{"content":{"sharePage":{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"24660869","dateCreated":"1274901801","smartDate":"May 26, 2010","userCreated":{"username":"tahlisab","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/tahlisab","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/bhs-forensics.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/24660869"},"dateDigested":1532428012,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"INNOCENT!","description":"Tahlisa Brougham
\nAfter a more thorough examination of the case, I have decided to stick with my original conclusion \u2013 innocent. This is primarily because of the tampering, dismissal, and suppression of evidence by the prosecution. These tactics both prevent a fair trial and suggest those involved (lawyers, government, army members?) have something to hide. Most interesting, perhaps, is that the CID ignored a potential suspect, Helena Shockley, who fit the crime physically and personality-wise. They decided to withhold knowledge of her from the FBI, and later dismissed her open confession to being involved by saying she was crazy and incompetent. However, Helena could describe the MacDonald household perfectly and she admitted burning a blonde wig, boots, and a floppy hat (in accordance with MacDonald description AND an investigator\u2019s description of a women he saw on the way to the crime scene). Blonde wig hairs were even found at the crime scene in an area that MacDonald claims to have seen the women, and the woman was a drug addict. She could have easily said, \u201cAcid is groovy\u201d. Yet, the woman\u2019s potential relevance to the crime was hid and ignored. (http:\/\/karisable.com\/mac7.htm<\/a>, http:\/\/www.themacdonaldcase.org\/index.html<\/a> )
\n This was not the only evidence that could have lead to a solution and that was not brought into the light. Hairs under both of the children\u2019s fingernails were found that did not belong to MacDonald, and one was bloody. Neither of these were presented in the trial. Also, after four years of the defense trying to get their hands on the evidence from the lab, they were finally allowed to look but not to test anything. They were not allowed a fair examination of the evidence. (http:\/\/www.themacdonaldcase.org\/index.html<\/a> )
\n Directly in the defense of MacDonald, without criticizing the methods of others, some of the claims against him, such as his hair and fibers being places can be justified by the simple fact that he lived in the house and had contact with his family. For example, if fibers from his pajama shirt were found under the nails of his daughter, maybe she clung to him while he carried her to bed.
\nEven if Jeffrey was actually guilty, you can\u2019t prove a man guilty when you use unfair law practices, destroy evidence, and don\u2019t give both sides of the story a real chance in court.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"24634981","dateCreated":"1274878892","smartDate":"May 26, 2010","userCreated":{"username":"Pooge2010","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/Pooge2010","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/pic\/1270838026\/Pooge2010-lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/bhs-forensics.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/24634981"},"dateDigested":1532428012,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Innocent!","description":"I believe that Macdonald is innocent because the stories kept changing and the government withheld evidence that they later burnt. There are reports from doctors saying that the wounds on Jeff Macdonald were of an icepick which he couldn't of done to himself.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"24635411","body":"I agree, the government withheld ALOT of vital information to the case that could prove MacDonald's theory. They tried to cover up the evidence that they found by not doing proper tests or just not reporting that it was found at all. The entire government and investigator side of the story is too suspicious, why should they leave out such vital information?","dateCreated":"1274879389","smartDate":"May 26, 2010","userCreated":{"username":"10jprosser","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/10jprosser","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}}],"more":0}]},{"id":"24634133","dateCreated":"1274878088","smartDate":"May 26, 2010","userCreated":{"username":"clipps3","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/clipps3","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/bhs-forensics.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/24634133"},"dateDigested":1532428012,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"INNOCENT!","description":"I believe Jeffery MacDonald to be innocent. Although each side has their own story and points to back up their views, many articles of evidance should have been presented, but weren't even accounted for. Not only that, but the investigating team was in and out of the crime scene, destroying evidence. Along with destroying evidence, they didn't collect other pieeces when they should have, and moved other vital objects. Instead of taking care of the evidence when initially found, the team moved, used, or regretted to even record it. Becuase most of the vital evidence was destroyed, the court couldn't exactly make a convincing story against MacDonald. The wounds that were said to be inflicted on himself would