Jeffrey MacDonald?

72 views
Skip to first unread message

MIRSE

unread,
Oct 6, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/6/98
to

Does anyone know how Jeffrey MacDonald is doing
in trying to get a new trial? I haven't heard anything in
a while and I was just wondering.
I have no doubt that MacDonald viciously murdered
his wife and two little girls, but I was just wondering
what the latest news was about him. Mi...@aol.com

hall...@borg.com

unread,
Oct 6, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/6/98
to
In article <19981006021521...@ng114.aol.com>,

mi...@aol.com (MIRSE) wrote:
>
> Does anyone know how Jeffrey MacDonald is doing
> in trying to get a new trial? I haven't heard anything in
> a while and I was just wondering.

Almost a year after Jeffrey MacDonald won a court order requiring the FBI to
allow testing of biological evidence for DNA, the defense team has had to go
back to court to ask that the order be enforced.

> I have no doubt that MacDonald viciously murdered
> his wife and two little girls,

All you lack is evidence.

>but I was just wondering
> what the latest news was about him. Mi...@aol.com
>

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own

Sniper

unread,
Oct 6, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/6/98
to
They had on TV the girl that he says was one off the real killer's. This
was on A & E. There are some that think she was involved..
Frank

MIRSE <mi...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19981006021521...@ng114.aol.com>...


>
> Does anyone know how Jeffrey MacDonald is doing
> in trying to get a new trial? I haven't heard anything in
> a while and I was just wondering.

> I have no doubt that MacDonald viciously murdered

> his wife and two little girls, but I was just wondering

hall...@borg.com

unread,
Oct 7, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/7/98
to
In article <01bdf16b$ac214c60$340881ce@default>,

"Sniper" <ar...@galaxynet.com> wrote:
> They had on TV the girl that he says was one off the real killer's. This
> was on A & E. There are some that think she was involved..
> Frank

I assume you mean Helena Stoeckley, Frank. She was with the killers but
apparently took no part in the murders. She was seen before and after by
numerous witnesses including one of the MP's on the way to the murder scene.
The MP risked his own freedom by talking about it after he was ordered not to.

Helena has since died but there are numerous interviews available. She was
even polygraphed a number of times by the FBI. She passed when she told of
being in the MacDonald apartment the night of the murders, failed when she
developed amnesia as she did at the criminal trial.

Helena left evidence of her presence by fibers from a blond wig. FBI
hair-and-fiber expert Michael Malone submitted a perjurious affidavit
affirming the prosecution's claim that the fibers were doll hair from Mattel
dolls owned by MacDonald's daughters despite denial by a Mattel expert who
had refused to sign the affidavit. She complained of the pressure she
suffered in her own affidavit after she refused to sign a false affidavit.

Judge Fox last year turned down an appeal based on the false affidavit for an
evidentiary hearing on numerous showings of falsified and suppressed evidence
and was upheld on appeal this year.

Appeals courts are not much interested in evidence of innocence. Procedure is
their thing. Procedure has nothing to do with factual guilt or innocence.

Thank God for DNA. It is almost unique in being physical evidence that
appeals courts will seriously consider.

> MIRSE <mi...@aol.com> wrote in article
> <19981006021521...@ng114.aol.com>...
> >
> > Does anyone know how Jeffrey MacDonald is doing
> > in trying to get a new trial? I haven't heard anything in
> > a while and I was just wondering.
> > I have no doubt that MacDonald viciously murdered
> > his wife and two little girls, but I was just wondering
> > what the latest news was about him. Mi...@aol.com
> >
>

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------

MIRSE

unread,
Oct 7, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/7/98
to

Subject: Re: Jeffrey MacDonald?
From: hall...@borg.com
Date: Tue, Oct 6, 1998 09:06 EDT
Message-id: <6vd4js$g76$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>

In article <19981006021521...@ng114.aol.com>,
mi...@aol.com (MIRSE) wrote:
>

> Does anyone know how Jeffrey MacDonald is doing
> in trying to get a new trial? I haven't heard anything in
> a while and I was just wondering.

Almost a year after Jeffrey MacDonald won a court order requiring the FBI to


allow testing of biological evidence for DNA, the defense team has had to go
back to court to ask that the order be enforced.

> I have no doubt that MacDonald viciously murdered


> his wife and two little girls,

All you lack is evidence.
******
hallinan: As you know, MacDonald emphasized that a black man and two white
men attacked him when he tried to get up from his living room sofa. According
to MacDonald, the black man hit him several times with a baseball bat.
What ever happened to the search for this black man? As far as I know, no
black man has been pointed out as the black man who attacked MacDonald.
How long has it been since the murders? It must be at least 20 years,
and still MacDonald's black man has not been found.
I don't believe there was ever a black man at the home as MacDonald
claimed. MacDonald's bizarre story about the black man reminds me of
the famous incident a few years ago in which a woman in South Carolina
claimed that a black man stole her car and her two little boys. But the truth
was that there was no black man involved. Instead, the woman herself drove
her car into a nearby lake and drowned her two little boys.
Come on now. Fayetteville, N.C., the home of Fort Bragg, is not that big.
How come no one has been able to find a black man in that small city who hung
around with a group of white young people in the 20 years since the murders?
The reason, I'm afraid,
is that there was never any black man
in MacDonald's home the night of the murders. The only black man near the
MacDonald's home that night was the imaginary one found in MacDonald's sick
mind.
Hallinan, come up with the name of the black man who was in the home the
night of the murders. Also, come up with some evidence that he was in the
home. Can you, or anyone else, do that after these 20 years since the murders?
I doubt it.
Mi...@aol.com

hall...@borg.com

unread,
Oct 7, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/7/98
to
In article <19981006235216...@ng94.aol.com>,

mi...@aol.com (MIRSE) wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: Jeffrey MacDonald?
> From: hall...@borg.com
> Date: Tue, Oct 6, 1998 09:06 EDT
> Message-id: <6vd4js$g76$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
>
> In article <19981006021521...@ng114.aol.com>,
> mi...@aol.com (MIRSE) wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone know how Jeffrey MacDonald is doing
> > in trying to get a new trial? I haven't heard anything in
> > a while and I was just wondering.
>
> Almost a year after Jeffrey MacDonald won a court order requiring the FBI to
> allow testing of biological evidence for DNA, the defense team has had to go
> back to court to ask that the order be enforced.
>
> > I have no doubt that MacDonald viciously murdered
> > his wife and two little girls,
>
> All you lack is evidence.
> ******
> hallinan: As you know, MacDonald emphasized that a black man and two white
> men attacked him when he tried to get up from his living room sofa.

Dr. MacDonald "emphasized" nothing. He told what he could recall when he was
revived by the MP's at the scene of the murders. His story has been the same,
is the same today. He has changed nothing. Any emphasis is your own.

> According
> to MacDonald, the black man hit him several times with a baseball bat.

As best he could remember.

> What ever happened to the search for this black man? As far as I know, no
> black man has been pointed out as the black man who attacked MacDonald.

There was a black man among Helena Stoeckley's circle. It is suspected he is
the one and is living in Southern California. MacDonald has no police force.
He has a few volunteers and lawyers who have been paid nothing at all for a
defense team. I have gone out of my way to name no names under the
circumstances. Helena Stoeckley, Gregg Mitchell and Cathy Perry all
confessed to being in the apartment the night of the murders and there is
evidence of their presence. The sightings of a black man wearing a
sergeant's jacket with the young woman in a blonde wig and floppy hat were
made by numerous witnesses.

> How long has it been since the murders? It must be at least 20 years,
> and still MacDonald's black man has not been found.

It has been about 30 years.

Uhh, Mirse, the police aren't looking and they are the only ones who have the
power to "find" anyone.

> I don't believe there was ever a black man at the home as MacDonald
> claimed. MacDonald's bizarre story about the black man reminds me of
> the famous incident a few years ago in which a woman in South Carolina
> claimed that a black man stole her car and her two little boys. But the truth
> was that there was no black man involved. Instead, the woman herself drove
> her car into a nearby lake and drowned her two little boys.

Susan Smith was the only one who claimed to have seen this mysterious black
man. It was pure fiction like the stories of Dr. MacDonald's drug addiction
and narcissism.

> Come on now. Fayetteville, N.C., the home of Fort Bragg, is not that big.
> How come no one has been able to find a black man in that small city who hung
> around with a group of white young people in the 20 years since the murders?
> The reason, I'm afraid,
> is that there was never any black man
> in MacDonald's home the night of the murders. The only black man near the
> MacDonald's home that night was the imaginary one found in MacDonald's sick
> mind.
> Hallinan, come up with the name of the black man who was in the home the
> night of the murders. Also, come up with some evidence that he was in the
> home. Can you, or anyone else, do that after these 20 years since the
murders?
> I doubt it.
> Mi...@aol.com

It's been done, Mirse. The DNA evidence may even point directly to the
culprit if he left biological samples and if the FBI has his when testing is
finally allowed more than a year after a court ordered it. The FBI still
refuses to give a full accounting of the biological evidence they are
holding. MacDonald has had to go back to court to get its order enforced.

MIRSE

unread,
Oct 8, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/8/98
to

Subject: Jeffrey MacDonald?
From: mi...@aol.com (MIRSE)
Date: Tue, Oct 6, 1998 02:15 EDT
Message-id: <19981006021521...@ng114.aol.com>


Does anyone know how Jeffrey MacDonald is doing
in trying to get a new trial? I haven't heard anything in
a while and I was just wondering.

I have no doubt that MacDonald viciously murdered

his wife and two little girls, but I was just wondering
what the latest news was about him. Mi...@aol.com

*******
To all posters: If you want to criticize
or agree with me on the Jeffrey MacDonald case, please do so on the open
board,
where everyone else can see it.
I say this because I sometimes receive
interesting e-mail messages on the case, but these messages should be
presented to the entire board, where others can agree or disagree with the
message.
So, please, if you have anything to say to me about the case, please post it

on this message board, and do not e-mail me.
I make it a policy not to respond to e-mails from complete strangers,
because I like to present my views on a topic to an entire newsgroup,
where more than one person can read it.
Mi...@aol.com

MIRSE

unread,
Oct 8, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/8/98
to

><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: Jeffrey MacDonald?
>From: hall...@borg.com
>Date: Wed, Oct 7, 1998 08:50 EDT
>Message-id: <6vfo35$tk7$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>

Helena Stoeckley, Gregg Mitchell and Cathy Perry all
>confessed to being in the apartment the night of the murders and there is
>evidence of their presence.
******
Hallinan:
1. Stoeckley: Didn't she testify at the trial that she knew nothing about the
murders and that she wasn't at the crime scene? That is, isn't it contained
in an official court record that Stoeckley denied being at the murder scene?
Are you now saying that she committed perjury at the trial? If she committed
perjury at the trial, and you can tell when she is telling the truth or making
up stories. For instance, Monica Lewinsky at least had the semen stained dress
to prove that she
had an affair with Clinton. Stoeckley, on the other hand, has nothing to
present to prove that she was at the crime scene.
2. Greg Mitchell: Didn't he pass a lie detector test a few months after the
murders? It is really a shame the way
you and others dirty the name of a person who
is now dead and cannot defend himself. I think Mitchell's family should sue
you and others like you who
dirty Mitchell's name without any proof whatsoever.
You know as well as I do that Mitchell had some mental problems, and at
one time, he may have used drugs regularly.
I don't doubt that those people who claimed that they heard Mitchell confess
to the crime actually did hear him, but so what? As you know, people like
Mitchell make up stories all the time, either to try to impress their friends,
or
because they are not mentally stable.
And so, what proof do you have that
Mitchell was at the murder scene?
If you point to what Stoeckley has said, then you must also point out that
Stoeckley said a friend, who we know is black, drove her to the murder scene.
She obviously put a black person at the crime scene,and, since he was her
friend, she would know his name.
So what was his name? You are free and loose with throwing around the names of
two dead people---Stoeckley and Mitchell-- so why not say the name of a living
person for a change? If you know the name of the black man who Stoeckley
claimed drove her to MacDonald's home the night of the murders,
why not come out and say his name over and over again for the world to hear?
You would be putting pressure on the black man and his friends to come
forward and admit that the black man was involved in the murders.
Do you know if the black man who
was often seen with Stoeckley and her group ever
passed a lie detector test?
Mi...@aol.com


Tammy

unread,
Oct 8, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/8/98
to
mi...@aol.com (MIRSE) wrote:

>
>><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: Jeffrey MacDonald?
>>From: hall...@borg.com
>>Date: Wed, Oct 7, 1998 08:50 EDT
>>Message-id: <6vfo35$tk7$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
> Helena Stoeckley, Gregg Mitchell and Cathy Perry all
>>confessed to being in the apartment the night of the murders and there is
>>evidence of their presence.
>******
>Hallinan:
>1. Stoeckley: Didn't she testify at the trial that she knew nothing about the
>murders and that she wasn't at the crime scene? That is, isn't it contained
>in an official court record that Stoeckley denied being at the murder scene?
>Are you now saying that she committed perjury at the trial? If she committed
>perjury at the trial, and you can tell when she is telling the truth or making
>up stories. For instance, Monica Lewinsky at least had the semen stained dress
>to prove that she
>had an affair with Clinton. Stoeckley, on the other hand, has nothing to
>present to prove that she was at the crime scene.

