The Jeffrey MacDonald Information Site is a compendium of information about the Jeffrey MacDonald case. MacDonald was convicted in 1979 of the murders of his pregnant wife and two small daughters. He is serving three life sentences for that brutal crime.


The Murders of Colette, Kimberley and Kristen MacDonald
 

The Jeffrey MacDonald Information Site

1979 JEFFREY MACDONALD CASE TRIAL TRANSCRIPT
August 21, 1979: Major James Williams


MR. SMITH: Your Honor, if you would give us one moment, we will have another witness ready.

(Counsel confer.)

(Whereupon, JAMES WILLIAMS was called as a witness, duly sworn, and testified as follows:)


D I R E C T E X A M I N A T I O N 2:48 p.m.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Major Williams, will you tell us where you are presently stationed, and what your assignment is?
A I am a Major on active duty stationed at Fort Sam Houston, Texas. I am an instructor with the Academy of Health Sciences.
Q And just briefly, what is the Academy of Health Sciences?
A It is the Army's medical school for all medics and officers -- medical officers -- from privates to colonels.
Q Are you a medical officer yourself?
A I am a Medical Service Corps officer.
Q What is the distinction between that and being a medical officer?
A Well, technically I am a medical officer, but I am not a doctor. I am more in the administrative aspects of supporting the professional doctors.
Q How long have you been in the Army, Major Williams?
A I have been in the Army 13 years.
Q What have been the nature of your assignments throughout those 13 years -- the general character of them?
A Primarily I have been assigned to Airborne or Airborne-type units with the exception of this present assignment, where I am in fact an instructor. I am not on Airborne status.
Q Now, are you an Airborne qualified officer?
A Yes, sir.
Q And jump qualified?
A Yes, sir; I am.
Q Now, back in 1969 and '70, were you stationed at Fort Bragg, North Carolina?
A Yes. I was assigned to the Sixth Special Forces Group as the Medical operations and Training Officer.
Q Now, when you say "Special Forces Group," that is also known as the Green Berets; correct?
A Absolutely.
Q When did you first commence your assignment at Fort Bragg at the Special Forces?
A My first assignment with Special Forces was in January, 1968. I had just returned from Viet Nam.
Q How long had you been in Viet Nam prior to that?
A Twelve months, sir.
Q When you joined the unit at Fort Bragg, what was your particular assignment? Just the nature of the job and what you were required to do?
A It was primarily to organize for the doctor -- the group surgeon -- and for the Group Commander all the aspects of any mission whatsoever that involved medical support. My training aspect -- I was responsible for what we call refresher training of all the Special Forces troopers -- officer and enlisted -- primarily enlisted and NCO or non-commissioned officers, generally two weeks in duration. We would cross-train various specialty areas, people with --
Q What do you mean when you say "cross-training"?
A Well, as an example, an infantryman would receive medical training -- it would not be his primary specialty, but we would, as medics, present that type of training to those individuals and give them what we call "cross-training" so they would at least have an exposure to medical situations which would prepare them for situations involving the need for medical whatever.
Q Now Mr. Williams, in 1969 and 1970, did you become aware of the existence of any type of drug problem at Fort Bragg?
A Yes, sir; I did.
Q Would you tell us about that?
A It was a very bad period during that time. We had exposure to many soldiers coming back from Viet Nam who had become either addicted to drugs or were presently abusing drugs. We had a high turnaround of soldiers coming from Viet Nam to Fort Bragg and then going back -- some within nine months of return from Viet Nam. It was critical for us because we were caught in the middle as the medical people of this group. Not only were we responsible for our Special Forces troopers, but we were responsible for non-Special Forces people -- primarily individuals from the Fourth Cyops Battalion who had a high incidence of drug abuse. We were responsible for their daily care and it was becoming of such a problem to us because the Army had no program whatsoever for dealing with this type of a situation. In other words, there was no formal Army program for treating addicts or drug abusers.
Q Now was there some discussion between you and other responsible officers as to how to treat the problem of drug abuse among the soldiers you are talking about?
A Yes, sir. We surfaced this to our group commander and brought it to his attention, trying to get some guidance as to, "What do you do with these individuals?" They were not classified as medical problems or legal problems. We didn't know, and primarily at that time, the guidance was to turn them over to the law authorities.
Q You mean any soldier found involved in drug abuse was to be a reference made to the MPs and CID?
A Absolutely.

MR. BLACKBURN: We would OBJECT to this on the grounds of relevancy.

MR. SEGAL: I'll make an offer, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Go ahead.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Now, did the solution or the approach of referring these matters to the CID and MPs for resolution -- did that produce any noticeable change in the drug abuse problem that you were aware of at Fort Bragg?
A No, sir; it did not. We made a counter-proposal that we participate with the law enforcement people in sort of an open seminar with our troops to bring it out in the open -- so to speak -- as to what the ramifications were for drug abuse and to sort of eliminate an environment that was becoming quite hostile. I would characterize the feeling at Fort Bragg during that time -- and especially around our unit and our troops -- as being quite a paranoia situation.
Q You say paranoia. You mean paranoid about what, are you talking about?
A Troopers were suspecting other troopers of being agents of CID and what have you.

