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

August 21, 1974: Robert Shaw (CID)


I, Carolyn Y. Hall, being a Notary Public in and for the State of North Carolina, was appointed to take the testimony of the following witness before the Grand Jury, Raleigh, North Carolina, commencing at 11:00 a.m. on August 21, 1974. All Grand Jurors were present.


ROBERT B. SHAW having been first duly sworn by the Foreman, testified as follows:

Q Will you state your full name, please sir?
A Robert B. Shaw,
Q Where do you live at this time, Mr. Shaw?
A Camp Zama, Honshu, Japan.
Q Will you spell those Japanese words for our reporter?
A Zama is Z-a-m-a. Honshu is H-o-n-s-h-u, Japan.
Q What is your employment, sir?
A I'm a member of the Criminal Investigation Division of the Army. I'm presently assigned to the CID Laboratory as a forensic photographer.
Q Do you have a military rank or grade?
A Yes sir. I'm Chief Warrant Officer 2.
Q Now, directing your attention to the night of February 16th, February 17th, 1970, where were you stationed?
A I was stationed at the Criminal Investigation Detachment at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
Q What was your duty at that time?
A I was a Criminal Investigator.
Q Did you get a call on the morning of February 17th?
A Yes sir, I did. At 042 hours, Investigator Ivory called me at my quarters.
Q All right. As a result of that call, what did you do?
A He explained that he was at the scene of what appeared to be a multiple murder and that he had been instructed to call various agents and request help so I dressed and went to the CID office, obtained an automobile, my investigator's kit. Another investigator rode with me. I met him at the office and we went to the crime scene which was 544 Castle Drive, given to me by Ivory.
Q Who accompanied you to the crime scene?
A Mr. Carl Black.
Q Will you tell the jurors, if you please, what your investigator's kit consist off?
A Yes sir. It was a brief case and in there I had items which are normally used to collect fragile evidence such as tongs, tweezers, a small knife, pill vials, glass test tubes, rubber stoppers, that sort of thing, envelopes.
Q And you took that equipment with you?
A Yes sir.
Q Now approximately when was it you arrived at the crime scene?
A I arrived at the crime scene 0450 hours.
Q All right. Who was in charge at that time?
A Mr. Ivory.
Q Did you report to him?
A Yes I did.
Q Did he give you any specific instructions?
A Yes he did. He briefed me on what he had found up that time and instructed -- told me that there was a body in the south bedroom on the bed and he asked that I go in there and begin to process that room at the crime scene.
Q Now, is that what you did?
A Yes, until about 6:30 in the morning. He told me that it was beginning to get light. He'd like to organize a search of the outside area around the house and he asked that I go out and conduct that.
Q Well, did you do that?
A Yes I did.
Q What door did you go out when you conducted this search? Do you recall?
A Yes, the door through the living room which would be the south door of the quarters.
Q Now, did you examine the house around its perimeter?
A Oh, yes.
Q Tell us how you examined it. Tell us the first thing you did.
A The first thing I did was to take my flashlight and search the sandy bed area around the walls of the quarters. I was looking for, specifically I was looking for foot prints in the sand.
Q Did you see any foot prints?
A No, I didn't.
Q Did you make a test to ascertain whether or not had a person been standing in any of these areas they would have left a foot print?
A Yes I did. Since I didn't find any, I wanted to know if someone looking in the window would leave a foot print. I made a test print and it was very clear and very deep in this soft sandy area.
Q Now, in your examination did you cover the area around all the windows in the house? That is the side, the east side and the north side?
A Yes I did. I also noticed that none of the windows were open so that anyone could see in. They were closed with blinds and drapes and that sort of thing.
Q What else did you find?
A As I was doing that, I previously organized some MPs to cover a larger area than I could cover in a short time and I heard one of them say, here's something. I went around to the north side of the quarters and near the utility room door I found a club laying in the grass.
Q Do you see that club in front of you right now?
A Yes sir, I do.
Q All right. Now, what did you do when you observed the club?
A Well, of course I had a flashlight with me and I approached it carefully and looked for things around it and I didn't see anything laying on the grass so while it laying in place I marked the direction that it was laying in with a blue arrow -- here it is -- I see it's still on here -- and I marked it with my initials and the date so I could identify it later. It was raining, not very hard, but it was raining and I could see blood, or what I thought was blood on the club and I could see what looked like it might have been hairs or fibers or something. Since the photographer wasn't there -- he had gone to get more flash bulbs -- I decided to collect that evidence right away, rather than let any of it get rained off or destroyed. I took some little wooden stakes that I have like tongue depressors out of my investigator's kit and while it was laying on the ground I put these stakes into the ground before I moved it and then I picked it up like this and looked it over pretty good, took it to my CID sedan and put it in a cardboard box and secured it in the trunk of the vehicle. When the photographer did come back, I took a picture of that area that it was in. Would you like to see that now?
Q Yes. Do you have that picture with you sir? All right. I'll ask our reporter to mark that as Shaw, Exhibit #1 of this date.


