MacDonald on 48 Hours
September. I don't know the air time or date as it's not posted on the website as yet.
It's not the size of the dog in the fight but the size of the fight in the dog
When I saw a promo for him being on 48 hours coming up, I got so angry! Why do people keep giving this loser a forum to spew his bogus claims of being a victim of a "conspiracy"! ON the plus side, every time he is on tv claiming his innocence, people run to learn more about the case, and read Fatal Vision. Every time people read it, more people become convinced of his guilt. Fatal Visin is NOT why he's locked up, as he claims, he's locked up because he butchered his family. Reading the book is a good starting point in researching the case, and so far i've never seen anything that screams to me that he is innocent. If he didn't have Fatal Vision to use for his silly claims of innocence, i'm sure he would latch on to something else to hang is "i'm a victim too" hat on...the man is pathetic.
shareI wish I had seen that promo, I am trying to find the airdate and for some reason I can't get an email alert from the website. But it looks as if the next program is on September 24th., so maybe that's his air date.
I totally agree. The last time the killer was given air time I promptly emailed Larry King to express my displeasure and disappointment. He sits there spewing his garbage about the "real killers" living in Florida and went totally unchallengend by the host.
It's not the size of the dog in the fight but the size of the fight in the dog
[deleted]
Actually, he is married, so please don't make it look as if he is looking for females to write to him.
bmp
Actually, he is married, so please don't make it look as if he is looking for females to write to him.
You must be joking? Mac never took his marriage vows to Colette very seriously. He is/was a serial adulterer. He still does write to young women from prison, his new wife notwithstanding.
It's not the size of the dog in the fight but the size of the fight in the dog
Guess who he's married to.
The woman who taught me drama when I was 8 years old. true *beep* story. crazy. it's the only reason I follow this case. Oh, and P.S. the 48 Hours Special was on last night. I tried to order a tape of it from CBS but it ain't available for copyright reasons. but you can get a transcript of it (thought that might be helpful for the thesis writer)
Read Fatal Vision, huh? A book not based on fact, as stated by the author, who admitted to writing it and showing the "facts" as he saw fit so that it would fit his theory? Even a court of law saw that, as he was sued over the book and LOST. The book does not prove his guilt. Far from it.
bmp
cami2 believes that MacDonald is as guilty as sin. Before I read cami's posts, I was convinced MacDonald was innocent. Now, I don't know what to believe. bmks, I would like to hear if you think he is innocent or guilty and how you have come to believe as you do.
Learn a new language, explore a new world.
cami2 believes that MacDonald is as guilty as sin. Before I read cami's posts, I was convinced MacDonald was innocent. Now, I don't know what to believe. bmks, I would like to hear if you think he is innocent or guilty and how you have come to believe as you do.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My belief is based on my years of researching his case. All his legal documents are now online, the April 6th interview, the Article 32, the Grand Jury, and the 1979 trial, the autopsies, etc. everything. Once you scratch the surface, you will find that it's impossible to believe that anyone other than MacDonald committed the crime.
www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com has everything a researcher could want. If you only base your belief on MacDonald's website or on Fatal Justice and don't open yourself up to the other side then yes you are going to believe he's innocent.
When you learn those wig hairs in the hairbrushes are actually saran fibres, synthetic fibres and that all three of them differ in chemical composition, you are left with the impossible scenario that three of the intruders would have had to have been wearing wigs.
When you learn the five bloody gloves are actually oven mitts and dish gloves you're left with the even more impossible scenario that the hippie intruders were wearing oven mitts and dish gloves and brushing their wigs all the while slaughtering two tiny girls.
But it's the blood evidence that points right to MacDonald as the killer. There's no refuting it. The whole US Army could have stomped through that murder scene that night and they still could not, would not have comtaminated the blood evidence. There's two articles that are the smoking guns, the pajama top and the blue bedsheet.
Here's the link to the lab reports, you can verify what I have stated here yourself. http://azwest.net/c&j/html/cid_reports.html
It's not the size of the dog in the fight but the size of the fight in the dog
Cami...everything you say is so right on. I am so sick of hearing McDonald go on TV and talk about those new wig hairs, and they couldnt be matched to any of the kids dolls. Well, first of all, no one can claim they were deposited that night, for all we know the girls had friends over who had a doll...etc.etc, what Jeffrey always tries to do is paint a broad picture and hope know one will look at the details. Thank god he was denied parole, and cant try again until 2020..at least by then hopefully he will be too old to have more children that he could kill again. My problem is his new wife. what is wrong with these women who marry men in prison for murder it makes no sense to me.
May the force be with you...and the schwartz too.
Isn't he? What's even more disconcerting to me is those networks are giving him airtime.
His wife was on Larry King two weeks ago discussing some foolishness about a US Marshall that heard someone confess 25 years ago, LOL. It gave her the opportunity to bring in all those old tired claims of suppressed evidence, i.e, wig hairs, candle wax and black fibres. What she failed to mention was the hairs match falls that Colette and her mother owned, and dolls owned by Kristen, that the candle wax was old and some of it contained household debris, some of the drippings matched candles you use on a birthday cake, etc., and that MacDonald promptly sold or gave away most of his household articles quite quickly after the murders so the black fibres could not be sourced. I very promptly emailed Larry to express my displeasure.
Yes, that's exactly what he tries to do. He didn't think anyone would get their hands on those documents and scratch beneath the surface. As long as he is in control of them, he can convince his supporters of his innocence, and he's a micro manager. He's been exposed finally as the liar and killer that he is. My favourite name for him is Ice Pick Baby Killer. He hates that, LOL. I'd like to sue his wife, Kathryn if I could. I'd like her to remove Helena Stockeley's name and the incorrect and unfounded allegations against her on that website of his. I wish her family would act. I live in Canada so there's nothing I can do express speak out about it on public message boards. The only killer is MacDonald.
It's not the size of the dog in the fight but the size of the fight in the dog
Read Fatal Vision, huh? A book not based on fact, as stated by the author, who admitted to writing it and showing the "facts" as he saw fit so that it would fit his theory? Even a court of law saw that, as he was sued over the book and LOST. The book does not prove his guilt. Far from it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fatal Vision did not convict Mac nor does it attempt to prove his guilt.
As for it's not being based in fact, you are completely incorrect. Joe McGinniss sat through the whole trial, exposed to the blood and fibre evidence that proves Mac is the killer. Those are the facts in his book, the trial facts, the evidence against Mac. McGinniss clearly states in FV that his amphetemine pyschosis is speculation based on MacDonald's own handwritten journal mentioning that he had been taking diet pills in the weeks preceeding the murders as part of a weight control program. McGinniss speculated he took an overdose. MacDonald sued him for fraud not libel.
As for the lawsuit, you got that wrong also. He was sued for fraud and he did not lose. The jury hung on the very first question. Rather than have a mistrial declared and have to go through the whole thing again and again, McGinniss offered to settle. Mac jumped at the settlement very quickly. He was asking for $15M and he settled for $325,000. McGinniss knew Mac would keep him tied up in court for years. The Kassabs then sued Mac and received $75,000 and most of the rest of it went to his attorneys. Mac himself received $50,000. He was desperate for money to keep his appeals going, that's the only reason he sued McGinniss in the first place.
Here's a link to Cleve Backster's testimony re: the civil suit. You can clearly see that Mac lied and lied.
http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/html/backster_1987aug11.html
It's not the size of the dog in the fight but the size of the fight in the dog