Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Should Jeffrey MacDonald Get a New Trial?

  1. #1
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    8,011
    Blog Entries
    3

    Should Jeffrey MacDonald Get a New Trial?

    FayObserver.com - <div>Jeffrey MacDonald lawyers argue in filings for new trial</div>

    Jeffrey MacDonald is becoming one of the most expensive convicted murderers in U.S. history. He is the subject of the best seller Fatal Vision by Joe McGinniss. Should he get a new trial 4 decades after the brutal murders?

    Here is one of my favorite pages on the topic.

    Here is a recent news story.

    I think that man is guilty as hell and the taxpayers money is being wasted hearing his endless nonsense appeals.

    Soapboxmom

  2. #2
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    8,011
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Should Jeffrey MacDonald Get a New Trial?

    FayObserver.com - <div>Lawyers say evidence backs up MacDonald conviction</div>
    Published: 05:53 AM, Sat Jul 17, 2010
    Lawyers say evidence backs up MacDonald conviction> <
    Jeffrey MacDonald
    RelatedBy Drew Brooks
    Staff writer

    Lawyers for the U.S. government argued in court filings Thursday that evidence that Jeffrey MacDonald claims exonerates him actually reinforces his 1979 conviction in three murders.

    MacDonald, a former Army surgeon at Fort Bragg, is serving three life sentences for killing his pregnant wife and their 5-year-old and 2-year-old daughters in 1970.

    Lawyers for MacDonald are trying to convince a federal appeals judge of his innocence. But the government opposes any move to grant MacDonald a new trial.

    The latest court filings by U.S. Attorney George E.B. Holding's office were in response to a supplemental brief filed by MacDonald's lawyers last month.

    The Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals requested supplemental briefs when it expanded the original scope of MacDonald's appeal this year.

    MacDonald's lawyers have argued that their client should receive a new trial while focusing on two pieces of evidence that were not available at the 1979 proceedings.

    The first is that a retired U.S. marshal said that a prosecutor coerced and threatened a witness to make her lie in the original case. The marshal has since died.

    The second piece of new evidence is DNA testing ordered in 1997 that MacDonald's lawyers say absolves him because it shows he was not the source of hairs found at the murder scene, including those taken from under the fingernails of one of his daughters.

    Lawyers reject claims
    Lawyers for the government reject the first claim because they say the witness, who also has since died, was unreliable, and that the U.S. marshal's recollections showed inconsistencies with what was recorded in the trial record.

    The DNA evidence, they said, also has no value.

    "The determination, via DNA testing, that three hairs did not match any other sample tested and therefore had no known source has no probative value in this case .," the government said in its brief. "Nor is there substance to MacDonald's claim that any of the three unsourced hairs was bloody and/or forcibly removed. That assertion is based upon a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the forensic evidence."

    The lawyers claim that MacDonald has misrepresented when, where and by whom some evidence was collected and fails to mention that the hairs were found with numerous threads from his pajama top, with his own hair and on a bedspread contaminated with dog hair.

    The government also argues that some of the evidence MacDonald cites was collected in March 1970, almost a month after the removal of the victims' bodies.

    Instead of exonerating him, the government argues that the forensic evidence not available at trial would only serve to further convince a jury of his guilt.

    "MacDonald's DNA claim does not call into question any forensic evidence introduced by the government at trial," the government argues. "Moreover, the DNA test results do not in any way impugn the compelling forensic evidence that demonstrated the falsity of MacDonald's version of events on the night of the murders and showed that he was the only possible criminal agent."

    The government says the evidence of pajama threads and MacDonald's footprint in his wife's blood can't be explained by the actions of intruders.

    "The jury understood that nobody but MacDonald could have stabbed his wife through his pajama top because, according to his own account of the event, he placed the pajama top on his wife's chest after the alleged intruders had departed," the government said.

    Several appeals
    MacDonald has always maintained his innocence and has appealed his convictions several times. He has repeatedly said a group of hippies killed his family in their home on Fort Bragg.

    He has been in federal prison since 1982, after an appeal he won was overturned. MacDonald, who was 26 when his family died, is now 66.

    MacDonald's latest appeal has been in the appellate court since shortly after its dismissal by a lower court in 2008.

    Lawyers for the government argue that MacDonald's many attempts at a new trial should put increased scrutiny on this and any other appeals.

    MacDonald's lawyers have asked to be allowed to argue their case before the court later this year. Lawyers on both sides last argued their cases in a federal courtroom in March.

    The MacDonald case was the basis for a best-selling book and television miniseries, "Fatal Vision."

    Staff writer Drew Brooks can be reached at brooksd@fayobserver.com or 486-3567.
    I believe it is high time these costly appeals end. How many millions are the tax payers going to have to spend on this clown?

    Soapboxmom

  3. #3
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    8,011
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Should Jeffrey MacDonald Get a New Trial?

    This has to be the most nauseating video on the web. I hope he rots in jail where he truly belongs!

    http://vodpod.com/watch/2609712-jeff...on-dick-cavett

    Soapboxmom

  4. #4
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    8,011
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Should Jeffrey MacDonald Get a New Trial?

    Jeffrey Macdonald has won his appeal. Years of legal wrangling and millions of tax dollars later this obviously guilty murderer is still tying up the courts.