There is no concrete evidence that conclusively proves that
Helena Stoeckley was at the crime scene.


>2. Greg Mitchell: Didn't he pass a lie detector test a few months after the
>murders? It is really a shame the way
>you and others dirty the name of a person who
>is now dead and cannot defend himself. I think Mitchell's family should sue
>you and others like you who
>dirty Mitchell's name without any proof whatsoever.
> You know as well as I do that Mitchell had some mental problems, and at
>one time, he may have used drugs regularly.
> I don't doubt that those people who claimed that they heard Mitchell confess
>to the crime actually did hear him, but so what? As you know, people like
>Mitchell make up stories all the time, either to try to impress their friends,
>or
>because they are not mentally stable.
> And so, what proof do you have that
>Mitchell was at the murder scene?

There is no concrete evidence that conclusively proves that
Greg Mitchell was at the crime scene.


>If you point to what Stoeckley has said, then you must also point out that
>Stoeckley said a friend, who we know is black, drove her to the murder scene.
>She obviously put a black person at the crime scene,and, since he was her
>friend, she would know his name.
>So what was his name? You are free and loose with throwing around the names of
>two dead people---Stoeckley and Mitchell-- so why not say the name of a living
>person for a change? If you know the name of the black man who Stoeckley
>claimed drove her to MacDonald's home the night of the murders,
>why not come out and say his name over and over again for the world to hear?
>You would be putting pressure on the black man and his friends to come
>forward and admit that the black man was involved in the murders.
> Do you know if the black man who
>was often seen with Stoeckley and her group ever
>passed a lie detector test?

The black person does not have a name because he doesn't exist,
except in Jeffrey MacDonald's fertile imagination. There is no concrete
evidence that conclusively proves that there was ever any black man at
the crime scene.

Tammy


Tammy Parkhill
park...@fox.nstn.ca
Http://Fox.nstn.ca:80/~parkhill/

hall...@borg.com

unread,
Oct 8, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/8/98
to
In article <19981008030605...@ng18.aol.com>,

mi...@aol.com (MIRSE) wrote:
>
> ><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: Jeffrey MacDonald?
> >From: hall...@borg.com
> >Date: Wed, Oct 7, 1998 08:50 EDT
> >Message-id: <6vfo35$tk7$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
> Helena Stoeckley, Gregg Mitchell and Cathy Perry all
> >confessed to being in the apartment the night of the murders and there is
> >evidence of their presence.
> ******
> Hallinan:
> 1. Stoeckley: Didn't she testify at the trial that she knew nothing about
the
> murders and that she wasn't at the crime scene? That is, isn't it contained
> in an official court record that Stoeckley denied being at the murder scene?

Nope. Stoeckley had one of her periodic amnesia attacks and pleaded once
again that she was too high that night to remember much of anything. She
never once denied that she was at the murder scene. Never, never, never.

> Are you now saying that she committed perjury at the trial?

Of course she did.

>If she committed perjury at the trial, and you can tell when she is telling the
>truth or making up stories. For instance, Monica Lewinsky at least had the
>semen stained dress to prove that she had an affair with Clinton. Stoeckley,
>on the other hand, has nothing to present to prove that she was at the crime
>scene.

And again we get to the forensic evidence you choose to ignore. Helena
Stoeckley left fibers from her wig which the prosecutors to this day maintain
was doll hair from MacDonal's daughters Mattel dolls. This is despite
documentation and an affidavit from a Mattel doll expert who was pressured by
the government to say otherwise. The woman in the blond wig and floppy hat
was seen by many people.

There is the fresh candlewax which matched no candles in the MacDonald
apartment and even a neighbor who saw a group with candles as well as Dr.
MacDonald seeing the halo effect before he was beaten senseless.

There are the numerous polygraphs of Stoeckley which she failed when she
claimed the usual amnesia, passed when she didn't. There is her memory of
events and the apartment and a confession within hours of the murders.

All you choose to ignore and ask how one can tell whether a witness is lying
or telling the truth once again. By the evidence, Mirse.

> 2. Greg Mitchell: Didn't he pass a lie detector test a few months after the
> murders? It is really a shame the way
> you and others dirty the name of a person who
> is now dead and cannot defend himself. I think Mitchell's family should sue
> you and others like you who
> dirty Mitchell's name without any proof whatsoever.

LOL! You have no compunction whatever about calling Dr. MacDonald a killer
despite the massive evidence of innocence and you find my using a confession
and complelling evidence to name a killer somehow evil. I don't recall at
the moment if Greg Mitchell passed a lie detector test or not but I have a
vague memory that he did.

I would be delighted to be sued. It would not be the first time. I love to
discuss the evidence and would love to do it with a jury. There is massive
proof of Mitchell's guilt as you well know.

> You know as well as I do that Mitchell had some mental problems, and at
> one time, he may have used drugs regularly.
> I don't doubt that those people who claimed that they heard Mitchell
confess
> to the crime actually did hear him, but so what? As you know, people like
> Mitchell make up stories all the time, either to try to impress their
friends,
> or
> because they are not mentally stable.
> And so, what proof do you have that
> Mitchell was at the murder scene?

Mitchell was the boyfriend of Helena Stoeckley who was there. He was
identified by one witness as the man who was seen harassing Colette MacDonald
the night of the murders. He was named by Helena as the killer of Colette
(she was most certainly attacked by others). Colette had Mitchell's blood
type on her hands and was attacked by a left-handed killer. Dr. MacDonald's
blood type was not found on Colette's hands and he is right-handed. We have
been over this again and again. You simply ignore it.

A confession by itself is quite questionable. That is hardly what we have
here. We have a confession with much information to confirm it.

You have a much more valid point about mental problems and lack of evidence
with Cathy Perry. Her confession did not fit all the facts and her evidence,
like much else, disappeared in the hands of law enforcement.

> If you point to what Stoeckley has said, then you must also point out that
> Stoeckley said a friend, who we know is black, drove her to the murder scene.
> She obviously put a black person at the crime scene,and, since he was her
> friend, she would know his name.
> So what was his name? You are free and loose with throwing around the names
of
> two dead people---Stoeckley and Mitchell-- so why not say the name of a living
> person for a change? If you know the name of the black man who Stoeckley
> claimed drove her to MacDonald's home the night of the murders,
> why not come out and say his name over and over again for the world to hear?
> You would be putting pressure on the black man and his friends to come
> forward and admit that the black man was involved in the murders.
> Do you know if the black man who
> was often seen with Stoeckley and her group ever
> passed a lie detector test?

> Mi...@aol.com

I have no idea.

You have confused me, Mirse. You do not seem to be dishonest. I confirmed
to you privately that the man you named as the black man in Stoeckley's
circle, the man Stoeckley named as being in the group of killers whose car
was seen was quite likely the black man Dr. MacDonald saw attacking him. The
evidence is quite compelling and I am told there is suspicion the man resides
in Southern California.

It is ludicrous to think that there will be some kind of "pressure" that will
occur if I name the likely killer. I am reluctant to name people as killers
without physical forensic evidence. To date there is no forensic evidence to
my knowledge tying this man to the scene though obviously there is much
eyewitness testimony.

I wish you had the same compunction, Mirse. You have not shown any evidence
Dr. MacDonald is guilty. We simply have to learn of your belief without
evidence.

At least the jury looked at the fabricated evidence. They did not have
available knowledge of the suppressed evidence. One who did learn of it later
said he would go to his grave believing Dr. MacDonald was innocent. This is a
man who put him where he is.

hall...@borg.com

unread,
Oct 8, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/8/98
to
ta...@king.igs.net (Tammy) wrote:

> There is no concrete evidence that conclusively
proves that

> Helena Stoeckley was at the crime scene.

As with the OJ groupies that deny that OJ was at the scene of his murders, you
can deny the truth as you wish, Tammy.

Helena Stoeckley was seen by numerous people including one of the MP's on the
way to the murder scene, left fibers and fresh candlewax, confessed within
hours to having been at the scene. Polygraphs showed she was telling the
truth. During her periodic bouts of amnesia, polygraphs showed she was lying.

> There is no concrete evidence that conclusively
proves that

> Greg Mitchell was at the crime scene.

You probably wouldn't be well advised to do cement work, Tammy.

Colette MacDonald was killed by someone with Greg Mitchell's blood type and
by a left-handed killer. Dr. MacDonald was right-handed. Greg Mitchell was
left-handed. Greg Mitchell was seen harassing Colette the night of the
murders. He was identified by his girlfriend as one of the killers. He
confessed to the killings.

> The black person does not have a name because he
doesn't exist,
> except in Jeffrey MacDonald's fertile imagination. There is no
concrete
> evidence that conclusively proves that there was ever any black
man at
> the crime scene.
>
> Tammy

A black man was in Stoeckley's circle of friends. She said he drove her to
the scene of the crime. His model of car was seen near the murders. A black
man with sergeant's jacket was seen by numerous witnesses besides Dr.
MacDonald. Most black men like most white men have names.

Some people look at the evidence. Some would rather just believe.

MIRSE

unread,
Oct 9, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/9/98
to

><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: Jeffrey MacDonald?
>From: hall...@borg.com
>Date: Thu, Oct 8, 1998 12:39 EDT
>Message-id: <6vipro$493$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>

>
You have confused me, Mirse. You do not seem to be dishonest. I confirmed
to you privately that the man you named as the black man in Stoeckley's
circle, the man Stoeckley named as being in the group of killers whose car
was seen was quite likely the black man Dr. MacDonald saw attacking him. The
evidence is quite compelling and I am told there is suspicion the man resides
in Southern California.
******
hallinan: Yes, you sent me the name of the black man in Stoeckley's company
in an e-mail a few months ago. But the reason I am asking you again for his
name is that I want you to post his name publicly on this board for all the
world to see.
Maybe he or one of his friends or relatives will see your accusation and
come out with a public denial. They may
even explain once and for all what he was doing the night of the murders.
So, I'm asking you to repeat the name of the black man who you believe was
in MacDonald's apartment the night of the murders and
supposedly hit MacDonald several times with a bat while MacDonald was lying on
the couch.
I would like to talk to him myself, because I would like to know if was
undernourished that night, and if he ever played baseball in his life.
The
reason I would llike to know the answers to the above questions is that
I'm amazed that he did very little damage to MacDonald with the baseball bat,
even though MacDonald claimed that he was lying on the couch and just waking
up.
I tell you what, Hallinan, if you were sleeping on a couch and I hit you a
couple of times with a baseball bat, I doubt very seriously if you would be
able to get up. In fact, I
believe that you would by lying on the couch unconscious for a long time, if
you weren't already dead from my bat slamming several times against your skull.

MacDonald, however, was somehow able to get up and fight with his 3 male
attackers after being hit several times with a baseball bat. Amazing.
So, Hallinan, what is the name of the black man who you claim was one of
the persons who murdered MacDonald's wife and two little girls?
Mi...@aol.com

hall...@borg.com

unread,
Oct 9, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/9/98
to
In article <19981009030027...@ng-fb2.aol.com>,

mi...@aol.com (MIRSE) wrote:
>
> ><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: Jeffrey MacDonald?
> >From: hall...@borg.com
> >Date: Thu, Oct 8, 1998 12:39 EDT
> >Message-id: <6vipro$493$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
> >
> You have confused me, Mirse. You do not seem to be dishonest. I
confirmed
> to you privately that the man you named as the black man in Stoeckley's
> circle, the man Stoeckley named as being in the group of killers whose car
> was seen was quite likely the black man Dr. MacDonald saw attacking him. The
> evidence is quite compelling and I am told there is suspicion the man resides
> in Southern California.

It is you who make unsupported claims, Mirse. For anybody who has the
interest they can look back through the numerous postings. You yourself
named the black man who was part of Stoeckley's circle, who Stoeckley said
drove her to the MacDonald apartment. As you know a black man was seen by
numerous witnesses with Helena Stoeckley.

Dr. MacDonald's blunt instrument injuries as well as the numerous stab wounds
are matter of hospital record.

I have not been in the least hesitant to name those people for whom there is
physical evidence of their presence. Cathy Perry's presence is somewhat
debatable but she did confess and despite impossibilities in her confession,
it did explain some of the physical evidence.

I have had a sneak thief enter a room where I was sleeping. He woke me
searching for my wallet. This fine fellow was actually lifting the mattress.
He had gone through numerous rooms before mine and when I woke he had my
geology pick in his hand. I am glad he did not have murder in mind.
According to Stoeckley herself the initial objective was not to murder
MacDonald and his family or Dr. MacDonald may well have been dead. In the
end he was left for dead.

