FATAL VISION: Jeffrey MacDonald gets new trial based on DNA!

glazier wrote:Gia- I watched the FatalVision T.V. movie from the 80s on You-Tube last month (I think it was in 17 parts)
First time I saw that in 20+ years. You should check and see if it's still on there.

Freckles- I'm glad you found Christina's site inspite of my stupid misspelling!
It is truly a great site...1 of my favorites is the Transcript of JM's April 6, 1970 interview by CID (Grebner-Ivory-Shaw)
He litterally strutted in there to complain about getting his furniture or some such out of 544...
and they had different ideas!

Try as he might, he has NEVER been able to shake loose of that 'story' he spun that spring day.

glazier - the movie is available in 18 parts on you tube, I posted the link upthread. It's been a long time since I saw the movie, I plan to watch it again, I do remember the movie was excellent and explained a lot about the crime, it certainly portrayed JM as a real ass.

LOL, I have been checking to see if there had been a ruling on a new trial for JM everyday, but I read it might be 2013. Is that correct? I am anxious to hear the decision, I didn't think about the Judge having the extended time to arrive at their decision, JM can continue to sit in jail. I guess I was thinking of Motions in on going trials, etc., in which decisions are made rather quickly.

The you tube link for movie:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyTfkTub67I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9-D4nGekVI&feature=related

Gia wrote:

Freckles wrote:
Wha-a-at? You got to be kidding me! What DOCTOR lets a child sleep for hours in her own urine?? This can cause urine burns on the skin. Absolutely not believable!

Freckles, this is the interesting part, which I only read this afternoon when I was going through his testimony for the Grand Jury. MacDonald claimed all along that it was the youngest, the 2 going on 3 yo, Kristen, who had wet the bed and who he carried back to her own bed. However, the findings from the urine analysis revealed that it was the older daughter, Kimberley, who had actually wet the bed.

Thanks for your assist in finding Christina's site.

I did look at the evidence pics. It is apparent Kimberly was struck by an object alongside the face/ear. Who the hell plans on "buying" his children a pony one week and then commits such atrocities against the little ones the next week? And what man would not bother to check the viability of the fetus his wife was carrying? So the "buy the kids a pony" was only a distraction to point to "what a loving daddy" he was. I call BS.

In the evidence, I found the weapon and it was NOT a baseball ball. It was left at the crime scene and identified as being a slat from one of the girl's beds. And, of interest, it actually had the family's home phone number written upon the slat. Which makes me wonder: Had they moved and this item was part of what was moved from one home to the next?

I did learn by reading the docs: A prisoner should ideally be incarcerated within 500 miles of his home (release location?). So, apparently, his mother put his name on property in Long Beach, CA. Later, when he wanted to move, they property was sold and invested in other property in Maryland. Correct me if I misunderstood this??? I was trying to piece it together from docs at Christina's site.

So I DO believe he did this. The following reasons:
1. The tucking in of the beaten/dead children;
2. Lack of defensive wounds on JM; yet, sleeping children DID have defensive wounds;
3. Failure to ask of his unborn child;
4. His focus on the surgical gloves;
5. His blood drops in areas he did not report he was in;
6. The weapon used was acquired from the home and not brought to the home by any "drug-crazed" persons;
7. The report of the perps being 3 men--- one an African American, one in military garb--- and a potential female in a "floppy hat" who had natural blonde hair, not "peroxided" tells me he was busy trying to set up a story scenario. Who notes such when they are being awakened from his own drug induced sleep to a violent attack?
8. The rugs are "scuffed up" in the wrong direction.
9. The couch area would not be conclusive for sleep.

This creep should have been executed a long time ago.
Why are we paying to maintain him?
Send the bill to his family and see how long they wish to sustain his good health!

glazier wrote:Gia- I watched the FatalVision T.V. movie from the 80s on You-Tube last month (I think it was in 17 parts)
First time I saw that in 20+ years. You should check and see if it's still on there.

Freckles- I'm glad you found Christina's site inspite of my stupid misspelling!
It is truly a great site...1 of my favorites is the Transcript of JM's April 6, 1970 interview by CID (Grebner-Ivory-Shaw)
He litterally strutted in there to complain about getting his furniture or some such out of 544...
and they had different ideas!

Try as he might, he has NEVER been able to shake loose of that 'story' he spun that spring day.

The housing unit has been burnt and hauled to the dump.

Help me to figure this out:
JM was brought up on court martial charges.
Was he then tried on the base with military law and military attys;
tried with military law and public atty (Segal ?);
tried in public court?

Freckles wrote:

glazier wrote:Gia- I watched the FatalVision T.V. movie from the 80s on You-Tube last month (I think it was in 17 parts)
First time I saw that in 20+ years. You should check and see if it's still on there.

