January 21, 1975
Testimony of Jeffrey MacDonald
Scans of original transcript
I, Manie F. Currin, being a Notary Public and Court Reporter in and for the State of North Carolina, was appointed to take the testimony of the following witness, DR. JEFFREY R. MacDONALD, before the Grand Jury, Raleigh, North Carolina, commencing at 9:50 a.m. on January 21, 1975. All Grand Jurors were present with the exception of Juror Samuel Cannady who was permanently excused from all subsequent Jury duty by the Judge.
Whereupon, DR. JEFFREY R. MacDONALD, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
EXAMINATION BY MR. WOERHEIDE:
Q Dr. MacDonald, you are the same Dr. MacDonald who testified before this grand jury last August, are you not, sir?
A Yes, I am.
Q And you are -- and your full name is Jeffrey R. MacDonald?
A That's correct.
Q And your address is the same as it was in August?
Q Before we get started, do you have any statement you'd like to make to the grand jury? I take it you have heard of the -- from your friends and associates in the course of this investigation to the extent they have been called before the grand jury to testify in this matter?
A No, I don't have any specific statements to make at this time.
Q All right, sir, well, we have a few loose ends now. Let's go back to about April of 1970 when you went to Philadelphia and you were in touch with Mr. Segal and Dr. Sadoff and Dr. Mack. Dr. Sadoff interviewed you at some length, did he not, at that time?
A That's right.
Q And Dr. Mack also interviewed you and gave you a number of tests?
A That's right.
Q As a psychiatrist. Now, were you interviewed or tested by anyone else during this period of time?
Q Well, were you interviewed or tested by anyone other than a psychiatrist or a psychologist?
A Or a lawyer?
Q A lawyer?
Q Well, specifically were you given a polygraph test?
A We had some discussion about it. But the answer is no.
Q I don't mean a polygraph test by a polygraph expert connected with the Army or connected with the government investigators, but a polygraph test that a polygraph operator, let's say privately retained, to examine you?
A No, I'd have to discuss any more answers on that with Mr. Segal.
Q I see. As you know, when you were here before we asked you about various girls or ladies that you knew, and one of those was Carol Larson. And in the course of the investigation we have contacted some of them. There is a name that I don't think we have mentioned to you, that is Gloria Lloyd. Do you recall her?
Q Well, that's going very far back but do you remember being employed by Monvent Inc. or Montain Ventures?
A Montvent, yes, I do.
Q Yeah, and do you recall when that was?
A No, it was summer employment one of my years in college, I think.
Q Well, specifically, do you remember it was the year 1964?
A No, I don't.
Q All right, and well, do you remember where you worked in '64?
A No, I'm sure you know.
Q All right, well, when I mentioned Montvent Inc., does that refresh your recollection with respect to Gloria Lloyd?
A Yeah, I think she was a secretary working for Montvent.
Q Oh, and tell us what happened?
A I balled the girl, big deal, she was a secretary.
Q Well, did Colette find out about this?
A No, Colette didn't find out about it.
Q And this didn't create a problem between you and Colette?
A No, it did not.
Q Did Colette find out about any of the girls?
Q She never knew any of these girls?
A (Shakes head negatively) No.
Q As the result of the incident you refer to was Gloria Lloyd fired from the job?
A My brother told me that later.
Q You were not?
A No, I was leaving as of the end of the summer.
Q You were married in '62 I take it, weren't you?
A (Nods affirmatively)
Q In going over your previous testimony, particularly with respect to the bedwetting. You indicated that there was a -- well, some difference of opinion between yourself and Colette as the best way to cope with this problem. And I read the statement you made when you testified before the grand jury and statements that you made on previous occasions concerning this problem. And I still don't understand quite what the difference of opinion was. Can you explain that to me and to what extent was there a bedwetting problem in the family? Was Kimberly involved and what did you think should be done? And what did Colette think should be done?
A Kimberly was not involved. Kristy wet the bed occasionally and there wasn't a problem. The only one who thinks it's a problem, apparently, is you people.
She wet the bed occasionally and Colette and I talked about it and I said why don't we not give her a bottle at night.
Q Why don't we refrain from giving her a bottle at night?
Q So, her bladder wouldn't fill up?
A Right, and she said why, what harm is there in a bottle. And, of course, I had no answer for that. So we kept giving her the bottle.
Q But you say Kimberly never wet the bed?
A Well, not now, she was five years old. When she was a baby, she wet the bed. I mean every kid wets the bed.
Q When did she stop wetting the bed?
A I don't know. When she was about two, I suppose.
Q And thereafter it was not a problem?
Q And the difference in approach between you and Colette was that you wanted not to give the baby a bottle at night when she wet the bed?
A I thought we ought to wean her off the bottle. I thought she was two or two and a half and it was time she didn't need a bottle in bed anyway.
Q And what about the wandering from bed to bed? How --
A That didn't bother me at all.
Q That didn't bother you. Did it bother Colette?
Q So, there was no problem between you with respect to that?
Q And it was simply how to cope with Kris's bedwetting problem?
Q And your solution was not to give her a bottle at night? And Colette's was to --
A Well, that was my suggested solution. But we were still giving her a bottle. If you're not going to give her a bottle, I mean, someone is going to sit up for a couple of nights while she yells for a bottle.
A And we never got to that point because it wasn't a problem.
Q I have these pictures that were made in the F.B.I. premises of you to show the location of the wounds that you suffered during this assault. And just to illustrate your testimony to the grand jury now, I wonder if you, since these pictures are sort of close-up and it's not all that clear without a verbal explanation, just stand up and point to the various parts of your body where you suffered certain injuries? And to facilitate this I am sure you can explain these better than I can. But I take it the first one is of a wound in your lower abdomen but above the -- not the lower abdomen your abdomen but above the waist, is that correct?
A That's right.
Q Would that be about here? (Mr. Woerheide indicates portion of abdomen.)
A That is correct.
Q Now, the second one is pointing to an area to the right side of your navel and that is to indicate what, a series of ice pick --
A They were puncture wounds there, right.
Q Puncture wounds, do you recall how many?
A No, not specifically. There was a number of them.
Q All right, this shows the wound on the left side. This shows the area in which there are ice pick wounds.
MR. WOERHEIDE: Let's mark these as MacDonald Exhibits 1 and 2 of this date.
(MacDONALD EXHIBITS 1 AND 2, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) Now, the ice pick wounds to the right side of the navel didn't leave any scars, did they?
A I don't think so, no.
Q And this is another view of the same area and -- with a pencil out of the way or the pointer it shows the fact that there are no visible scars, is that correct?
A That's right.
MR. WOERHEIDE: Let's mark this as MacDonald Exhibit 3 of this date.
(MacDONALD EXHIBIT 3, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) And these next two pictures show you indicating where the wound in your chest was at the seventh intercostal space which resulted in the pneumothorax, is that correct? And the one after that?
A (No answer)
Q And the one after that shows the same view without a ruler and without a pointer, right?
MR. WOERHEIDE: All right, let's mark these 4 and 5.
(MacDONALD EXHIBITS 4 AND 5, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) All right, the next view shows your left bicep where you suffered a wound that left a scar?
A That's right.
MR. WOERHEIDE: Let's give this the next number.