We will never know about your ability to kill me as you describe unless you
attempt it now will we?

gatogordo

unread,
Oct 9, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/9/98
to

MIRSE wrote:

> *******
> To all posters: If you want to criticize
> or agree with me on the Jeffrey MacDonald case, please do so on the open
> board,
> where everyone else can see it.
> I say this because I sometimes receive
> interesting e-mail messages on the case, but these messages should be
> presented to the entire board, where others can agree or disagree with the
> message.
> So, please, if you have anything to say to me about the case, please post it
> on this message board, and do not e-mail me.
> I make it a policy not to respond to e-mails from complete strangers,
> because I like to present my views on a topic to an entire newsgroup,
> where more than one person can read it.
> Mi...@aol.com

How about a question? After reading the overpriced ($14.00! ) paperback
which suggested McDonald was innocent, I was wondering what the real
scoop on the piece of cloth ( pillowcase? ) with the knife holes might be.
The defense said he had it wrapped around his hand and contained
defensive wounds. The proscecution said it had been folded up and
used to prevent blood splatter as he inflicted offensive wounds. The
book, possibly called "Fatal Justice", suggested the prosecution's
demo had been faked by having the cloth folded such that entrance
and exit holes were lined up, but backwards.

gatogordo


MIRSE

unread,
Oct 9, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/9/98
to

><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: Jeffrey MacDonald?
>From: hall...@borg.com
>Date: Fri, Oct 9, 1998 09:32 EDT
>Message-id: <6vl39e$84t$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>


It is you who make unsupported claims, Mirse. For anybody who has the
interest they can look back through the numerous postings. You yourself
named the black man who was part of Stoeckley's circle, who Stoeckley said
drove her to the MacDonald apartment. As you know a black man was seen by
numerous witnesses with Helena Stoeckley.

********
Hallinan: Come on, refresh my memory. If I did mention the black man's name,
it had to have been a few months ago, and I have forgotten his name in the
meantime. Remember, this is not the only board I post on, so like many posters
who post on many boards, it is easy for me to forget a
message I posted several months ago.
Besides, I am not the one accusing the black man of being at the murder scene,
but you are.
So refresh my memory, and tell the whole world the name of the black man who
you know was in MacDonald's home that night. You must be very familiar with
him, because you claim to know that he is now living in
Southern California. Mi...@aol.com


MIRSE

unread,
Oct 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/10/98
to

Subject: Re: Jeffrey MacDonald?
From: gatogordo <gato...@altavista.net>
Date: Fri, Oct 9, 1998 19:05 EDT
Message-id: <6vm4og$1h6$1...@news-1.news.gte.net>
MIRSE wrote:

> *******
> To all posters: If you want to criticize
> or agree with me on the Jeffrey MacDonald case, please do so on the open
> board,
> where everyone else can see it.

How about a question? After reading the overpriced ($14.00! ) paperback
which suggested McDonald was innocent, I was wondering what the real
scoop on the piece of cloth ( pillowcase? ) with the knife holes might be.
The defense said he had it wrapped around his hand and contained
defensive wounds. The proscecution said it had been folded up and
used to prevent blood splatter as he inflicted offensive wounds. The
book, possibly called "Fatal Justice", suggested the prosecution's
demo had been faked by having the cloth folded such that entrance
and exit holes were lined up, but backwards.

gatogordo
******
gatogordo: I know the Simpson case pretty well, because like most tv viewers,
I was able to see the evidence first hand on tv and later read much of the
transcript here on the Internet.
As far as the MacDonald case goes,
however,
I can only evaluate the evidence on what I have read about it, because as
you know, it was not televised and we don't have access to the transcript on
the Internet.
I tell you these things, because when it comes to details on the case,
Hallinan seems to have followed the case closely, and knows much of the details
of the case. I think that he even mentioned that he has contacted
MacDonald. Hallinan would thus be a good person to contact if you have
questions about the details of the case.
But may I suggest that you contact him through this board, so that the rest of
us can read your questions and doubts about the case.
Hallinan and I may disagree strongly on the guilt or innocence of MacDonald,
but
I know that Hallinan knows the case as well as can be known.( He believes that
MacDonald is innocent.) So he
would be a good person to ask questions about the case.
Personally, I took a special interest in the case when it first made the
news about 30 years ago, because one of my uncles was in the army and retired
near Fort Bragg
about the time of the murders.
About the cloth: I believe you are
talking about MacDonald's pajama top. MacDonald claimed that one of his
attackers pulled the top over MacDonald's head as he was trying to get up from
the couch. MacDonald claimed that later he placed the pajama top over his
wife after he found her lying in a pool of blood in the master bedroom.
Have you had a chance to read
"Fatal Vision"? If you have read "Fatal Justice", you should read
Fatal Vision also, because Fatal Justice tries to point out the mistakes in
Fatal Vision.
You may not like the book after you read it, but it will give you a good
explanation of how the prosecution put on a demonstration in which one
attorney wrapped a pajama top around his arm and a second attorney swung at the
arm with an
icepick. The purpose of the demonstration,as I remember it, was to try to
show that a person protecting himself under those circumstances would
naturally receive cuts on his arm. According to the prosecution, MacDonald
had no such cuts, although he claimed he was attacked repeatedly with an
icepick. The prosecution thus argued that MacDonald made up the story about
being attacked with an icepick.
Anyway, feel free to ask questions about the MacDonald case. There are many
people out there who know the case very well and much better than I do, and
they would be glad to
help you clear up any confusion you may have about details of the case.
Mi...@aol.com

hall...@borg.com

unread,
Oct 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/10/98
to
In article <19981009192252...@ng114.aol.com>,

mi...@aol.com (MIRSE) wrote:
>
> ><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: Jeffrey MacDonald?
> >From: hall...@borg.com
> >Date: Fri, Oct 9, 1998 09:32 EDT
> >Message-id: <6vl39e$84t$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
>
> It is you who make unsupported claims, Mirse. For anybody who has the
> interest they can look back through the numerous postings. You yourself
> named the black man who was part of Stoeckley's circle, who Stoeckley said
> drove her to the MacDonald apartment. As you know a black man was seen by
> numerous witnesses with Helena Stoeckley.
> ********
> Hallinan: Come on, refresh my memory. If I did mention the black man's name,
> it had to have been a few months ago, and I have forgotten his name in the
> meantime. Remember, this is not the only board I post on, so like many
posters
> who post on many boards, it is easy for me to forget a
> message I posted several months ago.
> Besides, I am not the one accusing the black man of being at the murder
scene,
> but you are.

I do not make unsupportable allegations. I have told you very precisely what
the evidence is. I will tell you once again there is only the word of Helena
Stoeckley providing the identity of the black man who was seen by Dr.
MacDonald and many eyewitnesses. He was a member of Stoeckley's circle. His
model of car was seen near the MacDonald apartment. She is not trustworthy.
She often had trouble with strange bouts of amnesia. Her word must be
supported by the evidence.

It isn't terribly helpful when you make statements that are simply not true.

> So refresh my memory, and tell the whole world the name of the black man
who
> you know was in MacDonald's home that night. You must be very familiar with
> him, because you claim to know that he is now living in
> Southern California. Mi...@aol.com

I said he was suspected to be living in Southern California. I have no more
knowledge than that.

hall...@borg.com

unread,
Oct 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/10/98
to
In article <6vm4og$1h6$1...@news-1.news.gte.net>,
gatogordo <gato...@altavista.net> wrote:

> How about a question? After reading the overpriced ($14.00! ) paperback
> which suggested McDonald was innocent, I was wondering what the real
> scoop on the piece of cloth ( pillowcase? ) with the knife holes might be.
> The defense said he had it wrapped around his hand and contained
> defensive wounds. The proscecution said it had been folded up and
> used to prevent blood splatter as he inflicted offensive wounds. The
> book, possibly called "Fatal Justice", suggested the prosecution's
> demo had been faked by having the cloth folded such that entrance
> and exit holes were lined up, but backwards.
>
> gatogordo

Well I have to admit at least you want to talk about evidence, gatogordo,
rather than just stating the usual opinion.

The "pillowcase?" was Dr. MacDonald's pajama top. It had come over his head
and held his hands like handcuffs in front of him as he was being attacked.
There were ice pick and knife holes in the pajama top as there were in Dr.
MacDonald himself though even that was denied.

The prosecution put on a spectacular demonstration lining up holes in the
pajama top with puncture wounds from an ice pick in Colette MacDonald. The
problem is that the FBI expert's own lab notes show it was a fraud.

Paul Stombaugh tried to line up holes that he knew would have to be on top
because of the tapered ice pick, i.e. the larger holes on top. He could not.
The ice pick itself would have bent the fibers in the the direction of the
thrust which would not be reversed on withdrawal. That could not be
accommodated any way the pajama top was folded. In addition common sense
would tell you that the pajama top would move as it was stabbed through.

It was all quite colorful and Joe McGinniss wrote lovingly about it. It was a
lie like much of the prosecution case.

meaningfu...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Oct 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/11/98
to
In article <6vm4og$1h6$1...@news-1.news.gte.net>,
gatogordo <gato...@altavista.net> wrote:
>
>
> MIRSE wrote:
>
> > *******
> > To all posters: If you want to criticize
> > or agree with me on the Jeffrey MacDonald case, please do so on the open
> > board,
> > where everyone else can see it.
> > I say this because I sometimes receive
> > interesting e-mail messages on the case, but these messages should be
> > presented to the entire board, where others can agree or disagree with the
> > message.
> > So, please, if you have anything to say to me about the case, please
post it
> > on this message board, and do not e-mail me.
> > I make it a policy not to respond to e-mails from complete strangers,
> > because I like to present my views on a topic to an entire newsgroup,
> > where more than one person can read it.
> > Mi...@aol.com
>
> How about a question? After reading the overpriced ($14.00! ) paperback
> which suggested McDonald was innocent, I was wondering what the real
> scoop on the piece of cloth ( pillowcase? ) with the knife holes might be.
> The defense said he had it wrapped around his hand and contained
> defensive wounds. The proscecution said it had been folded up and
> used to prevent blood splatter as he inflicted offensive wounds. The
> book, possibly called "Fatal Justice", suggested the prosecution's
> demo had been faked by having the cloth folded such that entrance
> and exit holes were lined up, but backwards.
>
> gatogordo
>
>

I agree with Terry Hallinan when I think what you are referring to as a piece
of cloth is the "pajama top". During the trial a theatrical representation
of what "must have occurred" was performed by the prosecution with downward,
violent thrusts while the top was somewhat wrapped around the wrists,
resulting in the slashing tears that left the pajama top in shreds. This,
however, was not what happened to Dr. MacDonald, as he related to his
attorneys that the thrusts he incurred had started down below the top with an
upward motion as taught to men in the Army. This would have resulted in the
type of punctures that the pajama top sustained while on Dr. MacDonald's
wrists. The defense decided not to engage in such courtroom theatrics and so
posed no demonstration of their own.

Indeed, the pajama top folding experiment was a complete fraud by FBI Lab
Agent Paul Stombaugh. They managed to get the "different" sizes of holes
lined up, but they knew that there was no scientific basis at all to that
ludicrous theory and prevented the defense from seeing their lab notes at the
time of trial that even stated that fact. The only way they know now, is
that many years after they were finally allowed to see them after filing
numerous "Freedom of Information Act" FOIA requests. However, the jury was
only presented the side that the prosecution chose for them to see....that of
twisted and misrepresented evidence.

I too, would like to discuss the "evidence" in this case with anyone. Not the
fanciful notions that people love to embrace.

Best,

M D

MIRSE

unread,
Oct 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/11/98
to

><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: Jeffrey MacDonald?
>From: hall...@borg.com
>Date: Sat, Oct 10, 1998 01:27 EDT
>Message-id: <6vmr7j$1c0$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>

do not make unsupportable allegations. I have told you very precisely what
the evidence is. I will tell you once again there is only the word of Helena
Stoeckley providing the identity of the black man who was seen by Dr.
MacDonald and many eyewitnesses. He was a member of Stoeckley's circle. His
model of car was seen near the MacDonald apartment. She is not trustworthy.
She often had trouble with strange bouts of amnesia. Her word must be
supported by the evidence.

*******
Hallinan: I don't understand your statement above. You felt free to tell me
the black man's name in an e-mail, but you won't post his name
on this board, where the world can see it. I call your action cowardice and
hypocritcal.
Come on, what are you scared of?
You have my permission to tell the world what you told me in an e-mail,
especially the name of the black man who you told me was at the murder scene.
You just about gave his name to us anyway: you claim "He was a member of
Stoeckley's circle. His model car was seen near the MacDonald apartment." Any
police officer working on the case would have quickly learned his name from
just the two details you give above. It wouldn't take a rocket
scientist to ask people in the Fort Bragg area a few questions
about the two details you give above,
about the black man, and quickly come up with a name.
So, Hallinan, give us the name. If you have it, everybody in
Fayetteville, N.C, the home of Fort Bragg, probably had it 20 plus years ago
when the murders occurred.
Who knows, maybe if you constantly post the black man's name on this board
and elsewhere, you may help solve this case. For instance, it
may l force him to come out publicly and explain what he was doing that night.

Or maybe it will force one of his friends or relatives---if by chance they
happen to read this message board--- to come out publicly to defend him or to
accuse him of having confessed to being
involved in the murders MacDonald's wife and two little girls.
If they sued you in court for defamation of character, that would even be
better, because then the black man would have to explain under oath in a court
of law what he was doing the night of the murders.
So, Hallinan, what is the name of the black man who you claim was at the
murder scene? The world is anxiously waiting for your answer.

Note: I'm confused about what you say concerning Helena Stoeckley in your
message:


>"She is not trustworthy.
>She often had trouble with strange bouts of amnesia. Her word must be
>supported by the evidence."