Q (Mr. Woerheide): All right, sir. Does this picture accurately indicate the location of the club in relation to the back door and the back stoop and the length of the club when you first observed it?
A Yes it does.
Q All right. What did you do next?
A Well, continuing the search, another military policeman called my attention to some objects under a bush located at the northeast corner of the quarters. I went over there, again with my flashlight, and I approached these objects in the same manner and found an ice pick and a paring knife.
Q All right. What did you do with respect to these objects?
A Of course I observed them as carefully as I could without touching them and I realized that they were under the foliage enough so that I could leave them in place without any danger of destroying the evidence until the photographer came on the scene.
Q Did he come on the scene shortly thereafter?
A Yes sir, within ten minutes.
Q All right. Did you have him make a photograph?
A Yes, I did and I have that photograph with me. In fact, I made two photographs or had him make two photographs. One a location shot and one a close up shot.

MR. WOERHEIDE: All right, we'll mark the location shot as Shaw Exhibit #2 of this date and the close up shot as Shaw Exhibit #3 of this date.


Q (Mr. Woerheide): This bush grows right at the corner of the house, is that correct sir?
A That's correct. You can see the corner of the house in the photograph.
Q And the objects appear to be right under the outer edge of the overhang of the bush, is that correct?
A That's correct.
Q And they -- neither the point of the ice pick nor the knife is stuck in the ground. They seem to have sort of rolled into that position. Would you say that's a correct analysis?
A Yes.
Q Now, would it be accurate to say, referring to this picture, this being the back door, the club was approximately here and the ice pick and the knife were approximately here?
A Yes, that's accurate.
Q Now, after you conducted this investigation of the exterior of the house, did you reenter the house?
A Yes, again by the living room door. Of course I informed Ivory as to what I had found.
Q All right. Sometime thereafter did a medical officer by the name of Neal, I think it was Captain Neal, come to the house?
A Yes, he did.
Q Were you there at the time?
A Yes, I was.
Q Did you observe his arrival at the house and what occurred after he entered the house?
A Oh yes, very carefully.
Q Now, will you tell us what instructions, if any, were given to him at the time he came to the house and what you observed him do, what was said to him on later occasions while he was in the house and describe the whole sequence of events until such time as he left the house?
A Captain Neal arrived and Ivory was informed of his arrival as was I. Ivory met him at the end of the hallway, I believe in the living room. That's where I first observed them together anyway. Captain Neal was there to examine the bodies and pronounce them dead. He was told by Ivory that that was his purpose there. Ivory told him, don't disturb the crime scene anymore than absolutely necessary, don't move the bodies unless it's necessary. Captain Neal said, all right, and Ivory led him to the North bedroom which would be Kristen's bedroom. We got to the doorway and Ivory pointed out some blood on the floor and some other things on the floor that may have been evidentiary value, said, be careful of these Captain Neal. He said all right.
Q Did Ivory cause a picture to be made at that time before Neal observed the bodies or approached the bodies?
A Yes, he did. All of them. There was a gentleman there by the name of Squires who was a civilian employee of the Army. He is photographer and Mr. Squires took pictures all the way around. Captain Neal approached Kristen's bed and he bent over her body, pulling the blanket back. I was observing this from the doorway and I made a sound of some kind. Captain Neal examined the -- the when I say he moved the body, he sort of rolled it back and then let it fall back into place. Ivory again instructed him, don't move the bodies unless it's absolutely necessary. If they're still alive -- I'm not quoting him exactly but he said, if they're still alive then we'll do something about it, we'll get them out of here and get them to a hospital. Captain Neal again agreed that he would do that. We went across the hallway to Kimberly's bedroom which would be the south bedroom and I said something to Neal again about that, reiterating it because I was primarily concerned with this room. It was my area to search. I said, Doctor, if you don't have to move anything, don't move it. He said, all right. He went to the south side of the bed. He leaned over the little girl's body. He lifted the covers up so he could see her neck and he touched her face and I believe he touched her wrist which was exposed and indicated that she was dead and straightened up and left the bedroom. We went from there to the master bedroom where Colette MacDonald was laying on the floor. He squatted down near her body and he reached over and thumbed open one of her eyelids. I'm not sure which one, but one of them and he stood up and moved around to the back of her head and he reached down and, I think, felt her pulse in her throat. He straightened up and said, she's dead too. He was escorted out of the house via the hallway and living room and front door by Mr. Ivory.