(MacDONALD EXHIBIT 6, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) Well, the reverse side is another view of the same arm, is it now?
A Unh-hunh (yes).
Q Showing the thing on a bigger scale?
MR. WOERHEIDE: Let's mark this, please.
(MacDONALD EXHIBIT 7, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) And the next view shows a photograph of your left hand showing the area between the thumb and forefinger and that is to illustrate the fact that you had some fine cuts in that area, is it not?
A That's right.
Q Did they leave any scars?
MR. WOERHEIDE: All right, give these two the next numbers.
(MacDONALD EXHIBITS 8 AND 9, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) All right, the next photograph shows first your full face and then your upper left forehead that is to indicate where you had the -- a swelling and contusion, is it not?
A That's right.
MR. WOERHEIDE: Let's mark these with the next two numbers.
(MacDONALD EXHIBITS 10 AND 11, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) All right, the next photographs show your face, the right side, and a close-up of your forehead showing the right side. Is that to reflect some lump or swelling on the right side of your forehead, sir?
A That's right.
Q Is that abraded, too?
A No, I don't think so. It was just a lump or bruise.
Q Skim wasn't broken?
A No, it wasn't.
Q Just a sort of a swelling, is that correct?
A Unh-hunh (yes).
Q All right.
MR. WOERHEIDE: Let's give these the next two numbers.
(MacDONALD EXHIBITS 12 AND 13, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) All right the -- now, the next two photographs show the left rear part of the head to an area behind the ear and above the ear. I take it both these views show the same area. Would you say that?
A I can't tell what this shows. But I presume so. That's where I was holding the hair.
Q Yeah, and what was this to indicate?
A There were a couple of lumps back there.
Q Unh-hunh (yes), how large were they?
A I don't know.
Q Well, as large as a pea, or as large as a marshmallow, or as large as a potato, or -- how big were they?
A I would say, egg-size lumps.
Q Egg size?
A Unh-hunh (yes).
MR. WOERHEIDE: Would you give those the next two numbers, Miss Reporter.
(MacDONALD EXHIBITS 14 AND 15, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) The next two photographs are a back view. And show your back down to the waist and no one is pointing to anything. And I take it these were taken to illustrate the fact that you have no injuries on your back?
A That's right, none that I am aware of.
MR. WOERHEIDE: Let's mark these please.
(MacDONALD EXHIBITS 16 AND 17, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) The next is a vew taken from the right side of your body and the pointer indicates a scar at approximately the seventh intercostal space. On the reverse side is an enlargement of that scar area. Is that the scar resulting from the surgery whereby a chest tube was inserted to relieve the pneumothorax?
A That's right.
MR. WOERHEIDE: Let's mark these with the next two numbers.
(MacDONALD EXHIBITS 18 AND 19, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) The next photo shows the upper right portion of your chest with a visible scar at about the second intercostal space, I take it. And the reverse side shows a close-up of that area. Is that were the second chest tube was inserted, Dr. MacDonald?
A Yes, I believe it was.
MR. WOERHEIDE: Let's give these the next two numbers, please.
(MacDONALD EXHIBITS 20 AND 21, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) The next photograph shows your upper left -- well, your left shoulder, your upper left arm?
A Right on.
Q And on the first one there is a pointer used to indicate something on the reverse side. I really don't see any scar there, can you tell me what you had in this area?
A That's the right shoulder, sir, that was the scratch there.
Q A scratch?
A And a bruise.
Q I'm sorry, it is the right shoulder. I misspoke myself. Scratch and a bruise. Was it a long scratch, or a deep scratch, or could you describe it?
A I don't really remember. It seemed like a superficial scratch, a couple of inches long.
MR. WOERHEIDE: Would you give these the next two numbers, please.
(MacDONALD EXHIBITS 22 AND 23, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) The next two photographs are of the frontal area. One being from the waist on up to the upper part of the chest. I see the scar here on the lower left side and the scar of the second chest tube that was inserted. I see the scar of the incision in the seventh intercostal space that caused the pneumothorax. Now, is there anything else in this area that you recall in the way of an injury?
A There were some ice pick wounds in the left chest. But you can't see them. There are no scars.
Q Well, I'll hold this up to the Jury. Did you indicate this area here?
A Sir, as I remember it was a little bit higher.
Q About here?
A About there, yeah. (Indicating)
Q And how many were there?
A Three or four.
Q And you say they left no scars and they were superficial, is that it?
A Well, you can't tell how deep they are. But they left no scars.
Q And the second of these two photographs is simply another photograph indicating the location of the -- of the wound that you had just about here, is that correct? (Indicating)
A That's correct.
Q Do you recall when you were in the hospital, whether you got any special treatment for this wound on the left side of your chest?
A (No answer)
Q Did they do anything special for it? Apparently, it was not stitched or anything.
A No, it was just bandaged up.
Q They just put a BandAid on it?
A A dressing, right.
Q A dressing.
MR. WOERHEIDE: Could you give those the next two numbers.
(MacDONALD EXHIBITS 24 AND 25, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) Where were you, Dr. MacDonald, when you received all of these wounds?
A You mean physically, in the house?
A In the living room.
Q Yeah, and -- and were you wearing your pajamas at the time?
Q Now, somewhere in the fight the pajamas were ripped over the -- I think you used the term ripped over your head. I was reading something this morning, I thought it was this particular one. But -- how would you describe what happened so far as your pajama tops were concerned during the course of the struggle?
A I don't know how they got around my hands, sir. You keep telling me I said they were ripped. I never said that that I know of.
Q Well, I saw it in something that I was just read --
A (Interposing) They were either pulled over my -- over my head or was ripped from around my back. I don't know which. I have no idea.
Q Well, during what phase of the struggle was this. Right at the very end, sort of before you went down and hit the floor?
A No, it seemed earlier than that because I remember my hands were bound up.
Q Oh, did you hear a ripping sound or tearing sound at that time?
Q Well, do you know in what manner they were torn or --
A I have no idea.
Q All that you knew was they got around your hands and wrists and they hampered you in your struggle?
A That's right.
Q Then you fell unconscious?
Q Then you came to and they were still around your wrists?
Q And you went back to the bedroom and you removed them from your wrists?
A That's right.
Q And do you recall how you did that?
A No, I do not.
Q Did you use any force?
A Mr. Woerheide, I don't know.
Q Well, did you --
A (Interposing) Hear a ripping sound? No, I didn't hear a ripping sound.
Q Well, how did you remove them?
A I just pulled them over my hands. You know, it seemed like I was struggling to get my hands out of them.
Q And then you say you dropped them on the floor?
Q Went to your wife?
A (No answer)
Q Took the knife out of her chest?
A (Nods affirmatively)
Q And then reached out and picked up the pajamas and covered her?
A Yeah, that's right.
Q And at the same time you reached over to the chair and retrieved some objects and also tried to cover her with those?
A That's right.
MR. WOERHEIDE: What is your next number?
(MacDONALD EXHIBIT 26, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) This is the pajama top that was recovered over the body of Colette, Dr. MacDonald. And I am not asking you to examine it in detail but does that -- is that your pajama top?
A Looks like it.
Q Now, after you put it on the body of -- over the body of Colette, did you do anything else with it?
A Like what, sir.
Q Well, did you move it from one part of the body to another part of the body?
A I think at one point I took it off her chest again to check her chest.