As I understand it, MacDonald's whole defense and cry for a new trial is
based on his argument that Stoeckley confessed to being at the crime scene.
But if you admit above that "She is not trustworthy", then I don't see how
MacDonald can point to Stoeckley's
"confessions" in order to argue for a new trial. In other words, without
Stoeckley and her "confessions", MacDonald has nothing to back up his claim of
innocence.
Mi...@aol.com

hall...@borg.com

unread,
Oct 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/11/98
to
There was a black man all right in Dr. MacDonald's apartment the night of the
murders. He was hardly the only one who saw him. The black man with a
jacket with sergeant's stripes was seen by many people with the woman with a
blond wig and floppy hat (Helena Stoeckley).

His baseball bat is little more than surmise. Dr. MacDonald when he was
revived remembered grabbing the club that hit him and it felt smooth. He had
a vague memory of a baseball bat. He had quite noticeable and serious head
wounds. The hospital only reluctantly sedated an agitated Dr. MacDonald
because of the head wounds. No one else ever saw a baseball bat as far as I
know and Dr. MacDonald may not have either.

The splintery hickory club that was used on other victims, if used on Dr.
MacDonald, left no splinters on him.

Bruce Fowler was the name used by a black man in Helena Stoeckley's close
circle of friends. She identified him as the man who drove her to
MacDonald's apartment. His model of car was seen in the neighborhood. He is
currently suspected of living in Southern California and the MacDonald
Defense Team would very much like to talk to him.

As should be obvious Bruce Fowler is quite likely one of the intruders who
attacked Dr. MacDonald and killed his wife and two little girls. Unlike Greg
Mitchell and Helena Stoeckley, there is no known physical evidence, no
confession, no statement of any kind that links him to the murders except
what I have written - at least none that I am aware of. The coming DNA tests
could obviously do that.

The black man with a baseball bat that battered Dr. MacDonald, as Mirse has
described it, is not quite so clear. The black man is quite real. The
baseball bat is not so clear. It is quite likely the man that called himself
Bruce Fowler participated in the murders of MacDonald's family.

Just to clear the record.

Gimarie330

unread,
Oct 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/11/98
to

>From: hall...@borg.com

>Bruce Fowler was the name used by a black man in Helena Stoeckley's close
>circle of friends. She identified him as the man who drove her to
>MacDonald's apartment. His model of car was seen in the neighborhood.
He is
>currently suspected of living in Southern California and the MacDonald
>Defense Team would very much like to talk to him.
>
>As should be obvious Bruce Fowler is quite likely one of the intruders who
>attacked Dr. MacDonald and killed his wife and two little girls. Unlike Greg
>Mitchell and Helena Stoeckley, there is no known physical evidence, no
>confession, no statement of any kind that links him to the murders except
>what I have written - at least none that I am aware of. The coming DNA tests
>could obviously do that.

Terry,
If Bruce was able to get away with no physical evidence linking him to the
murder don't you think he has changed his name, identity and looks by now?
+++++++gini marie

gatogordo

unread,
Oct 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/11/98
to

hall...@borg.com wrote:

> In article <6vm4og$1h6$1...@news-1.news.gte.net>,
> gatogordo <gato...@altavista.net> wrote:
>
> > How about a question? After reading the overpriced ($14.00! ) paperback
> > which suggested McDonald was innocent, I was wondering what the real
> > scoop on the piece of cloth ( pillowcase? ) with the knife holes might be.
> > The defense said he had it wrapped around his hand and contained
> > defensive wounds. The proscecution said it had been folded up and
> > used to prevent blood splatter as he inflicted offensive wounds. The
> > book, possibly called "Fatal Justice", suggested the prosecution's
> > demo had been faked by having the cloth folded such that entrance
> > and exit holes were lined up, but backwards.
> >
> > gatogordo
>

> Well I have to admit at least you want to talk about evidence, gatogordo,
> rather than just stating the usual opinion.
>
> The "pillowcase?" was Dr. MacDonald's pajama top. It had come over his head
> and held his hands like handcuffs in front of him as he was being attacked.
> There were ice pick and knife holes in the pajama top as there were in Dr.
> MacDonald himself though even that was denied.
>
> The prosecution put on a spectacular demonstration lining up holes in the
> pajama top with puncture wounds from an ice pick in Colette MacDonald. The
> problem is that the FBI expert's own lab notes show it was a fraud.
>
> Paul Stombaugh tried to line up holes that he knew would have to be on top
> because of the tapered ice pick, i.e. the larger holes on top. He could not.
> The ice pick itself would have bent the fibers in the the direction of the
> thrust which would not be reversed on withdrawal. That could not be
> accommodated any way the pajama top was folded. In addition common sense
> would tell you that the pajama top would move as it was stabbed through.
>
> It was all quite colorful and Joe McGinniss wrote lovingly about it. It was a
> lie like much of the prosecution case.
>

> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own

Thanks for the info. This seems to be the most important piece of
evidence in this case; second would be the floppy-hatted woman
being seen standing next to the road by an individual responding
to the emergency call that night. I'll be back with more questions
and observations as soon as I find where I hid the book.


gatogordo


hall...@borg.com

unread,
Oct 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/11/98
to
In article <19981011073552...@ng145.aol.com>,
gimar...@aol.com (Gimarie330) wrote:

> Terry,
> If Bruce was able to get away with no physical evidence linking him to the
> murder don't you think he has changed his name, identity and looks by now?
> +++++++gini marie

We don't know if there is any physical evidence linking Fowler to the
murders. Even with a successful appeal requiring the FBI to provide the
defense with biological materials for DNA testing, the government is fighting
tooth and nail to prevent examination of evidence held and even DNA nuclear
testing which is the most discriminatory of all DNA testing. The defense
team proposed a far more expensive and less discriminatory mitochondrial DNA
test (which can only define maternal heritage) for badly degraded or
contaminated materials. The government laughably claims that is the only
testing that should be allowed for whatever material they choose to provide.
The defense team has been forced to return to court to get access to the
appropriate evidence.

Dr. MacDonald has been convicted. The killers have escaped justice to date.
No one is looking for any survivors. A defense team of a few volunteer
lawyers working parttime and a handful of volunteers provide no real threat
now to Fowler.

Fowler may very well have altered his identity. But it would hardly seem
necessary at this point. Sadly.

rm...@sprintmail.com

unread,
Oct 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/12/98
to


Bruce Fowler was not the black man. Bruce Fowler is white. He did hang around
the Stoekley crowd and Helena did name him as being in the house that night.
Bruce Fowler was interviewed by the BBC in 1989 for a documentary on the case
called "False Witness".

The black man's nickname might have been "Smitty". He was arrested a month
before the murders after three men named him as thier dealer. These three men
went to Cape Fear hospital because one had overdosed on herion. MacDonald was
on duty that night. Dr. MacDonald saved the man's life and the nurse called
the police and they came an arrested the three. They in turn gave the name of
thier drug dealer , a black man who hung around a Poolroom in Fayetteville.
Many police officers remember this arrest but the file has disappeared.


In article <19981011073552...@ng145.aol.com>,
gimar...@aol.com (Gimarie330) wrote:
>

> >From: hall...@borg.com
>
> >Bruce Fowler was the name used by a black man in Helena Stoeckley's close
> >circle of friends. She identified him as the man who drove her to
> >MacDonald's apartment. His model of car was seen in the neighborhood.
> He is
> >currently suspected of living in Southern California and the MacDonald
> >Defense Team would very much like to talk to him.
> >
> >As should be obvious Bruce Fowler is quite likely one of the intruders who
> >attacked Dr. MacDonald and killed his wife and two little girls. Unlike Greg
> >Mitchell and Helena Stoeckley, there is no known physical evidence, no
> >confession, no statement of any kind that links him to the murders except
> >what I have written - at least none that I am aware of. The coming DNA tests
> >could obviously do that.
>

> Terry,
> If Bruce was able to get away with no physical evidence linking him to the
> murder don't you think he has changed his name, identity and looks by now?
> +++++++gini marie
>
>

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------

hall...@borg.com

unread,
Oct 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/12/98
to
In article <19981011014812...@ng147.aol.com>,

mi...@aol.com (MIRSE) wrote:
>
> ><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: Jeffrey MacDonald?
> >From: hall...@borg.com
> >Date: Sat, Oct 10, 1998 01:27 EDT
> >Message-id: <6vmr7j$1c0$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
>
> do not make unsupportable allegations. I have told you very precisely what
> the evidence is. I will tell you once again there is only the word of Helena
> Stoeckley providing the identity of the black man who was seen by Dr.
> MacDonald and many eyewitnesses. He was a member of Stoeckley's circle. His
> model of car was seen near the MacDonald apartment. She is not trustworthy.
> She often had trouble with strange bouts of amnesia. Her word must be
> supported by the evidence.
> *******
> Hallinan: I don't understand your statement above. You felt free to tell me
> the black man's name in an e-mail, but you won't post his name
> on this board, where the world can see it. I call your action cowardice and
> hypocritcal.

Whatever grabs you.

> Come on, what are you scared of?
> You have my permission to tell the world what you told me in an e-mail,
> especially the name of the black man who you told me was at the murder scene.

I didn't tell you that then. I don't tell you that now. I have never told
anybody that.

I told you then and I repeat that there is very compelling the man known as
Bruce Fowler was one of the killers in the MacDonald's apartment. I have
never said the black man had a bat. That is what Dr. MacDonald recalls under
obviously strained circumstances. I don't deny it. I simply cannot confirm
it from the evidence.

> You just about gave his name to us anyway: you claim "He was a member of
> Stoeckley's circle. His model car was seen near the MacDonald apartment." Any
> police officer working on the case would have quickly learned his name from
> just the two details you give above. It wouldn't take a rocket
> scientist to ask people in the Fort Bragg area a few questions
> about the two details you give above,
> about the black man, and quickly come up with a name.
> So, Hallinan, give us the name. If you have it, everybody in
> Fayetteville, N.C, the home of Fort Bragg, probably had it 20 plus years ago
> when the murders occurred.
> Who knows, maybe if you constantly post the black man's name on this board
> and elsewhere, you may help solve this case. For instance, it
> may l force him to come out publicly and explain what he was doing that
> night.

ROTFL!

What the evidence clearly shows is that Dr. MacDonald was not the killer. It
would not matter one bit if not a single person could be identified as one of
the actual killers.

> Or maybe it will force one of his friends or relatives---if by chance
they
> happen to read this message board--- to come out publicly to defend him or to
> accuse him of having confessed to being
> involved in the murders MacDonald's wife and two little girls.

> If they sued you in court for defamation of character, that would even be
> better, because then the black man would have to explain under oath in a
court

> of law what he was doing the night of the murders.

Believe what you wish, Mirse, but I do not fear lawsuits. I have been sued.
It is not a notably intelligent thing not to fear lawsuits. As our President
can tell you lawsuits have the capability to do great harm.

> So, Hallinan, what is the name of the black man who you claim was at the

> murder scene? The world is anxiously waiting for your answer.

There is no such man. My claim is what it is. It is what the evidence says
is true.

> Note: I'm confused about what you say concerning Helena Stoeckley in your
> message:
> >"She is not trustworthy.
> >She often had trouble with strange bouts of amnesia. Her word must be
> >supported by the evidence."
> As I understand it, MacDonald's whole defense and cry for a new trial is
> based on his argument that Stoeckley confessed to being at the crime scene.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

MacDonald's whole defense is that the evidence proves him innocent. It does.
The least trustworthy of all evidence is eyewitness accounts.

> But if you admit above that "She is not trustworthy", then I don't see how
> MacDonald can point to Stoeckley's
> "confessions" in order to argue for a new trial. In other words, without
> Stoeckley and her "confessions", MacDonald has nothing to back up his claim
of
> innocence.
> Mi...@aol.com

He has the blood and fibers. He has the hair torn from the killers. He has
the fresh candlewax. He has the hospital records. He has the fingerprints
and bloody palm print. He has the bloody gloves. He now has the lab notes of
the technicians. And before too long he will have the DNA evidence.

It is all supported by eyewitness testimony. And in his case and that of
Helena Stoeckley it has been tested by polygraphs. (I note your claim that
Greg Mitchell passed a polygraph and I haven't gotten around to looking it
up. Dr. MacDonald was tested by one of the best polygraphers in the country.
The competence of the polygrapher is extremely important as even the most
knowledgeable of opponents recognize and make that the primary point of their
complaints.)

MIRSE

unread,
Oct 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/12/98
to

Subject: Re: The Black Man - Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald Case
From: rm...@sprintmail.com
Date: Sun, Oct 11, 1998 21:27 EDT
Message-id: <6vrltk$ep6$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>

Bruce Fowler was not the black man. Bruce Fowler is white. He did hang around
the Stoekley crowd and Helena did name him as being in the house that night.
Bruce Fowler was interviewed by the BBC in 1989 for a documentary on the case
called "False Witness".

The black man's nickname might have been "Smitty". He was arrested a month
before the murders after three men named him as thier dealer. These three men
went to Cape Fear hospital because one had overdosed on herion. MacDonald was
on duty that night. Dr. MacDonald saved the man's life and the nurse called
the police and they came an arrested the three. They in turn gave the name of
thier drug dealer , a black man who hung around a Poolroom in Fayetteville.
Many police officers remember this arrest but the file has disappeared.