Freckles- I'm glad you found Christina's site inspite of my stupid misspelling!
It is truly a great site...1 of my favorites is the Transcript of JM's April 6, 1970 interview by CID (Grebner-Ivory-Shaw)
He litterally strutted in there to complain about getting his furniture or some such out of 544...
and they had different ideas!

Try as he might, he has NEVER been able to shake loose of that 'story' he spun that spring day.

The housing unit has been burnt and hauled to the dump.

Help me to figure this out:
JM was brought up on court martial charges.
Was he then tried on the base with military law and military attys;
tried with military law and public atty (Segal ?);
tried in public court?

Freckles, the way I understand it is that the court martial (the Article 32 hearing) was not a trial but merely an investigation into the events. Based on the findings of the investigation it was decided by one individual not to pursue charges against MacDonald. Due to it being merely an investigation and not a trial meant that MacDonald could later be charged as it didn't count as double jeapardy.

Thereafter, the army again instituted an investigation and the findings again pointed to MacDonald being guilty, but nothing was done until Freddy Kassab (Colette's step father) started pushing for action. Eventually the findings from the previous investigations were looked at more closely by Mr Woerheide (a prosecutor I think) who took his findings to the Grand Jury, who in turn indicted (sp?) him. Thereafter a trial was held and he was found guilty. As he had already left the army, the latter investigation and trial was done and carried out as part of the normal justice system.

Of course I'm providing just a summarised sketch of what happened. It's also important to note that with every single investigation (even the first one) that the findings pointed to MacDonald being guilty. Looking closely at the evidence and the facts of this case, it would be very difficult to even try to believe that he could be innocent.

As for Helena Stoekley (sp?) - I think it was nothing more than a stroke of good luck on his part that there was a misguided, drugged out lost soul out there who fit the description of the hippie drug queen he provided. Even if one wanted to believe she played a role, it would be hard to try and select from one of the many different versions she provided ... plus a few of her versions included being there and seeing MacDonald as being the person who killed his family. Plus, most of the names of individuals she mentioned along the way, were cleared by polygraph tests and none of her or their DNA was ever found at the crime scene even though DNA testing was still being done for this case after he was convicted.

Freckles- As Gia pointed out, it was an Article 32 Hearing which I guess is the Military version of a Grand Jury.
JM was helped immensely by one Col Rock who basically felt a Green Beret Doctor could not possibly commit this horrible crime and then along comes Helena Stoekly and AHA!
Evil drug crazed hippies! (perfect timing for the Defense)

In fairness, there WERE 'problems' with the initial crime scene investigation...young inexpirienced M.P.s on the scene...the edict of "preserve life supercedes investigation" and such.
1 young M.P. actually stole JM's wallet that was siting on a table...they picked up the flower pot BEFORE pics were taken,etc.
MacDonald's Lawyer Segal made the most of these errors and,imo, a Triple Murderer spent the 1970s in freedom.

(big mistake to do Dick Cavett though--that awoke the sleeping Lion Freddy Kassab)

Art Tart- As far as this current decision will take, people 'in the know' have said the last appeal decision took over a Year for the Judge to make, so...I think that's where the 2013 comes from.
Interesting though, that last appeal which led to DNA testing of unsourced hairs?

NONE matched so-called intruder suspects and SEVERAL
(including 1 found clutched in Collette's hand and 2 found in the bedding Matched JM)

Now they want to test yet MORE unsourced hairs?(at Taxpayer expense)
Why didn't they test those last time?
Everyone of us has 'unsourced' hairs in our houses!
ENOUGH ALREADY!
IIRC, this case has been appealed more than any other in U.S. History.

I ran across this opinion piece by Joe McInnis from October 2012 on Jeffery McDonald's case.

Court cases that last longer than some lives:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/07/opinion/sunday/court-cases-that-drag-on-forever.html?_r=0

Jeffrey MacDonald appeal rejected by federal judge
Posted: Thursday, May 28, 2015 7:02 pm | Updated: 1:38 pm, Fri May 29, 2015.

A federal judge has rejected a request to change a 2014 judgment in an appeal by convicted murderer Jeffrey MacDonald.

Senior U.S. District Court Judge James C. Fox issued an order on May 18 denying MacDonald's motion to alter or amend the judge's 2014 judgment, which found that lawyers failed to establish that MacDonald shouldn't have been found guilty of the murders of his family.

At the time, Fox said in his 169-page order that MacDonald's lawyers failed to establish the merits of new evidence presented at a seven-day hearing in September 2012.

Read more:  http://www.fayobserver.com/military/jeffrey-macdonald-appeal-rejected-by-federal-judge/article_3e69e52d-a256-5361-867e-98bf084b202e.html