MR. ANDERSON: Your Honor, I OBJECT.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Now, Mr. Williams, was there some effort made to treat this particular drug problem the latter part of 1969 as a medical problem, to deal with it through medical resources?
A Yes, there was. The group commander agreed to allow the doctors to treat the drug abusers. In addition, he agreed to have a sort of a balanced seminar. As a result of this seminar, he had all of his troopers in this one auditorium.
Q Before you get into that, let me ask you, did you come to know Dr. MacDonald during that period of time that these problems were being discussed and some solutions being developed?
A Yes, sir; he was going to be our solution to this problem.
Q How would that be a solution?
A I checked down at Fort Sam Houston whether in fact they had any doctors just becoming captains in the Army, and I learned from my friends that there was a young doctor down there who had volunteered for Special Forces.
Q Was that unusual in any way?
A It was extremely unusual. Doctors were assigned to us generally for about a year and a half and then they had a lapsed term of service and they got out of the service. So we were constantly searching for other doctors to come and give us a hand. So he was brought to my attention that he had volunteered for Special Forces and was going to jump school. We kept contact with our friends -- our medical friends at Fort Benning, and even tracked him up to Fort Bragg.
Q You were following his whereabouts although he didn't necessarily know about it?
A He didn't know us, and we knew him -- of him by his reputation; and when he got to Fort Bragg, something happened and he got assigned to the Third Special Forces group instead of to my group.
Q You mean the Sixth Special Forces?
A Absolutely. I didn't give up on him. Finally he was assigned to us as the preventive medicine officer, and one of his duties was drug abuse counseling.
Q Now, tell us about that. First of all, when was he assigned to your unit, and then what was the nature of the drug abuse counseling and responsibility?
A He was assigned to the Sixth Special Forces in December of 1969, and the group surgeon at that time -- Captain Heeston -- was getting ready to get out of the service; so he was -- he told me and I was -- well, his -- I worked for this group surgeon -- that now we had the preventive medicine officer who would have at least a year with us. So the drug abuse counseling would be, in fact, Captain MacDonald -- at that time, Captain MacDonald's -- total responsibility, and --
Q (Interposing) Do you know whether during the time that Captain MacDonald -- then Captain MacDonald, with the Third Special Forces -- whether he had similar assignments and responsibility?
A I don't know that, sir.
Q When did Captain MacDonald join the Sixth Special Forces Unit as a preventive medical officer with these duties?
A It was in December 1969, sir.
Q Was that the first time you had actually talked with him or met him face to face?
A Oh, I had seen him before then, but that was the first time that I had talked with him. One of my duties, by the way, was to take care of Dr. MacDonald, and make sure that he learned the Army system; so I was sort of his mentor.
Q Now, you started to tell us before that a special program on drug abuse had been arranged, some kind of general group meeting. Can you tell us when that was, first of all, and who were required to be present at that meeting?
A That was the seminar that was conducted in January, one month after Dr. MacDonald was assigned to us. Participants in the seminar were representatives from the MPs, the lawyers. There was an individual -- Mr. Pat Reese -- who was an ex-drug addict, and Dr. MacDonald and Dr. Heeston, and the chaplain. And how it went was that the -- I believe it was the law enforcement personnel presented the -- and the legal -- the lawyers presented the ramifications of what would happen to you if you were caught, and then --
Q (Interposing) Essentially they told about what the punishments were and the type of discharge that one might get if convicted of varying types of crimes?
A Right. What was unique about this is that the participants in this seminar -- it was a mandatory class, so everybody available at the group, from private on up the group commander were there; and General Emerson, the Special Forces Commander, introduced him, because Mr. Pat Reese was a good friend and had offered to do this.
Q About how many people were present at that seminar, if you can tell us, please?
A It was held at the auditorium at John F. Kennedy, and it was -- it was almost full, so -- the capacity was 300, I believe -- 300 or 350. It was almost full.
Q And there were both enlisted men as well as officers present there?
A That's correct. Everybody who could not account for something else was there and present.
Q Now, you say Mr. Reese -- Pat Reese -- also spoke as part of that seminar?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT to that again on the grounds of relevancy.

THE COURT: Well, I have no idea where counsel is going but we spend a lot of time arguing relevancy. Can you come maybe a little quicker to the point than where you are right now?

MR. SEGAL: I think this is the point, Your Honor, and again I would be glad to make an offer to the Court.

THE COURT: Go ahead. Go ahead.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q What was Mr. Reese's part of this seminar for the troops on January, 1970?
A He described the paraphernalia and the actions of drug abusers and addicts, and he had a briefcase. He showed us all the tools and instruments that some of us had not seen before.
Q Did he describe the effects of drugs -- what they had on various people?
A In his layman's terms, yes. He was followed by the doctor to explain the medical aspects.
Q Now, that was Dr. MacDonald you are speaking of?
A Right.
Q Without going into detail, what was the nature of Dr. MacDonald's presentation and how did he present it to the men that were present?
A He presented it as the addiction and the drug abuse as related to the medical effects as to what this does to an individual's body, and he was followed by the chaplain who announced that the chaplain was the only individual who had privileged conversations with those they discussed anything with --
Q (Interposing) Let's just hold it right there because apparently something different has happened right now. I just want to ask you one other question about Dr. MacDonald's presentation. How would you characterize -- what was the tone of his presentation about drug abuse?
A It was what I would expect a doctor would talk to me as a patient -- what was wrong with me -- not so much why I did it as what happens to me if I take these drugs or abuse these drugs. It was a medical -- on a layman's terms that even a private could understand.
Q Now, you say the chaplain then said something about privilege. What do you mean by that? What was meant by his comment?
A This is what shocked the whole group. We didn't understand why the chaplain would stand up and tell us that he or the chaplains were the only ones who had privileged conversations with their patients. He went on to say that basically -- and I'm paraphrasing what he was saying -- I remember it distinctly -- that it was sort of a plea to "come to me, and I will not -- no one can force me to tell anyone what's your problem." At that time when he said that, there was a buzz in the audience and it became louder and louder and the Deputy Commander asked me, "Is that a fact?"
Q What seemed to be unusual or novel about that statement that the chaplain made that only conversations to him were going to be privileged?
A Because my understanding and the Deputy Commander's understanding was that doctors also had privileged conversation.
Q "Privileged" meant that doctors, if it did not exist, would have to do what or could be made to do what?
A What had been suspected from my standpoint, after I heard that, was here are doctors -- physicians -- counseling and helping out drug addicts and drug abusers who now are being exposed as having no protection whatsoever. In other words, the people they discussed their problem with, under the legal system, the doctor could be forced to testify of what happened.
Q The doctor could be forced to testify against the patient in criminal proceedings?
A Absolutely.
Q After that lecture was over, did you have occasion to talk with any of your enlisted men under you or others about that information for the reaction to the revelation that only conversations with the Chaplain were going to be considered privileged conversations?

MR. MURTAGH: OBJECTION, Your Honor.

MR. SEGAL: It goes to a state of mind, if Your Honor pleases.

THE COURT: Yes, I will OVERRULE the objection.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Yes, Major Williams, will you please tell us about that?
A As a matter of fact, there were many, many enlisted men who sought me out and asked me that same question --
Q (Interposing) Was it really true that what the chaplain said --
A -- was it really true that the doctor could not protect them? And my only answer at that time was, "I think the chaplain is wrong."
Q Did you subsequently find out whether or not the chaplain was correct in his statement that only conversation with the chaplain about drug abuse would be privileged against being compelled at a court martial or in other proceedings?