Q And then you put it back over her chest?
A As I recall.
Q And when you checked her chest you observed it was bloody?
A It was bloody?
Q And had stab wounds?
A Yeah, I think we covered that, Mr. Woerheide.
Q Dr. MacDonald, here are two photographs that were made in the -- in your bedroom that morning. And they show in front of the open closet door, this being the hallway, (indicating) some items in a heap on the floor. Upon examination, they turned out to be a -- well, let me ask you, do you recall seeing them there when you were in that room after the assault, and when you went back to the room?
Q Do you recall seeing them that night at all?
A Well, looks like a sheet to me.
Q Well, there are two items there together, one is a sheet, and one is the bedspread and I have both of those items here.
MR. WOERHEIDE: Now, do you have another label?
(MacDONALD EXHIBIT 27, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) All right, the sheet is Exhibit 27, the bedspread is Exhibit -- or will be Exhibit 28.
(MacDONALD EXHIBIT 28, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) Let's deal with the bedspread first. Can you recognize this bedspread by its colors, and the pattern as a bedspread that was used on the bed of yourself and Colette?
Q And although it has blood and various marks on it, by its color, would you say this appears to be the sheet of the type that was on the bed that night?
A Now, how do I know. It looks like a sheet that could have been on the bed that night, right.
Q Well, you did have blue sheets, didn't you?
Q The sheet -- the bottom sheet which is on the bed is blue and the sheet on the floor is blue and -- Now, when you went back to go to sleep that night, I think you said it was around 2:00 a.m., was the bedspread on the bed? Was Colette sleeping under the bedspread?
A I think so, yeah.
Q And Kris had crawled into the bed?
Q And she wet the bed?
A That's right.
Q Now, at what time did you -- did Colette get up and pull the bedspread back and the sheet back to remake the bed?
Q So, neither the sheet nor the bedspread was stripped off the bed at that time in preparation for remaking the bed?
A That's right.
Q And what you did at that time was just pick up Colette -- I mean, not Colette, Kris, take her back to her room with her bottle, and tuck her in bed and leave the sheet and the bedspread back over the bed, is that it?
A Right, pushed away from the --
Q In the main bedroom?
Q And Colette wasn't disturbed? She didn't get up, she didn't bother, she just stayed there?
A That's right.
MR. WOERHEIDE: What number are we at now?
(MacDONALD EXHIBIT 29, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) This is a -- it's been referred to both as a towel and a bath mat. This has the name, "Hilton" on it and was found in your house that morning over the body of Colette. Over the area, below her waist. Can you recognize this as a -- as a -- resembling or at least appearing to be a bath mat that was kept in your house?
Q Where was it kept?
A Probably, usually -- if it wasn't in use, in the hall closet.
Q It was usually in the hall closet?
A I would guess if it was not in use. That's where the linen was kept, right.
Q You didn't remember seeing it that night?
Q You don't remember it was in the bathroom?
Q Do you remember seeing it in the bedroom?
A No, it could have been one of the things that was in the green chair.
Q And that you laid over Colette's body to keep her warm?
A (Nods affirmatively)
Q Dr. MacDonald, I'm sort of skipping around here. Do you remember when you moved into the house you had to make some bed slats for -- to support the box springs on the bed?
A No, not specifically.
Q Well, do you remember that you did not make some bed slats?
A No, I could have made some bed slats. I don't know when I made them.
Q Do you remember our showing you a club when you were here before?
Q Do you remember ever having seen that club before?
A No, I do not.
Q Now, I have a series of pictures here and they are already marked for Exhibits and so I will just refer to them by their numbers.
They are Ivory Exhibits 4, 5, 6 and 7. And I will explain to you what they are.
Number 6 shows the bed slat that was taken from underneath the box springs of Kim's bed. And right next to that is a -- another piece of wood less wide, the bed slat has the number 2 written over it. And the other piece of wood has the number 1 written over it. The number 1 was the club which was found outside of the rear door of your house. And which I showed you earlier today.
A Unh-hunh (yes).
Q I mean earlier when you testified previously?
The photograph shows the -- that the grain on this side of the bed slat corresponds to the grain on this side of the club.
Next is Ivory Exhibit 7; it shows the same thing from the other side as the grain -- that is the grain on the other side of the bed slat matches the grain on the other side of the club.
Exhibit 4 shows the edge of the bed slat and the edge of the club.
A (Nods affirmatively)
Q And the grain pattern follows through from one to the other.
Exhibit 5 is a picture of the end and it shows how the -- the rings -- the growth rings of the bed slat match the growth rings of the club.
Now, does that refresh your recollection as to where that club came from, Dr. MacDonald?
A No, it doesn't refresh my recollection. It seems to me that you have proven that the club comes from the same piece of wood as the bed slat.
Q Now, you mentioned when you previously testified that, and this, I think is the diagram you made showing that your -- your movements that you went from one, to two, to three, to four, to five, to six, to seven, to eight, to nine, to ten, to eleven, to twelve, to thirteen, to fourteen, to fifteen -- and somehow or other got back here to sixteen.
So, you went in and out of Kris's room twice. And as I recall your testimony you checked her pulse and attempted to give her mouth to mouth resuscitation.
Here is another diagram of the house with a couple of overlays. There are two bloody footprints here. And the footprints are your footprints.
Now, can you tell us how you got blood on your feet in that room and how those footprints happened to be made?
A Well, I presume I walked in --
Q And you stepped in the blood?
A I have no idea, sir.
Q Well, when you were in the room did you feel any blood under your feet, any slipperiness, or wetness on your feet?
A No, I wasn't thinking about that. I'm sure you would have been.
Q Well, when you were in the room, Kris was in the room?
A That's right.
Q Was there any other person in the room?
A Not that I know of.
Q Well, let me ask you this, did you see this bedspread or this sheet in that room?
A No, I didn't.
Q Did you -- did you, when you were in that room did you get on the bed or in any way I mean did you sit on the bed, or lie on the bed, or lean on the bed?
A You mean Kris's room?
A I don't specifically remember it. I'm sure I touched it while I was checking Kristy.
Q Well, did you stand when you were checking Kristy? Did you stand at the edge of the bed and lean over the bed and touch her?
Q Did you get on the bed?
A I don't think so.
Q When you were in Kris's room did you have your pajama tops on?
Q The same thing is true for when you were in Kim's room, is that it?
A That's right.
Q When you went from Kris's room the first time that would be four to five and then you went in the bathroom six. Did you carry anything with you?
A No, not that I remember.
Q Now, when you left Kris's room the second time, that is twelve, to thirteen, to fourteen, did you carry anything with you?
A I don't believe so.
Q Dr. MacDonald, we have been told that these two bloody footprints that I have referred to from the impression they made on the floor indicated that you must have been carrying something because of the dimensions of the footprints themselves.
A Who told you that, the Army?
Q Well, that is the information we have from --
A Well, it's very suspect information, Mr. Woerheide.
A Very suspect information. They can't even take fingerprints, much less make decisions about them.
Q We're told that fibers and threads from your pajama top were found in Kris's room, and in Kim's room. They were found on the beds, under the covers of the beds. Can you tell us how that happened?
A No, I presume it could be contamination from me or from the other people who were in the house that night.