********
Well, well, well. It appears that we have a controversy here. But that is
what is so great about the Internet and boards such as this one: we have
an international forum to straighten out mis-conceptions about issues such as
the MacDonald
murder case.
Hallinan--- a regular poster to this board--- who I know has followed the
case closely, and I believe knows the details of the the MacDonald case very
well, says that the black man
who went with Stoeckley to MacDonald's home was Bruce Fowler. I also think
that in Fatal Justice, the recent book on the case, Stoeckley---who is
dead---is quoted as saying that Fowler drove her to the MacDonald home that
night.
But now we have a newcomer named rmtl---who e-mailed me a few days ago and
told me he/she lives near Fort Bragg---who contradicts Hallinan.
Rmtl says that Fowler was white and that the black man's name was "Smitty."
So could someone out there---hopefully someone who knew
Fowler and "Smitty"---please straighten
us out as to whether Fowler is black or not? Also, any other information on
Fowler or the black man or " Smitty"would be appreciated. For instance, are
they still living? If so,
where are they today?
I still say the black man was the invention of MacDonald. No black man was
involved in the murders of
MacDonald's wife and two little girls,
because no evidence was ever found linking a black man or any man to the crimes
except MacDonald himself.
Mi...@aol.com


rm...@sprintmail.com

unread,
Oct 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/12/98
to

> Well, well, well. It appears that we have a controversy here. But that is
> what is so great about the Internet and boards such as this one: we have
> an international forum to straighten out mis-conceptions about issues such as
> the MacDonald
> murder case.

There is no controversy Mirse. The black man MacDonald saw is just simply not
Bruce Fowler. I'm not saying Bruce Fowler was not in the house that night.What
i'm saying is that he is not the black man MacDonald saw. If anybody wants a
copy of that documentary then just let me know and i will give you my address
to send a blank tape.

> Hallinan--- a regular poster to this board--- who I know has followed the
> case closely, and I believe knows the details of the the MacDonald case very
> well, says that the black man
> who went with Stoeckley to MacDonald's home was Bruce Fowler. I also think
> that in Fatal Justice, the recent book on the case, Stoeckley---who is
> dead---is quoted as saying that Fowler drove her to the MacDonald home that
> night.

Stoekley never said that Bruce Fowler was the black man.

> I still say the black man was the invention of MacDonald. No black man was
> involved in the murders of
> MacDonald's wife and two little girls,
> because no evidence was ever found linking a black man or any man to the
crimes
> except MacDonald himself.


MacDonald did not invent anyone or anything. Those people were in his house
that night. You say there is no evidence linking anyone to the crimes? You
obviously know nothing about the case. There is eyewitness accounts from
people in MacDonalds nieghborhood. There is eyewitness accounts from several
people in and around Fort Bragg. There is 3 (almost 4) confessions from the
Stoekley crowd. There was black wool in Colette's mouth, shoulder , and
murder club. There was a bloody palmprint on the footboard of the bed in the
masterbedroom that didn't match anyone. There was blond wig hair in a brush
in the kitchen that didn't come from the home. There was brown hairs with
there roots intact underneath both of the girls fingernails that weren't
Jeffs. There was a hair in Colette's hand that wasn't hers or Jeffs. There
was a fingerprint on glass in the living room that didn't match anybody.
There was fresh candle wax in several different places that didn't match the
MacDonalds candles. There was bloody gloves in the kitchen that didn't come
from the home. There was a burnt match in Kristens room. There was a blue
acrylic fiber in Colette's hand and on the hallway steps that couldn't be
matched to anything. There was a bloody syringe in the hallway closet that
was destroyed. There was a piece of skin under Colette's fingernail that was
destroyed. There were multiple unidentified hairs in Kimberly and Kristens
bed sheets. All of the weapons except for the club didn't come from the
MacDonald home. There is the eyewitness account of Dr. MacDonald who saw that
assailants and was beaten and stabbed unconscious.

What else do you need Mirse?

Now Mirse its your turn. Give me evidence that MacDonald murdererd his
family. The only evidence against him is that fact that he lived there and
did not die.

Logan

hall...@borg.com

unread,
Oct 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/12/98
to
In article <6vrltk$ep6$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,

rm...@sprintmail.com wrote:
>
>
> Bruce Fowler was not the black man. Bruce Fowler is white. He did hang around
> the Stoekley crowd and Helena did name him as being in the house that night.
> Bruce Fowler was interviewed by the BBC in 1989 for a documentary on the case
> called "False Witness".
>
> The black man's nickname might have been "Smitty". He was arrested a month
> before the murders after three men named him as thier dealer. These three men
> went to Cape Fear hospital because one had overdosed on herion. MacDonald was
> on duty that night. Dr. MacDonald saved the man's life and the nurse called
> the police and they came an arrested the three. They in turn gave the name of
> thier drug dealer , a black man who hung around a Poolroom in Fayetteville.
> Many police officers remember this arrest but the file has disappeared.

Thanks, friend, for the correction.

Do you have any information on the interview or the documentary?

hall...@borg.com

unread,
Oct 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/12/98
to
In article <19981012004744...@ng114.aol.com>,

mi...@aol.com (MIRSE) wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: The Black Man - Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald Case
> From: rm...@sprintmail.com
> Date: Sun, Oct 11, 1998 21:27 EDT
> Message-id: <6vrltk$ep6$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
> Bruce Fowler was not the black man. Bruce Fowler is white. He did hang around
> the Stoekley crowd and Helena did name him as being in the house that night.
> Bruce Fowler was interviewed by the BBC in 1989 for a documentary on the case
> called "False Witness".
>
> The black man's nickname might have been "Smitty". He was arrested a month
> before the murders after three men named him as thier dealer. These three men
> went to Cape Fear hospital because one had overdosed on herion. MacDonald was
> on duty that night. Dr. MacDonald saved the man's life and the nurse called
> the police and they came an arrested the three. They in turn gave the name of
> thier drug dealer , a black man who hung around a Poolroom in Fayetteville.
> Many police officers remember this arrest but the file has disappeared.
> ********

> Well, well, well. It appears that we have a controversy here. But that is
> what is so great about the Internet and boards such as this one: we have
> an international forum to straighten out mis-conceptions about issues such as
> the MacDonald
> murder case.
> Hallinan--- a regular poster to this board--- who I know has followed the
> case closely, and I believe knows the details of the the MacDonald case very
> well, says that the black man
> who went with Stoeckley to MacDonald's home was Bruce Fowler. I also think
> that in Fatal Justice, the recent book on the case, Stoeckley---who is
> dead---is quoted as saying that Fowler drove her to the MacDonald home that
> night.
> But now we have a newcomer named rmtl---who e-mailed me a few days ago and
> told me he/she lives near Fort Bragg---who contradicts Hallinan.
> Rmtl says that Fowler was white and that the black man's name was "Smitty."
> So could someone out there---hopefully someone who knew
> Fowler and "Smitty"---please straighten
> us out as to whether Fowler is black or not? Also, any other information on
> Fowler or the black man or " Smitty"would be appreciated. For instance, are
> they still living? If so,
> where are they today?

There is no controversy at all. I am perfectly willing to accept assurances
that Fowler was a white man and the black man was the drug dealer whose arrest
led to the FBI warning MacDonald his life was in danger. It changes little of
anything. The most it means is that I can be mistaken.

> I still say the black man was the invention of MacDonald. No black man was
> involved in the murders of
> MacDonald's wife and two little girls,
> because no evidence was ever found linking a black man or any man to the
crimes
> except MacDonald himself.

> Mi...@aol.com

LOL! This is like the atheist who assures the world that he can prove there
is no God. The proof is hard to come by. I suppose you won't sure any proof
of your thesis would you, Mirse?

There is, of course, evidence of a black man besides MacDonald's story. Many
people saw Helena Stoeckley (the blonde in the blonde wig and floppy hat)
with a black man in a jacket with a sergeant's stripe.

Obviously Fowler is still a viable suspect, white or black.

meaningfu...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Oct 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/12/98
to
In article <19981012004744...@ng114.aol.com>,
mi...@aol.com (MIRSE) wrote:
I still say the black man was the invention of MacDonald. No black man was
> involved in the murders of
> MacDonald's wife and two little girls,
> because no evidence was ever found linking a black man or any man to the
crimes
> except MacDonald himself.
> Mi...@aol.com
>
> Mirse, is it all right with you then that the Government withheld evidence

from the defense at the time of trial? You are aware, are you not, that the
only reason the defense knows about much of what was suppressed is that they
were only able to obtain these documents through the Freedom of Information
Act well after the time the trial ended. These documents CLEARLY show there
is evidence of other people in the MacDonald home the night of the murders.
Other false science was used by the prosecution at the time of trial such as
the pajama top folding experiment, which so twisted the evidence that it
would be laughable if not used to help convict the innocent.

What amazes me Mirse is that you seem to fixate on items such as "the black
man" in the home that night while refusing to comment on each item that was
kept from the defense. For all the defense knows there is, indeed, evidence
that directly shows hairs, for example, from a black man were found at the
crime scene. But many of these crucial evidentiary items orginally shown as
hairs in handwritten notes were merely catalogued as household debris or just
plain omitted from final reports.

What I challenge you to do, Mirse, is go over the list of items in Logan's
posting and explain the "insignificance" of each one. Then, tell me why the
Government continues to fight so hard to keep the DNA from being tested. For
them topping the list is ego and the fraud against the court, etc. For you,
is it the repeating of the same old disproved myths that keep you going or
are you one of the "I can see it in his eyes" type of people? Now that's
science.

Best,

M D

rm...@sprintmail.com

unread,
Oct 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/13/98
to

> Thanks, friend, for the correction.
>
> Do you have any information on the interview or the documentary?
>

> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>


Yes, i have the documentary on tape. If you would like a copy i would be more
than happy to make one for you. The documentary was made in 1989 by the BBC.
Bruce Fowler only had a very short interview. All he talked about was how the
drug dealing was going on back then and about what the main "hippie" apartment
looked like on the inside. It is a very interesting documentary and it runs
approximately 2 hours. It has the videotaped Stoekley confessions among other
things.

caz...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Oct 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/13/98
to
In article <19981010005320...@ng100.aol.com>,
mi...@aol.com (MIRSE) wrote:
>

I have followed this case and read everything I could find on it. I think the
answer can be found in the trial testimony presented in "Fatal Vision". The
Blood Pattern evidence, the "pajama tops" and MacDonald's testimony in his
own defence, taken together seem to me to be absolutly devastating to Dr Jeff.

The Blood evidence demonstrates conclusivly that bodies were moved after
the killings. For anyone who has read any of the Douglas or Resner books
knows, staging is done by an obvious suspect to divert suspicion. Most
commonly it is done by a close family member to make a homicide appear to be
a victim of a "burglary gone wrong". The blood, after the forensic
investigation, tells avery very different story that the positions of the
body.

TThe Prosecution shows the jury the pajama tops and an "expert" explains that
they were caused by someone stabbing Dr Jeff's wife multiple times through
the pajama tops while they were lain on top of her while she lay on the
ground. Dr Jeff claimed that an attacker pulled the pajamas he was wearing
over his head so that the back of the pajamas was in front of his chest while
his arms were still in the sleeves. He then held the pajamas in front of his
face as a shield to protect himself from the knive attack. The stabbing
action, Dr. Jeff claims, caused the knife holes (holes, not rips or tears)
and the pajamas miraculously protedted his face, chest and arms from any
knife wounds.

I haven't seen a picture of this pajama top, but if I did I am sure I to tell
which account was true. The jurors did see it and we know who they believed.

Anyone who wants to understand the issues should read just the account of the
trial in "Fatal Vision" (the rest of the book is arguably biased against Dr.
Jeff but largly irrelavent) and then read " Fatal Justice" and any Pro Mac
Donald inf on the Net. You will find lots of personal attacks on people
involved in the prosecution, lots of nit-picking at some of the evidenc and,
best of all, all kinds of stories of hippies(now conveniently dead) who may
not may not have told other people they had something to do with the killing,
but not adequet explaination for the Blood forensics and the condition of the
pajama tops."

Dr. Jeff is apparently a very personable fellow who has convinced many people
who have met him that he "couldn't possibly have done it", and many of us
would prefer to believe that drug-crazed hippies rather than such a clean cut
all american type could have done such a thing.

I am interested in a serious dialoge with anyone who has anything to
contribute to theses issues. Subject: Re: Jeffrey MacDonald?

> From: gatogordo <gato...@altavista.net>
> Date: Fri, Oct 9, 1998 19:05 EDT
> Message-id: <6vm4og$1h6$1...@news-1.news.gte.net>

> MIRSE wrote:
>
> > *******
> > To all posters: If you want to criticize
> > or agree with me on the Jeffrey MacDonald case, please do so on the open
> > board,
> > where everyone else can see it.
>

> How about a question? After reading the overpriced ($14.00! ) paperback
> which suggested McDonald was innocent, I was wondering what the real
> scoop on the piece of cloth ( pillowcase? ) with the knife holes might be.
> The defense said he had it wrapped around his hand and contained
> defensive wounds. The proscecution said it had been folded up and
> used to prevent blood splatter as he inflicted offensive wounds. The
> book, possibly called "Fatal Justice", suggested the prosecution's
> demo had been faked by having the cloth folded such that entrance
> and exit holes were lined up, but backwards.
>
> gatogordo

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------

hall...@borg.com

unread,
Oct 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/13/98
to
In article <6vupg4$h5s$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
caz...@my-dejanews.com wrote:

> I have followed this case and read everything I could find on it. I think the
> answer can be found in the trial testimony presented in "Fatal Vision". The
> Blood Pattern evidence, the "pajama tops" and MacDonald's testimony in his
> own defence, taken together seem to me to be absolutly devastating to Dr Jeff.