MR. ANDERSON: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Yes, Major Williams.
A I immediately checked that statement out with the lawyers. They assured me that what the chaplain had said was in fact true and I then warned Jeff to be very careful.
Q Before we get to that, following that lecture -- that information that was imparted to the troops there -- did you observe any change in the drug abuse program that had then been operating under Dr. MacDonald?
A Our calls to set up appointments with Dr. MacDonald dropped almost to zero. From approximately an average of 20 a week before, with referrals from the hospital, we had nothing for about a week or two weeks immediately after this seminar. That's when we all -- that's when -- I can only speak for myself -- that's when I became very concerned not only for my health but for Dr. MacDonald's health.
Q Now, why did you become concerned and what, if anything, did you do about it?
A Well, because rumors which -- whether they were based in fact or whether they weren't --

MR. ANDERSON: OBJECTION.

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

MR. MURTAGH: OBJECTION to the rumors, Your Honor.

MR. SEGAL: This goes to a state of mind.

THE COURT: Whose state of mind?

MR. SEGAL: The state of mind of the individuals who believed that there was a danger there and was communicated to the Defendant.

THE COURT: I'll SUSTAIN the objection.

MR. SEGAL: I would appreciate the opportunity to be heard more fully on this, Your Honor. It goes exactly to motive of what happened on February 17th, sir.

THE COURT: Come up here and I'll hear you.


B E N C H C O N F E R E N C E

MR. SEGAL: The testimony is not being offered for the truth of the words contained in the rumors, Your Honor. It is being offered to indicate that a state of mind existed among responsible military persons which caused them to even warn Dr. MacDonald for his safety first of all. Secondly, Your Honor, the further testimony of this witness is likely to be that the rumors also indicated that soldiers believed Dr. MacDonald was a fink, that he turned them in. Whether that was true or not is not the issue again. It goes to indicating whether or not there was a reason for someone to attack the MacDonald family. The Government suggests there is no reason. This has been -- they are not surprised by this testimony. They have heard this and it has been given under oath in the military proceedings in this case, and I think it is critical for the Defendant to be allowed to show that there were, in fact, people who thought they had a reason to want to hurt him.

MR. MURTAGH: Your Honor, I think the Defense is going very far afield. I mean, in fact, Dr. MacDonald saw one of his patients that day and then he was one of the first names to crop into the investigation -- a guy by the name of Badger -- and Badger had nothing to do with this.

MR. SEGAL: So you say, Mr. Murtagh, so you say. You weren't even there.

THE COURT: One at a time.

MR. SEGAL: I'm sorry, Your Honor.

MR. MURTAGH: But we have gone all over the place. I think what Major Williams thinks, what he believes, what the troops felt, what they believed, all the rest of this is irrelevant. It is completely irrelevant, Your Honor, and I think the prejudicial effect far outweighs any probative value in this sense.

MR. SEGAL: First of all, we do not intend to develop any names of any individual without -- again, the Government is trying the wrong case.

THE COURT: Well, one of the reasons he has objected --

MR. SEGAL: (Interposing) We're not going to develop -- he doesn't want me to -- I'm not going to develop the name. I have no intention to. The issue here, Your Honor, is a state of mind. Did there exist a belief that Dr. MacDonald had turned in soldiers for drug abuse once people learned there were no privileged conversations? The time frame in which this happened is so absolutely compelling -- it is less than a month before the murders of his family -- that to deny us the right to show that a state of mind existed is to deny the Defendant a right to show that there were other people or other circumstances that might have led someone to want to hurt him and his family.

THE COURT: I will let you show, if you can produce evidence that there were people who were out to get him.

MR. SEGAL: We can do that by reputation -- that is, there was a state of mind.

THE COURT: Show me in here where you will do it.

MR. SEGAL: Your Honor, that is non-hearsay testimony under 801, Your Honor, when it is offered not to prove the truth or falsity of the matters concerned here. We are not offering to prove that it is true --

THE COURT: (Interposing) Wait a minute. Let me read 801.

MR. SEGAL: Yes, Your Honor. I am talking about 801(c).

THE COURT: That is the definition of "hearsay."

MR. SEGAL: Yes, sir; and it is offered into evidence to prove the truth of a matter. We are offering to prove the state of mind existed. There was reason to believe -- people acted -- in fact, we will show they took actions upon this, sir.

THE COURT: You mean you can prove that because there was a rumor that somebody had a state of mind. I'll let you show a state of mind on the part of some particular person.

MR. SEGAL: I can ask him what persons he spoke to and their names and what they said? I mean, in an attempt to deal with the issue directly -- to not take forever to prove the issue -- I will ask, "Did you speak to any of your subordinates? Did they indicate that Dr. MacDonald had a reputation that he was a fink?" The answer is that is what they are going to say.

MR. MURTAGH: Your Honor, I submit they would be offering it to prove the truth of the matter stated and, besides, the whole thing is ludicrous because, if someone did harbor something like this, then the last person in the world they would leave alive at the crime scene is this supposed fink. It doesn't fit.

THE COURT: That just a matter of argument there.

MR. SEGAL: They didn't leave him alive. That's stupid, Brian. It's just stupid to say that they left him alive. What the hell did you say that for?

MR. MURTAGH: Without acceding, Your Honor, to counsel's inflammatory remarks, I would simply say that the matter is being offered for the truth of the matter stated.

THE COURT: I think that is right. Anything else?

MR. MURTAGH: No, sir; we would OBJECT.

MR. SEGAL: I would like to ask the Court to now permit us --

THE COURT: (Interposing) Wait a minute. You are making a speech to the jury.

MR. SEGAL: No, I don't want a speech to the jury. I want to be able to address the Court in the presence of the Defendant in regard further to our views on the unnecessary limitations the Court has placed on the Defense. I mean, this issue has gotten to the point, sir, where we are not being able to assert a defense. It has reduced itself to the point where Your Honor's view is: "Put up a couple of character witnesses. Let the Defendant testify." We've sat here and been subjected to considerably more of less worth with no limitations and I think the Defendant is entitled to have it placed in the record, sir, that that's the way the Defense has been handled here.

THE COURT: Are you through?

MR. SEGAL: Yes, sir.

THE COURT: Now, you listen to me. I think that I have gone just as far as I could to give you every consideration that you could get in developing this testimony in the Defense of this man. I gave you an entire day of jury time in which you and your lawyers and all of your witnesses, after asking for 30 minutes, took all day to interview this Stoeckley. You spent all day on Saturday and Sunday with your people going with her all over motel rooms and all over the lot, and you did all of that and now you come and say I'm cutting you off. I resent that and it is wrong and I am not going to accept it. But I tell you what I'm doing now. You are undertaking to prove as hearsay this state of mind of some unknown person. In my considered professional judicial judgment, you are wrong, and, if I am wrong, you know where you can get it corrected. But I'm ruling on that now and that's the rule. If you can show that somebody harbored some ill will toward this man, had a motive to kill him or his family, you can show it; but I am not going to let you show it by rumor that somebody might have had something in mind like this.