If you'd stop trying to prove that it was just me, you may think about some of the other choices.
Q Well, we are trying to consider all the possibilities --
A (Interposing) You're not trying to do anything, Mr. Woerheide. You're doing the same thing.
Q And hoping you could be helpful to us --
A (Interposing) No, you're doing the same thing.
Q Now, I'm told that particularly in the fingernail scrapings from Kris that some fibers were found under the fingernails.
Q Can you tell us how that happened?
Q You have no idea?
A I have no idea.
Q I'm told that when they recovered the sheet and the bedspread they found some fibers of threads and hairs and I'm told that among these was a hair from Colette's head that was twisted around a thread from your pajama top. Do you have any idea how that happened?
A No, I don't. Just before or after I was dragged across the floor and everyone was in and out of the house?
Q These were found when the things were examined.
A You mean after the twenty people ran in and out of the house a couple of times and everyone moved everyone and this is the critical evidence?
Q This is when they were recovering the objects.
A This is a blood expert that's tested the one other drop of blood in his life? These are the people you're talking about? Or is this a laboratory report from Ft. Gordon?
Q No, this is an examination made by a competent expert from the F.B.I.
Dr. MacDonald, getting back to this diagram, I'm told on the top sheet of the bed in Kris's bedroom they found a large amount of Colette's blood which indicated massive direct bleeding by Colette at that area.
Do you have any idea how Colette's blood got in that location?
A Nope, unless it was from my hands.
Q You mean you may have put your hand over there and leaned against that point when you were administering aid to Kris, is that correct?
A It's possible.
Q I am also told that the footprints going out of the room were in Colette's blood?
A I'm sure I had bloody feet.
Q How did they get bloody?
A From blood on the floor.
Q Well, I'm told there was none of Colette's blood on the floor here. That blood was Kristy's blood?
A Well, I had been in the master bedroom first, Mr. Woerheide.
Q So, you think you picked up Colette's blood in the master bedroom? And you tracked those two footprints on the floor going out of Kris's bedroom? As a result of having blood from the master bedroom on your feet, is that correct?
A I don't know. You're asking me for explanations that I can't give. I don't know.
Q All right, now, if you picked the blood up in the master bedroom, where would you have gotten it? Was there a pool right around Colette there?
A Seemed to me there was a lot of blood.
Q So, your explanation would be that you had picked it up in the vicinity of Colette, you had it on your feet?
A Either that or it's a lab error. I have no idea, Mr. Woerheide.
Q Either that or it's a what?
A A laboratory error. They mistyped the blood. With their record I wouldn't see that as an unlikely possibility.
Q Okay, where would you say you were when you started bleeding as a result of the injuries that you sustained, Dr. MacDonald?
A I never noticed much blood on myself. I don't know.
Q Well, you had all these injuries when you were lying on the floor in -- at point one there, did you not?
A Unh-hunh (yes).
Q Were you bleeding at that time?
A I don't remember seeing any. I suppose I was.
Q How heavily were you bleeding?
A I just told you. Apparently you are not listening. I didn't see any blood. How can I then say I was bleeding heavily?
Q Well, at one point you went in the bathroom and looked at yourself in the mirror, you saw, you know, that you had some blood on you?
Q Did you observe that you were, in fact, bleeding?
A No, I've told you that ten times.
Q This was blood you picked up from Colette?
A I saw blood around my mouth.
Q Well, I'm told that splinters of the club were found in the master bedroom and in each of the children's bedrooms but none were found in the living room. Particularly, in this area (indicating on diagram) and around -- or around here (indicating hallway). Now, do you have any explanations as to that.
A Well, first of all, Mr. Woerheide, there's a lot of traffic up and down that hall, including a stretcher. And moved clothing so I have no idea which time is accurate. It probably isn't, that's the first premise.
The second, I have no idea. I can't answer that. Seems to me the club was used in the other rooms after it was used on me.
Q Well, that would mean that -- what would that signify, now? Colette and Kimberly were screaming when you awoke? That's what woke you up.
And yet, and the time they were screaming, these four people were down here with the club and striking at you?
And yet, it is the club that they were striking at you whose splinters are found in this room, this room and this room.
Now, do you have any theory that explains this?
A Only that it sounds to me like the club went from where I was into the other rooms.
Q Now, when you were in this room, (indicating) did you notice that legend that was written on the headboard, "PIG"?
A No, I didn't.
Q How close did you get to the headboard?
A I don't specifically remember. The only thing I remember is being next to Colette.
Q Well --
A I don't know if going to the phone I went around her head, or -- I thought I went over her feet.
Q Well, the fiber from your pajama tops was found up here behind this headboard in the area where a person would be standing if he wrote the word "PIG" on that headboard?
A Hmmm, maybe one of the assailants did it. Did you ever think of that?
Q Now, in the area of the living room that I referred to, a very close examination revealed no fibers or threads from your pajama tops but there are so many of them scattered up in this area (indicating diagram) that you can still go into the house and check the rug and pick up almost as many as you want. Now can you explain that?
A No, except that when I took off my top, that's where I took it off in the room. Picked it up and moved it a couple of times. Dr. Neal testified that he moved it. Just seems to me that that's an explanation.
Q Dr. MacDonald, you remember when you were here before, I showed you a couple of knives and an ice pick?
Q One was the Old Hickory knife?
Q One is the Geneva Forge knife?
Q And the other was an ice pick?
A (No answer)
Q And the Old Hickory knife was straight and sharp and the Geneva Forge was bent and had a curve in the blade and was dull.
Well, for your information -- well, let me say something else. As I recall, you said you didn't have an ice pick.
A That I know of, right.
Q Yeah, and you didn't recall either one of those knives?
A That's right.
Q As being in your house?
A (No answer)
Q Witnesses have testified before the grand jury that they have observed items that appeared to be the same in your house before February 17?
A Unh-hunh (yes). Witnesses now, four years later. That's good. That's good police work. How much did you pay them? More than you paid for the grave robbers, fifty bucks a person they got.
Q Dr. MacDonald, in the east bedroom of the house they found four fragments of a rubber glove.
One fragment was in the -- in with the sheet and bedspread. One was on the floor near Colette's body. One was on the bed. And one was in front of the dresser.
And these fragments were tested by neutron activation analysis with fragments that -- I mean, with rubber gloves that were surgical gloves that were kept here under the sink.
They were found to be identical. So far as the material from which they were made, and your type blood was found in this area where the rubber gloves were kept.
Can you tell us about that?
A No, I have already testified that I may have gone to that sink. I have already testified that we had gloves in the house.
Q Did you put on the gloves?
A That night?
A Not unless I put on gloves when I was doing dishes.
I also testified that there may have been gloves on the dryer in the utility room.
Q Well, there was blood on these fragments of rubber gloves I'm talking about.
A I didn't scatter fragments of rubber gloves around the master bedroom.
Q Well, if you had the rubber gloves on while you were doing the dishes, how come some fingerprints are on those dishes?
A I have no idea.
Q Your fingerprints?
A I didn't say I had them on. You keep asking me if I had them on, I said, I don't know. But it's logical I may have put them on.
Q Would it surprise you if by --
A (Interposing) Nothing would surprise me, Mr. Woerheide.
Q Would it surprise you if I told you that by chemical process your print could be found on those rubber glove fragments?
