Jeffrey MacDonald - The Case Against Him

The government’s version of what happened is that Jeffrey and Colette got into a life and death battle. This theory justified the multiple wounds on MacDonald as being from a fight with Colette, self inflicted or a combination of both.

According to government, all except one of MacDonald’s wounds, were caused by his wife during their altercation. The exception, being the wound that caused his partial collapsed lung, on his right side. This was a wound, the government contended, deliberately and carefully inflicted to make it appear he was seriously injured. They belittled the seriousness of the, so called, "self inflicted" wound, declaring it carefully incised without endangering his life. Prosecutors ignored the 1970 testimony from multiple doctors describing the seriousness and dangers of such a wound. One of the most accurate descriptions of the danger of this type of wound was from the state medical examiner, hired by Army Prosecutors to give an independent evaluation. These doctors were never again called to testify. At trial, only one doctor testified on this. He said it was possible to do it to one self, based on what the prosecutors had shown him.

In following their script of Jeffrey and Colette doing bloody battle, the prosecutors were forced to deny that MacDonald suffered any ice pick wounds.

February 7, 1985, during a television interview on Channel 40, Fayetteville, North Carolina, James Blackburn, a former prosecutor on the case, stated physicians testified at the trial that MacDonald suffered no ice pick wounds. This is not true.

Documented the medical reports acknowledged obvious the ice picks wounds. But the ice pick wounds didn't work with the prosecution’s theory. It would show a vicious Colette wielding both a knife and an ice pick against her husband in a highly successful, ambidextrous fashion.

One reason the prosecutors felt confident in denying the extent of MacDonald’s wounds is the CID and hospital personnel failed to photograph of his injuries. It was necessary to look elsewhere in the government’s documentation to get a complete, more accurate picture of the scope and seriousness all of MacDonald’s injuries. The complete facts, significantly contradict the scenario and information the government presented.

The facts surrounding the weapons are very different than those presented by the government.

How would MacDonald do on a polygraph -- a lie detector test?