JUNE 2, 2008
To all of you who have sent e-mails asking when I am going to add new uploads - I am far from being done adding things to the website, but due to illness in my family, my time is limited for now. I will continue to add new things as time permits.
Thank you all for your support and please keep us in your prays
Below are a few of the e-mails I have received with question.
QUESTION: Fred Kassab was an alcoholic. He was drunk most of the trial walking around carrying a gun andthreatening Dr. MacDonald. Dr. MacDonald was scared for his life and his friends in Long Beach Police Force even provided him with a gun shot protection vest to wear. Kassab shouldn't have been allowed at the trial. He should havebeen jailed. Why was Kassab allowed to do this? You talk about justice. Wherewas the justice for Dr. MacDonald? How do you explain that?
ANSWER: I am happy to answer any questions, but I will not get into a pissing contest about the character of Freddy Kassab. You know nothing of the man except what you have read/been told by MacDonald's side.
How do you know he was drunk at the trial and that he had a gun? Were you at the trial? Did you search him everyday? Did you see him drinking? Did you witness him exhibiting any s/s of being intoxicated? I was at the trial and I can state that Kassab was not drunk, nor was he walking around threatening MacDonald. Kassab was never alone, he was with Mildred, and 99% of the time he holding her arm or hand. They arrived together and left together.
MacDonald exhibited no sign of fear at any time during the trial. He appeared cold, the few times I did see his eyes, there was no expression in them, with the exception of the time I was in the same elevator with him and Segal, he was smiling and starring at a very beautiful young woman. Of course he had no idea that she was the daughter of Peter Kearns. Even when the woman he said he saw in his home the night his family was murdered and claims he was attacked entered the courtroom, he showed no emotions. Everyone at the trial had heard so much about Helena Stoeckley and her so-called involvement in the case. When it was announced that she would be the next witness, all heads turned to finally see this mystery woman as she was escorted into the courtroom. Not MacDonald, he stared straight ahead and never even looked directly at her while she was on the stand. That is how interested he was.
Judge Dupree, like any other judge must consider many things, even protecting an accused murderer if need be, that protection extended to Jeffrey MacDonald. During the trial at MacDonald's request, Judge Dupree provided MacDonald 24 hour U.S. Marshal protection. MacDonald argued that he was in fear of his life and he was afraid Kassab would try to kill him. In January of 1976, when the Circuit Court dismissed the case on speedy trial grounds, Kassab publicly made the statement and it was printed in the press, "If the courts of this country won't administer justice, I most assuredly will."MacDonald used that to ask for protection which cost the tax payers money. If Freddy had wanted to kill MacDonald, he could have done it with the twist of his hand making no noise and leaving no evidence long before 1979. That is not what Freddy wanted, he wanted justice from the court.
And yes, MacDonald had a bullet proof vest at the trial. It was just another one of his antics. He was a sympathy seeker who wanted to be thought of as a victim, which he was not.
I remember talking with Bob Keeler at the trial on breaks various times. He was not a fan of Judge Dupree and he expressed to me that he felt it would be a hung jury. I also spent time talking to Hugh Salter, a U.S. Marshal who was a big burly man with a shock of white hair and a ruddy face that reflected a lifetime of living at the ocean in North Carolina in a small community that bore his family name, Salter Path. He had seen lots of cases, and lots of juries. His feeling was the jury would convict MacDonald.
According to the grapevine that traveled in the courtroom among law clerks and out to those of us who were spectators, it was rumored that Judge Dupree did not believe the government would get a conviction. While it might be true that the government had proved its case, it was questionable to him that the jury would unanimously say so. Judge Dupree knew that time was rapidly becoming of the essence. If the jury should acquit MacDonald which he believed it might very well do, he did not want Kassab to dispense his own brand of justice either in his courtroom or any where close to it. He did not want Kassab to try and kill MacDonald. There had been enough discussion of death and the MacDonald family in his courtroom, and he passionately wanted no more of it. He would do whatever was necessary to prevent any possible problems.