MR. SEGAL: Your Honor, one of the reasons why we are restricted to just this limit is because Your Honor has refused to rule on our right to have statements that the Government has. Your Honor won't let us have it. We have tried everything in the world to get information, and Your Honor takes the view that all those Defense efforts are to be ignored. When we are forced to this kind of testimony, we are told "You can't put it in." Now, there has to be at some point some give where the Defendant is entitled either to get that information or put it on as best that he can. This testimony was received before, Your Honor, under oath. It was cross-examined and it was received in a judicial proceeding. It was a ruling of law and now you have made a contrary ruling so we put the law in the position that one day the law says it's right, the next day the law says it's wrong. The Defendant who has a right to rely upon some consistency in the law is told that the Government is prejudiced. How in the name of heaven can he defend himself when the system seems to work so inconsistently? It would be forgivable if Your Honor would rule on our demand that they finally turn over statements of witnesses. They are done with their case. You won't order that. Now, what are we left with? We are left with the position that you said earlier in this case: put on the Defendant. Well, we intend to put on more, sir. We are entitled to it, and you are blocking us.

THE COURT: Well, I have not said "put on the Defendant." Why do you make a statement like that?

MR. SEGAL: Yes, sir; I will point it out in the record. I will tell you when and where it took place, Your Honor -- at the Bench here. Now, I ask leave, Your Honor, either at this juncture one of two things: that I would ask Your Honor at this time to consider our motion either to dismiss the indictment or give us some alternative relief to force the Government to turn over the things that by all God and reason they should have given us the information that they sit there locked on.

THE COURT: I don't know what they have.

MR. SEGAL: I have set it forth in my motion, sir.

THE COURT: What -- in this grand jury thing?

MR. SEGAL: No, no. There are two documents: the Motion to Dismiss the indictment filed two days ago -- yesterday morning, rather -- in which we say that because they have failed to turn over Brady materials and because they have sat on these things that they should have given us. We have no access to this information.

THE COURT: You file a minimum of one lengthy motion a day; right? Ever since this case started, I have amassed this much material on it.

MR. SEGAL: Yes, sir.

THE COURT: Every day.

MR. SEGAL: It seems to be minimal in a case of this magnitude.

THE COURT: I'm not --

MR. SEGAL: (Interposing) I'm sorry. I could not hear you, sir.

THE COURT: I'm not faulting you for doing that, but I hope it will be understandable that, if I have to carry on my regular duties -- I worked an hour and a half at lunch. I have had no lunch. I do this every day. I work until midnight every night.

MR. SEGAL: I appreciate that fact. The Defense counsel has the same view.

THE COURT: I have not seen any motion that you filed yesterday for Brady materials. I may have seen the title to it, but I haven't been able to work that motion. But now, I'll say this: I have always taken this position that, if the Government has anything that classifies as Brady material and they do not give it to you, they are certainly going to get reversal. I have instructed them to do it, but now I am not going into their files and in a case as big as this, I'm not going to take three days off to see what they've got and whether or not you are entitled to it -- I'm not going to make that. That's their risk. If they've got stuff, they're going to do it.

MR. SEGAL: But now --

THE COURT: (Interposing) Now, listen: I have ruled on this motion. You may proceed with your questioning.

(Bench conference terminated.)


THE COURT: Any further questions of this witness?

MR. SEGAL: Yes, Your Honor.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q In the latter part of January of 1970, Major Williams, did you know other persons, other soldiers, other members of the unit who knew Dr. MacDonald?
A Yes, sir; I sure did know soldiers who knew Dr. MacDonald.
Q Would that include both enlisted men and officers?
A Yes, sir; it would.
Q At that time, following the lecture you have talked about, did you know what his reputation was as far as a person who could keep a secret?
A I certainly did. He would not tell us anything. I even asked him for further information about what he was involved in and he told me that he would not tell me because it was too dangerous.
Q What subject were you referring to at that point?
A We were talking about sources of drug supply into Cumberland County and on Fort Bragg, and he would not tell me.
Q Now, as a result of that information and as a result of all that you heard following the lecture, what, if anything, did you say or do in regard to Dr. MacDonald?
A Well, I felt helpless after I told him that I thought it was way over his head and that he ought to leave this to the legal experts, the judicial, the military police, or whatever. I just said, "You are out of class. You are a doctor. You are a compassionate man. You are dealing with what I consider to be hard people." I just felt helpless. I could not persuade him to tell me anything or to let me share his problem or whatever.
Q Did he stop treating drug abusers or drug offenders who came in even on the limited numbers you have described?
A No, he did not. He kept treating his patients. As a matter of fact, he had an appointment with a patient that we thought was, in fact -- we thought the patient was a drug abuser the afternoon before the 17th of February.
Q When did you learn of the deaths -- of the killings of the MacDonald family and the injuries to Dr. MacDonald?
A I received a phone call approximately 4:30 the morning of the 17th from Lieutenant Charles Penlishock (phonetic). He was my medical supply officer -- medical service corps officer. He was on duty that night for the group. He was also Dr. MacDonald's next door neighbor.
Q What was the reaction when you received that message?
A He told me that something had happened at Mac's house and that there was a murder. My first reaction was extreme shock, and all I could think of was, "My God, the drug abusers have killed him."

MR. MURTAGH: OBJECTION. MOVE TO STRIKE.

THE COURT: Don't consider that, members of the jury.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q What did you do after you received the message from Mr. Penlishock (phonetic)? Did you do anything?
A I got some clothes on -- I dressed. I got into my car and I raced on to the post.
Q When you went on post, tell us where you went first?
A Well, initially, I was going to go to his house because I didn't believe what I had just been told, but I stopped into the group headquarters and was yelling at the duty officer's assistant to get a certain individual that I had known had created a problem in our office with Dr. MacDonald that afternoon.
Q After you went to your group headquarters, did you do anything else?
A After that, I got back in my car and I drove to Corregidor Courts. I stopped, couldn't get any information, tried to find out what happened -- where are they?
Q Did you know whether Dr. MacDonald himself was alive or dead, at that time?
A The only thing that I knew was that something had happened. I did not know whether he or anybody was alive. I went around the back of the house and an MP asked me if I was a medic. I tried to explain I am probably a good medic, but I am not a doctor. He said then that the doctor had been taken to the hospital. I didn't know then whether he was alive or dead. I got in my car and went to the Provost Marshal's Office.
Q That is the Military Police Headquarters?
A Right. It was a block back on Randolph Street.
Q What did you do when you went to the Provost Marshal's office then?
A I went inside to the desk sergeant and I said, "Let me talk to somebody. I've got to tell you what happened yesterday, and you need to look into this."
Q Did you get to talk to anyone at that time?
A Well, the desk sergeant, but he referred me back to the back of the building. He told me to look up some investigators. It wasn't until about an hour and a half after I had made the initial contact with the desk sergeant that two investigators sat down and I told them what had happened the day before.
Q Did you, on that same day, eventually see Dr. MacDonald himself?
A Sure did. It was in the afternoon, I went to the hospital. I -- let me back up, if I may.
Q Please do?
A When I left the Provost Marshal's office, I felt like -- well, I reported in to my Group Commander. I went to a meeting with the Group Commander and his staff --

