.............................................................. >From the New Paradigms Project [Not Necessarily Endorsed]: From: "Lloyd Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Jeffrey MacDonald DNA Timeline--Green Beret Family Slaughter Date: Sunday, July 30, 2000 5:07 AM Justice Dept. DNA Stonewall indicates cover-up? The Murder Night, February 17, 1970 On a cold, rainy night at Ft. Bragg, North Carolina, military policemen responded to a telephone call from Green Beret group surgeon Dr. Jeffrey R. MacDonald. Upon their arrival at his darkened apartment, the MPs discovered the horribly slaughtered bodies of Captain MacDonald's wife, Colette, 26, and their daughters Kimberly, 5, and Kristen, 2. An MP revived MacDonald through mouth-to-mouth resuscitation. MacDonald told that he had been asleep on the sofa when he awoke to the screams of his wife and oldest daughter. Three men, standing over the sofa, attacked him, he said. They were a black man wearing an army field jacket with E-6 stripes, and two white men, apparently under the influence of drugs. MacDonald said that the black man, who showed no signs of being drugged, wielded a baseball bat. The two white men had used bladed weapons. Behind these men, MacDonald said he had caught a fleeting glimpse of a blonde woman wearing a floppy hat. She chanted, "Acid is groovy. Kill the pigs." MacDonald told the MPs, "She carried a flickering light, perhaps a candle. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alex Constantine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Kris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Lloyd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2000 2:35 AM Subject: Jeffrey MacDonald DNA Timeline http://www.themacdonaldcase.org/dnatime.htm Background on the use of DNA testing to disprove convictions The chain of events since Dr. MacDonald won the right to conduct DNA testing in October, 1997 1. 1989-90: First use of DNA in a criminal case, using only nuclear DNA, which requires a relatively large sample in good condition. 2. 1996: FBI Laboratory begins using DNA in criminal cases, utilizing both nuclear and mitochondrial DNA. The mitochondrial variant can be taken from smaller samples of biological material in less pristine conditions than are required for nuclear DNA testing. 3. April, 1997: Inspector General Michael Bromwich of the Department of Justice releases a long-awaited report on the FBI lab. He finds the lab seriously deficient, and scathingly names one FBI agent, Michael Malone, as having testified falsely in the Alcee Hastings case. 4. April 16, 1997: The Wall Street Journal prints a large, front-page investigative story regarding Michael Malone's actions in a series of cases, culminating in an expose of Malone's fraudulent testimony in the MacDonald case. (It was Malone's testimony that caused the Federal courts to deny Dr. MacDonald's appeal regarding the presence of wig hairs at the crime scene, thought to be from Helena Stoeckley's wig.) 5. April 22, 1997: Dr. MacDonald files a federal appeal, attempting to reopen the prior appeal that was rejected based on Malone's false testimony. Included in this 1997 appeal is new evidence regarding the wig fibers, plus other new evidence. ** In addition, this appeal requested that the court order DNA testing on the biologic exhibits in the MacDonald case. 6. May, 1997: The government, still led by prosecutor Brian Murtagh, begins a massive campaign to have Dr. MacDonald's new information denied by the court. In their legal filings, the government requests the court to not allow DNA testing in the MacDonald case. 7. October 17, 1997: The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals orders DNA testing in the case. Specifically, the court order is direct and clear: "It is adjudged and ordered that the motion with respect to DNA testing is granted, and the issue is remanded (sent back to) the District Court." (All other portions of the appeal are denied.) 