Q Did you observe on that occasion Captain Neal use a stethoscope in his examination of any of these bodies?
A No sir.
Q And apart from the fact that he did move Kristen's body slightly, did he move or change the position of the body, either of Kimberly or Colette MacDonald?
A No, not at all.
Q You say definitely he did not roll over Colette MacDonald?
A Oh no.
Q Definitely he did not roll over the body Of Kimberly MacDonald?
A Not at all. He didn't touch the bodies other than what I've already described.
Q All right. Now, what did you observe so far as Captain Neal's demeanor, his actions -- did he seem to be tense, was he shaken? Did you make any observations along that line?
A Well, Captain Neal, like all the people that were called into the crime scene for one reason or another were serious. They wanted to do their business and leave. In his particular case, we thought, and I think any prudent person would think that these people were obviously dead and he recognized that right away, I'm sure, being a doctor. His examinations were done immediately. He didn't hesitate about all -- and that's the only observation I was concerned with.
Q Sometime thereafter were the bodies removed from the house?
A Yes sir, they were about 0800 hours, eight o'clock in the morning.
Q This was done by medical corpsman?
A That's correct, under the supervisor of Mr. Ivory and myself and possibly Mr. Connally. Connally was there but I don't know if he actually supervised any of the operation or not.
Q But you observed removal of the bodies?
A Yes sir.
Q Would you describe that?
A Well, a canvas stretcher was brought into the hallway by two medical corpsmen who had been briefed at the door by Ivory. Again, they were informed that this was a crime scene, there was a lot of fragile evidence around and they were to be very careful as to where they walked and what they touched. They weren't to do anything unless they were told to do it by the investigators. So following that briefing, they brought the canvas stretcher into the hallway and set it down between the north and south bedrooms. I think they picked up Kristen's body first and went into the bedroom, pulled the sheet back. One of them picked her up by the shoulders and the other one by the ankles, brought her out and laid her down on the stretcher. All right. Then we went into the south bedroom, into Kimberly's bedroom and one of them asked me, is it all right if we put this little girl on the same stretcher with the other little girl and I told them it was. He pulled the blanket back and again it was a matter of one of them at the shoulders and one at the ankles. They picked her up out of bed and took her out of the room and set her down on the stretcher, laid her down on the stretcher. That stretcher was taken out of the house then, picked up and carried out. They came back with another stretcher and this was a wheeled stretcher if I recall correctly, with high chromed sides on it. They carried it down the hallway, set it down just inside the master bedroom. I think part of it might have been protruding out into the hallway. Again, it was a matter of one of them at the head and shoulders and one at the feet. Of course, just before they did this, I do want to say that Ivory and I collected some evidence that was on top of her body.
Q Pajama top and towel?
A Pajama top and the towel. I don't think we collected anything else at that moment. As they lifted her up and stepped over to set her down on the stretcher, my attention was called away for a moment. Bill said, look at this and I looked over there and there was a lot of blood under her head region and there was something sticking out of it. I looked at it and I looked back and they were putting the body down on the stretcher. They picked the stretcher up and carried it partly down the hallway. I'm not sure, they might have rolled it part way down the hallway, I don't know, but they had to carry it out of the house. They lifted it up and took it down the two steps and out of the house.
Q Was it about the time the bodies were removed that these wet articles that were at the west end of the hallway were removed from that position and laid on the couch.
A Yes, Mr. Grebner who was the Chief of CID at the time at Fort Bragg, lifted them up and put them on the end of the couch so the people wouldn't have to walk over them or roll the stretcher over them.
Q After the bodies were removed, I take it you and Mr. Ivory and Connally proceeded further in collecting evidence, including these fibers which you referred to.
A Well, Mr. Connally was sent to the hospital with the bodies.
Q I see.
A Mr. Ivory and I stayed there and began to collect hairs and fibers that we -- that he had noticed and called my attention to under Colette MacDonald's head That's the first thing we looked at because that stood out to us as being very fragile. They had outlined the position of the body on the rug and while we were at it went ahead and collected hairs and fibers from within the body outline.
Q Now, you say Kimberly's room was your room, the south bedroom?
A That's right.
Q Now, at the time the body was picked up and just a moment prior it was picked up, did you make an outline of the body on the sheet on which she was lying?