A No, nothing would surprise me. I'm sure at this date you can do anything you want. That is why the whole thing is ridiculous.
(Mr. Woerheide removes photograph of pajama top from envelope.)
MR. WOERHEIDE: This is Stombaugh Exhibit 15. It already has a number.
Q (Mr. Woerheide) Dr. MacDonald, here is a photograph made in the F.B.I. lab of the back of the pajama top that you were wearing that night.
And starting down here are a number of ice pick holes. One, two, three, four, five and it goes up through sixteen and seventeen, in the back now. You weren't stabbed in the back. You weren't injured in the back.
Can you tell me how those ice pick holes got in there?
A I presume when they were around my arms.
Q I see. While they were around your arms, they were stabbing at your arms. Is that it, and they got in there then?
A Yeah, we've talked about it at length, Mr. Woerheide.
Q Dr. MacDonald, this is a bath mat.
(Mr. Woerheide removes bath mat from plastic bag.)
I want to show you when you take the Old Hickory knife and lay it down here it is a perfect match. The blade and the handle when this is folded over it comes around in the reverse. And when this is folded over this way it will be transferred from the other side.
This is a perfect match for the ice pick. And this also indicates the ice pick was here and it was rolled in an arc this way.
Now, you said you -- this may be one of the things you put over Colette's body. Is it possible that when you were handling this you also had a knife and an ice pick in your hands?
A No, I didn't.
Q And where was it you found this?
A I never said I found it, Mr. Woerheide.
Q Yeah, well, what you put over --
A (Interposing) You made me --
Q -- Colette's body was on a chair?
A You have made me reconstruct a story --
A -- in which I may have pulled this from the green chair and put it over her. Why don't you stick to the facts for a change, Mr. Woerheide?
Q Dr. MacDonald, this is a photograph of the sheet which is Exhibit 27.
And this shows some of the blood on it. Well, it showed the pattern of the blood on the sheet. And they found Kris's blood, a small amount of it there, and in this area, and the rest of the sheet basically was Colette's blood. They didn't find any of your blood on the sheet.
But I am going to ask you again, did you handle that sheet that night?
Did you touch it? Did you have anything to do with it?
A Not that I remember.
(Mr. Woerheide removes photograph from envelope.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) Dr. MacDonald, I want to show you a few pictures.
Underneath here is a picture of the sheet, and above it is a picture of a part of Colette's pajama top.
And an expert in making examinations of this type has testified before the grand jury that the pattern of Colette's pajama top and the blood stains on Colette's pajama top was transferred from Colette's body to the sheet and he is able to tell how the sheet was laid over the body of Colette. What position she was in when the blood was transferred from her pajama top to the sheet.
This is another picture of it to illustrate his testimony.
The same man has testified that your pajama top had blood on it; that it was blood of Colette's type; that at the time it was -- the pajama top was torn and that the design of your pajama top, the textile design, the creases, the beading and the design of the blood stain was transferred from your pajama top to the same sheet. He's also testified it was your pajama top that was torn on the left side leaving your shoulder bare.
That there were marks indicating where your left shoulder transferred blood to the sheet. And where your chin transferred blood to the sheet. And this was Colette's blood.
Now, tell us how that blood from your body and from Colette's body got on that sheet?
A I have no idea. I have no idea. I don't even know what crap you're trying to feed me.
Q Dr. MacDonald, did you take Colette off the bed in Kris's room, lay her on top of the bedspread on the floor in Kris's room, cover her with this sheet, then pick her up and carry her out of Kris's room?
A No, I did not do that.
Q And lay her on the floor in the master bedroom?
A No, I did not do that.
Q Your pajama top, Dr. MacDonald, transferred blood to that sheet at the same time that Kris's [sic; Colette's] pajamas and Kris's [sic; Colette's] body transferred blood to that sheet. And your footprints indicate that you were carrying something out of that room. And the footprints are in Colette's blood.
A None of that happened to my -- Jesus, oh, would you -- the answer to the question is no.
Q All right, I have another question. This is Stombaugh Exhibit 9. This is Colette's chest. It shows a bruise that corresponds to the end of the club. It shows a total of twenty-one ice pick stabbings that penetrated deep inside of her body, went straight in.
This is Stombaugh Exhibit 12, Stombaugh Exhibit 10, Stombaugh Exhibit 11, and this shows how Colette was covered by your pajama top when they found them.
Mr. Stombaugh by careful examination of these photographs was able to reconstruct the manner in which the pajama top was folded.
He did reconstruct it. He found there were forty-eight ice pick penetration marks on your pajama top.
And when the pajama top was folded the same way it was folded on top of Colette's body these ice pick holes went through your pajama top and into her body.
Now, can you tell us how that happened?
A No, because I don't believe it. It's a lot of bullshit.
Q Take a look at the picture.
A You can do anything you want to with fifty holes in a pajama top is what I am trying to say, Mr. Woerheide. It's a bunch of crap.
If this was a legitimate investigator technique why wasn't it done four years ago?
Q Do you have any other comment?
A No, except that by my being unable to explain blood spots, you make me guilty of homicide of my family.
Q Well, tell me this, did you ever at any time become enraged with Colette?
A I can't remember being enraged, no. Angry, sure.
Q Was there anything she could have said to you at any time that might set you in a state of rage?
Q If she had accused you of a lack of sexual competence, would that have --
A (Interposing) Oh, my.
Q -- would that have set you in a state of rage? Or would it have had no effect whatsoever as far as you're concerned?
A (Interposing) I can't imagine me being in a state of rage over that.
Q How about accusing you of a lack of masculinity?
A Colette, accusing me of that?
Q (Nods affirmatively)
A No, I wouldn't be in a state of rage.
Q Now, that night there was no argument or quarrel between you and Colette?
A None whatsoever.
Q And all of this evidence that I have told you about is fabricated?
A I don't know what to make of it, Mr. Woerheide. It doesn't make any sense to me. I have told you what I know to the best of my ability four years later --
Q You didn't roll in the sheet on the floor?
A Roll in the sheet?
Q Yeah, to get your body prints all over it?
A I don't even remember the sheet.
Q And so far as you know, Colette was not in contact with that sheet?
A I don't remember seeing the sheet. I was lying against Colette.
MR. WOERHEIDE: Jay, have you got any suggestions as to where we should go from here?
MR. STROUD: Well, there are some things we talked about.
Q (Mr. Woerheide) Dr. MacDonald, you say you came to in the hall, you went down to the master bedroom, you took the pajama tops off from around your wrists, you threw them on the floor, and then you put them on Colette's body.
And obviously, Colette's body was bloody. And blood could have been transferred at that time to the pajama top.
Now, until the time that you laid them on her body, was there any way you can explain how blood would have gotten on them?
A How blood would have gotten on them?
Q Your pajama top, her blood.
A Not unless there was blood from the assailants originally.
Q In other words, they picked up blood from Colette and transferred them to your pajama top?
A I'm just hypothesizing.
Q Well, I want to make clear to you the information that's available to this grand jury in this matter.
Now, one item of information is that Colette's blood was on your pajama top in a certain area that became torn.
And it was there before it was torn, not after it was torn.
A I have no idea what that means.
Q Do you have any explanation for that?
A Do I?
A I'm not a criminologist.