8. October 1997-December 1998: The government mounts a fierce campaign to prevent or delay the tests, and to limit the scope of the testing. Specifically, the government prosecutor says: a. The defense should not be allowed both nuclear and mitochondrial DNA tests, but should have to choose one or the other. b. The defense should be limited to certain exhibits, and not be allowed access to all the biologic exhibits, i.e. limit defense testing. c. The defense should not be allowed to utilize its experts¹ own labs. d. The defense should be forced to see, evaluate, and test material only at the FBI lab. e. The defense should not be allowed to test any material which would be consumed in the testing process. f. The defense should not be allowed access to the "known" exemplars of hairs, blood from suspects, victims, or people who might have been at the crime scene (e.g. known hairs of Colette, Kimberly, and Kristen MacDonald, Helena Stoeckley, investigators, etc.) g. The defense should not be allowed chain-of-custody documents from the government to verify the contents of the exhibits. The defense, faced with this astonishing array of sometimes non-sensical government demands, argued the following positions: aa. Both nuclear and mitochondrial testing are necessary, depending on the condition of the exhibit, to increase accuracy. bb. All of the biologic material should be tested if the search for truth were to be complete and as accurate as possible. cc. The defense requested that the material be investigated at its own labs, or, in the alternative, at a "neutral" lab, but not at the FBI lab with its record of problems. dd. The defense refused to test materials at the FBI lab. ee. By necessity, some of the biologic material must be destroyed to run DNA tests; there are no "non-destructive" DNA tests. Obviously, as little as was needed would be consumed in any legitimate testing. ff. The known exemplars must be made available to the defense (or neutral lab) for comparison purposes. (That was the entire purpose behind DNA tests in the first place.) gg. Several unanswered requests for chain-of-custody documentation records were made in an effort to authenticate that biologic material which was ultimately provided. 9. December, 1998: Judge James C. Fox, U.S. District Court judge in the Eastern District of North Carolina, ruled that the evidence (never before seen and evaluated by the defense) must be made available to the defense by February 1999, i.e. within 2 months. Needless to say, this deadline was not met by the government. ** Judge Fox also ruled that both mitochondrial and nuclear DNA tests may be used as needed. ***Importantly, and to the defense, inexplicably, Judge Fox limited the DNA testing to only 15 of the 50 or so biologic exhibits. Thus, a large proportion of the biologic material collected at the crime scene was made off-limits for DNA testing. Obviously, this narrows the ability of the lab to prove the existence of the outside assailants at the crime scene. 10. March 23, 1999: The defense, having until this point been denied any access to the exhibits, and no closer to DNA tests than in October, 1997 when the court order was issued, files a motion to be heard in court. Oral arguments occurred in the federal courthouse in Wilmington, N.C., in front of Judge Fox. Leading the defense team were attorneys Barry Scheck, Andrew Good, Phil Cormier, Wade Smith, and Melissa Hill. The prosecution team of three was led by Brian Murtagh. The defense attempted to reach concensus on all of the outstanding "issues" between prosecution and defense in order to expedite DNA testing. 11. March 26, 1999: Judge Fox ruled on several important issues: a. The court would designate a "neutral" lab. b. Both mitochondrial and nuclear testing would be available (DNA labs which can perform both are exceedingly rare). c. Regarding the defense's fear of further government tampering with exhibit contents, Judge Fox ruled that the government must supply video and still photos of each step of the "inventory" process of the exhibits. d. Judge Fox ruled that the government must produce the known exemplars of hair and blood for comparison purposes. e. He also ordered the government to complete all preparations for turning over the exhibits to the neutral lab (still to be named) by May 17, 1999. f. Lastly, Judge Fox ordered the neutral lab to do a "divisibility assessment" of each exhibit, because the government wanted its own piece of each exhibit separate from the neutral lab. The non-divisible items were to be put in order of priority for testing so as to destroy as few items as possible - i.e. testing can be stopped when important discoveries are made. 12. April 14, 1999: Two years after filing the appeal for DNA tests, and 18 months after the court order allowing (ordering) DNA tests, Judge Fox selects the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology as the independent lab. 13. May 21, 1999: Months after Judge Fox made it clear that all testing was to be done in the neutral lab, the defense is informed that prosecutor Brian Murtagh had the FBI lab looking at the exhibits as of May 19 (!), and that he produced a "hair comparison" lab report on 2 exhibits as evidence of his good faith. The defense team is astonished, once again, at this extremely unseemly turn of events. The "hair comparison" consisted of routine hair studies under the microscope, exactly as was done in 1970, 1971, 1975, 1979, and 1990 by the government. When asked by the news media what the significance of this new hair comparison ordered by Brian Murtagh was, Dr. MacDonald replied, "I think it is obvious. He generated a request for further hair comparisons so his people would have access to crucial exhibits, just before the contents could be studied by DNA analysis." 