A Well when I first arrived, within the first hour there, I made an outline of the blanket line, her head, the exposed hand and when we rolled the blanket back to remove her body at about eight o'clock, then I continued to trace the rest of the body outline which was under the cover.
Q Do you know whether Mr. Connally made a similar outline?
A Yes, I know they did.
Q Kristen's body?
A Kristen's body.
Q And were marks made around Colette's body to indicate where that was lying?
A Yes sir.
Q I take it, later that morning according to the testimony we've already heard, some technicians arrived from Fort Gordon?
A Yes, they arrived about eleven o'clock. We had requested a team from the CID Laboratory to assist us in processing this crime scene.
Q Did you work closely with these technicians?
A Yes, I did.
Q Did you continue to work on the scene through the remainder of the week?
A Yes, until Saturday.
Q And, in this connection, what type of evidence did you collect? You've already referred to fibers, how about blood stains?
A There were various body fluid stains that were collected. We collected things that might have finger prints on them that couldn't easily be processes at the crime scene because of their makeup for one reason or another.
Q How about splinters or fragments of woods?
A Certainly. We found splinters of wood and collected them and sent them to the lab.
Q And, in the process of collecting these things, did you keep an accurate record of where you found certain items of physical evidence?
A Yes, I did.
Q And on the basis of the lab reports submitted by the CID Lab at Fort Gordon, is it now possible to determine as to blood, fibers, hairs, pieces of wood, where blood of a certain type was found, where hairs of a certain type were found, where pieces of wood of a certain type were found?
A Yes, it is.
Q During the later investigation of this case, did you have an occasion to interview various witnesses?
A Yes, I did.
Q Do you have any idea how many?
A Yes, I only participated in the interview of two people in connection with this case.
Q Who are they?
A Mr. and Mrs. Alfred Kassab.
Q And that involved traveling to New York?
A Yes, it did.
Q Did you participate in the interview of Captain MacDonald on April 6, 1970?
A Yes, I did.
Q Was a tape recording made of that interview?
A Yes, it was.
Q Now, is there a typewritten transcript of that?
A Yes.
Q Now when the lab people arrived -- we've talked about physical evidence such as blood, fibers, hairs and wood particles. Did you also participate in the collection of fingerprints?
A Not in the collection of them, no.
Q Were you present when the fingerprints were dusted?
A Yes. That was being done while I was there, of course, Mr. Medlin from the laboratories and Mr. Turbyfill did most of that.
Q And they were being photographed at the time?
A That's correct.
Q You're a photography expert now?
A Now.
Q And is it a part of your work to collect fingerprints?
A It's part of my work to photograph fingerprints, not to collect them.
Q I see. Well, just tell the jury, if you will, from your observations made in the house during the week following the morning of February 17th, beginning as of that date, and for your knowledge of the procedures now, how that was done, what could go wrong and if you know, what went wrong that particular morning?
A Yes sir. In processing a crime scene of that type, when the technician dusts for fingerprints and he begins to find what looks like it may be an identifiable fingerprint, he continues to work with it until he has it to a degree of clarity that's optimal, until he begins to destroy it by further dusting. At that time the fingerprint is photographed in place. At this point, several considerations come into play. If it's a public room, let us say.
Q A public what?
A A public room of some kind, you must lift the fingerprint and that's done with a piece of rubber that has a sticky substance on it, placed over the fingerprint very carefully and peeled back and hopefully in the transfer from the wood to the rubber the powder isn't destroyed.
Q Not necessarily wood, it could be plaster or paint or what have you?
A Yes sir.
Q A piece of glass or a piece of leather, any surface?
A Yes. The other consideration is, if the crime scene is going to remain intact for an indefinite period of time, such as the MacDonald house, we knew at that point we were not going to return it either to Captain MacDonald or to post housing to rerelease, the best thing to do is to cover it with a very clear special made cellophane tape. Just to actually tape over the fingerprint and then in theory it becomes a permanent piece of evidence. Well, in this case, we did have problems because we had to shut the house up and not allow any drafts or rain to come in, certainly no strangers to come into the house, and the humidity got so low in the house from being shut up all the time, that the tape they covered some of these fingerprints with actually dried out and it buckled. I understand that some fingerprints were lost in that respect. Of course, they had already been photographed but again the photographer ran into a problem, I think I know what happened, he was using a tripod and all the accepted photographic methods, but the floor was very shaky and due to low light level, he had to use a very long shutter speed and I know that if anybody walked in that house during the moment he was taking the exposure it moved the camera and I think he lost some fingerprints in that manner, some good negatives.