Q Now, Dr. MacDonald, you have always said that it was Kristen who was wet -- who was in the bed with Colette and wet the bed?
A Right, it was.
Q A test of the urine spot indicates it was Kimberly's urine and not Kristen's urine?
A Kristy was in the bed. What do you want me to say? Jesus Christ, Kristy was in the bed. She wet the bed and I put her back in her own bed. You people are crazy. I picked up Kristy and put her back in her bed.
Q And it was not --
A It was not Kimberly.
Q It was not Kimberly who was in the bed?
A Jesus Christ.
Q Well, do you have any reason for saying it was Kristen instead of Kimberly?
A (No answer). (Dr. MacDonald is sighing heavily enough that it is picked up on the reporter's back-up tape.)
Q As I say, scientific laboratory evidence indicates --
A (Interposing) Scientific bullshit.
Q -- Kimberly's urine?
Q All right, now, the evidence indicates that Kimberly was injured in the master bedroom. That her blood is on the carpet and is in the vicinity of the door?
A So Mr. Shaw told me.
Q Do you have any explanation for that?
A No, not unless the blood was tracked in by other people.
Q Well, --
A What if the blood dripped off weapons?
Q All right, when you first came in, Dr. MacDonald, I asked you about whether or not you had been given a -- in effect given a polygraph in Philadelphia and you said you'd have to talk to Mr. Segal about that?
A (Nods affirmatively)
Q So, I'm going to suggest that you do talk to Mr. Segal and then let us know what your answer is.
MR. WOERHEIDE: Want to take a break, Mr. Foreman?
FOREMAN: Well, it's ten of twelve now. Do you want to stop and take a lunch break now and get back about a quarter to one?
MR. WOERHEIDE: Okay.
A Are we going to be finished today, Mr. Woerheide?
MR. WOERHEIDE: Yes.
(The grand jury investigation reconvenes at 12:45 p.m. with all jurors present.)
(The witness, Dr. MacDonald, returns to the witness stand.)
EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WOERHEIDE:
Q (Mr. Woerheide) Dr. MacDonald, do you have a statement which you wish to make to the grand jury at this time, sir?
A This is a reply, formally, in regards to your question about the trip to Pennsylvania in April of 1970.
A I can read it or give it to you. I have two copies.
Q Well, why don't you read it in the record and we'll take one copy and mark it as an exhibit.
A Mark that one, because this is the copy. This one has misprints.
Q All right.
A May I read this one then? I can't read that one either.
MR. WOERHEIDE: Well, first let's mark it and then you can read it.
(MacDONALD EXHIBIT 30, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Q (Mr. Woerheide) All right, sir.
A "To the Foreman of the Grand Jury and Counsel for the Government.
"Regarding the response of Dr. MacDonald to questions to pertaining to his visit with and meetings with his attorneys in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in April, 1970, on advice of counsel the following constitutes Dr. MacDonald's full and only answer on the above-captioned subject.
"I understand that Dr. MacDonald has been questioned in regard to the meetings he had with his attorneys in Philadelphia in April 1970, nearly two months after the death of his family and after he had been formally charged with the deaths of his family.
"The lawyers he came to visit, principally, Bernard L. Segal, had been retained several weeks earlier to represent Dr. MacDonald and the Government was advised and knew this.
"Dr. MacDonald was specifically given permission by the Army to come to Philadelphia for the purpose of meeting with his lawyers in the preparation of his defense which resulted in his having been found not guilty of the deaths of his family.
"At the time of Dr. MacDonald's first appearance before this grand jury in August the Government's attorneys made persistent and demanding efforts to have disclosed to them that he did and said with his attorneys in the preparation for his defense against the false accusation of being responsible for the deaths of his family.
"We will not burden the grand jury with the repetition of our prior memorandum answers in which we pointed out that the law prohibits inquiring into what goes on in the preparation of one's cases.
"It became a matter of large and angry dispute among the lawyers. It was a shoddy attempt to embarrass Dr. MacDonald in front of the grand jury and make it appear that he was hiding something that he should not.
"In an attempt to break this deadlock it was Dr. MacDonald's lawyers who asked the Government what they were seeking.
"The Government's answer was that the Government wanted copies of statements by Dr. MacDonald. A report of his psychiatric examination.
"In a spirit of cooperation the attorneys for Dr. MacDonald agreed to voluntarily turn this material over to the grand jury and this has been done.
"The Government was advised then, and we repeat now, that we would not permit Dr. MacDonald to discuss anything further. No matter how trivial or how important about what work he did with his attorneys in April, 1970 in the preparation of this case or at any other time.
"The questions that we understand were put to Dr. MacDonald today pertain to his visit with his attorneys in Philadelphia in April, 1970.
"He will not under our advice answer any questions about such matters as they all appear related to the attorney-client relationship and work.
"He is not required by law to do so and in truth there is no purpose in his doing so that would legitimately assist the grand jury in its work.
"We wish to make it clear that this is not an admission or a denial that any particular acts or words or events that happened in Philadelphia.
"In taking this position, you may even find that your curiosity is aroused.
"That is precisely what the Government wants the Jury to do. To guess when it doesn't have any facts.
"We are sorry but we cannot permit the Government to renege on its word that it would not discuss attorney-client matters further.
"The Government's attorneys will not be permitted any further illegal questions.
"Signed, Bernard Segal, and Michael Malley."
Q All right, for the record, Dr. MacDonald, I don't remember asking you this morning any questions concerning any statement made to you by your attorneys or by you to your attorneys.
Now, you referred to the fact that certain material was voluntarily furnished for the benefit of the grand jury and I assume that you are referring to the notes that you testified previously you prepared over a period of time and at the request of one of your military attorneys for the benefit of your attorneys.
They were furnished under seal or they were submitted under seal with a letter placing certain restrictions upon them.
And Mr. Segal and I subsequently did have some conversation on the telephone about that. And he wrote another letter relating to the thing.
Well, I have never opened that envelope and I have never made the material available to the grand jury and I will return it to Mr. Segal under seal. I don't have it here right now, otherwise I'd turn it over to him right now.
But I will turn it over to Mr. Segal under seal, I have not opened it, the grand jury has not seen it, has not had the benefit of it. So, with that comment I am going to ask you if you have any further statement to make to the grand jury, or any further information to bring to the attention of the grand jury?
A You mean before we close?
A My testimony?
A Yeah, I have a few things.
Q All right, will you please state what you have in mind?
A Well, you asked me this morning if I had any comments relative to the investigation and I do.
I think this grand jury ought to know how this case has been investigated.
Since you like newspapers, Mr. Woerheide, I have here a newspaper clipping from December, 1974 from Newsday about the graves of my wife and children.
I'd like to let the grand jury take a look at it. It's indicative of how the case has been investigated from beginning to end, Mr. Woerheide.
Nothing -- no one asked the husband or the father if these graves should be opened, or could they be opened.
What you did was you son of a bitches paid off six grave diggers fifty dollars apiece not to say anything.
And I'd just like to put that in evidence because that's exactly how the whole God damned case has been handled.
Q Well, we'll mark this as MacDonald Exhibit 31.
(MacDONALD EXHIBIT 31, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
A I'd like also to say for the record that I don't appreciate you -- you lying to and badgering my relatives in order to get some testimony from them.