MR. ANDERSON: (Interposing) OBJECTION, Your Honor. Not responsive.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. He was asked what he did and he is in the process of telling it.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q All right.
A I went back to my Group Commander. He gave me instructions then that he wanted me to take care of -- he had received word that Jeff was in the hospital and alive. He wanted me to take care of Jeff and all the arrangements involving the family, from whatever. I immediately went home and what struck me as being odd in that --

MR. MURTAGH: (Interposing) OBJECTION.

THE COURT: I will SUSTAIN the objection to that.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Let's go back a second.

THE COURT: You may answer the question but don't volunteer any answers, please.

THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honor.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q When did you originally come on to Fort Bragg on that morning, the 17th, at what time; if you could tell us, please?
A It was after 4:30 in the morning, sir.
Q When you came on, could you describe whatever MP activities you saw as you came on to the Post?
A There were no MPs at the intersection that I came through because I was speeding. I was trying to find an MP. There were no MPs except at the house at Castle Drive.
Q That's about 4:30 or 5:00 in the morning?
A Between 4:30 and 5:00 o'clock in the morning.
Q At that time, where were you living in regard to Fort Bragg. Did you have a residence on the Post itself?
A No, sir. I lived in Devonwood Subdivision, approximately three miles off the Post. That is between Morganton and Riley Road.
Q When you drove onto the Post, you were coming in on one of the public highways leading onto and through Fort Bragg?
A Through one of the major intersections.
Q When you returned to your home, it was later that morning?
A It was probably closer to noon, sir.
Q Did you observe any MP activity at that time?
A I then noticed the roadblocks. I was not stopped, but there were roadblocks at that intersection.
Q You went home and you returned. Did you go to Womack Army Hospital at that point?
A Yes, I did.
Q About what time in the afternoon was that?
A About -- well, we would say 1500 or 1600; 3:00 or 4:00 o'clock in the afternoon.
Q When you went to the hospital, did you go to the room where Dr. MacDonald was?
A I was directed by the nurses up to the Intensive Care recovery area.
Q Were you actually able to go in and see Dr. MacDonald?
A I sure was. Was not stopped.
Q At that time, were there other people there when you went in to see him?
A Yes, there were a lot of nurses and doctors and Corpsmen.
Q How close did you come to Dr. MacDonald at that time?
A I was at his bedside, initially, and then I moved down to the end of his bed.
Q You were at his bedside -- how far away would you say you were?
A I could have touched him.
Q Now did you have occasion to notice anything about his head at that time?
A Yes, that is the first thing that I looked at.
Q What is it?
A Well, what struck -- what I saw was what looked like bumps on his head -- on his forehead.
Q You are indicating with your fingers.
A In this area. It looked like like horns -- bumps -- on the front of his head.

MR. SEGAL: Indulge me for one second.

(Pause.)

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Let's see if we could ask Major Williams, to take a look at the figures here. With Your Honor's permission, may we leave the display back here rather than put it in the corner there?

THE COURT: Yes, sir.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q I would like for you to come down, if you would, Major Williams, and take a look at the Defendant Exhibit 72 here and see whether on this figure, you can point out to us the areas on the head of Dr. MacDonald where you saw these marks. I will ask you if you will mark that if you will stand on the other side, please -- on the full-face drawing of Dr. MacDonald's face, will you take the marking pen and mark the area -- approximately the size that you saw them and the position that you saw them? (Witness complies.)
Q Would you put your initials, Major Williams, on the side of each of those two markings, please? (Witness complies.)
Q Now let me ask you to hold this portion of the display, here. I want to ask you if you could describe in any additional detail -- well, take the one of the left side of the head first. Did you get a chance to look at it close enough to be able to give us any detailed definition of what that injury look like?
A All I saw were bumps. It just looked like bumps -- little bumps on the head, you know, contusions to me.
Q Did you observe any blood in and about those bumps?
A The one on the left looked like there might have been blood around there. To me, it looked like blood had been around the left one. The right one, as I recollect in nine years, just looked like a bump.
Q Now, after you observed those bumps, did you have occasion to see anything else on or about Dr. MacDonald's head?
A Yes, I did. He turned his face to the left. By this time I was down at the foot of the bed and I saw the back of his head. As he had turned his head I saw matted hair back where my cowlick would be. This looked like another bump -- a bump with matted hair.
Q All right. You are indicating on the right side on the rear of your own head.
A In this area here by my cowlick, I noticed a bump with matted hair.
Q Now, this particular drawing we have here is not the right side of the head -- the correct side of the head -- that you are referring to?
A No; that's not -- that -- other side.
Q I just want to ask you to come down and on this indicate -- on this model just with your finger -- if it were the right side, can you show us here the size and approximate shape of the injury you saw on the opposite side of the head?
A It was in this area -- if it was on the right side it would be in this area -- a bump about -- it seemed like the hair was pushed up about this far -- about an inch, with the hair matted down on the right side.

MR. SEGAL: Thank you. You may go back to your chair.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Now, at that time, did you also look at any other injury or see any other injury aside from the three you described on or about the head of Dr. MacDonald?
A Well, I looked at his face, and then I started working down to see what injuries I could see, and I saw tubes (sic) going into his right chest area. And I saw -- I don't remember which arm it was on -- I saw a scratch or a cut; and again I cannot remember which side that was -- on which arm.
Q Did you see any other markings on the torso of Dr. MacDonald, other than the chest tube insertion?
A None that I remember now.
Q Now, was Dr. MacDonald conscious at this point; was he fully alert or awake when you first met him or saw him on the afternoon of the 17th?
A No; he opened his eyes, and he appeared to be drowsy. His speech was slow. One thing I was interested in knowing was, was he aware that his family was dead; and I was waiting for him to ask me. He never did.
Q Have you ever seen persons in your service as a medical service officer who have been under sedation?
A Yes, I have.
Q Based upon that experience, did you have any opinion as to whether he was or was not under sedation at that time?