Q Now, he was not using electronic flash or floodlight, he was using available light and the available light in the house was dim and this would require a time exposure in effect.
A That is correct.
Q And the least little -- in taking these fingerprints was he using a close focus?
A Yes he was. He was using a micro camera, it's called microphotography, excuse me, and it involves a very long bellows extension, the lens of the camera was probably not more than an inch and a half or two inches from the fingerprint itself, which involves a very great enlargement on the film. The least bid of movement will make that fingerprint unrecognizable and unidentifiable.
Q Prior to the Article 32 hearing, Mr. Shaw, were you required to give a deposition to counsel for then Captain MacDonald?
A Yes I was.
Q Where was that deposition taken?
A It was taken at the Staff Judge Advocate's office at Fort Bragg, North Carolina on a weekend. I believe it was a Sunday afternoon. I was ordered to report there.
Q Was it something in the early part of July, either just before or after the fourth of July?
A I have a copy of that, if I can refer to it. It was on the fifth of July, 1970.
Q Please describe to the Grand Jury who was present at the time that deposition was made and the general atmosphere of the taking of the deposition.
A Well, I was present as was a stenographer and there was Mr. Segal and Mr. Eisman, his partner, and Captain Douthat, the primary military counsel for Captain MacDonald and a Lieutenant Malley, who was, as I understood it, a good friend of and appointed counsel for Captain MacDonald. The atmosphere I can frankly say was hostile. I had requested, as had other investigators who had to appear, that the government provide us counsel because all of us felt that we were being questioned with the idea in mind of preferring charges against us at some later date.
Q Were you appointed counsel by the Army?
A No.
Q All right. Now, during the course of the taking of this deposition, did they inquire into the fingerprint situation?
A Yes, they did.
Q Did they ask -- Do you have a copy of the questions and answers that were propounded to you at that time?
A Yes, I have.
Q All right. Apparently an accusation was made against you based at least in part upon the statements made in this deposition and in part also based on testimony you gave later at the Article 32 hearing. The accusation is that you did not submit prints to the FBI, that you should have submitted for purposes of identification and when you were asked why you did not do that, you said "I didn't know the FBI performed that service." Now, will you tell us at this time and you may refer to the transcript of your testimony, either on the taking of the deposition or later when being examined at the time of the Article 32 hearing, what you were in fact asked and what you did in fact say and explain to the Grand Jury what the situation is?
A Yes, I can. The FBI keeps two fingerprint files, one of them is very large and it involves somewhere in the neighborhood, I believe, of sixteen million fingerprint cards.
Q Now, when you say fingerprint cards, are these fingerprint cards showing all ten prints of the subject?
A Yes, they are. They're the kind of fingerprint cards that are made if you go into the Army, or if you apply for a federal position of some kind or a position that requires a security clearance. There are ten rolled impressions that are made of your fingerprints and, of course, the card bears all your identity on it.
Q Those are individual prints?
A Individual prints.
Q All right. In addition they are what?
A In addition, they print the fingers of each hand simultaneously so what you end up with is twenty impressions from each person. All right when a card gets to the FBI, they have a classification system which revolves around all ten fingers. They take every finger into account and they classify the print and give it a number and file it, the idea being that if you later apply for a job and they want to verify your identity or your clearance, they take another card and send it to the FBI, they pull the card and they match the prints. If you apply for a job under an assumed name, let's say, they go to the assumed name file and they don't find that name, so then they take a classification of the fingers and go to another section of their files and they look up and see whether or not they have any fingerprint card which has that ten finger classification on it. The other file that they keep is a single fingerprint file. They keep it on a very limited category of offenders, for instance, bank robbers. When they process the scene of a bank robbery they find a fingerprint on the teller's cage, they will keep that single fingerprint in a special file for later comparison with other bank robberies and that sort of thing. They keep single fingerprints on known syndicate figures whenever they can pick up the fingerprints, they take it and they --
Q When you use the word syndicate, that's referring to organized crime type people?
A Yes.
Q Members of the Mafia and other organized crime groups?
A Yes. That's correct. The other classification that I know wherein they keep single fingerprints is for kidnappers. So, this is the background to give you to understand my answers I made to them. Mr. Segal was asking me questions. This is at the pre-Article 32 deposition.


