December 20, 2005: Regarding Jeffrey MacDonald's New Motion Filed
Several months ago I posted that MacDonald's defense was preparing another motion for filing. Well, as most of you know by now, a "Brief in Support of Jeffrey R. MacDonald's Motion Under 28 U.S.C. Section 2244 and 2245 for an Order Authorizing the District Court to Consider the Attached Successive Motion Pursuant to 28 USC Section 225 to Vacate the Sentence of Jeffrey R. MacDonald based on Newly Discovered Evidence" has been filed by the defense attorneys.
The affidavit of one Jim Britt, a retired US Marshal, who has come forth to say he heard Jim Blackburn, the prosecutor at the time of the 1979 trial, threaten a witness. That witness being one Helena Stoeckley, now deceased.
But a far more important question begs for an answer: why would a United States Marshal, one who is bound by the laws of the court, hear such a statement and do nothing about it for all these years? If Mr. Britt heard Blackburn make such a threat to the witness, Helena Stoeckley, then it was his duty to address the matter right away to his superiors, to the court, to MacDonald as well as to Blackburn and all other people who were involved in trying the case. Why didn't he approach Blackburn at the time and tell him his actions were unethical and he was going to report him? Where was his conscience then, that allowed Jeffrey MacDonald to remain in prison for more than 25 years without making this information known?
This newly filed document does nothing but rehash the same old things that have been tried for years, mostly dealing with Helena Stoeckley and Greg Mitchell supposedly being the ones who were responsible for the murders of Colette, Kimberley and Kristen MacDonald. One name previously mentioned time and time again, with much ado, is now missing, that being Cathy Perry as being one of the supposed murderers.
Mr. Britt is not the only person Helena Stoeckley told she was in the MacDonald house or that she was involved in the murders, she told many people. She confessed and recanted and reconfessed.
As to Mr. Britt, what are his true motives for coming forward now? I hope this is not the same U.S. Marshal that was chastised by the CID for inappropriate behavior and told if this behavior did not cease, he would be shipped off to Biloxi, Mississippi. I hope this is not the same U.S. Marshal that was suspended and tried in Raleigh, North Carolina, later to be reinstated.
Wade Smith's name is missing from this document. Is that because he is a friend of Jim Blackburn's and came to his aid when he was in trouble? There is a tremendous amount of respect between Smith and Blackburn. Smith was completely upfront with Blackburn about what was occurring and even when Blackburn signed a legal waiver that would allow Smith to be on board with the motion, Smith declined. This says a lot about the man and his ethical conduct and that he does respect himself as well as the causes he fights for.
Greg Mitchell and Helena Stoeckley are both deceased; they are not here to be questioned or answer any questions. It therefore becomes a matter of he said, she said.
My own personal opinion is there are two chances for MacDonald to get back into court: (1) slim (2) none. He has had more than 35 years and many motions filed, none resulting in evidence to warrant him getting back into court. This will just be another one added to the long list and the defense will once again go home empty handed.
I believe Ms. Fulginiti summed it up best by her statement, "I don't think they'll hear it. The standard just to hear it because this is called a successive habeas corpus petition is that the facts if proven, when viewed in light of the totality of the evidence, there would be no reasonable juror who would have found the defendant guilty. That's a very high standard and it's extraordinarily high, and I think that alone could be a reason for defamation."
As to the continuing claims that Helena Stoeckley was seen in the area close to MacDonald's house, the person allegedly observed by Ken Mica was never found and therefore has never been identified. It is mere speculation on the part of MacDonald that it was Helena. It was cold and raining that morning, most anyone out would have been wearing a raincoat and possibly a hat of some kind out of necessity to remain warm and dry. Helena Stoeckley herself denied being on foot in the area. It is therefore ridiculous for MacDonald to continue to maintain that the person Mica saw was Helena Stoeckley. Furthermore, none of Helena's confessions match anything that MacDonald said occurred that fateful night. They both tell a different story.
How does a group of so-called hippies stoned out of their minds go into a house that they are unfamiliar with, enter this house surreptitiously, find all the weapons used in the murders without arousing anyone and then in a maniacal rage kill all the females, crushing bones and skulls and only superficially injuring the big bad Green Beret, and doing all of this without leaving one of shred of evidence? How does a struggle/fight take place between four men and no evidence of the fight be left behind? The picture on the wall behind the sofa remained in place and the shade of the lamp by the sofa perfectly straight. Firearms were in the house; none were taken. These so-called people were reported as drug users, yet they took none of the drugs or syringes in the house. Those drugs and syringes represented a lot of money for them; even if they were not useful to them, they could have been sold.
Helena Stoeckley never mentioned anything about answering a phone call until after Jimmy Friar came forward and said he called MacDonald's house. If Jimmy Friar was a witness that could have been used, then why didn't the defense use him at the 1979 trial? It was the defense's decision not to. Perhaps it was because he had a long history of mental problems and had been in and out of mental hospitals as well as being arrested for multiple crimes and spent time in prison. One of his crimes was for mail fraud in which he pled insanity, but still was convicted.
