Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald and the MacDonald Case

[RavenDarkendale]

This case pf Doctor Jeffery MacDonald is eeriely similar to Doctor Sam Sheppard and of special interest to me. It has always interested me because I was born at Womack Army Hospital, Fort Bragg, NC (scene of the drama) in 1960. Doctor Jeffery MacDonald was assigned as group surgeon at Fort Bragg, North Carolina in 1969. The murders of his pregnant wife and two small daughters were in 1970. My mother split with my dad during his second tour of duty in Vietnam and returned to SW VA in mid 1965. My dad and uncle Huck knew MacDonald personally. He was convicted in 1979.

However; the Army had dismissed the charges against him. The justice department took over and somehow managed to get a conviction. Unfortunately, he remains in the federal prison in Cumberland, MD. Like Doctor San Sheppard, Jeffery MacDonald had a story that made no logical sense but from which he has never varied. The funny thing is people have been found that fit his description of the assailants, and some have confessed.

Truth seems to be on MacDonald's side, and people wonder why he is still behind bars. We have to take clues where we can get them and invariably they are slanted either for or against MacDonald, so I believe he alone knows if he killed his family or not. The fight goes on to clear his name and free him, but 1970 was 43 years ago.

In checking out this case, ignore the book Fatal Vision by Joe McGinniss. As a result of that dubious book, McGinniss settled out of court with MacDonald for $325,000 on November 23, 1987. He would hardly have paid this sum to a convicted man if he had all of his ducks in a row, would he?

One always wonders. Nobody expects it to happen in their neck of the woods, but hey, anyone's neck of the woods is foreign to somebody...

[RivkahChaya]

Without responding to the truth or falsity of the case overall, just to the question of whether of not McGinniss would have settled if MacDonald were guilty, I have to say this: the decision to settle was not McGinniss's. It was the decision of the insurance company for McGinniss's publisher. After one civil trial ended in a hung jury, the insurance company did not want to pay for another one, win or lose, and settled, as a better economic choice.

The specific issue of libel wasn't simply whether or not MacDonald had committed the murders. By the time the civil trial went before a jury, MacDonald had been convicted, and truth is a defense against libel in the US. MacDonald's issue was that McGinnis had lied to him, pretending to believe his story, and saying he was going to write an entirely different book. In addition, McGinniss, spun a wild theory that MacDonald was taking diet pills, and had a psychotic break when he killed his family. This wasn't part of the prosecution's case, and McGinniss admitted on the stand that he made it up.

Nevertheless, motive was not part of the prosecution's case, except in the case of the child who was killed last, and the motive was supposed to be eliminating a witness. That was the only first degree murder charge. The other two were second degree charges. Each of the four family members had a different blood type, so a fairly accurate reconstruction of the course of events was possible.

I don't think the fact that MacDonald got a settlement in the libel case has any bearing on his guilt or innocence.

[RavenDarkendale]

@RivkahChaya

I never said it had anything to do with McDonald's guilt or innocence. What I said was McGinniss' book is not the place to look for answers.

As a result of that dubious book, McGinniss settled out of court with MacDonald for $325,000 on November 23, 1987. He would hardly have paid this sum to a convicted man if he had all of his ducks in a row, would he?

He settled with MacDonald because he HAD made things up. He didn't have the facts straight (all his ducks in a row). MacDonald could be guilty as hell. Proof of his involvement isn't going to be found in a book where the author admits he was making things up. therefor I said ignore the book. If McGinniss made part of the books facts up, it throws the whole book into question.

God bless

Darkendale

[RivkahChaya]

OK. It seemed like you were implying more. But at any rate, the bit about the decision having been made by the insurance company, and not by McGinniss himself is still worth pointing out. Business in the right still make payouts because it's cheaper than a protracted court battle.

FWIW, I think MacDonald is guilty. I think the crime scene evidence suggests that he is anyway, and on top of that, it doesn't match his ridiculous story of a Manson-type gang of hippies killing them.