Question: Do you know whether any fingerprints of any unidentifiable people were found in the house?

Answer: Yes, I believe there were.

Question: What attempts were made to locate or determine who these people might have been? Were they sent to Washington to the FBI or The National Criminal Identification Bureau or anywhere else to identify these people?

Answer: The fingerprints which today have not been identified were matched with recorded fingerprints taken during this investigation.

Question: You mean suspects or people who are known?

Answer: People who are known to have been in the house, suspects, investigators.

Question: But they were never sent to the FBI to determine whether or not they matched fingerprints of people whose fingerprints were on record? As an aside, that's the sixteen million fingerprint cards.

Answer: To the best of my knowledge, the FBI doesn't perform that service. They might but sending a fingerprint to the Federal Bureau involves work that I'm not sure they are prepared to do. And then --











Q (Mr. Woerheide): When you say sending s fingerprint, you're referring to just one isolated fingerprint as distinguished from a set of fingerprints?
A A single fingerprint.
Q All right.
A The questioning goes on but that's the substance of it.
Q All right. How about the testimony at the Article 32?
A At the Article 32, which was on the 24th of July, this testimony, Captain Thompson, one of the counsels for the government asked me questions.


Question: You indicated that you did not send any prints to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for analysis, is that correct?

Answer: That's correct.

Question: Why didn't you?

Answer: Because I know that the FBI does not offer fingerprint record check service except in very limited areas. One, repeated kidnaper offenders, the other that I know about is a file kept on certain figures of crime that are considered to be by syndicate figures. Otherwise, the FBI will not provide the service of checking their millions of cards for single fingerprints. They just don't do it. That's the substance of that testimony.


Q (Mr. Woerheide): All right. After this issue had been raised in the Article 32 hearing, was there any further efforts made by the CID so far as having an examination of these single fingerprints by the FBI to resolve the problem?
A Yes there were. There were repeated efforts.
Q Does the material you have with you at this time reflect that?
A It reflects the action that the Federal Bureau of Investigation did finally take on it.
Q All right. Do you have a copy of the letter there from the FBI?
A Yes, I do.
Q Will you please read that for the record?
A Yes, I do.
Q Will you please that for the record? Do you have a copy that we can mark as an Exhibit?
A Yes sir.

MR. WOERHEIDE: Let's give this copy of the letter Shaw Exhibit #4 of this date.


Q (Mr. Woerheide): It's not a very long letter. Will you read it?

Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C.
Report of Identification Division, Latent Fingerprint Section

August 26, 1970.

To Mr. Carl A. Sensi, Acting Commander, Criminal Investigation Laboratory, U.S. Army, Military Police School, Department of the Army, Fort Gordon, Georgia, 30905

Reference: Captain Jeffrey Robert MacDonald Fingerprint matter.
Reference: Letter 14, 1970 Examination requested by addressee.
Specimen: Thirty-two photographs of latent print prints.