All the people Helena named as being with her in the MacDonald house and committing the murders were all checked out very thoroughly. There was nothing ever found to indicate or incriminate any of them whatsoever.
MacDonald continues to hang his hat on the fact that Greg Mitchell's blood type was found on the hand of Colette and that Stoeckley said she saw Mitchell struggling with Colette.
That Mitchell told several friends and ministers that he was involved in the killings. While it is true that type O blood was found and that Mitchell's blood type was O, it does not prove that Mitchell was there or took part in the murders. Colette fought hard to save her own life and lives of her children. Kristen, the youngest child had type O blood.
That brings the issue to the minister. Ann Cannady and Juanita Sisneros, who both stated that they went to the farm that the Manor had just bought, to look it over, and that Randy Phillips was with them and that when they went inside they found written in what appeared to be red paint, "I killed the MacDonald family" written in three lines on the wall. Phillips denied seeing the writing on the wall and clearly stated in his affidavit that he remained outside and that he never went into the house on this occasion; however, he says he did on a later date return to the house but the walls had been painted by Manor personnel. He does not know who actually painted the walls and never heard anyone else make any statement about there being writing on the walls.
Some years later he was contacted by both Ann Cannady and Juanita Sisneros asking him if he remembered a guy named "Dave" and that he had confessed at a prayer meeting that he was involved in the MacDonald murders. He told them that he did not attend any prayer meeting at the farm and did not recall ever hearing Dave make any such statement regarding the MacDonald murders.
Some time later he was contacted by Mr. Ray Shedlick, a private investigator working for the defense. During the process of these meetings Mr. Shedlick presented a statement to him. He read the statement and advised Mr. Shedlick that he could not sign the statement in its present state as item number five was not true. Item number five of this statement indicated that he had personal knowledge that "Dave" had made a statement regarding his being responsible for the MacDonald slayings. Additionally, he advised Mr. Shedlick that item nine of this declaration was not totally correct, as he had never returned to the farm for the purpose of cleaning the walls. In his opinion, the original writing of this declaration as far as item nine is concerned indicated he knew something about writing on the walls which he actually did not. He then crossed through all of item five of this declaration and a portion of the statement under item nine and then signed the statement. The interesting part of this whole thing is that Randy Phillips was not a minister at the time he was involved with the Manor. It was several years later that he went to college and ultimately became a minister.
Prince Beasley, who was Helena Stoeckley's handler, eventually came to the conclusion that Helena was not involved in the murders. When he came forward to give his story to the Fayetteville Observer, if what is printed in that story is true, he was threatened by Fred Bost.
Another witness who testified at the 1979 trial was Jane Zillioux. I find it strange that in a letter she wrote June 20, 1979 that her knowledge on the case was limited and even stated that she had not seen any publicity on the case or she would have come come forward sooner with what she knew. Just what is it that she knew? As a matter of fact the person she spoke of was named Linda. Of course Helena used several aliases and it is possible that if she was shown a picture of Helena she recognized her as the person she knew as Linda.
Still, all in all, her information in the letter was what was told to her by Linda with also the statement that Linda told her she thought she was involved in the murders, but did not know for sure. Ms. Zillioux clearly states in her letter, "I wish I remembered all the details, I am sorry, I wish I remembered everything." At the trial it appeared she suddenly got her memory back.
There are so many misstated facts put out there about this case and most of them are just not true. While MacDonald did sue Joe McGinniss in court, MacDonald was awarded nothing from the court. He could have re-filed and gone back to court, but he accepted an offer from McGinniss's insurance company and settled the case. The court did not award MacDonald any settlement from McGinniss.
For more than 35 years MacDonald has attacked the government, the investigators, the courts and anyone else who does not agree with him. According to him they are liars, thieves, and that he was framed, but how do you frame a guilty person? He would have people believe he is the only one telling the truth. In my opinion he has never told the whole truth of what occurred and it is doubtful that he ever will.
In my opinion MacDonald showed how he felt about his family, evidenced by what Dr. Sadoff said when questioned for the grand jury. He said, "[MacDonald] admits to a feeling of relief that she is gone. And that the kids are gone and that he is ashamed of that feeling."
But I say give MacDonald a new trial and this time try him for four counts of murder. There was a fourth victim here, the baby boy that Colette was pregnant with, who died because its mother was murdered. And make it clear to MacDonald that if he is found guilty this time, he will face the death penalty.
What will be the next step in this never-ending saga? Will MacDonald ultimately sue all parties involved for millions of dollars? Is this the original intent of MacDonald and his attorneys who appear to be more than willing to act as the plaintiff's advocates?
I believe in our justice system and I believe that justice will continue to be served and that MacDonald will spend the rest of his life in prison. That should be the price he has to pay and it is a small price for the taking of four innocent lives. If this man is released, I would lose respect for any legal adjudication in this country. MacDonald is guilty of the murders, no matter what flimsy, eleventh-hour shenanigans, exhibits or tactics are displayed to try and confuse the issue.
Christina Masewicz
|