Have you read "Fatal Justice" or even "The Journalist and The Murderer?" Joe
McGinniss wrote a fictionalized account of the case. MacDonald, a man
serving three life terms, was paid $325,000 for McGinniss' lies after the
jury hung 5-1 in MacDonald's favor. The prosecution and the FBI fabricated
and withheld evidence.

Dr. MacDonald was destroyed on the stand by a prosecutor who kept asking why
there was no blood where he said he was beaten and stabbed unconscious.
There was, in fact, blood found there. Blood had been found in the hallway
and even a pile of fibers were seen before it was destroyed by investigators
and gawkers.

> The Blood evidence demonstrates conclusivly that bodies were moved after
> the killings.

No it doesn't. The blood evidence along with eyewitness testimony shows that
the sheet that supposedly moved Colette MacDonald was actually used to cover
the body.

> For anyone who has read any of the Douglas or Resner books
> knows, staging is done by an obvious suspect to divert suspicion. Most
> commonly it is done by a close family member to make a homicide appear to be
> a victim of a "burglary gone wrong". The blood, after the forensic
> investigation, tells avery very different story that the positions of the
> body.

The blood evidence accords perfectly with Dr. MacDonald's account of the
murders. In addition there were hairs found in the grasp of Colette and the
little girls that probably came from the killers. Some hair was torn from the
killer containing roots with flesh. Colette had a piece of flesh on her
fingernail that could not have come from Dr. MacDonald. The investigators
cleverly lost that.

The supposed staging had no identifiable purpose.

> TThe Prosecution shows the jury the pajama tops and an "expert" explains that
> they were caused by someone stabbing Dr Jeff's wife multiple times through
> the pajama tops while they were lain on top of her while she lay on the
> ground.

The spectacular pajama folding demonstration was a complete fraud. Paul
Stombaugh's own lab notes show he was not able to fold MacDonald's pajama top
so that holes lined up as they should. He had to fake it. The lab notes,
like much other evidence, were divulged only years after the trial through
Freedom of Information Act requests which were strongly fought. Almost two
decades after the trial the FBI is still withholding evidence.

> Dr Jeff claimed that an attacker pulled the pajamas he was wearing
> over his head so that the back of the pajamas was in front of his chest while
> his arms were still in the sleeves. He then held the pajamas in front of his
> face as a shield to protect himself from the knive attack. The stabbing
> action, Dr. Jeff claims, caused the knife holes (holes, not rips or tears)
> and the pajamas miraculously protedted his face, chest and arms from any
> knife wounds.

Dr. MacDonald was attacked by three men according to his account. Paul
Stombaugh, a chemist, was qualified as somehow a fabric expert. His claims
that the knife and ice pick could not have made the holes in the fabric makes
many unwarranted assumptions. Hospital records, again withheld by the
prosecution, show that Dr. MacDonald did, in fact, have numerous puncture
wounds both from an ice pick and knife, three obvious contusions of the head
from a club, as well as numerous abrasions. And then for those who wish to
believe he fought with Colette there were no fingernail scratches. Colette
MacDonald had blood on her hands that did not match Dr. MacDonald but did
match Greg Mitchell, who confessed to the murders. The prosecutors claimed
it came from one of the girls. They are fighting DNA testing to this day
even though it was ordered by the courts.

> I haven't seen a picture of this pajama top, but if I did I am sure I to tell
> which account was true. The jurors did see it and we know who they believed.

Yes, indeed.

> Anyone who wants to understand the issues should read just the account of the
> trial in "Fatal Vision" (the rest of the book is arguably biased against Dr.
> Jeff but largly irrelavent) and then read " Fatal Justice" and any Pro Mac
> Donald inf on the Net. You will find lots of personal attacks on people
> involved in the prosecution, lots of nit-picking at some of the evidenc and,
> best of all, all kinds of stories of hippies(now conveniently dead) who may
> not may not have told other people they had something to do with the killing,
> but not adequet explaination for the Blood forensics and the condition of the
> pajama tops."

Did you really read "Fatal Justice?" The "nit-picking" is what forensics is
all about.

Some of the "hippies" may not be dead at all. Helena Stoeckley has been
caught on tape confessing.

> Dr. Jeff is apparently a very personable fellow who has convinced many people
> who have met him that he "couldn't possibly have done it", and many of us
> would prefer to believe that drug-crazed hippies rather than such a clean cut
> all american type could have done such a thing.

Dr. MacDonald and his family were not the only victims of a cult. Perhaps you
think Charles Manson is fiction?

> I am interested in a serious dialoge with anyone who has anything to
> contribute to theses issues. Subject: Re: Jeffrey MacDonald?

Thank you for your interest.

MIRSE

unread,
Oct 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/14/98
to
><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: The Black Man - Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald Case
>From: rm...@sprintmail.com
>Date: Mon, Oct 12, 1998 13:37 EDT
>Message-id: <6vteoi$n1d$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>

MacDonald did not invent anyone or anything. Those people were in his house
that night. You say there is no evidence linking anyone to the crimes? You
obviously know nothing about the case. There is eyewitness accounts from
people in MacDonalds nieghborhood. There is eyewitness accounts from several
people in and around Fort Bragg.

*******
rmtl: Yes. You probably know more about the case than I do. You told me in
a recent e-mail that you live in the Fort Bragg,N.C. area, the scene of the
murders. So it is understandable that your local papers would have included
more detail information abut the case over the past 20+ years since the crime
than my local paper. So I have no arguement that you know more about the case
than I do.
Still, I believe that MacDonald is guilty as sin.
1. You say that the black man who
attacked MacDonald with a baseball bat was "Smitty". If you know so much about
the case, what was "Smitty's" real name? It seems to me that someone should
have easily been able to find out his real name in the 20 + years since the
murders. Was he mentioned in the 1989 British documentary?
What about GREG MITCHELL, the person Stoeckley claimed in Fatal Justice
attacked Macdonald's wife in the bedroom? Was he interviewed or mentioned in
the documentary?

2. MacDonald made sure to tell eveyone that he pulled a knife out of his
wife's chest after he found her, the
same knife that the military police found next to the wife's body when they
first arrived at the murder scene.
But as I understand it, later tests on the body of Colette, MacDonald's
wife, showed that the knife found near the body was never in Colette's body.
The knife that did all the damage was the one found outside in the back yard.
Am I wrong about this? If I am, could you please explain what did happen
concerning the knife found next to the wife's body.
3. In the Simpson case, the knife that killed Simpson's wife, Nicole, has
never been found. But in the MacDonald case, the killers dropped or threw a
knife. the icepick, and the piece of wood used to smash the heads of
MacDonald's wife and one of MacDonald's little girls outside near the back
door.
I find this act very strange. Why didn't the murderers take the weapons
with them, since they already had taken them outside?
And where was the bat that MacDonald claimed struck him?
The killers leave the knife, the icepick, and the long piece of wood in the
backyard, but for some unknown reason, they take the bat with them.
Excuse me, but this makes no sense to me. When the killer in the Simpson
case took the knife with him and presumably destroyed it, that makes sense to
me.
But the killers leaving three murder weapons
in MacDonald's back yard where they will easily be found is very suspicious to
me. Either the killers were very stupid or simply didn't care about the murder
weapons, even though just one fingerprint found on any of the weapons could
have put all of them on Death Row.
But for some
unknown reason, they valued that baseball bat a great deal, because it wasn't
left behind.
I believe that the weapons were found outside, not because the killers
dropped them as they were leaving out the back door, but because MacDonald
threw them outside in a fit of panic. As I recall, this was the theory in Fatal
Vision.
Mi...@aol.com

rm...@sprintmail.com

unread,
Oct 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/14/98
to

> rmtl: Yes. You probably know more about the case than I do. You told me
in
> a recent e-mail that you live in the Fort Bragg,N.C. area, the scene of the
> murders. So it is understandable that your local papers would have included
> more detail information abut the case over the past 20+ years since the crime
> than my local paper. So I have no arguement that you know more about the case
> than I do.
>

I live in Fayetteville, NC about 4 miles from Fort Bragg and the crime scene.
I don't trust newspapers because they always get thier information wrong. The
newspapers have nothing to do with what i know about the case.


Still, I believe that MacDonald is guilty as sin.
> 1. You say that the black man who
> attacked MacDonald with a baseball bat was "Smitty". If you know so much
about
> the case, what was "Smitty's" real name? It seems to me that someone should
> have easily been able to find out his real name in the 20 + years since the
> murders. Was he mentioned in the 1989 British documentary?
> What about GREG MITCHELL, the person Stoeckley claimed in Fatal Justice
> attacked Macdonald's wife in the bedroom? Was he interviewed or mentioned in
> the documentary?
>
>

I said his nickname MIGHT have been "Smitty" i never said that was his
nickname. The army investigators knew his name. The file of his arrest has
disappeared and the arrest was not in the local papers. He did exist however,
i know that from all of the witnesses who saw this man several times
including police officers and CID agents. He was mentioned several times in
the documentary by the witnesses who saw him. Greg Mitchell died in 1982 and
the documentary was made in 1989 so he wasn't interviewed but the witnesses
who Greg Mitchell confessed to and the witnesses who saw Greg Mitchell that
night were interviewed.

2. MacDonald made sure to tell eveyone that he pulled a knife out of his
> wife's chest after he found her, the
> same knife that the military police found next to the wife's body when they
> first arrived at the murder scene.
> But as I understand it, later tests on the body of Colette, MacDonald's
> wife, showed that the knife found near the body was never in Colette's body.
> The knife that did all the damage was the one found outside in the back yard.
> Am I wrong about this? If I am, could you please explain what did happen
> concerning the knife found next to the wife's body.
>

You are reading Fatal Vision to much. He didn't make sure he told everyone
like in the movie Fatal Vision but he told investigators he pulled a knife
out of his wife's chest. The knife that was found in the masterbedroom did
stab Colette. You are getting all of your information from Joe McGinness.

3. In the Simpson case, the knife that killed Simpson's wife, Nicole, has
> never been found. But in the MacDonald case, the killers dropped or threw a
> knife. the icepick, and the piece of wood used to smash the heads of
> MacDonald's wife and one of MacDonald's little girls outside near the back
> door.
>

First of all this case has nothing to do with the Simpson case. So you are
saying MacDonald is guilty because the killers left the weapons out back? If
they would have took the weapons with them would he be innocent?

I find this act very strange. Why didn't the murderers take the weapons
> with them, since they already had taken them outside?
> And where was the bat that MacDonald claimed struck him?
> The killers leave the knife, the icepick, and the long piece of wood in
the
> backyard, but for some unknown reason, they take the bat with them.
> Excuse me, but this makes no sense to me. When the killer in the Simpson
> case took the knife with him and presumably destroyed it, that makes sense to
> me.
>

Why take the weapons with them so they could just be found on them later? If
you leave them at the crime scene they couldn't be traced back to you right.

MacDonald said he was struck with what he at first thought was a bat but
might have been the club. I personally believe he was struck with a bat. This
black man was known to have a bat on him sometimes. A mail carrier said when
she was delivering mail one day that a black man wearing an army field jacket
swung a bat and hit a baseball towards her. After the phone call the killers
thought they were discovered and they were hurrying to get out of the house .
All of them were on drugs except for the black man . They threw the weapons
out back except for the scissors and the bat. I don't see what is so strange
about that. That is certainly not evidence that MacDonald is guilty.


But the killers leaving three murder weapons
> in MacDonald's back yard where they will easily be found is very suspicious to
> me. Either the killers were very stupid or simply didn't care about the
murder
> weapons, even though just one fingerprint found on any of the weapons could
> have put all of them on Death Row.
>

That is a bunch of crap. They left fingerprints everywhere but they were
destroyed by the army. The army probably destroyed the fingerprints on the
weapons also. Somebody wiped the knife that was found in the masterbedroom
after MacDonald left for the hospital. The knife was seen by the military
policemen in one direction and then photographed in another direction but yet
nobodys fingerprints were on that knife. They left tons of evidence in the
home and they are not on death row.


But for some
> unknown reason, they valued that baseball bat a great deal, because it wasn't
> left behind.
>

The black man probably thought the baseball bat could be traced to him so he
didn't drop it. Who knows what they were thinking they killed 3 people so i
don't think they were in thier right mind.

I believe that the weapons were found outside, not because the killers
> dropped them as they were leaving out the back door, but because MacDonald
> threw them outside in a fit of panic. As I recall, this was the theory in
Fatal
> Vision.

Fatal Vision, Fatal Vision, Fatal Vision, that is your problem you keep Fatal
Vision as a source. Fatal Vision is a fiction book. Joe McGinness was on the
stand for 4 or 5 days embarrassing himself. He was caught in so many lies. He
admitted he didn't even believe his own diet pill theory. He is a known liar.
Quit using Fatal Vision as a source of information on the case.