Specifically, I'd like to say that my sister and -- my sister was told that the only time that Dr. MacDonald broke down and cried was discussing the sodium amytal interview.
Now, that's an absurd allegation. If you were sitting in this room when I was sitting here last August, it doesn't seem right to me --
Q (Interposing) Who allegedly made the statement to her?
A That creep that works for you. That little viper.
Q All right.
A The little guy who doesn't have enough politeness to introduce himself. Or doesn't know any of the social amenities.
There's ben a lot of comments made about my sexual proclivities through the case, Mr. Woerheide.
Apparently, sleeping around isn't left just to Dr. MacDonald. I'd just like to relate an instance as to how this case gets investigated.
A girl that I met after I was out of the Army and in New York, was investigated by the F.B.I. And he spent about an hour beating around the bush. And finally she said look what you're trying to say is how was Dr. MacDonald in bed, right? And he said, that's right. And she told him. And they talked for a little while longer. And then he asked her out.
She called me and tells me this. And I was absolutely astounded. An F.B.I. agent asking out a potential witness in a homicide case.
So then she went and contacted her attorney. She felt a little unsure about how to handle that. So he said, well, if he ever contacts you make sure all your meetings are down in the F.B.I. office.
And he called back and said that he had to have another meeting, that it was imperative and she said fine, we'll meet in the F.B.I. office and he said, that's okay, we don't need the meeting.
That's just a little aside, it's not important. Nothing to do with the facts of the case. It's just indicative of how the case has been handled from beginning to end.
Then I'd like to -- well, there's a lot I'd like to say. But what I'm going to do, if it's okay with you, so I'll make some sense instead of yelling and screaming like I did last time. I'd just like to sort of make my statement which I wrote --
MR. WOERHEIDE: (Interposing) Please do.
A -- which I wrote on the plane.
This, of course, was with the help of my attorneys.
Okay, this is me but they edited it and said, you shouldn't say that and you do say this; what they always waste lunch hours doing.
"It's been five years since my life collapsed when my family was murdered. I tried to start over -- " I'm reading this. This is obvious. I'm not going to speak off the cuff because I wanted to say too much.
"I tried to start over again in California. Some people, Mr. Woerheide, Colonel Pruett, my father-in-law, they don't seem to understand how hard it's been for me. They seem to feel that because I moved away from New York, away from the graves, somehow I don't love my family, and I don't miss them, and I faked everything about the murders.
"This means, of course, that I never cared for my family at all. And, of course, that leads to that I must have killed them.
"The last time I was here in August and this time I tried to answer your questions. I have told you as much as I know except in regards to attorney work products that Mr. Segal says I shouldn't talk about.
"I wish I knew more of your questions especially today. I wish I knew why it happened. And I wish I knew who killed Colette, Kristy and Kimmie. I do pretty well most of the time.
"I wish I could tell the grand jury the answers to all the questions Mr. Woerheide has been raising for five or six months. These are questions that I have had to live with for five years.
"I have had to accept that I may never know what happened. It is not easy to live with that. The whole explanation but it's really all I can do.
"What I wanted to tell you about is what my life has been like now since the 17th of February. That [seems] to bother Mr. Kassab, and Mr. Woerheide, and Mr. Stroud and everyone else. They all seem to think that I just walked away from Colette, and Kimmie, and Kris. And that shows I couldn't have cared for them.
"They all seem to think that if I never cared for my girls I could have killed them.
"And then going out to California and bought a car and a boat and forgot all about it. Well, that's not true.
"People want to know why I don't spend all my time crying on other people's shoulders. Why don't I break down? Is he cold? Doesn't he have any feeling? Wouldn't that show more of my love?
"Let's start with the newspaper interviews and the Dick Cavett Show. My mother, my brother and my sister they all tell me that when they were here they were asked at length why I did those interviews, and yet why didn't I ever talk about the killings to anyone else including my family. No one questioned me about it. I'm not going to talk about it for no reason.
"And the reason I went on the Dick Cavett Show is because a congressman called me and asked me to go on. And I also know that a lot of people don't believe me.
"I have a right to try to live and try to get this statement out once and for all.
"So, I did two things: I talked to Time magazine and I talked on the Dick Cavett Show. You know, the upshot is I was trying to not have to spend the rest of my life explaining to everyone that meets me.
"In the confusion of the time, I thought that if I said it once loudly maybe that I wouldn't have to continually, you know, reply to those questions.
"I don't find it very easy to beg for sympathy. Every time I tell the story of February 17th, I -- you know -- I die a little bit. I'm ashamed that I couldn't help my family. But I tried.
"I'm the one that hears Colette and Kimmie. I can't keep talking about that. You expect me to talk about it over coffee to everyone that comes by or I'm not normal.
"The grand jury, except for my lawyers, the grand jury and Colonel Rock are the only three people who ever heard the whole story. My lawyers never really heard the whole story until I was in front of Colonel Rock. I mean never in detail at once in one sitting. In bits and pieces it's so different when you are talking about it later.
"You make it sound like we are supposed to be sitting and talking about it constantly. The only one that I know that does that is Freddie. So, I don't spend a whole lot of time talking about it. I don't tell everyone I meet. I don't tell all my friends. I didn't tell anyone the whole story. That doesn't seem normal to me and yet you make it sound the other way. You make it sound like it's abnormal that I don't go around telling everyone. Saying, hey, let me tell you about Ft. Bragg, 1970.
"That brings me to Freddie. He feels, I guess, that I never told them the full story. And I didn't. He also feels that I lied to him when I told him about these stupid, pathetic attempts to find the real killers. He's partially right, but he's partially wrong, too. I never did sit down with him and tell him the whole story. But contrary to the implications that he keeps leaving he was apprised of everything. We were in daily contact. He knew exactly what was being said all through the Article 32. And then I gave him a copy of the Article 32.
"And it isn't as though later or a couple of years later, it sounds like, Jesus, he never knew what was going on and he never heard. He heard daily. He talked to Bernie, and Denny, and Jim Douthat, and Mike Malley and myself all the time. He knew exactly what was going on. I never just decided to just go over to his house and sit down and start telling him again. He never asked, for one. My friends never asked. You know, my family has never asked me. My mother has never said to me, what happened. It seems to be one of my major sins that I don't talk about it all the time.
"Freddie was a funny kind of a friend. All through the Article 32 he was my devoted supporter. He was proclaiming my innocence the loudest. He said that he would be the only one or he would have been the first to know if anything was wrong between Colette and me. Even if we never told him because he was so close, he knew we were happy.
"Freddie was the hardest person for me to talk to later because of that. I mean, he made a very dramatic and nice testimony for me at the Article 32.
"Then it was hard to sit around and talk with Mildred about comparing the prettiness of her respective grandchildren. And who should have been killed. How do you expect me to talk to a person like that.
"Then at the end of the Article 32, here I'm in -- (Pause) this obligation to Freddie. I'm supposed to devote my whole life to the night of the 17th and spend the rest of my life forging through North Carolina one man F.B.I. Well, I can't do it. And I knew I couldn't do it and I lied to him. I told him that. I was ashamed that -- well, I'm ashamed now I told him. I'm -- I was ashamed as soon as I told him. I'm ashamed I didn't die that night. That sounds stupid to you, I know.
