home

Appeals Court Orders Consideration of DNA Evidence in Jeffrey MacDonald "Fatal Vision " Case

By Jeralyn, Section Innocence Cases
Posted on Tue Apr 19, 2011 at 05:43:36 PM EST
Tags: Jeffrey MacDonald (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

In 1979, Jeffrey R. MacDonald, a captain in the Medical Corps, was convicted of murdering his pregnant wife and their two young daughters in the family’s Fort Bragg home. He was sentenced to three life terms and has steadfastly maintained his innocence. He lost his direct appeal and many post-conviction motions for relief. His case was the subject of the book and movie, Fatal Vision.

A year ago, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in his latest request for relief. Today, the Court ordered the trial court to consider DNA evidence casting doubt on his guilt in conjunction with the other submitted innocence evidence. The court said the innocence evidence must be considered together as a whole, rather than piecemeal. The opinion is here.

Via e-mail from the Innocence Project, which filed an amicus brief along with the New England Innocence Project and the North Carolina Center on Actual Innocence in the case: [more...]

Since MacDonald was convicted of the murders in 1979, considerable evidence of his innocence has come to light. Most recently, retired US Marshall Jimmy Britt came forward with information that another suspect in the case, Helena Stoeckley, admitted to the prosecutor that she was in the house on the night of MacDonald’s murder and that he treated to indict her for first degree murder if she admitted that in court.

In addition, DNA testing on evidence that was recovered from the fingernails scrapings of one of the victims and a hair found under another victim did not match MacDonald. Earlier, evidence came to light that a FBI forensic examiner mislead the jury about synthetic hair evidence. MacDonald claimed the hairs were from the wig of one of the murders, but the forensic examiner incorrectly claimed they were from one of the children’s dolls.

The Innocence Project says:

“Far too often the people who have been wrongly convicted uncover evidence of their innocence bit by bit, slowly over time. Courts reject this evidence claiming it wouldn’t have made a difference in their cases and then refuse to look at it again when more evidence is discovered,” added Scheck. “With this decision, courts will have to look at all the evidence as a whole when considering innocence claims, which will open up a whole new avenue defense for many people who can’t get the courts to take their claims seriously.”

The court's ruling denying relief in 2008 is here.

< Colorado About to Tinker With Medical Marijuana Caregiver Definition | Bradley Manning to be Moved to Ft. Leavenworth >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Appeals Court Orders Consideration of DNA Evidence in Jeffrey MacDonald "Fatal Vision " Case | 28 comments (28 topical)
    Joe McGinnis's book was quite (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by oculus on Tue Apr 19, 2011 at 06:03:59 PM EST
    convincing.  Perhaps he'll need a Vol. II.

    I will keep saying it to the day I die (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by NYShooter on Wed Apr 20, 2011 at 01:23:29 PM EST
    Those who society has entrusted to maintain Law & Order, and who have been granted the authority to arrest, detain, and incarcerate fellow human beings, have a sacred obligation, an irrefutable duty, to carry out their functions in a fair, open minded, and honest manner. I can think of very few things as horrible as being unjustly stripped of your freedom and caged like an animal.

    I am emotionally unable to suggest what punishment would be appropriate for violators of that trust other than it should be of a magnitude many times that of an ordinary citizen.

    Britt (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by AlansAunt on Mon May 09, 2011 at 05:01:25 AM EST
    Britt stated in his affidavit that Helena had confessed to him during the trip from Greenville County jail to Raleigh, NC. The problem with that is:

    (1) Helena was in Pickens County jail not Greenville
    (2) DUSM Kennedy signed for Helena at Pickens County jail
    (3) Kennedy and a female deputy then drove Helena to the Charlotte NC vicinity where they met DUSM Dennis Meehan and his then wife
    (4) DUSM Meehan accepted custody of Helena and with his then wife transported Helena to Wake County jail where she was incarcerated until the next day trial appearance.

    Kathryn also does not mention that Britt filed for bankruptcy shortly before signing the affidavit but was able to keep his house after signing it. Kathryn's statement about Britt's affidavit does not match what Britt said was his reason for waiting so long to come forth with his "information".  Britt said he did not come forth sooner out of respect for Judge Dupree. Excuse me? Judge Dupree had been deceased for a decade when Britt came forth. Britt had alcohol problems and was disciplined more than once for his conduct.