MR. MURTAGH: OBJECTION, Your Honor.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q What, if any, conclusion did you make about his condition at that time, as far as the degree of consciousness that he had?
A It was my opinion that he was going to die.
Q What caused you to feel that, Mr. Williams?
A I had -- I have been in combat. I have seen people wounded, and I have seen people die.
Q As a result of that did you do anything or take any action?
A I immediately asked a nurse-supervisor or nurse to, "Somebody, help him."
Q Did the nurse take any action or do anything in response to what you said?
A Yes, they did; and I left.
Q When was the next time you saw Dr. MacDonald?
A I saw him almost every day he was in the hospital.
Q Did you attend the funeral with Dr. MacDonald?
A Yes, I attended the funeral. I helped the family get into Fort Bragg. I assisted Mr. Kassab in picking out caskets.
Q Was that pursuant to the assignment made to you by your commanding officer to assist the family?
A Yes, sir; it was. That was my duties as escort officer.
Q What was Dr. MacDonald's attitude toward the deaths of his family during those days? Did he express any concern at that fact?
A Absolutely distraught, to the point that it is even painful for me. I shared his feelings and -- absolutely distraught.
Q When you were at the funeral with Dr. MacDonald, did you sit any place near or close to him during the funeral?
A I was in the back of the chapel, sir.
Q Were you able to observe Dr. MacDonald at that time?
A Right.
Q What was his attitude toward the deaths of his family?
A He appeared to me to still be in shock.
Q Now, let me take you back a little bit prior to the deaths of the family. Was your relationship with Dr. MacDonald a social one or a professional one as a fellow officer?
A It was primarily a professional-work relationship. Colette and my wife were both pregnant, and my wife and I did not socialize much during that time; but Jeff and I worked together and we played sports together. So I knew him on a day basis.
Q Did you have any occasion to talk to him about the pregnancy of his wife during the months or two preceding February 17, 1970?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT to this line of questioning, or to this question.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: I asked him much more questions. I was going to become a father for the first time, so he was my expert -- mentor, or whatever -- to tell me what was going on here. He would beam -- he would be very happy when we would be discussing -- I would probably tell him he would have another girl, and I would have the boy.
Q You were just kidding each other?
A Certainly. We didn't care what we had, and we were both anxious to find out who got the boy.
Q Major Williams, based upon your contacts with Dr. MacDonald in working with him and your other knowledge of him, do you have an opinion as to whether or not Dr. MacDonald was a violent, non-peaceful man?
A Let me give you an example.

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Yeah, I'll -- you will have to answer the question "yes" or "no" --

THE WITNESS: (Interposing) Yes.

THE COURT: -- you got an opinion as to this Defendant's traits for violence or peacefulness?

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Answer "yes" or "no," please; then I will ask you your opinion. Perhaps then you can tell us?
A Would you rephrase the question, please?
Q Do you have an opinion, Major Williams, as to Dr. MacDonald's character as to being a peaceful or non-violent man?
A Yes, I have an opinion.
Q Would you please state for the members of the jury what your opinion is in regard to those two particular character qualities?
A He is a kind and peaceful man.
Q Do you have some specific example that you feel helped you arrive yourself at that conclusion?
A May I give an example?

MR. ANDERSON: OBJECTION.

MR. SEGAL: You waited too long, Major Williams.

MR. ANDERSON: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: Are you OBJECTING?

MR. ANDERSON: Yes, sir.

THE COURT: The OBJECTION of counsel to the question directed to the Court by the witness is OVERRULED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Yes, you may give the example, Major Williams.
A Immediately after May, when my son was born, I brought Jeff to our house to get some rest. He went inside. He said, "Hi" to my wife, he picked up our baby boy and he was playing with -- excuse me, Your Honor -- he was playing with -- fondling the baby and it broke her heart because I saw tears come down his eyes also. I realized then what I had done -- unconsciously -- I had not realized what a situation I had put him in. This is an example I can give you of a compassionate man.
Q Do you have an opinion, Major Williams, as to Dr. MacDonald's character in regard to whether he is violent or assaultive toward children? I assume you covered that with your last example?
A I believe him to be incapable of that type of action.
Q Finally in that regard, Major Williams, based upon your knowledge and contacts with Dr. MacDonald, having worked with him, do you have an opinion as to whether he is a truthful man or not?
A I believe him to be a truthful man; yes.
Q Now, on a slightly different subject: during the course of the investigation of the MacDonald family deaths, did you meet a CID agent by the name of Mr. Ivory?
A Yes, I met Mr. Ivory on many occasions.
Q Did you have any occasion -- well, after Dr. MacDonald was charged formally by the Army with these crimes on May 1st, 1970, did you have some responsibilities in regard to the custody of Dr. MacDonald?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Did you have any responsibilities in regard to Dr. MacDonald after May 1, 1970?
A I was his escort officer in charge of six officers at his BOQ.
Q What did that mean -- that you were his escort officer in charge of him?
A I was totally responsible for where he was at and where he went during that period of time.
Q Now, was access to Dr. MacDonald -- that is people who could see him and talk to him or go into his room -- was that limited in some fashion?
A It was limited by those individuals on a list prepared for the group commander's signature. I was working for Colonel Kane with specific instructions to admit only those personnel who were on the list -- approved access roster or I had the option to call Colonel Kane or his responsible individual and get an exception.

MR. MURTAGH: Your Honor, may we come up on this, please?

THE COURT: All right, come up. I am going to give the jury a three-minute bonus while you are up here. I am going to let them be out yonder. Don't talk about the case. We will come back at 4:00 o'clock. Our recess will be over then. Let the jury retire.

(Jury exits at 3:42 p.m.)


(The following proceedings were held in the absence of the jury and alternates.)


B E N C H C O N F E R E N C E

MR. MURTAGH: Your Honor, where I believe counsel is going --

THE COURT: (Interposing) Wait a minute. We will let the witness -- you may stand aside now and come back at 4:00 o'clock. We will resume your questioning then. No use in his sitting there.

MR. MURTAGH: Your Honor, where I believe counsel is going is one of two areas -- either the so-called illegal search for the weapon in MacDonald's BOQ room, which was the matter of a pre-trial motion, a Motion to Dismiss based on illegal search and seizure.

THE COURT: Well, let's not guess about it. Is that where you are going?

MR. SEGAL: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: All right, that is out.

MR. MURTAGH: The other area, Your Honor, would be the taking of the hair samples or whether Dr. MacDonald's mother was excluded from the BOQ. I think all of this is irrelevant.

