Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2015 10:54:33 GMT -5
Doing great, kma; hope you're doing well also. Sorry for taking so long to get back here: had a huge and disastrous computer crash, and getting back on track has eaten up a lot of time lately. Speaking of delays... Looks like the 4th Circuit has once again bowed to the wishes of Jeffrey MacDonald for yet another delay to file his opening brief. It was originally due on Nov. 17, he got a delay until Dec. 26, then until Jan. 21, and now they've given him until Feb. 9. Check the new uploads at: www.crimearchives.net/1979_macdonald/BTW, I agree with you completely about Widenhouse. I've told JTF more than once on the phone that I've come to believe now that Widenhouse pretty much is doing this only for the paycheck, not because he truly believes in Mac's "cause." Reading that last filing, and considering all the whining Gordie has done about how busy he is with other cases, I couldn't help but feel that he didn't really want to address the FBI review as it relates to the "evidence as a whole," and put a minimum of effort into his 26-page pile of nothing. But I guess when there's nothing much to fight for to begin with, that might be all you can do. LOL Can't wait to see the gov't response to this. I'm sure they'll tear this into a thousand pieces legally, as they've done many times before.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2015 22:40:57 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2015 11:30:55 GMT -5
On May 18, Judge Fox (district court) refused to amend/alter his July 24, 2014 judgment, So that's a dead-end for Mac right now, unless/until he tries to appeal to the 4th Circuit on this issue. And speaking of the 4th Circuit, Mac's appeal for additional DNA testing was opened last Oct. 22, and we're STILL waiting for his opening brief. He wasn't able to find an attorney willing to take on the case, so finally convinced William Palmer (an old friend of Kathryn MacDonald's) to take it on. Palmer isn't a DNA attorney, isn't an appeals attorney, and admits to knowing nothing about the case, but there you have it. After many delays, his brief is due tomorrow, so we'll see what happens after that. My guess is that once all the briefs are in, the 4th Circuit will probably allow the additional DNA testing, which will just end up meaning more time and money wasted, since no outside intruders killed the MacDonald family. On another subject: I'm not sure where this is going to lead, if anywhere at all, but it looks like at least one inmate has an interest in Mac's case: www.crimearchives.net/1979_macdonald/court/2015/2015-06-01-doc384_EDNC-niblock-request.htmlJames Niblock was convicted in 2003 of wire fraud, and ordered to pay almost $10 million in restitution. He filed an appeal in the Fifth Circuit, claiming that he was "actually innocent of the offense of conviction because the Government withheld favorable evidence," and that "Because he is alleging a claim of actual innocence, [he] asserts that the savings clause of § 2255 is applicable." In May 2012, the Fifth Circuit upheld the district court, and ruled that "Niblock has not shown that his claim "is based on a retroactively applicable Supreme Court decision which esablishes that [he] may have been convicted of a nonexistent offense...Thus, he has not shown that he is entitled to proceed under the savings clause of § 2255." www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/11/11-50903.0.wpd.pdf
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2015 23:49:14 GMT -5
Once again, and again almost at the very last minute, MacDonald's attorney, William Palmer, has asked the 4th Circuit to grant yet another delay for filing his opening brief and appendix, regarding MacDonald's appeal which was opened last Oct. 22. This, despite the Court's repeated admonishments about not requesting further delays, and despite their saying outright in their last Order that no further delays would be granted. Palmer cites basically two reasons for the request: (1) that Mac intends to appeal Judge Fox's May 18 decision not to amend or alter his July 24, 2014 judgment, and Mac is "presently in the process of identifying who will be his appellate attorney and retaining that attorney," with whom Palmer wants to consult. And (2) an alleged serious illness of a family member. www.crimearchives.net/1979_macdonald/uploads/uploads.html
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2015 10:46:13 GMT -5
The 4th Circuit has again granted an extension of time for MacDonald to file his opening brief and appendix, giving him until June 29 to do so: www.crimearchives.net/1979_macdonald/uploads/uploads.htmlI think a more appropriate title for Mac's latest request would have been "Request for indefinite delays." I also suspect that at the end of the day on June 29, the only thing we'll see from attorney Palmer is another request for another extension of time, which the 4th Circuit will probably again allow, since its own repeated admonishments that no further requests for delays will be granted seems to be meaningless.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2015 9:52:16 GMT -5
And of course, Mac didn't file any opening brief on June 29. Instead, his attorney, William Palmer, filed a request to withdraw as Mac's attorney, which was granted by the court today. However, they also issued a new briefing order, stating that MacDonald's informal opening brief is due by July 24: www.crimearchives.net/1979_macdonald/uploads/uploads.htmlMethinks this appeal might ultimately be headed for dismissal, but we'll see. Maybe Mac will manage to pull a rabbit out of the hat once again, and find another "Palmer" who can request more delays for him. Time will tell.