    Britt filed for bankruptcy shortly before he signed his affidavit and was able to keep his house after signing.  That should raise a few eyebrows.

    I would love for Kathryn to explain which documents support that Helena Stocekley or Greg Mitchell was ever in the MacDonald apartment. She can not because that is not true. When the DNA results came back, they proved that the "Suspects" were never there.

    I personally have no objections to Jeffrey MacDonald getting a new trial and the evidence as a whole considered. It is my personal opinion, that if that were to happen, the jury would find MacDonald guilty in less time than it would take to drink a cup of coffee.

    Jeffrey MacDonald said shortly after the murders that he felt a sense of relief that his family was gone. What innocent party would make such a statement? Who would feel a sense a relief that his whole family had been slaughtered?

    Jeffrey MacDonald always said that when they sourced the hair found clutched in his wife's hand they would have the murderer. He was right.
    DNA sourced that hair to Jeffrey MacDonald.

    Jeffrey MacDonald (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Tina on Mon May 09, 2011 at 01:32:31 PM EST
    I am a family member of Colette, Kimberley and Kristen, who were the victims. I respectfully disagree with Kathryn MacDonald.
    Our family's position can be found at

     

    Jeffrey MacDonald (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Tina on Mon May 09, 2011 at 01:36:11 PM EST
    http://thejeffreymacdonaldcase.com/

    Wasn't whatever Helena (none / 0) (#1)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Apr 19, 2011 at 06:00:41 PM EST
    Stoeckly said a problem because of her history of drug abuse and the fact that she changed her story a number of times?

    Anyway, whatever comes of this will certainly hopefully clear up any of the mysteries surrounding the death of McDonald's family.

    I saw a similar case on Investigation ID the other night where a guy named Marty spent 19 years in jail because he was the only one home when his parents were murdered. By gosh, the police really botched that case and the family had to fight for 19 long years to get him out.

    Interesting (none / 0) (#4)
    by Zorba on Tue Apr 19, 2011 at 07:00:34 PM EST
    I remember the case as it was playing out, and I subsequently read the McGinnis book.  I was never happy about the whole trial or the results thereof.  It will be interesting to see what happens.

    I didn't know the Innocence Project was involved (none / 0) (#5)
    by mjames on Tue Apr 19, 2011 at 07:02:09 PM EST
    Scheck was a law professor of mine back in the day, and a good one, and he does admirable work now, but I (a former public defender) have a lot of questions, among them:

    1. Was the US Marshall actually present, as he says, when the prosecutor allegedly "threatened" Stoeckley with criminal charges and when Stoeckley admitted she was in the house? If so, why did he stay silent for so long about that misconduct? Or wasn't it really misconduct?

    2. Why wasn't Stoeckley charged with the murders? What was she doing in the house? Who was with her? Is there physical evidence that she was in the house?

    3. Were these other people the alleged murderers? Aside from being "drug-crazed hippies." What was their motive? Where are they now?

    The book and TV movie were so damning of McDonald. His wound was so slight (allegedly). And Stoeckley was portrayed repeatedly as an unreliable druggie. Why? Are those facts true or not?

    I know these questions do not have to be answered for the conviction to be overturned, and I'm certainly OK with that, but they do have to be answered for us to understand what really happened. McGinness started on the book, according to him, believing in McDonald's innocence, and then changed his mind as the case unfolded.

    Finally, if this goes back to the Supreme Court (for the umpteenth time), the Court may reverse the Fourth Circuit. And we'll still never know. I wish I knew the truth.

    Hello, I'd like to answer your questions MJames (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by kathryn macdonald on Wed Apr 20, 2011 at 12:14:40 AM EST
    Dear Sir or Maam;
    I'd respectfully like to answer your questions- Jeff MacDonald is my husband, but I can assure you that what I state is backed up by documents/the record- this is not my "opinion"....
    Yes, the U.S. Marshal (Jimmy B. Britt) was present when prosecutor James Blackburn (since disbarred after pleading guilty to 11 felony counts of dishonesty- the 12th count (forging the signature of a judge) was dismissed b/c the judge in question (who presided over my husband's trial (Dupree)declined to press charges....) threatened key defense witness Helena Stoeckley.  His recollection of this event is corroborated by attorney Wendy Rouder (in 1979 she was a legal ass't) to whom H.S. confided and by H.S's own mother (also named Helena Stoeckley) whose sworn affidavit recoun