these candles and when did they light them if you believe his intruder story? It was raining outside at the time, and the candle wick would have been wet, making the candle impossible to light
.
7.) If a flashlight was used, and intruders were there, how did they know the dark house so well, and knowing exactly that MacDonald would be on the couch, and the kids in their beds upon entering?

8.) On drugs or not, who is stupid enough to enter the home of a medically trained Green Barret, his pregnant wife, and three little girls thinking that they are going to win a fight against him?

9.) Why were none of these intruders not even injured in the slightest during the alleged struggle? Prosecutor Jim Blackburn said that "If MacDonald's story were true, one of those people (at least) would be dead from him fighting with them during the struggle." I say, maybe not dead, but at least very badly injured.

10.) How are all these people able to fight in such a small space in that living room? There was only about 4-6 feet between the couch and the coffee table where all of this took place.

11.) Look at the magazines, newspapers, neatly stacked underneath the overturned table. If there was a fight in the living room, the living room would look like the slaughter house that was found in the bedrooms, where the evidence shows all the fighting and horror took place.

Satch
Click to expand...

Correction: #8 should read,"two little girls," not three.

Satch
 
the main evidence being the blood evidence, it clearly shows he was lying, plus the fibres from the pyjama top under Colette's body , blood of Kimberly on the pj top when he says he took off the top and put on Colette before going into his daughter's bedroom, he said Kristen wet the bed, it was Kimberly's urine in the bed, ice pic holes in the pj top match the wounds on Colette, all the weapons used come from the house.
 
Satch said:
Hi Waller,

I also used to think that McDonald was innocent. Actually followed this case for about forty years and write papers from both prosecution and defense viewpoints! The biggest problems with his innocence are:

1.) There is too much inconsistency with McDonald's statements and what was found at the crime scene.

2.) MacDonald's stuttering and stammering during all of those early interviews show that he is hiding something. "This guy throws a hell of a punch" when describing the alleged attack on him. I mean, who says something like that?

3.) He goes on Dick Cavett and only talks about the botched investigation, does not once even mention the "intruders" until Cavett prompts him.

4.) The jury said that McDonald's own demeanor on the stand and strong arrogance hurt him, terribly.

5.) That living room is too neat to make his story believable.

6.) Where did Helena and her friends get these candles and when did they light them if you believe his intruder story? It was raining outside at the time, and the candle wick would have been wet, making the candle impossible to light
.
7.) If a flashlight was used, and intruders were there, how did they know the dark house so well, and knowing exactly that MacDonald would be on the couch, and the kids in their beds upon entering?

8.) On drugs or not, who is stupid enough to enter the home of a medically trained Green Barret, his pregnant wife, and three little girls thinking that they are going to win a fight against him?

9.) Why were none of these intruders not even injured in the slightest during the alleged struggle? Prosecutor Jim Blackburn said that "If MacDonald's story were true, one of those people (at least) would be dead from him fighting with them during the struggle." I say, maybe not dead, but at least very badly injured.

10.) How are all these people able to fight in such a small space in that living room? There was only about 4-6 feet between the couch and the coffee table where all of this took place.

11.) Look at the magazines, newspapers, neatly stacked underneath the overturned table. If there was a fight in the living room, the living room would look like the slaughter house that was found in the bedrooms, where the evidence shows all the fighting and horror took place.

Satch
Click to expand...

The greeting cards on the top of the china cabinet in the living/dining room still standing as they had been put there, when MacD was fighting for his life & the lives of his family?

MacD's pajama top?

AND the blood evidence -- no "strange" blood was found despite MacD saying he was in a fight for his life? No bloody lip or forehead or knuckle wound, etc., from the "guy threw the hell of a punch" ??
MacD, the tuff Green Beret training for the boxing team (choke) didn't defend himself?

And, and the four different blood types of the MacD's -- that made it very easy for the investigators to track each MacDonald family member WRT where they were. His bloody footprint. His pj shoulder imprinted in blood on the sheet he used to carry Collette back to the master bedroom. So easy.
Nope, not buying any of it.
 
Satch said:
Yes, and someone also threw away MacDonald's PJ bottoms. Collette did use candles though and there were some unidentified prints that could not be traced to anybody. All this says is that Collette wasn't the neatest housekeeper and that there was botched handling of evidence during the investigation. But DNA testing was done for Stockley, and Mitchell at the crime scene for follow up and there was no match. The unidentified prints could have come from guests who visited the MacDonald's home.

