JTF

Since: Jul 08

Saint Albans, VT

#7896 Sep 24, 2013
Kudos to Brian, John, and Leslie.

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/downlo...

Since: Jan 09

Phoenix, AZ

#7897 Sep 24, 2013
I also found the sur-reply at:

http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_macdonald/u...

When I saw the exhibits re: Jimmy Friar and the others, I knew this was going to be another good read. Can't wait to go through all of it.

Since: Jan 09

Phoenix, AZ

#7898 Sep 24, 2013
Hmmm...my post seems to have disappeared. Here I go again...

I also saw the sur-reply at:
http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_macdonald/u...

I thought it was ridiculous for the defense to place such emphasis on Jimmy Friar, a small-time criminal if memory serves, and someone they didn't even bother to call as a witness at trial. When I saw the sur-reply list of exhibits re: Jimmy Friar and the others, I knew this was going to be another good read. Can't wait to get into it.

Since: Jan 09

Phoenix, AZ

#7899 Sep 24, 2013
And of course, the minute I post a 2nd time, there's my first post from several minutes ago. Sheesh.

Since: Jan 09

Phoenix, AZ

#7900 Sep 24, 2013
A few thoughts about the Sur-Reply:

Love how the first thing the government brings up was the agreement, violated by the defense, as to not including anything that wasn't in the record of the case prior to Mac's Aug. 22 filing. Also noteworthy is their dissection of the exhibits the defense submitted on June 10.

Good summary of Friar: "Friar was, and remains, an unreliable witness spinning a belated tale of improbably coincidences, that is riddled with contradictions and uncorroborated by and reliable and credible evidence."

The Sur-Reply once again eviscerates MacDonald via totally discrediting Mary and Jimmy Britt, Jerry Leonard, Jimmy Friar, and the contradictions and "atmosphere of suggestibility" with regard to the affidavit of Stoeckley's mother.

They also nicely sum up Mac's claims re: the unsourced hairs. "The section of MacDonald’s Reply dealing with his unsourced hair claims addresses none of the Government’s refutation, and contains not a single challenge or citation to the Government’s Memorandum...MacDonald merely repeats his arguments from the Evidentiary Hearing...MacDonald ignores the reality of his demonstrated failure to meet his burden of proof, and the Government’s refutation evidence in respect of his 2006 unsourced hairs claim..., and proceeds to argue, without citation to the record, as if there were no disputed factual issues."

All in all, it was a good read for sure. I'll bet ol' Mac is livid.

Since: Jan 09

Phoenix, AZ

#7901 Sep 24, 2013
JTF wrote:
The sur-reply puts a steak in the heart of the Ice Pick Baby Killer's remote chance at a new trial. The government put forth a painstaking portrayal of a flip-flopping defense team that has consistently failed to meet the burden of proof on any of the relevant issues in this case. The defense didn't come close to proving the Britt issue, the unsourced hair claim, the Gunders..., I mean, Leonard claim, and the reliability of the Stoeckley confessions.
To compare the defense's 37 page reply memo to the government's 54 page sur-reply is akin to comparing a velvet tiger portrait to a Picaso painting. Gordie has been unimpressive in collecting his blood money whereas Murtagh/Cooley/Bruce continue to advocate for those who can no longer speak for themselves.
http://www.th ejeffreymacdonaldcase.c...s/35 2-main.pdf
Well-said, JTF. ITA. I think Mac is truly nearing the end of his legal road, at long last. It can't come a moment too soon for me.

JTF

Since: Jul 08

Saint Albans, VT

#7902 Sep 24, 2013
The beauty of Gordie's arrogance (e.g., requesting a Defense reply to the Government's 200 page masterpiece) is that he allowed the Government to have the last word. There is NO chance that Judge Fox will allow a reply to a reply, so any rebuttal regarding the Gunderson/Leonard comparisons is limited to private diatribes between inmate, Kathryn, and Gordie. IMO, the Government did a good job of using the ramblings of Stoeckley/Friar as a bridge to Leonard's lifting from Gunderson's dubious investigation. In addition, they used Leonard's own words (e.g., 2012 evidentiary hearing) against him to prove that he is an unreliable reporter.