At approximately 4:45 p.m. on August 29, 1979 while the jury was deliberating, Judge Dupree summoned Kassab to his chambers just off the courtroom. The private meeting between these two proud men did not take long. But Judge Dupree got what he wanted, a promise from Freddy Kassab that he would not seek to harm Jeffrey MacDonald if he was acquitted of murder, while he, Jeffrey MacDonald was within the federal jurisdiction of Judge Dupree.
Judge Dupree being satisfied with Kassab's promise, excused him from his chambers, allowing him tore turn to his wife Mildred, while they continued to wait for the jury's decision.
A short time later, word came the jury had reached a decision and everyone was called back into the courtroom. When the verdict was read, there were six U.S. Marshals between Kassab and MacDonald and in addition two private detectives standing next to Freddy. MacDonald is a whining coward.
Judge Dupree made sure MacDonald was afforded secure protection at all time while in the courtroom and during the trial.
Regardless of how you look at it, Jeffrey MacDonald was incredibly lucky for almost ten years. It was the dogged Freddy Kassab, the investigators and the prosecutors, James Blackburn and Brian Murtagh who changed his luck and brought justice for Colette, Kimberley, Kristen and the unborn baby boy.
QUESTION: You keep harping on the injuries that Dr. Jeff's family had. Dr Jeff could have died from his injuries. You should be ashamed of yourself for all the lies you print. You are pure evil. You and your web site is a disgrace. You should be forced to removed it and to admit that you are lying. I suspect that you have doctored the records to make your points. I have known Dr. Jeff most our adult life. He is a good man and a good friend. You only want to tarnish his name.
ANSWER: Don't chastise me for what you consider lies. As to your comment that you suspect I doctored the records, I challenge you to find any record/document that I have altered to make my point. Contact the various departments and get your own copies and produce anything that I have altered. Ah, but that would take too much time and money and perhaps you are too lazy and cheap to do that. Produce the evidence to prove that I am lying then we will do battle. In the meantime, do not rely on what you have been told. The documents are available, read them for yourself.
I could care less what you think of me. Truth is truth, your friend is in prison, convicted of the brutal murders of his pregnant wife and two small defensive girls. In my opinion that doesn't makes him a good man or capable of being a friend to anyone. That makes him a triple convicted murderer.
Jeffrey MacDonald's life was never in danger from any of the so-called injuries he claims to have received from the intruders who entered into his home, killing his family and attacking him. None of the doctors stated, documented or testified to the fact that his injuries were life threatening.
Colette was 26 years old the night she died. I cannot help but think about how she died, not passively, but fighting back, as hard as she could, trying to the end to protect her babies. She was attacked, not just in the bedroom that belonged to her and MacDonald, but in her baby daughter Kristen's room as well. Colette was no coward, she fought hard. She was not just murdered. She was destroyed.
There is no more chilling way to describe what happened to Colette, Kimberley and Kristen than to read their autopsy reports.
Dr. George Gammel, the pathologist who performed the autopsy on Colette, wrote in his final summary paragraph the following -
"This 26 year old pregnant white woman died suddenly as a direct result of multiple stab wounds of the thorax and neck. There were two distinct types of penetrating wounds. Numerous (21) small round puncture wounds were present over the thorax and upper left arm, many penetrating to a depth of approximately 4 cm. There were also multiple (16) elliptical gaping incisional wounds with sharp edges, 1.5 cm. in length penetrating maximally approximately 4 cm. in depth. The lungs, trachea and pulmonary artery revealed incisional wounds with a subsequent massive internal hemorrhage. Most of the wounds appeared to be perpendicular to the surface of the body and no significant angulation was noted.
"There were also numerous lacerations and fractures of the head and arms. A skull fracture was present immediately beneath the mid-line laceration."
Kimberley, the oldest child, did not fare much better. Dr. William Hancock, who performed her autopsy, noted that "There are approximately 8 to 10 penetrating incisional wounds of the approximate mid-portion of the anterior medial right neck. Some of these wounds overlap each other, and a definite number cannot be ascribed. The mid-portion of the nose is deviated to the right and feels fractured beneath the surface of the skin.