|
|
|
Post by kma367 on Jul 3, 2015 11:56:05 GMT -5
I was very disappointed that the 4th Circuit didn't dismiss in response to Palmer's request, given the fact that he delayed the process. Hopefully with the next "pro bono" attorney, the 4th Circuit will finally put their collective foot down, cite the repeated delays and dismiss the appeal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2015 13:53:21 GMT -5
KMA: I agree 100%. But even though Palmer was allowed to withdraw and never file a brief at all, the 4th Circuit still gave Mac until July 24 to file a brief. In the meantime, Gordon Widenhouse (MacDonald's attorney) has filed a Notice of Appeal in the district court, intending to appeal Judge Fox's denial of MacDonald’s motion to vacate, which was entered on July 24, 2014: www.crimearchives.net/1979_macdonald/uploads/uploads.htmlI have more faith in Widenhouse filing a brief than I did with Palmer, but only time will tell whether Widenhouse asks for delays or actually files at some point.
|
|
|
Post by kma367 on Jul 29, 2015 22:31:19 GMT -5
Did MacDonald file an opening brief with the 4th Circuit on the IPA appeal? It was due on Friday.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2015 12:31:43 GMT -5
The short answer is no. Way back on July 27, the 4th Circuit sent MacDonald a notice of pending dismissal for failure to file his brief on his appeal for additional DNA testing. That appeal was opened on Oct. 22, 2014, and MacDonald has missed every single one of the filing deadlines the Court gave him since that time. Yesterday, having missed the last deadline of Aug. 11, Mac once again requested yet another extension of time for filing his opening brief. This time, the government said enough is enough, and filed a response/answer, asking the Court to deny MacDonald's latest motion. Today, the 4th Circuit did deny Mac's motion. But incredibly, at the same time, the Court gives MacDonald another three weeks to file (!), stating that his appeal will be dismissed at 5:00 p.m. on Sept. 14 unless his brief is received. Now, I'm going to look for something to tie around my head to keep my mouth from hanging open and my head from exploding. www.crimearchives.net/1979_macdonald/uploads/uploads.html
|
|
|
Post by kma367 on Sept 2, 2015 22:10:28 GMT -5
Several posters on another board were very upset about that. I am, too, but it's discretionary. If the appeal had been dismissed the second or third time Palmer requested an extension, we all know that MacDonald and the Wifey will find a way to blame that on the government and turn it into some kind of conspiracy. At least when they try that, we can counter with the multiple chances that MacDonald got in the year since the IPA claim was denied.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2015 9:36:02 GMT -5
So, once again waiting until the very last minute (actually, technically an hour past the very last minute), MacDonald finally filed an informal opening brief yesterday in the 4th Circuit, re: his IPA appeal for additional DNA testing. Interestingly, a cover note written by Kathryn MacDonald states that she has been "trying to fax the attached since 4:55 p.m.," which if true, was five minutes before the appeal was due to be dismissed. Even more interestingly, the fax header shows a time-stamp of 6:01 p.m., so, per the Court's order, this brief was filed an hour too late. I also noted that MacDonald references the date of Sept. 14 in his brief, but oddly, puts the date of August 8 in his title. In my opinion, this anemic two-page brief contains no real "meat" at all. MacDonald takes issue with how blood was described to the jury, and with Judge Fox's saying several years ago that he "knew nothing about DNA" and hadn't read the 1979 trial transcript. The curx of MacDonald's argument seems to be that the request for additional DNA testing is not untimely, and that "By refusing to test the blood evidence in this case, the government is not embracing the spirit of the transparency and full disclosure and has been allowed to do so by the District Court." www.crimearchives.net/1979_macdonald/uploads/uploads.htmlIt will be interesting to see what the 4th Circuit does now. Will they allow this appeal to continue (as I expect will happen), or will they abide by their own rules and issue a notice of dismissal for failure to file by the deadline? Time will tell.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2015 13:31:38 GMT -5
Here we go again. Yesterday, Mac's lawyer, Joseph Zezsotarski, filed a motion to extend the time for filing his informal opening brief on MacDonald's appeal re: Judge Fox's denial of Mac's motion to vacate. Naturally, the court granted the order, giving an extension until Nov. 12. www.crimearchives.net/1979_macdonald/uploads/uploads.htmlAnd once again, the court tells us that requests for further extensions will be "disfavored," just as they did for Mac's IPA appeal (for additional DNA testing). Of course, we know the court doesn't mean a word of this. Zezsotarski will be granted as many extensions as he likes, and if this appeal is anything like the DNA appeal, I'd guess we might see an opening brief sometime late next year. (Tongue in cheek...)
|
|
|
Post by kma367 on Sept 16, 2015 22:21:23 GMT -5
Yes, I read the brief. MacDonald (or his wife) obviously didn't read Judge Fox' well-reasoned opinion on the timeliness issue, since the crux of MacDonald's argument didn't bother to explain why five years elapsed between the AFIP report being issued and the filing of the IPA request, or why 3 years elapsed between Fox' denial of the 2255 motion in 2008 and the filing of the IPA claim in 2011.
Hopefully the 4th Circuit will not let MacDonald's 2255 attorney get away with the crap they let Palmer & MacDonald get away with on the IPA appeal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2015 13:52:33 GMT -5
The government had until Oct. 2 to file a response, but now, for the first time, has asked for a delay until Oct. 27, which was granted by the Court today. www.crimearchives.net/1979_macdonald/uploads/uploads.htmlAlmost unbelievable that this has dragged on for almost a year, and there's still no resolution to this worthless appeal. Mac's/Kathryn's brief was a mess, no doubt about it. I understand why the gov't wants a delay, but in the end, I think putting their response together will be like shooting fish in a barrel.
|
|