The other thing that stood out was how the Government placed importance on having citations for every one of their arguments which is in stark contrast to Gordie's reliance on sweeping claims with no accompanying documentation. As the Government pointed out in their sur-reply, this forced the Defense to alter and backtrack on several key evidentiary arguments. Prime examples of each are as follows.

BACKTRACKING: Prior to the evidentiary hearing, the Defense filed briefs arguing that the three unsourced hairs were bloody and broken. At the hearing, Gordie admitted that this was not the case, but he then went back to his original position on the hairs in his 130 response memo. In his 37 page reply, he again backtracked on his original position by stating that the condition of the hairs was irrelevant. Gordie stated that the only relevant aspect of the hairs was that they were unsourced.

ALTERATION: Since 2006, the Defense has argued that inmate's constitutional rights were violated when Blackburn allegedly threatened Stoeckley and allegedly lied to Judge Dupree about the nature of his interview with Stoeckley. In post-hearing memos, however, Gordie claims that the Defense has no obligation to prove that inmate's constitutional rights were violated. Considering that this was the MAIN argument leveled by the Defense during oral arguments before the 4th Circuit Court, his current position on this issue is flat-out laughable.

Inmate is done. He knows it. Kathryn knows it. Gordie knows it. This isn't some fawning interviewer buying into unsubstantiated claims spilling out of the mouth of Errol Morris. This is a legal process that requires concrete proof of claims rendered in briefs, memos, and appellate hearings. The burden of proof is on the Defense, that burden is "extraordinarily high," and they failed to meet that burden. They failed on the merits of the Britt claim. They failed on the merits of the unsourced hair claim. They failed on the constitutional claim. Most importantly, they failed to prove that a reasonable juror would not convict MacDonald based on the "evidence as a whole."

http://www.crimearchives.net/1979_ma..._sur-r...
sam aritan 1

San Jose, CA

#7903 Sep 24, 2013
Ol' macD's goose was cooked long ago. What's left is a shriveled, blackened scrap of goose-jerky. He's been given more chances than anyone on EARTH and incredible amounts of leeway. Why, I don't know, but I am happy to see that it is about to STOP!

JTF

Since: Jul 08

Saint Albans, VT

#7904 Sep 25, 2013
The Government's presentation of the Britt matter is another example of how advocates for inmate's shell game tend to scrape the bottom of the credibility barrel. For example...

"Mary Britt also testified that Jimmy Britt told her he was at Fort Bragg with MacDonald during his time in the Army, which is clearly false."

Like Stoeckley, Gunderson, and Leonard, Britt can't even keep the little things straight. Widenhouse and Morris make excuses for Britt's tall tales by stating that he simply has a poor memory. Considering that both men are hypocrites (e.g., Jack Crawley wasn't cut the same slack), their arguments are meaningless to those with knowledge of the documented record, but many media members have fed Gordie's and Errol's special brand of nonsense to the general public. Hopefully, discussion boards and websites that focus on the facts of this case, have influenced the thought process of those who don't take everything at face value.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
glazier

Mckees Rocks, PA

#7905 Oct 9, 2013
just think, this whole nightmare started around the time of the NFL/AFL merger..right around SuperBowl 4! We're getting ready or Super Bowl 48!

Puts it perspective, eh?
Heck, I still had hair when I first read FatalVision in the mid 80s.

What irks me most abut the ENDLESS appeals is the psychological 'boost' for MacMurderer...
in short: HOPE
and also ATTENTION, Media attention where he can play out his martyr fantasy.

But very very soon those four walls will close in with the realization that IT IS OVER!
No more Lawyer visits, media interviews, the last sickening, desperate Groupies will fade away...

Steven King once wrote: " The absence of HOPE is...
DESPAIR" !!

JTF

Since: Jul 08

Saint Albans, VT

#7906 Oct 9, 2013
GLAZIER: "C'mon, boys. Keep matriculating the ball down the field." That was the last time that the Chiefs appeared in a Super Bowl and the last time that MacDonald had a soul.

The good news is that whatever psychological boost that MacDonald gets from these ongoing appeals, the reality of the situation has kicked his ass on a physical and emotional level. He looked 10 years older at the 2012 hearing and he has to know that the Government destroyed any viable chance he had at a new trial.