"The trachea is lacerated and is filled with frothy, unclotted sanguineous fluid which extends 2/3rd of the way up the trachea from the cornea. The skull has been fracture. The base of the skull reveals multiple fractures some of which do transect the entire bone. All bones at the base of the skull have been fractured in at least one plane."
Dr. Hancock issued his written summary at the conclusion of the autopsy report the following - "This five year old Caucasian female sustained multiple blunt blows to the head that are considered sufficient to cause concussion and comatose state and possible immediate death. The lacerations of the trachea were at least in part ante-mortem, as represented by the associated surrounding interstitial hemorrhage; and in conjunction with the head injuries were sufficient to cause death. The blows to the head were most likely sustained prior to the neck wounds as represented by the more intense bleeding of the former. The impact of the blows to the head are considered severe based upon the fact that the base of the skull shows multiple fractures and the right calvarium was fractured through its entire thickness and slightly dislocated.
"The lesions of the head were most likely caused by a blunt instrument. The blows are most likely multiple on the right side of the head. The number of blows cannot be established; however it appears that at least two were sustained. The direction of the blows again is slightly equivocal; however it appears they varied from the horizontal by only a few degrees. Whether these blows were sustained from the front or the rear cannot be determined. The position of the body at the time the blows were given cannot be established either.
"The lacerations of the neck were consistent with stab wounds caused by a single-edged sharp instrument that caused wounds ½ inches in width and penetrated at least 5 cm. in depth. These stab wounds appear to have entered at right angles to the prone body in the head to toe plane but primarily from right to left with reference to the side-to-side plane of the prone body."
And finally, Kristen. Dr. Hancock, who had examined Kimberley, did the same with Kristen. He wrote in part that -"The anterior chest reveals 4 approximately 1.5 cm (0.59") gaping, sharply circumscribed incisional wounds which appear to penetrate with the body cavities. A similar fifth wound is in the anterior superior mid-line of the neck. The anterior chest also has 5 approximately 3 mm in diameter circular-type wounds surrounded by abraded skin and ecchymotic tissue to the extent of approximately 1 cm. These latter wounds appear to penetrate deeply. They are situated in line with and just below the plane of the nipples. Also on the anterior chest are 10 similar type wounds located on the right half of the chest, however the wounds do not appear to penetrate deeply and the ecchymotic area is 4 mm on each lesion; similar lesions are located in the anterior neck, one in the inferior mid-line and the other in the right superior lateral portion. The upper half of the posterior thorax reveals 12 approximately 1.2 cm gaping incisional wounds with sharply demarcated borders.
The wounds occupy the mid-line of the upper posterior back and are 10 in number while the remaining 2 lesions are situated over the inferior portion of the left scapula."
Basically, Dr. Hancock determined that Kristen died from a loss of blood with the wounds to her heart and lungs being the most lethal.
Whenever I reading these three autopsy reports, I am reminded once again that death by murder is awful. If there is anything that can make it worse, it is that the killer is lovingly known to the victims, as I believed it to be true in this case.
Now as to MacDonald wounds - It was noted that he had bruising over the left eye beneath the hairline, a superficial stab wound of the upper left arm, a superficial stab wound of the left bicep, a superficial laceration of the left index finger and a superficial wound to the left abdomen in the form of an upside down "V". Several small punctures wounds were present on the upper left chest. None of the wounds required suturing, however, in fairness, according to the report, the abdomen wound could have been sutured. The doctors were more concerned with the chest wound and the abdominal wound healed without any difficulties. A 1 cm. in length, neat, clean and precise wound in the 6th intercostal space in the mid-clavicular line, locate between two ribs on the right side of his chest that resulted in a partial collapse of the right lung. The wound to chest did not indicate that it occurred in a fight where someone was striking out in a random frenzied manner with a sharp object. In addition, MacDonald stated to CID investigators Pruett and Kearns that he had scratches on his left chest.
During the April 6, 1970 interview with CID investigators Joe Grebner, Bill Ivory and Bob Shaw, MacDonald asked the question, "How was I supposed to have gotten these wound?" Grebner responded, "You could get these wounds, at least the ones you had--the puncture--you could have done it yourself." MacDonald responded by describing his wounds as "A couple of blows on the head and a lot of little puncture wounds, and a little cut on the abdomen and a couple of stab marks in the arm and--and a puncture wound in the lung." Absolutely no mention of any of the wounds being life threatening whatsoever.