have been extremely hard to do to oneself. They wree dangerous, and wouldn't be easy to pull off without killing himself. There was also Helena Stoeckley. She was said to have been seen around the time of the crime scene, in an alley a few blocks from the home. But when reported by Mica, the 1st luitenant ordered him to not mention seeing her, and also didn't order an investigation on her. On multiple occasions, Stoeckley claimed to know what happened that night adn could describe the crime scene in detail along with the apartment. She was willing to give her full confession, in return for her immunity but the government refused. The defense attorney wasn't premitted to review the crime scene until days before the trial, and they were unable to gain valid evidence to prove he was innocent. Becuase much evidence was either destroyed or not collected, the defense attorney wasn't promitted to the crime scene, and many key parts to the story were looked over, I believe MacDonald is innocent. The government shouldn't have ruled him guilty without proper evidence to back the theories up, and without all this evidence it would have been hard for the defense attorney to even make a claim. The trial and investigation was unfair, and MacDonald should have been ruled innocent.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"24635155","body":"I completely agree with you, there is evidence and facts that most people are dismissing and they need to be looked at.","dateCreated":"1274879079","smartDate":"May 26, 2010","userCreated":{"username":"Pooge2010","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/Pooge2010","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/pic\/1270838026\/Pooge2010-lg.jpg"}},{"id":"24635595","body":"People need to look at the facts that the prosecutors left out of the crime scene report. People are immediately saying "guilty" without further reading into the case. They are determined to say he is guilty without sincerely examining the case.","dateCreated":"1274879575","smartDate":"May 26, 2010","userCreated":{"username":"10jprosser","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/10jprosser","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"24636345","body":"After reviewing the case more in depth, I now agree that MacDonald is innocent. Government officials don't have enough evidence that they can prove relates to someone or something in the murder case.","dateCreated":"1274880240","smartDate":"May 26, 2010","userCreated":{"username":"11aeliason","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/11aeliason","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}}],"more":0}]},{"id":"24619353","dateCreated":"1274837982","smartDate":"May 25, 2010","userCreated":{"username":"11anyoung","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/11anyoung","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/bhs-forensics.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/24619353"},"dateDigested":1532428013,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Amanda Young","description":"On account of poor presentation on the government investigators' part despite recent evidence advantage, i think that jeffrey mcadonald was innocent.Although there are valid points to each side, i believe that the prosecution investegators did not present these pieces of evidence in an effective manner. Also, the defense attorney was not permitted into the crime scene until mere days before the trial date. Therefore, the evidence needed to support their consensus would not be quite as useful as it would have been if collected prior to separate invesigation and evidence collection. Furthermore, there are several factors of evidence which were highly overlooked at the crime scene. for example, There were foreign hairs found on each of the bodies that did not originate from any individual from the macdonald household (http:\/\/www.themacdonaldcase.org\/index.html<\/a>). Furthermore, prosecutors left out critical evidence to the trial; there were indeed fibers and bloodstain belonging to macdonald where he had fallen unconsious. This was kept from the trial, as it was a key piece of evidence which could have proved prosecutors wrong (http:\/\/www.themacdonaldcase.org\/QandA.html<\/a>). Therefore, Macdonald was prosecuted due to the absence of this key evidence. Also, the other main suspects had constantly spoken of their motives and of reasoning for leaving macdonald alive. Furthermore, the wounds found on Macdoanld were much more severe than lead on (http:\/\/www.themacdonaldcase.org\/Jeffrey_Mac.html<\/a>). Macdonald suffered a punctured lung, several deep stab wounds to the abdominals, and a severe concussion. Some prosecutors have claimed that since macdonald was a surgeon, he would have been able to predict what he could recover from. However, macdonald proceeded his injuries with several necessary surgeries needed to heal his lung collapse by 40%.4 out of the 5 doctors in the court ruling have agreed that there was no "safe" way for macdonald to predict the outcome of these injuries. Furthermore, Macdonald has had no history of mental illness, or psychiatric disorders. Therefore, all of these major factors supporty the conclusion of macdonald's innocence.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]}],"more":false},"comments":[]},"http":{"code":200,"status":"OK"},"redirectUrl":null,"javascript":null,"notices":{"warning":[],"error":[],"info":[],"success":[]}}