|
|
70 of 89 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Same Old Same Old, December 22, 1999
By A Customer
Fatal Justice does nothing to convince me of Jeffrey MacDonald's innocence. In my opinion, every point raised can easily be refuted. First, I discount EVERYTHING Helena Stoeckley ever said. This pitiful woman had no idea where she was or what she was doing on the night of February 17, 1970. Additionally, many reliable witnesses place her far away from the murder scene on the night in question. Helena was well-known for lying and she lived, in part, to please Prince Edward Beasley. It has always been my thought that Beasley, seeking his "fifteen minutes of fame" tried to convince Helena that she had something to do with the murders. Ken Mica, who says he saw a woman in a floppy hat on a street corner near the MacDonald home has always been well-known as a MacDonald "groupie." The book tells us that drug-crazed hippies broke into the MacDonald home and committed the murders, yet there was no sign of forced entry and no sign of mud or grass or footprints even though the night was damp and rainy. All of the murder weapons came from within the MacDonald home. It just doesn't make sense that four people intending to commit premeditated murder would fail to bring weapons, counting instead on finding them inside the home of the victims. The book talks of MacDonald being awakened by four intruders, yet MacDonald himself says that while he was fighting the four intruders near the sofa, he heard his wife screaming, "Jeff, Jeff, why are they doing this to me?" To my way of thinking, a normal mother whose life is in danger, not to mention the lives of her children, would scream as loudly as possible and perhaps even run from the home, seeking help, yet none of the neighbors heard anything. The book asks us to believe Helena Stoeckley, but in ALL versions of her many confessions she names only three intruders and herself. The book states that MacDonald gave his wife and daughters mouth-to-mouth several times and saw bubbles coming from their chests. The first MPs on the scene couldn't even see the children without shining flashlights on them and MacDonald says he did not turn the lights on or off, which would be an illogical thing to do anyway, so how could he see something like bubbles? MacDonald claims he pulled a knife from his wife's chest. No doctor, let alone a surgeon would do this. No fingerprints were found on any of the weapons. I believe MacDonald wiped the weapons, not to conceal his own prints, which would naturally be on them since they came from his home, but to conceal the lack of prints from intruders. The many unmatched hairs and fibers found in the home could only show that Colette was a less-than-perfect housekeeper. MacDonald received only very minor injuries while his wife and daughters were the victims of "overkill." The book asks us to believe the ringing of a phone scared the intruders off. Whether you believe MacDonald to be guilty or innocent, everything this book presents is "old stuff" that has already been litigated and will do MacDonald no good. A book only for those intetrested in the details of the case, as it is cumbersome and lengthy.
|