At the time, no one knew what the motive for the Tate-LaBianca murders was, and people just thought the gang was high on drugs, and the crime was essentially motiveless. It turned out later that Manson thought Terry Melcher still lived there. Melcher had once expressed an interest in Manson's music, and also in filming a documentary at the Spahn ranch, but had scrapped the project after he realized what a violent temper Manson had. Manson sent the gang to kill the people at the Cielo Drive house, because he wanted to kill Melcher. Later, Tex Watson said that Manson did, in fact, know Melcher had moved, but he was trying to terrorize him.

It makes the idea of a bunch of hippies going into MacDonald's house, and killing everyone while chanting "acid is groovy, kill the pigs," seem really silly.

[RavenDarkendale]

OK. It seemed like you were implying more. But at any rate, the bit about the decision having been made by the insurance company, and not by McGinniss himself is still worth pointing out. Business in the right still make payouts because it's cheaper than a protracted court battle.

True, true. The point is McGinniss admitted to making things up, which causes the whole book to be of dubious value. There are other ways to get the information about the case which are far more likely to present the facts than McGinniss' book. http://themacdonaldcase.org/ It presents the facts of the case, but admittedly it is slanted towards MacDonald being not guilty. But it has news articles and other public domain tidbits about the trial.

You can also get the facts in the case here: http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/n...cdonald/1.html

There is a book called Fatal Justice that deals with the inconsistencies and utter betrayal in the McGinniss book.

Is MacDonald guilty? His conviction wasn't a railroading, that is for sure. Evidence pointed to him at least being involved, if not the killer he knew who was. It is just interesting to note that people fitting his description were in the area at the time. However, he could have seen them and figured they would make good people to accuse, as the Manson murders were big news at the time, as you pointed out.

I couldn't in good conscience call him innocent, the conviction has stood in spite of years of trying to get it overturned. But he could be. Probability isn't in his favor, however, and he will likely die in prison with his name never being cleared. Just like Doctor Sam Sheppard MacDonald will never detach his name from the murders of his family.

God Bless

Darkendale

[RivkahChaya]

McGinniss told MacDonald he wanted to tell "his (MacDonald's)" story as a way of getting extensive exclusive interviews, and then ended up writing a book that came down on the side of MacDonald having been correctly convicted. According to McGinniss, he went into the project with an open mind, and concluded that MacDonald was guilty after getting to know him. That may be true. McGinniss did not sign a contract promising to write a book supporting innocence. MacDonald is free to call it "betrayal," but some people might call it journalistic integrity.

It's awful that McGinniss went and blew his right to claim that with the unsupported "diet pill" theory.

From what I understand, MacDonald did have a prescription Dexedrine (dextroamphetamine), but that was a widely used diet pill at the time, and it was as easy to get a prescription for that back then, as it is to get a prescription for Prozac now. People who take it for the first time, or who overdose on it, can have manic, or even psychotic episodes, but thousands of people take it correctly with no problems whatsoever. Further, I don't think that anyone did a blood-level of amphetamines on MacDonald immediately after the episode.

So, yeah, McGinniss really blew it with the diet pill theory, but some of the other information may be good. He did spend hours interviewing MacDonald, after all. MacDonald's original complaint was that McGinniss had violated a theoretical oral contract to write a book defending him, and the publisher went to a jury, confident that this was nonsense. Then, the bit about the diet pills came out.

[RavenDarkendale]

There were two confessions that seem to have evidence that they were not just shooting their mouths off, they knew unreleased facts concerning the case. Helen Stoeckley confessed to being there during the murders, she was spotted by police on the way to the crime scene, and a wig fibers from her blonde wig was found in the in the victim's fingers. Wax drip from a candle she held, as MacDonald also reported, was found in the house. She is now deceased, but her confession was videotaped. She implicated Greg Mitchell who has a good deal of evidence pointing to him at least being there, and he confessed to other people. He is deceased and unfortunately, no videotape.

These people stated that they went to MacDonald's house in search of drugs, with two other guys. They were referred to simply as "soldiers". If they named them, it hasn't been reported that I know of. So they gang of hippies could have existed, given Stokley and Michell's appearance at the time. as an aside, I wonder that MacDonald did not recognize the others as soldiers, but Fort Bragg is a HUGE military installation which includes Pope Air-force Base. The 82nd are paratroopers, and the XVIII Airborne Corps are there as well. It is one of the largest Military Reservations on the East Coast.