    FayObserver.com - Appeals court backs MacDonald on review of new evidence

    Soapboxmom

  5. #5
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    8,011
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Should Jeffrey MacDonald Get a New Trial?

    Hilariously, all the lawyers who have worked for MacDonald have jumped ship. He has a public defender who has never been involved with his 40 year case before. He was already barfing up the wrong tree, but now he hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell!

    http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.c...2011-11-01.pdf

    I want to thank Christina Masewicz for spending the time and money to make all those vital court documents public.

    newuploads

    The killer's wife, Kathryn MacDonald has this list of counsel on their website. I think it is high time she remove that in light of his current representation.

    The MacDonalds are pleased and grateful to have the services
    of such a strong and dedicated team of attorneys
    HART MILES
    Raleigh, North Carolina

    Hart Miles graduated from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and received his law degree at Campbell University Law School. A native of Raleigh, his legal career began at the Wake County Courthouse, where he served as an Assistant District Attorney. In 1997, Mr. Miles went into solo practice as a criminal defense lawyer in Raleigh, where he has tried cases in both state and federal courts. He joined the defense in 2005 and continues to contribute considerable legal efforts toward achieving Jeff exoneration he neters the appeals process as co-counsel with attorney Joe Zeszotarski.

    Click Here
    JOE ZESZOTARSKI
    Raleigh, North Carolina

    Joe has defended clients in both federal and state cases. He regularly represents indigent persons in murder cases involving the death penalty across North Carolina. Joe’s expertise in the area of criminal defense is recognized by his “AV” rating by Martindale Hubbell, as well as his being selected by his peers for inclusion in “The Best Lawyers in America” since 2003, and as a “North Carolina Super Lawyer” since 2006. He was also ranked among Business North Carolina’s Legal Elite in 2008. Joe also represents clients on appeal, and has argued appeals in the federal courts of appeal, the North Carolina Court of Appeals, and the North Carolina Supreme Court.

    He is a member of the bar of all state and federal courts in North Carolina, and is admitted to the bar of the First, Fourth, and Eleventh Circuit Courts of Appeal. Prior to joining the law firm of Poyner Spruill, Joe served as a Law Clerk to the Honorable William L. Osteen of the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina from 1994 to 1995.
    PHIL CORMIER and ANDY GOOD
    Boston, Massachusetts

    The firm of Good & Cormier (formerly Silverglate & Good) has handled the MacDonald case since 1989, when attorney Harvey Silverglate (now of counsel to Good & Cormier) took the case because of his belief in Jeff MacDonald’s innocence. Andy Good, Phil Cormier and Harvey Silverglate have been heavily involved in the appeals process and DNA issues of the case, and are committed to Jeff’s criminal defense as well as student rights, civil liberties, and constitutional litigation.

    Click Here
    TIM JUNKIN
    Maryland

    Tim Junkin graduated from the University of Maryland with honors and from Georgetown University Law School in 1977. He began his legal career as a public defender. He served as counsel in several notable murder trials before becoming a national trial lawyer in private practice. He has taught at Georgetown, Harvard and American University, where he received the Adjunct Professor of the Year Award.
    Tim is also the author of three books, the novels Good Counsel (2000) and The Waterman (1999), as well as Bloodsworth (2004).
    After writing the story of Kirk Bloodsworth, the first death row inmate exonerated by DNA tests, Tim became deeply involved in the issue of wrongful convictions. He felt compelled to take the MacDonald case in 2004, viewing it as “the most horrendous case of injustice” he had seen in all of his years of practice. He recently formed a non-profit dedicated to saving the health of the Choptank River on the Eastern Shore of MD, part of the Waterkeeper's Alliance.

    Click Here
    WADE SMITH
    Raleigh, North Carolina

    Wade Smith co-founded the law firm of Tharrington Smith in 1964. During the ensuing forty years-plus years, he has tried and defended dozens of federal and state cases in North Carolina and other states. Also during those years, Mr. Smith was elected to the North Carolina House of Representatives twice, and served as President of the Wake County Bar Association, among other distinctions. In 1979, he served as co-counsel (with Bernard Segal), defending Jeff at trial. Losing this case, in which an innocent man went to prison, was a huge blow to Mr. Smith personally. He supported Jeff for 24 years as local counsel, and believes“this terrible wrong must be righted”. His illustrious and storied career was recognized once again in 2004 when his peers voted him North Carolina’s Number One Criminal Litigator for 2004 (Business North Carolina Magazine). He has been listed in Best Lawyers in America since its inception.
    Most recently, Mr. Smith has been noted for his work in the Duke-Lacrosse case, and the eventual disbarment of prosecutor Michael Nifong.

  6. #6
    baylee is offline Senior Scambuster
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    980

    Re: Should Jeffrey MacDonald Get a New Trial?

    I read the book and watched the movie and from that, I think he is one Arrogant person. I realize that books and movies can be slanted one way or the other but he was also judged guilty. Arrogant Fits.

  7. #7
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    8,011
    Blog Entries
    3

  8. #8
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    8,011
    Blog Entries
    3

  9. #9
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    8,011
    Blog Entries
    3

  10. #10
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    8,011
    Blog Entries
    3

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed on this website are solely those of their respective authors.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42