THE COURT: Let's ask him if he is going there. Are you going there?

MR. SEGAL: I am going to ask him about the attempt by the CID -- Mr. Ivory -- to take hair samples.

THE COURT: That is not relevant, is it?

MR. SEGAL: May I show Your Honor what the point of it is?

THE COURT: Yes, I will hear you.

MR. SEGAL: I think what I am being asked for is an offer of proof, and I would like to make it in this fashion.

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. SEGAL: That because then Captain Williams refused to permit CID Agent Ivory to do certain acts which Captain Williams had reason to believe were contrary to his orders and that because Captain Williams thereafter testified as a witness on behalf of Dr. MacDonald in a similar fashion as he has today, that Mr. Ivory was assigned to surveil Captain Williams and harass him by being assigned in Viet Nam to his unit as a punitive measure in regard to having acted in support of the Defendant.

THE COURT: That is your offer of proof?

MR. SEGAL: Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT: I will SUSTAIN OBJECTION to all of that.

(Bench Conference terminated.)


THE COURT: Take a recess until 4:00 o'clock.

(The proceeding was recessed at 3:45 p.m., to reconvene at 4:00 p.m., this same day.)


F U R T H E R P R O C E E D I N G S 4:00 p.m.

(The following proceedings were held in the presence of the jury and alternates.)

THE COURT: Any further questions of this witness?

MR. SEGAL: Yes, Your Honor, just very briefly.

(Whereupon, JAMES WILLIAMS, the witness on the stand at the time of recess, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:)


D I R E C T E X A M I N A T I O N 4:01 p.m. (resumed)

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Major Williams, I would like to show you two exhibits that have been marked as Defendant Exhibits 95 and 95(a). They have been shown to the Government.

(Defendant Exhibits 95 and 95(a) were marked for identification.)

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q I would ask if you can tell us first of all whether you recognize what D-95 itself is?
A It is a map of the Fort Bragg Military Reservation.
Q And I ask you to take a look at D-95(a) and see whether you recognize it to be an enlargement of a singular portion of that map?
A This is an enlargement of what we call the containment area -- the main area of Fort Bragg.
Q If I may just hold up D-95 for the jury, the darkened area, which is what you have identified as the containment area, what does that mean when you say for non-military people?
A That means where the troops -- where they have their quarters. Their headquarters buildings are there, their administrative quarters are there -- where they stay when they are not out on field maneuvers.
Q What about housing areas like Corregidor Courts?
A Families live in the containment area also and the Post Exchange and the grocery stores, banks.
Q Can you show us, using D-95(a), the route where you came in on the morning of February 17th, 1970, and then the route by which you went out after you left and returned home that morning to change clothes I think you said? Why don't you mark it with the red marking pen? Let me hold this up for a moment for you and if you will show us how you came in?
A I lived in this area (indicating), and there is a road that is called Riley Road. I went this direction (indicating). At this intersection of Yadkin Road and Riley Road, this becomes Riley Street. I came to Ardens Road and I went left. Approximately this location (indicating) was the headquarters of Sixth Special Forces Group. I went from the Group Headquarters back to Riley Street.
Q Will you put an arrow, please, on the road to the headquarters and an arrow again going away from it and continue to trace your path, please? (Witness complies.)
A I returned back to Riley Street. I went out to Honeycutt and took a right. There is another road in here (indicating) called Knox Street. I went past Knox Street to North Dougherty. North Dougherty is this area (indicating) -- the first street to the left -- and this is in Corregidor Courts housing area -- that is 544 Castle Drive (indicating) located -- actually, it is on the other side of the street right here (indicating). I parked my car in front of the house so I will make arrows that way. After I talked to the Lieutenant at the back door, I retraced my route back to Honeycutt and turned left and went onto Bragg Boulevard. I went up one block to Randolph and took a left. I went past Knox Street again and the Provost Marshal's Station was on this side of the road (indicating).
Q After you were at the Provost Marshal's Station, is that when you went to your home to get changed and get cleaned up again?
A Negative. I went from the Provost Marshal's office to the hospital at this location (indicating). I could not see him at that time, so I reported back to my group headquarters for instructions as to what I was to do. After receiving my instructions -- this is now Ardens Road (indicating) -- I went to Raleigh Street and back to Yadkin and retraced my steps back to my house in Devonwood. I circled the Post.
Q Now, earlier this afternoon in describing your testimony, you said the only time you saw a roadblock or MP checkpoint was on your way out of the Post on the way back to your home; is that correct? Can you show us where that was, please?
A That MP roadblock, and this was after 1200 hours approximately, was at the Yadkin Road -- Riley Street-Riley Road -- this is one of the main exits off Post. That is the only time I saw an MP station.
Q Would you just put the initial "MP" there, please? (Witness complies.)

MR. SEGAL: All right, Major Williams, return to the stand, please. Your Honor, I have no further questions of this witness. At this time, the Government can cross-examine.

THE COURT: Any cross-examination?

MR. MURTAGH: Yes, sir.


C R O S S - E X A M I N A T I O N 4:06 p.m.