14. June 3-4, 1999: At the AFIP, one of Dr. MacDonald's DNA experts is finally, after 29 years, allowed to look, under a microscope, at the 15 exhibits allowed by the judge. Quite striking is the fact that several vials said previously to have contents are now empty. One vial has a large fracture and hole in it with no contents. ** At one point in the two day study, the defense was told that AFIP was considering not testing any hair less than 0.5 cm (5mm). That is, small hairs, such as those found in fingernail scrapings from the victims, unless 5mm in length, would not be tested. One more piece of unsettling news: It was only at this meeting that the defense was informed by AFIP that the "only" microscopist available to do the divisibility assessment ordered by Judge Fox had written a paper early in his schooling in which he was negative to Dr. MacDonald¹s claims of innocence. 15. June-July, 1999: The defense urged AFIP to attempt to locate another microscopist to do the study. Ultimately, the defense is told none are available. The defense then asked AFIP to proceed, as the months (and years) were slipping by due to the never-ending delays. 16. February 2, 2000: The long-awaited "divisibility" study also turned out to be a "suitability for testing" study. There were three exhibits that gave the defense concern: Two separate hairs in two different exhibits, one being a hair from under the nail of a victim, were measured at 5 mm, the minimum amount of hair said by AFIP to be necessary for testing. Despite this seemingly adequate measurement, the two (crucial) hairs were now deemed "unsuitable" for DNA testing. Thus, it appears as if three of the most crucial hairs in the entire case may not be tested, despite at least two of them fulfilling the criteria set for such testing by the laboratory. It is, of course, doubly perplexing because the defense has located government lab notes which state quite clearly that the two brown hairs from under the victims¹ fingernails did not match the hair of Dr. MacDonald. 17. June, 1999-May, 2000: The defense is barraged with delays and contradictory demands by prosecutor Murtagh. For instance, despite clear court orders allowing both mitochondrial and nuclear DNA testing, Murtagh persists in stating both are not allowed. Similarly, Murtagh argued vehemently and repeatedly that only "nondestructive" DNA tests be allowed. This is an impossibility, plus the court orders clearly allowed the testing to proceed. These examples, and many other claims by Murtagh require extraordinary legal effort, time and manpower to answer. Most of all, it obscures the playing field, and adds months and years to a process that should take under one month for results. 18. May, 2000: The following is the current posture of the DNA testing: a. AFIP will commence testing once one exhibit is remounted and studied, and once all of Murtagh¹s "objections" are cleared up. b. Two crucial hairs, each measuring 0.5 cm (5 mm) will not be tested at present. c. All blood testing, as opposed to hair testing, is also on "hold" due to Brian Murtagh¹s objections and demands. d. No observers will be allowed to watch the DNA testing at AFIP. e. Brian Murtagh continues to refuse to produce chain-of-custody documents for the 15 exhibits. Addendum: As of June 9, more bad news occurred regarding the DNA issue. A third exhibit (63A) was remounted and restudied by AFIP, and despite this hair being 7mm in length with a possible root, it was declared "unsuitable for testing". This means there are now 3 hairs, each in a crucial location, (this third one being from under the nail of one of the children) which will not be tested. Forwarded for info and discussion from the New Paradigms Discussion List, not necessarily endorsed by: *********************************** Lloyd Miller, Research Director for A-albionic Research a ruling class/conspiracy research resource for the entire political-ideological spectrum. **FREE RARE BOOK SEARCH: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ** Explore Our Archive: <http://a-albionic.com/a-albionic.html> <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