Give me physical evidence that MacDonald did this. The weapons are not
evidence of anything. If MacDonald is guilty then he threw the weapons out
back. If MacDonald is innocent then the killers dropped the weapons on the
way out. So give me evidence that he is guilty.The only weapon that has
proven to come from his house was the club. The governments theory is that it
was in the masterbedroom where Jeff picked it up.What is wierd about that is
that the club was weatherworn and it matched with the other wood that was
found out back.The governments theory is also that Colette picked up a knife
just laying around in the masterbedroom, why would they have a knife laying
around with a 2 and 5 year old in the house? Why don't you try with the two
things the jury said they came to convict MacDonald on. "No blood on the
hallway steps" and "No evidence of outside assailants".

Logan

meaningfu...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Oct 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/14/98
to
I suppose I should just let you two go at it, but I just wanted to add that
there are still a lot of viable prints left. They were not all destroyed.
They just were all compared to the family members and the people known to be
at the crime scene after the murders, such as the MPs, the doctor, ambulance
driver, neighbors, interlopers - 123 people in all and were left as
"unidentified" - no match. They were not compared to Stoekley, Mitchell,
Perry, Fowler, etc., because they were NEVER thought to be suspects by the
prosecution. This includes the palmprint in BLOOD on the footboard of the
bed in the master bedroom and other fingerprints in crucial places. But
these items (of course) were kept from the defense at time of trial.

Best,

M D

MIRSE

unread,
Oct 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/14/98
to
><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: The Black Man - Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald Case
>From: rm...@sprintmail.com
>Date: Wed, Oct 14, 1998 12:28 EDT
>Message-id: <702jfg$gj5$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>


I live in Fayetteville, NC about 4 miles from Fort Bragg and the crime scene.
I don't trust newspapers because they always get thier information wrong. The
newspapers have nothing to do with what i know about the case.

********
rmtl: If you didn't get your information about the case from the media such
as your local newspaper,
how did you learn so much about the case? It seems that these sources of
information have convinced you that MacDonald is innocent, so you should tell
the rest of us about them.
Who knows, your sources may be able to change the minds of many people who
believe that MacDonald is
guilty, such as me.
You criticize me for using Fatal Vision as a source about the case, so why
don't you list your own sources so the rest of the world can learn about the
case without reading Fatal Vision.
To be fair to Fatal Vision and MacDonald, please cite your sources, so that
we can compare what is in Fatal Vision----which you say is not correct----to
your sources, which I assume you believe is correct.
Don't you want the rest of the world to know as much about the case as you
do? Mi...@aol.com

MIRSE

unread,
Oct 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/15/98
to

I said his nickname MIGHT have been "Smitty" i never said that was his
nickname. The army investigators knew his name. The file of his arrest has
disappeared and the arrest was not in the local papers. He did exist however,
i know that from all of the witnesses who saw this man several times
including police officers and CID agents. He was mentioned several times in
the documentary by the witnesses who saw him. Greg Mitchell died in 1982 and
the documentary was made in 1989 so he wasn't interviewed but the witnesses
who Greg Mitchell confessed to and the witnesses who saw Greg Mitchell that
night were interviewed.
**********
rmtl: I stand corrected: You did
say that "his nickname MIGHT have
been "Smitty" in your earlier message.
Still, this person who "MIGHT have
been 'Smitty' " surely had a real name.
It seems to me that if you know the case as well as you claim or have access to
material that the rest of us don't have, you should have been able to come up
with "Smitty's" real name in the 20+ years since the murders.
So, do you have the real name of this person who you say "MIGHT have been
'Smitty' "?
Forgetting "Smitty" for a moment.
It seems everyone agrees that there was a black man who hung around with the
Stoeckley crowd, who seemed to like to swing a baseball bat, who was known to
hang around or lived in a nearby trailer ,and who was known to wear an army
fatigue jacket. What was his name? This black person's name should have been
easily to find out in the 20+ years
since the murders, either from the records or from talk on the street.
What do people on the street say the black person's name was? Mi...@aol.com

rm...@sprintmail.com

unread,
Oct 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/15/98
to


> rmtl: If you didn't get your information about the case from the media such
> as your local newspaper,
> how did you learn so much about the case? It seems that these sources of
> information have convinced you that MacDonald is innocent, so you should tell
> the rest of us about them.

First of all i am only 19 years old. I have gotten my information from a man
who was in the CID, Fred Bost who knows more about the case then anyone ,Lucia
Bartoli,vidoes on the case, crime scene photos, FATAL JUSTICE!,Tainting
Evidence, people who lived her back then, etc.

> Who knows, your sources may be able to change the minds of many people who
> believe that MacDonald is
> guilty, such as me.
>

Believe me there is absolutely nothing that will change the minds of some of
the people who think he is guilty including you.

You criticize me for using Fatal Vision as a source about the case, so why
> don't you list your own sources so the rest of the world can learn about the
> case without reading Fatal Vision.
>

I just did.

To be fair to Fatal Vision and MacDonald, please cite your sources, so that

> we can compare what is in Fatal Vision----which you say is not correct----to
> your sources, which I assume you believe is correct.

Fatal Vision is not correct. Do you even know that there was a civil trial in
1987 where MacDonald sued McGinness? All of it came out in the trial Mirse.
McGinness also got alot of scrutiny for the book "The Last Brother" where he
invented most of it.

rm...@sprintmail.com

unread,
Oct 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/15/98
to

> rmtl: I stand corrected: You did
> say that "his nickname MIGHT have
> been "Smitty" in your earlier message.
> Still, this person who "MIGHT have
> been 'Smitty' " surely had a real name.

I'm sure he did to.

> It seems to me that if you know the case as well as you claim or have access
to
> material that the rest of us don't have, you should have been able to come up
> with "Smitty's" real name in the 20+ years since the murders.

I don't claim to know anymore than the next person. I don't have access to
material that you or anyone else doesn't have and i never said i did. I am
only 19 so i wasn't alive back then. I don't know his real name if i did i
would tell you. His real name doesn't matter we know he existed that is all
that matters.

> So, do you have the real name of this person who you say "MIGHT have been
> 'Smitty' "?

No, i don't know his real name.


> Forgetting "Smitty" for a moment.
> It seems everyone agrees that there was a black man who hung around with the
> Stoeckley crowd, who seemed to like to swing a baseball bat,

I never said he like to swing a bat i said a mail carrier said he swung a bat
and hit a ball towards her.

who was known to
> hang around or lived in a nearby trailer ,and who was known to wear an army
> fatigue jacket.

That's true.

What was his name?

Why do you want to know this man's name so bad?

This black person's name should have been
> easily to find out in the 20+ years
> since the murders, either from the records or from talk on the street.

Well it hasn't . I said before the army knows this man's name but will not
release it. The government still has documents that they have not given the
defense. The defense has specifically requested certain documents and have not
been provided with them. Why Mirse? What are they hiding?

> What do people on the street say the black person's name was?

I am not an investigator. This was 28 years ago. It's hard to locate people
who were drug user in Fayetteville in 1970.

hall...@borg.com

unread,
Oct 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/15/98
to
In article <7055bk$2rf$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
rm...@sprintmail.com wrote:

Mirse:


> > This black person's name should have been
> > easily to find out in the 20+ years
> > since the murders, either from the records or from talk on the street.

> Well it hasn't . I said before the army knows this man's name but will not
> release it. The government still has documents that they have not given the
> defense. The defense has specifically requested certain documents and have not
> been provided with them. Why Mirse? What are they hiding?

> > What do people on the street say the black person's name was?

> I am not an investigator. This was 28 years ago. It's hard to locate people
> who were drug user in Fayetteville in 1970.
>
> Logan

Drug dealers are not always eager to have their identities well known.
Aliases are quite common.

Mirse might be well advised to direct his inquiries to the FBI in a Freedom of
Information Act request. Their efforts to protect the eveidence
against and identities of killers has been quite touching.

MIRSE

unread,
Oct 16, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/16/98
to
><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: The Black Man - Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald Case
>From: rm...@sprintmail.com
>Date: Thu, Oct 15, 1998 11:45 EDT
>Message-id: <7055bk$2rf$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com

So, do you have the real name of this person who you say "MIGHT have been
> 'Smitty' "?

No, i don't know his real name.


> Forgetting "Smitty" for a moment.
> It seems everyone agrees that there was a black man who hung around with the
> Stoeckley crowd, who seemed to like to swing a baseball bat,

I never said he like to swing a bat i said a mail carrier said he swung a bat
and hit a ball towards her.

who was known to
> hang around or lived in a nearby trailer ,and who was known to wear an army
> fatigue jacket.

That's true.
********
rmtl: You say you live in the Fayetteville/Fort Bragg area. Do people in
Fayetteville who believe that MacDonald is innocent, also believe that the
black man who supposedly swung a bat at a mail carrier and lived or hung around
in the trailer park with the Stoeckley crowd is the same black man who was in
MacDonald's home and was involved in the murders of MacDonald's wife and
MacDonald's two little girls?
Was it ever determined if the black man who swung the bat at the mail
carrier also lived in that trailer park?
Do you happen to know the names of some of the people, especially men,
who were considered to be part of the Stoeckley crowd, besides Greg Mitchell,
Stoeckley's boyfriend at the time? Mi...@aol.com

MIRSE

unread,
Oct 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/17/98
to
><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: The Black Man - Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald Case
>From: rm...@sprintmail.com
>Date: Thu, Oct 15, 1998 11:29 EDT
>Message-id: <7054dl$1mm$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>


First of all i am only 19 years old. I have gotten my information from a man
who was in the CID, Fred Bost who knows more about the case then anyone ,Lucia
Bartoli,vidoes on the case, crime scene photos, FATAL JUSTICE!,Tainting
Evidence, people who lived her back then, etc.

*******
rmtl:
1. Who is the Lucia Bartoli that you mention above?
2. Fred Bost, a co-author of Fatal Justice: Are you saying that you talked to
him personally? You corrected me by saying that the knife
found next to MacDonald's wife had indeed been in her body, which is contrary
to what I said, which I had read in Fatal Vision. Did Bost tell you this? Do
you know him personally?
If you know Bost personally, ask him if he is sure that the autopsy of
MacDonald's wife showed that
she had been stabbed several times
with the knife found next to her body, which is contrary to what Fatal Vision
said.
3. Have you read Fatal Vision?
Mi...@aol.com

rm...@sprintmail.com

unread,
Oct 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/17/98
to

> rmtl: You say you live in the Fayetteville/Fort Bragg area. Do people in
> Fayetteville who believe that MacDonald is innocent, also believe that the
> black man who supposedly swung a bat at a mail carrier and lived or hung
around
> in the trailer park with the Stoeckley crowd is the same black man who was in
> MacDonald's home and was involved in the murders of MacDonald's wife and
> MacDonald's two little girls?

Not many people in Fayetteville believe MacDonald is innocent. But there are
several witnesses who saw this black man on several occassions. I don't know
where those people are now. I personally believe it is the same man that was
in the MacDonald home.

> Was it ever determined if the black man who swung the bat at the mail
> carrier also lived in that trailer park?

I don't know that it has been "determined" but Detective Beasley who did a
raid on the trailer park in question said that a black man who often wore a
field jacket and hung around Helena's crowd lived there along with a couple
of white males. Other witnesses also say that a black man who often wore an
army field jacket lived in that trailer park on Murchison Road.

> Do you happen to know the names of some of the people, especially men,
> who were considered to be part of the Stoeckley crowd, besides Greg Mitchell,
> Stoeckley's boyfriend at the time?

Don Harris , Ray Cazeras, Cathy Perry, Pam Kriwanek, Robert Wallack, Larry
Cook, Diane Cazeras, Thomas Vincent Brown, Bruce Fowler, and Kathy Smith is
all i can think of right now.

rm...@sprintmail.com

unread,
Oct 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/18/98
to
1. Who is the Lucia Bartoli that you mention above?

She is a defense team researcher.

> 2. Fred Bost, a co-author of Fatal Justice: Are you saying that you talked
to
> him personally?

I have talked to him on two occasions over the phone.I have also had e-mail
correspondance with Jerry Potter a couple of times.

You corrected me by saying that the knife
> found next to MacDonald's wife had indeed been in her body, which is contrary
> to what I said, which I had read in Fatal Vision. Did Bost tell you this? Do
> you know him personally?

I have spoken with him over the phone. He lives here in Fayetteville. He
didn't tell me that because i never asked him. I don't think it is true
because 1. The simple fact that it was in Fatal Vision 2. If the knife did
not stab Colette then Dr. MacDonald is clearly lieing but the evidence proves
that he is not lieing 3. Innocent or guilty why would the knife be there if
it didn't stab her?

> If you know Bost personally, ask him if he is sure that the autopsy of
> MacDonald's wife showed that
> she had been stabbed several times
> with the knife found next to her body, which is contrary to what Fatal Vision
> said.

I will call him and ask him about that because i am curious myself. I don't
remember hearing about that being brought up at the trial so i don't think it
is true but i will check ok.


> 3. Have you read Fatal Vision?

Yes i have and i have watched the movie. I thought he was guilty after reading
the book and watching the movie but then i looked into it more and found out
the truth about the case.