Thirteen Latent fingerprints, twelve latent palm prints and five latent impressions of value for identification purposes appear in the submitted photographs. Five of the latent fingerprints are from the tip areas of fingers and the latent impressions may be either fingerprints or partial palm prints. See attached page for the result of the comparison of one latent fingerprint with a fingerprint of Jeffrey Robert MacDonald, born October 12, 1943 in Jamaica, New York, FBI #490743H.

Seven latent fingerprints and two latent impressions are not identical with the fingerprints of MacDonald. The five latent fingerprints from the tip areas of the fingers and the three remaining latent impressions were compared insofar as possible with the comparable areas of available fingerprints of MacDonald but no identification was effected. Inked impressions of the tips, lower joint areas of the fingers and palm prints of this individual are necessary for conclusive comparisons with the latent finger tips, latent impressions and for comparison with the latent palm prints.

No searches could be conducted in our main fingerprint file inasmuch as a search of this file is based on a formula derived from the classification of all ten fingers of an individual. It is not possible to completely classify the submitted latent fingerprints in order to conduct a search of this file.

Searches were conducted in our single fingerprint file but no identification was effected.

Photographs of the latent prints have been prepared for our files and will be available for any additional comparisons you may desire.

Q (Mr. Woerheide): In other word, on the special request of the Army, they did compare the individual fingerprints with their single fingerprint file which consist of bank robbers, kidnappers and criminal syndicate figures and they found no match with those fingerprints?
A That's correct.
Q Mr. Shaw, in connection with the collection of evidence in the house beginning on the morning of February 17 and proceeding thereafter, did you direct the making of an inventory of certain items that were found in the closets of the house, specifically the medical supplies that were found there?
A Yes, I did.
Q Do you have a copy of that inventory with you?
A I have.
Q Will you pass it to our reporter and we'll have her mark as your exhibit number five?


Q (Mr. Woerheide): All right, sir. How many pages are included in that inventory?
A This inventory goes into the third page.
Q Now, it lists pill and other articles of medication, is that correct?
A Yes, it does.
Q Does it also list or itemize any surgical or other medical equipment that was found, including syringes?
A This particular list does not.
Q Do you recall whether or not such items were found?
A Oh yes.
Q In general, without being too specific as to number, can you tell us what was found?
A We found several disposable hypodermic needles, syringes, still in casing. We found surgical instruments, a great number of surgical instruments and a lot of medical paraphernalia.
Q Now, when you say several, what do you mean in the way of syringes?
A About a hundred.

MR. WOERHEIDE: Mr. Foreman, I think that about covers what I wanted to ask Mr. Shaw.

FOREMAN: Does anyone have any questions to ask Mr. Shaw?

JUROR: The fingerprints, they said one of the agents took -- used a telephone in the house -- as a matter of fact, I think MacDonald mentioned that to us also -- and you did not find any fingerprints of either the agent or MacDonald on the telephone, you could not find any? Tape was not put on those, right?

A That's correct. The military policeman who first arrived on the scene, I believe, picked up the telephone.

JUROR: One of them?

A Yes. You'll have to let the lab report speak for itself but I do believe that I'm correct in saying that there were smudges on the telephone but were no identifiable fingerprints on the phone, either MacDonald's or the MPs or anyone else.

JUROR: What method of interrogation was used in an effort to determine if there had been items removed from the closet by intruders?

A In interviewing who, Sir?

JUROR: MacDonald or anyone.

A Well, during the crime scene search, no one that I know of was interviewed along that line. The search I'm talking about is the week that we were in the house continuously. What we did look for were obvious things of value that were still there or components of items that might have been removed. For instance, the amplifier from the stereo set, binoculars but not the case. We were seeing if things of value were in the house that an intruder might likely take that would be easily sold or pawned or something like that. We found firearms, audio equipment, cameras, crystal and silver and all of that sort of thing. It appeared to us early on that there was nothing missing although we couldn't say that definitely, of course.

MR. WOERHEIDE: Well, the closet where the medication was kept, did it appear to have been rummaged through and perhaps people had departed with pockets or bags full of stuff taken from that closet?
A Not at all.

JUROR: When you accompanied Dr. Neal, you were especially interested in Kim's bedroom, did he carry his little black bag like other doctors?

A No.