Satch
Click to expand...

Collette had 2 kids, she was pregnant, and also attending a few college classes. I bet that house hadn't been "fussy" cleaned in months. It was probably "pick up clutter, vacuum, call it good".

Even if the entire house had been meticulously gone over for evidence, and finger printed, there probably would have been tons of stuff found in the house from other folks.

The testimony regarding the youngest child, it seemed that McDonald had emotional reaction the most to her death. The other two, were killed in an accidental fit of rage. The toddler, was killed in order to "make" the story. Kristen?

Even if we discount everything in the book, "Fatal Vision". The fact that a trained Green Beret couldn't even wound one of the attackers, either McDonald is the worst Green Beret ever, or he is a liar. Either way, the amount of drugs he was taking to be the "perfect doctor, Green Beret, Father", I believe that he hadn't had enough sleep, was tricked out on speed, and over reacted. After that, he needed a story.
 
mickey2942 said:
Collette had 2 kids, she was pregnant, and also attending a few college classes. I bet that house hadn't been "fussy" cleaned in months. It was probably "pick up clutter, vacuum, call it good".

Even if the entire house had been meticulously gone over for evidence, and finger printed, there probably would have been tons of stuff found in the house from other folks.

The testimony regarding the youngest child, it seemed that McDonald had emotional reaction the most to her death. The other two, were killed in an accidental fit of rage. The toddler, was killed in order to "make" the story. Kristen?

Even if we discount everything in the book, "Fatal Vision". The fact that a trained Green Beret couldn't even wound one of the attackers, either McDonald is the worst Green Beret ever, or he is a liar. Either way, the amount of drugs he was taking to be the "perfect doctor, Green Beret, Father", I believe that he hadn't had enough sleep, was tricked out on speed, and over reacted. After that, he needed a story.
Click to expand...

The conflict that escalated into a fight and than killing was caused most likely by MacDonald demanding that Collette change the sheets after Kim went the bed. She refused and one thing escalated into another. I think Collette throwing the hairbrush and hitting Jeff with it set of the extreme anger.The killing of Kim was accidental. MacDonald's intent was to hurt Collette with the club, and poor Kim walked in at the wrong time and was struck with the club instead of Collette.

MacDonald felt that there was no going back after Kim was accidentally struct with the club. In MacDonald's mind Collette would take severe action against MacDonald, so he had to kill her. Kim would be a vegetable for the rest of her life. Her Brain Serum was found in the bedroom, can't remember exactly where. So MacDonald had to kill her. Collette fought for her life to protect Kim and herself from MacDonald's attack on them.

He felt the most remorse toward Kristin because he felt that she would be old enough to remember the attack and testify against him. MacDonald might have thought about making up a story of a robbery gone bad. But because he knew of the hippie culture in parts of the neighborhood and with the Esquire magazine in the living room to reinforce the Charles Manson killings, he thought that by trying to copy that crime scene that it would sound better and make him look like a victim and not a perpetrator.

Satch
 
That's why MacD was charged with and found guilty of two counts of 2nd degree murder (Colette, from a fit of anger and then fighting with her; and Kimberly because she walked into their bedroom, and was in the way when he swung the club at Colette), and 1 count of 1st degree for the murder of Kristen, because he did kill her with malice aforethought, premeditation, and in cold blood.
 
Guys,

If any of you have not seen the BBC documentary on the Jeffrey MacDonald case, "False Witness" you can watch it here on You Tube:


It presents both sides of the case, but in the end it does not take away from the forensic evidence that proves MacDonald's guilt. Maybe if he would have messed up that living room more? Who knows. Some good background though and very well researched. To this day though, I have always had thoughts about Jimmy Friar and that phone call, and I had forgotten that a witness said that some hippie-like people had approach Collette the night of her college class. BUT there's just not enough there to make MacDonald innocent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 203 more.
Total: 3,047 (members: 204, guests: 2,843)

Online statistics

Members online
204
Guests online
2,843
Total visitors
3,047
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,139
Messages
17,964,027
Members
228,700
Latest member
amberdw2021
Back
Top