Logan

MIRSE

unread,
Oct 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/18/98
to
><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: The Black Man - Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald Case
>From: rm...@sprintmail.com
>Date: Sat, Oct 17, 1998 12:13 EDT
>Message-id: <70afn9$8a9$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>

> Was it ever determined if the black man who swung the bat at the mail
> carrier also lived in that trailer park?

I don't know that it has been "determined" but Detective Beasley who did a
raid on the trailer park in question said that a black man who often wore a
field jacket and hung around Helena's crowd lived there along with a couple
of white males. Other witnesses also say that a black man who often wore an
army field jacket lived in that trailer park on Murchison Road.

********
rmtl: You are kidding me about Det. Beasley, aren't you? You tell me that
Det. Beasley raided the trailer park and found out "that a black man who often


wore a field jacket and hung around Helena's crowd lived there along with a
couple of white males".

This would be in North Carolina in the late 1960's, at the height of the
civil rights movement. Don't you think that such a living arrangement in the
South in the late 1960's, in
North Carolina, might attract a little attention? That is, don't you think
that other people living in the trailer park would know the names of the two
white males and the black male who were living together?
Are you seriously telling me that Beasley got all of the information above
but somehow forgot to find out the black man's name? I doubt very seriously
that an experienced police officer such as Beasley---he was a detective
according to what you say---would walk away from the trailer park without the
black man's name. I wouldn't be surprised if Beasley even
knew how old the black man was and what he did for living.
I've done a little investigating for a public agency. If Beasley came back
to the office and told me he knew all about the black man in the trailer park
but didn't know his name, I would be
amazed. The first thing I would do: order Beasley back to the trailer park and
tell him not to return until he got the name of the black man and as much
details about the black man he could get from neigbors. If I were mad enough,
I would have told Beasley not to come back until he found out what the man
liked to eat for breakfast.
My point: There is no doubt that Beasley knew the black man's name.
If Beasley knew his name, you can bet that Bost, the co-author of Fatal
Justice, easily found out the name from Beasley, who is mentioned often in his
book, or from somebody else.
You say that you learned about the case from Bost. So why don't you ask
him the name of the black man who lived in the trailer park and often wore an
army fatigue jacket? I bet Bost, an experienced military investigator,
knew the black man's name long before he wrote the recent book
Fatal Justice.
You claim that the black man's name is unimportant. Maybe to you it is not
important, but to many of us it is
important. So if you are able, get the black man's name from Bost and let
each one of us decide for ourselves if it is important
or not.
Maybe one of us would take the time to find where the black man is now
living and listen to his side of the story. Maybe one of his friends or
relatives reads this newsgroup and could give us information about him.
But we can't do anything without a name.
Mi...@aol.com


rm...@sprintmail.com

unread,
Oct 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/18/98
to

> ********
> rmtl: You are kidding me about Det. Beasley, aren't you? You tell me that
> Det. Beasley raided the trailer park and found out "that a black man who often
> wore a field jacket and hung around Helena's crowd lived there along with a
> couple of white males".

He didn't find out when he raided it. Detective Beasley knew that a black man
lived there along with two white males. Helena said there was supposed to be
drugs at the trailer and Beasley got a warrant on the day of the murders.They
did the raid and found drugs but no one was home. This is the same trailer
that the mail carrier said the black man hit a baseball at her and the same
trailer where other witnesses said this black man lived.

> This would be in North Carolina in the late 1960's, at the height of the
> civil rights movement. Don't you think that such a living arrangement in the
> South in the late 1960's, in
> North Carolina, might attract a little attention? That is, don't you think
> that other people living in the trailer park would know the names of the two
> white males and the black male who were living together?

That is what makes MacDonalds story all the more credible. The fact that he
described a rare group and they turned out to be real. It did attract
attention. I don't know if people in the other trailer parks would know thier
names or not. Thier murderers i know i wouldn't have tried to talk to them. Do
you just go up to anybody and say hey what's your name?


> Are you seriously telling me that Beasley got all of the information
above
> but somehow forgot to find out the black man's name?

Beasley didn't hang around the guy he had just seen him before and knew he
hung around Helena's crowd. I'm just telling you what i know.

I doubt very seriously
> that an experienced police officer such as Beasley---he was a detective
> according to what you say---would walk away from the trailer park without the
> black man's name. I wouldn't be surprised if Beasley even
> knew how old the black man was and what he did for living.

I told you nobody was home when the trailer park was raided. The guy sold
drugs for a living.


> I've done a little investigating for a public agency. If Beasley came back
> to the office and told me he knew all about the black man in the trailer park
> but didn't know his name, I would be
> amazed. The first thing I would do: order Beasley back to the trailer park
and
> tell him not to return until he got the name of the black man and as much
> details about the black man he could get from neigbors. If I were mad
enough,
> I would have told Beasley not to come back until he found out what the man
> liked to eat for breakfast.

ok

> My point: There is no doubt that Beasley knew the black man's name.
> If Beasley knew his name, you can bet that Bost, the co-author of Fatal
> Justice, easily found out the name from Beasley, who is mentioned often in his
> book, or from somebody else.

All i'm telling you is that i don't know his name. I don't know all of the
details around Beasley and the black man.

> You say that you learned about the case from Bost. So why don't you ask
> him the name of the black man who lived in the trailer park and often wore an
> army fatigue jacket? I bet Bost, an experienced military investigator,
> knew the black man's name long before he wrote the recent book
> Fatal Justice.

> You claim that the black man's name is unimportant. Maybe to you it is not
> important, but to many of us it is
> important.

Why is it so important? If you knew his name and he confessed it still
wouldn't matter to you.

So if you are able, get the black man's name from Bost and let
> each one of us decide for ourselves if it is important
> or not.

Why don't you call Bost and ask him since you want to know so bad.

> Maybe one of us would take the time to find where the black man is now
> living and listen to his side of the story. Maybe one of his friends or
> relatives reads this newsgroup and could give us information about him.
> But we can't do anything without a name.

That is the funniest thing i have ever heard. Give me a break. You don't know
if the man is dead or alive or where he is. "Take the time to find where the
black man is now" give me a break. Do you think everybody in the world looks
at this newsgroup? You have got to be kidding me.


Even if nobody knew any names or nobody confessed the evidence found in the
home proves that MacDonald is innocent. Im curious to know how you explain
the evidence that was suppressed? You have never explained the black wool,
wig hair, candle wax, bloody palmprint, fingerprint on the glass of chocolate
milk, unidentified hairs under Kimberly's and Kristen's fingernails and in
Colette's hand, bloody gloves, unidentified hairs in Kimberly and Kristen's
beds, blue acrylic fibers in Colette's hand and where Jeff laid unconscious,
bloody syringe, skin under Colette's fingernail.

Please Mirse explain all of that to me!

How do you explain the blond wig hair? The black wool? Candle wax?
unidentified hairs in victims hand and under fingernails? unmatched bloody
palmprint

MIRSE

unread,
Oct 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/18/98
to
><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: The Black Man - Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald Case
>From: rm...@sprintmail.com
>Date: Sat, Oct 17, 1998 12:13 EDT
>Message-id: <70afn9$8a9$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>

> Do you happen to know the names of some of the people, especially men,
> who were considered to be part of the Stoeckley crowd, besides Greg
Mitchell,
> Stoeckley's boyfriend at the time?

Don Harris , Ray Cazeras, Cathy Perry, Pam Kriwanek, Robert Wallack, Larry
Cook, Diane Cazeras, Thomas Vincent Brown, Bruce Fowler, and Kathy Smith is
all i can think of right now.

*******
rmtl: You have a lot of names here.
Do you know which one is the black man who lived or hung around the trailer
park and was often seen wearing a fatigue jacket?
If the black man's name is not listed,
why not? Surely one of the persons you name above would know the name of the
black man who supposedly was seen hanging around for several weeks with the
same
Helena Stoeckley as they did. I'm sure Bost would know.
Mi...@aol.com

MIRSE

unread,
Oct 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/18/98
to
><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: The Black Man - Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald Case
>From: rm...@sprintmail.com
>Date: Sun, Oct 18, 1998 14:13 EDT
>Message-id: <70db3d$r63$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>

> ********
> rmtl: You are kidding me about Det. Beasley, aren't you? You tell me
that
> Det. Beasley raided the trailer park and found out "that a black man who
often
> wore a field jacket and hung around Helena's crowd lived there along with a
> couple of white males".

He didn't find out when he raided it. Detective Beasley knew that a black man
lived there along with two white males. Helena said there was supposed to be
drugs at the trailer and Beasley got a warrant on the day of the murders.They
did the raid and found drugs but no one was home. This is the same trailer
that the mail carrier said the black man hit a baseball at her and the same
trailer where other witnesses said this black man lived.

********
rmtl: Do you live in a rented home or does your family own your home?
My point: It would have been very easy for Beasley to contact the owner or
manager of the trailer park, or the trailer itself, to find out who was
renting the trailer and who was living there.
If Beasley could not think to do such
an elementary step in his investigation, then he should never have been made a
detective, as you say he was.
So I have no doubt that Beasley knew the names of the two white males and
the black male who lived in that trailer. So ask Bost, the co-author of Fatal
Justice, what the name of the
black man is. As I said, he mentions Beasley several times in his book, so
there is no doubt he asked Beasley for the black man's name, if he didn't know
the name already, which he probably did, because he is a retired
army investigator, and he would know
what elementary questions to ask in an
investigation of a murder. Mi...@aol.com

MIRSE

unread,
Oct 19, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/19/98
to
Subject: Re: The Black Man - Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald Case
From: rm...@sprintmail.com
Date: Sun, Oct 18, 1998 01:29 EDT
Message-id: <70bubd$5fe$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>

1. Who is the Lucia Bartoli that you mention above?

She is a defense team researcher.

*******
rmtl: Do you have Lucia Bartoli's
address or e-mail address?
Mi...@aol.com

MIRSE

unread,
Oct 19, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/19/98
to
><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: The Black Man - Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald Case
>From: rm...@sprintmail.com

>Date: Sun, Oct 18, 1998 14:13 EDT
>Message-id: <70db3d$r63$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>

So if you are able, get the black man's name from Bost and let
> each one of us decide for ourselves if it is important
> or not.

Why don't you call Bost and ask him since you want to know so bad.

********
rmtl: Do you have Bost's address or e-mail address? Mi...@aol.com

MIRSE

unread,
Oct 19, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/19/98
to
><HTML><PRE>Subject: The Black Man - Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald Case
>From: hall...@borg.com
>Date: Sun, Oct 11, 1998 06:56 EDT
>Message-id: <6vq2t6$7cl$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>


Bruce Fowler was the name used by a black man in Helena Stoeckley's close
circle of friends. She identified him as the man who drove her to
MacDonald's apartment. His model of car was seen in the neighborhood. He is
currently suspected of living in Southern California and the MacDonald
Defense Team would very much like to talk to him.

As should be obvious Bruce Fowler is quite likely one of the intruders who
attacked Dr. MacDonald and killed his wife and two little girls.
********
As you know, in another message on this board recently rmtl told you that
Fowler is not black.
That is what is so great about the Internet and these newsgroups: other
posters can correct our factual mistakes when it comes to facts on issues,
such as the
guilt/innocence of MacDonald.
Just think, all these years, you believed that the black man was named
Fowler. But in just a few days after you posted
Fowler's name, rmtl corrected you about Fowler's race: He is not black.
But I am wondering: If you were wrong about Fowler's race, then
what else about the MacDonald case are
you wrong about? Mi...@aol.com

hall...@borg.com

unread,
Oct 19, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/19/98
to
In article <19981019011105...@ng63.aol.com>,
mi...@aol.com (MIRSE) wrote:

> As you know, in another message on this board recently rmtl told you that
> Fowler is not black.
> That is what is so great about the Internet and these newsgroups: other
> posters can correct our factual mistakes when it comes to facts on issues,
> such as the
> guilt/innocence of MacDonald.
> Just think, all these years, you believed that the black man was named
> Fowler. But in just a few days after you posted
> Fowler's name, rmtl corrected you about Fowler's race: He is not black.
> But I am wondering: If you were wrong about Fowler's race, then
> what else about the MacDonald case are
> you wrong about? Mi...@aol.com

I will be wrong about a number of things.

I have not believed "all these years" that Fowler was black. I know nothing
at all about Fowler today. I was told by a usually reliable source that
Fowler was the black man. I was surprised to learn that the drug dealer who
was arrested as the indirect result of the tip from the hospital where Dr.
MacDonald was operating and for which the doctor was blamed was involved in
the murders (if he was). It makes for a more logical connection to the
murders. I have a vague recall of the man with a bat.

But the primary proof that Dr. MacDonald is innocent is the blood and fiber
evidence, the fresh candlewax, the hairs from the killers, the bloody palm
print and other fingerprints. The best evidence is always such physical
evidence. Other evidence is much more subjective.

rm...@sprintmail.com

unread,
Oct 19, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/19/98
to

> rmtl: Do you have Lucia Bartoli's

> address or e-mail address?
> Mi...@aol.com


Go to the Official Jeffrey MacDonald websight and you can e-mail the defense
team.

http://members.tripod.com/~MacDonaldDefense/index.html

rm...@sprintmail.com

unread,
Oct 19, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/19/98