Look at the injuries of everybody involved. Colette, Kimberley and Kristen died a horrible, brutal death. Where is MacDonald's battle scars? He has none just as he has no conscience, he has no heart, he has no soul. He is a dead man walking. His injuries can in no way be compared to the true victims of this case.
It has been said that every photograph steals a portion of your soul. The autopsy pictures of Colette,Kimberley and Kristen will remain burned within mine for the rest of my life.
I think it would be a very good idea to go back and let your brain rethink your question.
QUESTION: Can you describe the courtroom, provide some history on Dupree and do you think he was a bias judge?
ANSWER: Raleigh's Federal Building was eight stories high, white stone, with large windows surrounding all sides. Built in the 1960's, it was spartan in its decor, functional, not elaborate. On the seventh floor, there were two courtrooms, opposite each other, with a moderate sized lobby separating them. They were identical. They each had two long wooden benches on either side of a middle aisle. Paneling went midway up each wall. The carpet was thin and government issue. Perhaps the most interesting thing about the courtroom was the judges bench was bullet proof. However, only the lower part of the judge's body was protected.
Judge Franklin T. Dupree, Jr. at the time of the trial was in his late sixties, possessed a round face that was quite active in expression, and a wisp of white hair. He had a photographic memory, and an extreme attention to detail. I found it amazing how he would often lay back in his chair, as if he were sleeping, with his glasses on the end of his nose and in the flash of an eye come forward in a rush, taking issue with some statement or argument made by an attorney. There was no doubt who was in control in his courtroom.
He was a member of the Federal Bench since President Nixon appointed him in 1970. Within the previous two months, prior to the trial, he had taken the title and responsibility of Chief Judge of the Federal Eastern District of North Carolina, which covered forty-four of the state's 100 counties from Raleigh to the coast.
When one entered into the large inner sanctum of the most powerful federal judge in eastern North Carolina, you quickly become aware of how large his office was, but unpretentious. He used government issue desks and two large overstuffed green chairs seated directly in front of him. The chambers reflected the man, pure hard work, fair and caring on behalf of all those who appeared before him. He took seriously his responsibility to protect all the parties that might come before him. He was a conservative, no-nonsense trial judge who had spent the majority of his legal career representing large insurance companies. He was a devoted patriot, taking great pride in the American Pledge of Allegiance, which he regularly recited each Monday at the Raleigh Host Lions Club, of which he was a long time member.
Attorneys who appeared before him unprepared did so only once. He could be stern with those who represented parties before him, hand out stiff active sentences to those convicted of crimes in his court, and yet with the individuals who helped him manage the courts, including those in the clerk of court's office, jurors who helped resolve cases, and his long time secretary, Nona, a pretty statuesque lady whose penchant for discretion was legendary around the courthouse, he was unfailingly polite and courteous.
The judge was also a great disciple of the game of tennis and still played very actively well into his seventh decade. Indeed, the one time that I saw him smile during the trial of Jeffrey MacDonald was when a government witness was leaving to fly to Europe immediately after his testimony, and the judge had secured the help of the witness in locating a new foreign brand of tennis shoe that he wanted so badly.
As to Judge Dupree being bias, I never saw any partiality or favoritism to either side. Both sides experienced his exasperation at times. In my opinion, he had a very dry sense of humor. He at times did come across as funny and the spectators would get a laugh. I would say there were times things were said that I did not think should have been. Many people considered him a pain in ass, and he may well have been. However, he took serious his duties and made sure every I was dotted and every T was crossed. That is why none of his rulings have ever been overturned.
He did get impatient with Bernie Segal at time. I believe that was because Segal's ways were total alien. He was an northeast liberal with a long head of hair who let himself get carried away with trying to beat down the government's investigation. His tactics and redundancy worn thin with Judge Dupree at times.