JUROR: He did not at any time have his little black bag, his stethoscope?

A Ma'am, I didn't see a black bag at all, no. I think that I would have seen it because he would've had to put it down somewhere.

JUROR: That's what I was thinking.

A And I would have been interested in that.

FOREMAN: Mr. Shaw, does the State SBI have a fingerprint file? State of North Carolina? State of North Carolina?

A I believe that they do.

FOREMAN: How about the local police and sheriff in Cumberland County and Fayetteville, do they or do they rely on the SBI?

A Again, I think you're correct. I don't think they maintain local files but I don't know that for certain.

FOREMAN: Is it possible that the State SBI would have print records of single prints, individual prints that the Federal Bureau would not have?

A No. The State police and the SBI and the different state investigatory agencies are all tied into the NCIC which is the National Crime Information Circuit and the SBI is a clearing house for all this information. They would send their fingerprints to the FBI. They may keep a copy, certainly, but they would send their fingerprints and any information they have along that line directly to the FBI, that's why a patrolman can call from his car on an out-of-state license plate and find out within a matter of moments whether it's stolen because all this information goes to a central depository. What you're suggesting is the same thing.

FOREMAN: If the State SBI has a fingerprint that they cannot place with anyone or that the FBI cannot place with anyone, then they have an unidentifiable print unless they can find an individual to match it up with?

A That's correct.

FOREMAN: Do you reckon they have that computerized where they could recall that in case they do have a print from another crime scene to determine if that person has been at different locations before?

A They do --

FOREMAN: Even though they don't know who he is?

A There is such a thing in existence now. Yes. They have -- In fact, I think there is a setup in Charlotte that has this computerized. What they'll do if they have, let us say, a murder with a particular modus operandi, if they have other open cases that shows this same MO, they will compare fingerprints, unidentified fingerprints with unidentified fingerprints from the first case to see if they have the same person.

FOREMAN: Could these unidentified prints here he run through the State SBI to see if they've shown somewhere else at a crime scene before?

A Yes, I'm sure they could.

FOREMAN: But they have not been?

A I can't answer that.

MR. WOERHEIDE: Mr. Foreman, we'll check on that and find out if anything can be done along that line. I see Mr. Stroud is making a note of it and we'll inquire into it.

FOREMAN: Did you ever talk to Helena Stoeckley yourself, personally? Do you know who she is? Did you know who she was prior to this case?

A No I didn't because I hadn't been at Fort Bragg very long. I had been transferred from overseas to Fort Bragg and I wasn't working in the narcotic section.

FOREMAN: So you don't know who she was or any of her alias or anything?

A No, I don't.

FOREMAN: Were tip prints made of Dr. MacDonald?

A Yes, I believe --

FOREMAN: They said an individual would have to be inked from tips to lower joints, et cetera. Was that done to see if they matched up with any of these unidentified tips?

A Yes, it was.

FOREMAN: Do you have any results on that?

MR. WOERHEIDE: Well, I think from the testimony you heard yesterday that some of those tip prints appear to be made by children and so on and so forth. You know it was a house that had been lived in before the MacDonalds lived there.

FOREMAN: It could very likely be DR. MacDonald's or anyone else's?

MR. WOERHEIDE: It could be. I'm sure when they had MacDonald they took all the ridge lines they could for the purposes of getting out his finger tips or any other identifiable prints.

FOREMAN: No fingerprints on the cabinet where the medical supplies were kept, there were no unidentified prints?

A No there were none.

JUROR: Would heavy shooting have anything to do with the camera taking pictures?

MR. SHAW: I'm sorry, I didn't understand you, sir.

JUROR: Heavy shooting at Fort Bragg. I know it rattles my house.

A Yes, it could possibly have something to do with it.

JUROR: Do you know whether they were shooting that morning or not?

A I don't recall specifically but frequently they have artillery fire. Not only that, but a truck driving by out on the street can affect photography in that manner. The floor is a wooden floor, suspended, and like I say, a truck, a low flying aircraft, of which there are several across Fort Bragg, artillery fire, certainly. They would all affect the photography.

FOREMAN: Anyone else?

Mr. Shaw, your original subpoena will be in effect if you're recalled during the remainder of these hearing.

Any further questions?

Mr. Shaw, thank you very much.




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  - 
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