These inconsistencies with the official story should have earned MacDonald a new trial on appeal. MacDonald pissed the Army off with talk show appearances when the charges were initially dropped, saying publicly that the investigation should be an embarrassment to the Army Command.

Time and again evidence was introduced by the prosecution that was never even mentioned to the defense, which gave them no time to prepare for cross examining. Every time the defense objected they were overruled by the Judge, Franklin T. Dupree Jr. Some evidence was simply ignored by the prosecution, such as hairs under the fingernails of the dead woman, and not reported at all to the defense for their own testing, and never presented in court.

Bottom line, under the circumstances of the trial, evidence allowed to be presented, the total unprepared and weak cross examining by the defense, there was no choice but to find MacDonald guilty. If they were wrong, (AND I AM NOT SAYING THEY WERE. BUT IT IS A POSSIBILITY), the Military will never admit they were mistake before MacDonald dies in prison. Afterward they may admit to shaky evidence, but given the results of the Sam Sheppard case, it isn't very likely.

Even if they were to set MacDonald free tomorrow, he would never be able to clear his name. They would say that they feel he has served sufficient punishment by time served. His name will always be linked to his family's deaths as at least the most likely perpetrator.

God Bless

Darkendale

[RavenDarkendale]

A lot of things don't make sense about MacDonald's conviction:

The murders were committed 2/17/1970

MacDonald was in the hospital until 2/25/1970, despite the funerals being held on the 21st, and the fact that during his trial, the prosecution claimed his wounds were not serious,

Charges dropped, October 1970

MacDonald receives an HONORABLE DISCHARGE December 1970. On the 15th he goes on The Dick Cavett show to publicly accuse the CID of screwing up the case. (My opinion, that was his big mistake. Never piss off the powers that be)

Every effort to bring him to trial was dismissed by the courts until a grad jury was convened in 1974.

Jeffery MacDonald was finally arraigned in May, 1975. He plead not guilty,

Charges dismissed by the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals citing his right to a speedy trial. January, 1976

The Supreme Court reversed the lower court's decision January 1978

Trial started July 1979

The Fourth Circuit court dismisses all charges against Jeff MacDonald, August 1980

The Supreme Court reverses the speedy trial win. Jeff is rearrested and returned to prison. March 1982

January 4, 1983 Helena Stoeckley, who had a videotaped confession as to her involvement in the murders, was found dead in her apartment, Seneca, SC.

In 1984 the entire MacDonald apartment including everything in it was totally destroyed, burned, and buried at Fort Bragg. Prosecution took the last sweep before the destruction, retaining what they felt was evidence. Not so for the defense.

Joe McGinniss releases Fatal Vision, a book on the MacDonald case that contained contrived "facts" painting MacDonald as a narcissist and murderer, using interviews McGinniss conducted under false pretenses. Spring, 1984.

In November, a mini-series based on Fatal Vision aired on NBC. It pulled down some high ratings.

November 1987, McGinniss pays MacDonald 350,000 to settle a lawsuit based on the book out of court. MacDonald missed winning the lawsuit by one vote, which hung the jury. McGinniss didn't want to risk a second trial.



MacDonald won an appeal in Fourth District Court March 2011. The new evidentiary hearing was scheduled to begin September 2012. It continues to delayed due to the usual lawyer hijinks on both sides.

MacDonald has had the charges dropped or dismissed so many times only to have them brought up again and again. There could be a case made for personal animosity from Army Captain Brian Murtagh who was attorney for prosecution for the Army CID. He began his campaign to convict MacDonald in February 1972. He has stayed on the case ever since. He was allowed to resign his post to head the civilian case against MacDonald, a position he still holds.

One wonders...

If he had not antagonized the CID with his public belittling of their investigations, MacDonald would probably never spent a day in prison. As I said before, don't piss off the powers that be...

God bless

Darkendale