Personal tools

Home > News & Events > Press Releases > Innocence Project Applauds Federal Appeals Court Ruling in Jeffrey MacDonald Case Saying Court Must Consider All Evidence of Innocence When Considering Innocence Claims

Innocence Project Applauds Federal Appeals Court Ruling in Jeffrey MacDonald Case Saying Court Must Consider All Evidence of Innocence When Considering Innocence Claims

Share This:

Posted: April 20, 2011   12:00 AM

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
April 19, 2011

CONTACTS:  Paul Cates, 212/364-5346, cell 917/566-1294, pcates@innocenceproject.org

A federal appeals court today ruled that courts must consider all relevant evidence of innocence when deciding whether to grant a defendant’s writ of actual innocence.  The Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued the ruling in a case brought by Jeffrey MacDonald, a former Captain in the Army Medical Corps who claims he was wrongfully convicted of murdering his wife and two daughters back in 1970. 

“This decision is extremely good news for everyone who has been wrongfully convicted of a crime and is seeking relief in the federal courts,” said Barry Scheck, Co-director of the Innocence Project, which is affiliate with Cardozo School of Law, which submitted a friend-of-the-court brief in the case.  “Over the years, MacDonald has uncovered significant evidence pointing to his innocence, including DNA testing, but the district court refused to look at all this evidence as a whole.   Today, the 4th Circuit correctly rejected this piecemeal parsing of innocence claims and said all the relevant evidence must be considered.”

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. 

“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.”  

A pdf of the appellate court’s decision is attached.  A copy of the friend-of-the-court brief filed by the Innocence Project, the New England Innocence Project, with the support of attorneys Andrew Good and Phillip Comier, and the North Carolina Center on Actual Innocence is available here.
Philip Callahan says:
Jul 30, 2015 09:05 PM

I just came across this article, so my commentary is full of old news. Despite receiving more chances at a new trial than any convicted murderer in history, the 4th Circuit Court completely ignored the voluminous case record, and made a decision that smelled of political leanings. The good news is that Judge Fox followed the 4th Circuit's roadmap to a tee and he allowed the kitchen sink to be presented at the 2012 evidentiary hearing. The government destroyed all of the claims contained in this article and the specious arguments put forth by MacDonald attorney Gordon Widenhouse. Judge Fox denied MacDonald relief on 7/24/14, and despite the inclusion of the FBI's Microscopic Hair report, Judge Fox again denied MacDonald relief on 5/18/15. IMO, the Innocence Project has done some good work, but getting involved in the MacDonald Case will forever tarnish the Project's accomplishments.

Robyn Bishop says:
Jul 31, 2015 08:24 AM

I used to be a supporter of the IP but since it became involved in this case my feelings have been forever tarnished. During the initial investigation of this case a limb hair was found clutched in Colette MacDonald's hand along with a bloody splinter from the murder club. The defense named this hair "the mystery hair" and said that it HAD to have come from the murderer. The DNA testing showed (as most of us suspected/new) the hair was a 100% match to Jeffrey Robert MacDonald. He was rightfully convicted, all the sourced evidence points to him being the sole criminal actor in this case, and it is long past time for the courts to put an official and formal end to his appeals. The IP needs to review the evidence as a whole before jumping on any particular inmate's bandwagon.

Add comment

You can add a comment by filling out the form below. Plain text formatting.