I get e-mails asking if I was a supporter of Jeffrey MacDonald. I will address the issue based on the following e-mail -
QUESTION: I am confused and have some questions. There is a letter on the MacDonald website that has your name on it. Did you write that letter and were you a supporter of Jeff MacDonald?
ANSWER:Yes, I did write the letter years back, but it is not the complete letter that I wrote, and I can assure you, I have never signed a letter in my life, a retired nurse. For many years, just as there were no pictures of MacDonald's family on his website, there were no letters of so-called supporters. It was after I started my website that a few pictures of Colette and the children were added. Then I started sharing e-mails I was receiving, good and bad and that is when the few letters were added on his site.
As far as being a supporter of MacDonald - No, I never was. Did I donate money to his defense, never.Did I ever try or want to be a part of his defense? Never. What I am guilty of is at one time believing that there was a chance he was innocent.
QUESTION: I read on American Justice discussion board where [name withheld] said something to the effect they believe you were infatuated with MacDonald, whom they refer among many other names as inmate, but he was not interested in you. Some imply you got mad and started your website to get even.
ANSWER: Well, anyone can believe what they want to, and for me to constantly deny their allegations is a waste of time simply for the fact that they have made up their minds and nothing can change that. This, however, will be my last word on the subject and the matter is closed as far as I am concerned. This is a no win situation - when I respond to the allegations, they say I am lying or that I am protesting too much. If I ignore them, they say I refuse to answer their questions. So be it, believe what you want.
When I went looking for information, the government did not condemn me because I voiced that I thought there was a chance he was innocent. Instead they were helpful, never trying to change my mind and always directing me to where I could find what I was looking for. Peter Kearns, Bill Ivory, Colonel Pruett, Jim Blackburn, Brian Murtagh, and all the others who have assisted me in finding information never condemned me or made insulting remarks. Bob and Pep Stevenson never condemned me, or made insulting remarks and have welcomed me into home and we consider each other extended family. My husband and children understood my passion for this case and always encouraged me to find my answers. These are the people who are important in my life, not someone who does not even know me, and whose only interest is to start and partake in vicious gossip.
I do not know Jeffrey MacDonald and have never had any desire to know him. I do not hate him as a human being, but I do hate what he did to his family. To hate serves no purpose. Richard M. Nixon, in his White House farewell speech said "Always remember others may hate you but those who hate you don't win unless you hate them. And then you destroy yourself." Those words are so true. I have never and I repeat never been infatuated with him. I am however obsessed with the case and learning every detail possible about it.
I never thought of starting a website. In fact I had no idea how to do it. Then I met someone who encouraged me to start one and share the information. With their help and encouragement, that is how the website started. I have wished many times that I had never started this website or shared any of my thoughts and information that I obtained. It has caused many problems in my life. I have been attacked from both sides, but the attacks from those who say he is guilty are far worst than from his supporters. Some seem to think that they are entitled to have all the information that I have to use as they see fit, while at the same time make false accusations about me.
My only intent from the beginning was to share with those who were interested in the case to read the actual documents/records/transcripts and to make up their minds as to his guilt or innocence. For so many years there was nothing out there available to the public to counter the lies MacDonald wanted people to believe. Fatal Vision, an excellent, truthful book by Joe McGinniss was the closest thing there was. Still there are some who want to believe that I am hiding something as to the reason I changed my mind and came to believe beyond any shadow of doubt that MacDonald is guilty of murdering Colette, who was pregnant, Kimberley and Kristen and why I started the website.
Life is short, and we never know what's in store. That is why I do not get involved in common gossip. When I have extra time, I choose to cherish quiet moments to reflect on because it is during quiet moments, you really find out who you are underneath it all. It's a time when the world seems to slow down and everything makes sense, if only for a moment.
And so until next time, I leave you with Colette's own words. You be the judge, did she know the kind of man he was? I am sure she knew more than MacDonald ever imagined. Colette had so many dreams of a happy marriage and future on her wedding day. No one would have ever thought of the horrible, inexorable end that was to come. I believe there were a few happy moments at times, but all short lived. She was happy with her children and they became her whole life. A life that her husband played a very small part in.