BY MR. MURTAGH:
Q Mr. Williams, I believe you testified on Direct Examination that one of your duties involved seeing that Dr. MacDonald sort of learned the Army system; is that correct, sir?
A That was one of my duties; yes.
Q And I believe you mentioned something to do with cross-training, and I believe you gave the example of an infantry officer or infantryman might receive some medical training and vice-versa, I suppose?
A That is a very simplified way. I designed a training course that was two weeks long. A portion of that two weeks -- the troopers with various specialties, demolition, weapons, intelligence operations, intelligence, I would have the medical portion of that training. They would rotate the troops around. We called this cross-training.
Q Let me ask you about the intelligence portion of this training. Did any portion of special forces training include training in what is called "escape and evasion"?
A I don't know what the intelligence portion entailed because I only had the medical portion of this cross-training.
Q Let me ask you with respect to your knowledge: are you familiar with the terms "escape" and "evasion" as they pertain to special forces?
A I am familiar with the terms "escape" and "evasion."
Q Does part of that training in escape and evasion include training to withstand interrogation?
A No, not to my knowledge; it doesn't.
Q Well, do you know that it does not?
A I never received any training in how to -- whatever -- evade or suffer through interrogation.
Q Do you know whether Dr. MacDonald ever participated in any training exercises, for example, in which he would play the part of a prisoner of war doctor who was being interrogated?
A I have no knowledge whatsoever.
Q Are you familiar with the term "cover within a cover"?
A No, I am not.
Q You were in Special Forces; were you not?
A I sure was.
Q Now, let me ask you with respect to Dr. MacDonald's duties as a Preventive Medicine Officer, do I take it that you sort of broke him in on that or showed him the ropes?
A I had nothing to do with his medical training, but I was responsible for the administrative aspects -- introducing the doctors to how to wear a uniform, what uniform to get. He would use me as a sounding board for advice -- "What about," and "How would you handle the younger troopers," and "What is the relationship between the officers and the NCO's?"
Q Let me ask you: I gather what you are saying is you did not have to train Dr. MacDonald in how to be a doctor, but there would come times when you would instruct him in what his duties might be with regard to the military as a doctor?
A As it applies to officer duties.
Q And he was the Preventive Medicine Officer; was he not?
A Yes, until he became Group Surgeon. Initially, he was the Preventive Medicine Officer.
Q Did part of his duties as the Preventive Medicine Officer involve the inspection of mess halls?
A I can't state whether he inspected mess halls or not, but that is a portion of the responsibilities of a Preventive Medicine Officer or the enlisted staff.
Q Do you have any reason to believe he did not perform the normal duties?
A I have no knowledge of that.
Q Major Williams, I believe you said you had been in the Army 13 years?
A That is correct.
Q Now, at any time -- let me ask you: do you know to what use, if any, an ice pick is put in a mess hall?
A I personally would use it to break ice.
Q Right. Do you know whether ice picks are sometimes used in Army mess halls at that time?
A I don't know. I really don't know.
Q Let me ask you, have you ever been in the field at such a time when the troops were going to be given some sort of a drink such as Kool-Aid -- I don't know whether they still have that or not, but they used to have --
A (Interposing) We provided drinks for our troops, yes.
Q Right. Have you ever seen them served in great big tubs out in the field?
A I have seen them in large -- large --
Q (Interposing) GI cans?
A Oh, I have seen that too, but they also have these big metal cans. We used to cook potatoes in them.
Q What do they cool those drinks with, if anything?
A Well, somewhere, somehow ice came there.
Q Have you ever seen anybody assigned to the messing duties in the field using an ice pick to break up ice in one of these cans?
A Sir, I have seen ice picks used but I don't know who used them, whether it was GI's. I don't know what they used.
Q Would it be accurate to say that an ice pick is not an uncommon implement in the Army inventory?
A I would say that an ice pick would be extremely rare on field problems, because most of the time you woUd get crushed ice and there would be no need. I personally -- and I commanded a medical company in the 82nd -- I don't remember seeing ice picks in my mess hall. But if you want assumption, I assume there probably were ice picks somewhere.
Q Now, let me ask you with respect to what you testified to on direct -- what happened when you received notification that there had been the murders at the MacDonald quarters. I believe you told us about a patient that Dr. MacDonald had seen that day or had an appointment with somebody?
A The day before -- the afternoon before.
Q Right. That would be the 16th of February?
A That is correct.
Q Would that by any chance be a corporal by the name of David Edward Badger?
A All I know him is as Corporal Badger.
Q Was that the individual you were referring to in your direct examination?
A That's right.
Q Now, do you know whether Corporal Badger was apprehended that morning?
A I have no idea.
Q Do you know that he was not?
A I don't know whether he was or whether he wasn't.
Q Let me show you a photograph if I may, which I would mark with the next number, as 1152 for identification.

(Government Exhibit No. 1152 was marked for identification.)

BY MR. BLACKBURN:
Q I ask you to take a look at that, Major Williams?
A I would not know Corporal Badger if I saw him, sir.
Q Okay, would you please read what the inscription is that he is holding with reference to the date?
A There is a sign that says, "Badger, 17 February '70, David Edward," and a social security number, "092-36-7246."
Q And the date, sir?
A 17 February '70.
Q Would it be accurate to describe that photograph as a mug shot?
A I don't know.
Q Now, Major Williams, do you know whether Dr. MacDonald has ever been shown this photograph or a copy of it?
A I have no idea.
Q Do you know whether Corporal Badger's fingerprints were taken?
A Sir, I don't know anything except that Corporal Badger was in Dr. MacDonald's office in my building the afternoon before.
Q And you assumed that he had something to do with this crime at that time?
A Based upon his actions in that office, yes.
Q Do you know for a fact whether he was involved or not?
A Involved in?
Q In the murders?
A In the what?
Q In the murders?
A I have no knowledge whatsoever.
Q Now, Major Williams, with respect to your visit to Dr. MacDonald in the hospital, you testified, I believe, that you thought he was drowsy. Is that correct?
A He looked drowsy.
Q Did you consult with the doctors on duty at that time?
A I did not consult with anybody.
Q Then I take it you did not review his medical charts at all?
A I would not have had access to his medical charts.
Q So would it be fair to say that you don't know what medication, if any, he had?
A I have no idea.
Q Now, with respect to your direct testimony that you thought he was going to die -- what did you base that on, sir?
A That is purely my experience and my belief.
Q Okay; now, you say you called the nurse, is that correct?
A I walked out of the room, and I looked at a nurse and said, "Somebody please take care of him."
Q Well, do I understand then that your testimony is not that he was at the point of death and because you summoned a nurse he was resuscitated or revived in some way?
A I am positive in my own mind --
Q (Interposing) Well, that wasn't my question, Major Williams.
A Would you rephrase it, please. I didn't understand it.
Q The question is: what action if any did you take which prevented Dr. MacDonald from dying, in your opinion?
A Absolutely nothing.

MR. MURTAGH: Okay, thank you. No further questions.

MR. SEGAL: Thank you, Major Williams. You are excused.

THE COURT: Call your next witness.

(Witness excused.)


Note from Christina Masewicz:
The Court Reporter's misspelling of Reece has been corrected to read Reese in above transcript.

 

 

Home  -  Contact  -  Scholarship Fund  -  New Uploads  -  Christina's Corner  -  Resource Page
Chronology  -  Claims vs. Facts  - 
Various Documents  -  CID Records  -  FBI Records
April 6, 1970 Interview  -  Article 32 Hearing  -  Psychiatric/Psychological Data  -  DNA Results
July 23-24, 1970: John Cummings' exclusive interview with MacDonald  - 
Polygraphs
Affidavits  -  Grand Jury Transcripts  -  1979 Trial Transcripts  -  MD License Revoked
1987: MacDonald v. McGinniss  -  Mildred Kassab sues MacDonald  -  Court Records

 Parole Hearing  -  Kassab's Work  -  Bob Stevenson Answers Your Questions
Photograph Pages 

 


Go to top