The Government's two post-hearing response memos demonstrated that the Defense did not come close to meeting their burden of proof. They basically avoided addressing the evidence that led to inmate's conviction and their talking points were a series of distortions, assumptions, half-truths, and b.s. Inmate is done. He knows it. His wife knows it. His lawyers know it.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
Popeye

Deer Park, TX

#7908 Jan 18, 2014
Been off for awhile. Glad to see JTF and the rest of you are keeping close watch. When is Judge Fox supposed to render his decision?

JTF

Since: Jul 08

Saint Albans, VT

#7909 Jan 22, 2014
POPEYE: The most likely scenario is Judge Fox making a decision in the Spring. The last brief was filed in September, so it will take him 6-8 months to sort through all of the issues addressed at the 2012 evidentiary hearing.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
glazier

Pittsburgh, PA

#7910 Feb 17, 2014
Watching "Green Beret Murder Mystery" on the Biography channel
right now...it's from 2004 with Bill Curtis.

Thought maybe it was on cause a decision was in.
I guess not yet.
Tick-Tock....

JTF

Since: Jul 08

Saint Albans, VT

#7911 Feb 18, 2014
GLAZIER: A majority of that show was taped in 1998, so there is little new information.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

JTF

Since: Jul 08

Burlington, VT

#7912 Feb 21, 2014
GLAZIER: Heck, the most updated information on that show is that DNA test results are "pending." Considering that DNA test results were released in 2006, the updated version of the show is at least 9 years old.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
glazier

Pittsburgh, PA

#7913 Feb 22, 2014
Yes it was definitely dated...how confident the MacMurder groupies
were back then!
They have whined and pontificated through the years the years, but eventually hit the brick wall of TRUTH. It will never change even if the names and faces of his "advocates" do so.

Feel a little STUPID now for not realizing the show was on that day (Feb 17)
because it was the Anniversary of that dank,cold. rainy night I 1970...
propelled me to pull out my paperback of Fatal Vision, watch the Movie
on You Tube(how GOOD was Gary Coe as JM, eh?)...re-visited
Christina's site and read all he Christinas Corner posts...
this case has a way of staying with you through the years even if you put it on the back burner for long stretches of time.
I was born 3 months before Kimberly in 1964.
If we had lived in the same town she would have been my class mate,
and it caused me to think of all the little girls from Elementary School
that I still see today with their own Grandkids now.

It is way beyond time to END this nightmare once and for all.

JTF

Since: Jul 08

Burlington, VT

#7914 Feb 23, 2014
GLAZIER: In Fatal Vision, McGinniss comments on Paul Stombaugh's ongoing effort to piece together a murder timeline, stating that Stombaugh, "is just one of many who have grown obsessed." This case will do that to you. There are several reasons (e.g., most litigated murder case in history, Golden Boy charged with the murders, an abundance of forensic evidence) why this case has stuck for 44 years, and I'm hoping that sometime this Spring, Judge Fox ends this nonsense once and for all. The case is open and shut. Jeffrey MacDonald is a coward, a liar, and a psychopath.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com
glazier

Pittsburgh, PA

#7915 Feb 23, 2014
COWARD most of all, imo.(although He lies just as natural as drawing a breath)
Who could murder in such horrific fashion a 5 year old and a toddler?
Beyond my comprehension.
Little to do for us now but to wait...wait for the decision to end all decisions.
The inmate must wait as well...but he surely knows, in the wee hours of the morning, that it is over.
I read the sur reply, and I can't see anyway how the Defense could prevail here.
I do hope the Judges response contains some language of...
"finality" ?
Been a long time coming and I am looking forward to it!

JTF

Since: Jul 08

Saint Albans, VT

#7916 Feb 25, 2014
GLAZIER: The Government's reply AND sur-reply were incredibly impressive. Brian Murtagh, John Stuart Bruce, and Leslie Cooley left no stone unturned. I wish every prosecutor would advocate for victim's of murder in the same manner.

http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

JonBenet Ramsey Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
ICU2 's Child Trafficking 1 hr ICU2 21
Fleet and Priscilla White on Peter Boyles show ... 11 hr Passion 43
Note-odd detail? 17 hr JBI 2,403
JonBenet Investigation (Nov '11) Tue JBI 1,629
JonBenet Ramsey, DNA and the Phantom of Heilbronn Dec 22 Bakatari 6
The Forgotten Suspect Dec 22 Legal__Eagle 227
"Note-Free Case Discussion" Dec 22 Legal__Eagle 99
More from around the web