"So, here I was trying to prove that especially to Freddie, you know, that I would do the best I can.
"So, I do this little fantasy bit. Well, that's over, we've talked about it. So, I try to satisfy him."
(The witness flips through some of the pages of the prepared statement.)
A Shit, it's not making sense even reading it. "I'm sorry I told Freddie about it."
This doesn't make any sense.
"So, now I'm up to the winter of 1970-71 and I'm in New York trying to practice medicine, waiting for my residency at Yale to start in June of '71, trying to carry on my life. But you've got to understand that this was a life that Colette and I had planned. Colette and I were supposed to go to Yale and get a farm and I was supposed to be a hot shot orthopedic surgeon and live on a farm with the kids."
I can't -- I mean, I can't keep that dream going without Colette and the kids. So, I go out to California. So what, there's no crime in that.
Essentially, to paraphrase all these pages that I'm turning, you know, I just had to change my life.
So, I go out there and work with Jerry Hughes, a friend of mine from the Army, a different kind of life. I don't expect Brian Murtagh to understand that. Maybe the Grand Jury will.
Right now in California I'm director of the emergency department. After I left here in August, they made me director. Big deal, they called me in and they said, despite of what's happening we still like you. And I said, big fucking deal, you don't have to like me. And they said, no, you're doing a good job and we want to make you director. So I'm director now.
It's a busy emergency room. A lot of car accidents, and heart attacks, and gun shots, and stabbings.
I work very hard. And I work on purpose. I've got to work. I stay busy, see a lot of people. I'm exhausted, I work a twelve hour shift, I make a lot of money. Okay, I don't work hard to make a lot of money. That's not my goal in life. I make a lot of money so I spend a lot. That's another crime.
I have -- this really sounds trite -- I like emergency medicine, you know, I help a lot of people. It makes me -- makes me feel a little useful. You know, I didn't do enough to save my family. And then you come in here and you say someone folded the top of my pajama top and put little probes through it and that means that I killed Colette.
What can I say about that? These arguments about other women are just -- they are absurd. I've slept with a lot of women. It doesn't mean anything to me, at all. It never has meant anything to me. It's been very easy for me my whole life. I haven't chased one girl in California and I must have slept with thirty since I've been there.
Because I didn't spend the rest of my life, you know, praying on the graves you tell me I don't love my family. And that means I must have killed them. That's not true.
Oh, it's a lot of shit. I didn't kill Colette. And I didn't kill Kimmie, and I didn't kill Kristy, and I didn't move Colette, and I didn't move Kimmie, and I didn't move Kristy, and I gave them mouth to mouth breathing, and I loved them then, and I love them now. And Colette didn't kill them either. And you can shove all your fucking evidence right up your ass.
Q Dr. MacDonald, we have gone into certain matters because we have had to go into those matters.
Q You were examined by a psychiatrist, your own psychiatrist, your own psychologist, you were examined by the Army psychiatrist and psychologist, and you know when psychologists and psychiatrists probe into your personality and state of mind they inevitably focus on your sex life and how that affects your family life --
A I'd like to probe into some of the psychiatrists's sex life you know.
Q Yeah. Now, do you recall telling any psychiatrist or psychologist that you had a sense of relief after your family was gone? That because you felt the sense of relief from the fact that you no longer had those responsibilities you were a little bit ashamed?
A Well, the comment, I don't know if it was to Bailey or Sadoff, the comment -- we were talking about dreams, you know, we were talking about shame. And I was crying or something, I don't know. And he said, what are you crying about. And I said, I'm ashamed. And he said, what for. And I said, occasionally -- I said occasionally, I have a feeling, you know, that I have no more responsibilities. And I was ashamed of the feeling. And he said, it's not an abnormal feeling. And I said, well, I'm very, very ashamed of that. And I am. And I occasionally get it. You know, I feel guilty every time I have a good time. You know that? Every time I have a good time I pay an equal price. If I have a good day in the emergency room, I have to spend some time by myself to sort of recuperate because I shouldn't have been having a good time. Because I should have died.
Doesn't make any sense. That's what that was in reference to.
Q Dr. MacDonald, you made specific reference in your statement concerning the pajama top and the probes that went through it that matched up in their pattern with the stab wounds in Colette's chest. How about the story that's told by that sheet? Let's talk about that.
A I have no idea what that even means, Mr. Woerheide. You know, you tell me you have an expert in impressions, he comes in and says that a body was put on there a certain way. I don't know what that means. I don't have any idea.
Q It's like a fingerprint, Dr. MacDonald.
A I don't believe that, first of all.
Q You take a fingerprint and you compare it with an unknown print. And if the fingerprint that you take matches in its details, the ridge lines, the whorls --
A Yeah, right.
Q -- with the unknown print then you know that this fingerprint was made by the same finger. Now, you take a sheet that's been laid over a body wearing clothing that is soaked in blood, and if the pattern of the clothing and the pattern of the blood spots is transferred to the sheet you can make the same identification that you can with a fingerprint.
A Well, that sounds like a much more inexact science to me. I never even heard of it. Neither had Mr. Segal.
Q All right, now, this sheet has transferred to it impressions made by Colette's clothing soaked in blood and by your clothing soaked in Colette's blood?
A I was lying against Colette, Mr. Woerheide, that's all I know. I didn't even see a sheet. Maybe a sheet was something that I was pulling off a chair or off the bed to lay on her but I don't remember that at all. I don't remember seeing a sheet even.
Q It has your hand prints on it?
A All right, so they are on it. But I don't know. I told you what I know. I gave her mouth to mouth breathing and I tried to cover her with something and that's all I know. I didn't move my wife. I moved her off a green chair, that was all I did.
Q Dr. MacDonald, I was informed by Mr. Segal that you are planning on a skiing trip, is that right?
A No, that had to be cancelled. I cancelled it.
Q I see. So, you are not planning to take any trip in the immediate future?
MR. WOERHEIDE: Well, Mr. Foreman, I think we are through so far as Dr. MacDonald is concerned. I think we have done the best we can to sort of fill him in on some of the things that have developed during the course of this grand jury and to afford him the opportunity to respond to them. We could go into some more minute and detailed matters but I don't think at this juncture it's worthwhile. And I wonder if any of the Grand Jurors would have any questions they'd like to ask him before we excuse him?
JUROR: How did you know I had one?
MR. WOERHEIDE: Well, you have some of the best questions.
JUROR: I do have one, Dr. MacDonald. Out of all earnesty I want to know from you -- I can't say I know how it's been for the last five years but I can imagine. And I'm sure it hasn't been easy. And in the job that you have got with people coming in through the emergency room, I'm sure you see a little bit each day of what must have happened.
But what I am wondering is and it doesn't seem, you know, like it's ended -- but if there was a drug you could take, even though you might have to relive the incident, that would help prove your innocence and maybe help shed some light on you that you could tell them then through this drug, why won't you take it?
I mean it's a living hell anyway. I'm sure it is.
A Yeah, but I think the answer has two parts, okay. One is my feeling, the best that I can understand it and I reasonably trust Dr. Sadoff, okay, as much as I trust any shrink. You know, it isn't like coming here talking about it. It's a whole different thing, you actually go through it again. You smell it, you hear the sounds, you relive it, you are there. It's not a matter of recounting it. You know, recounting is very difficult and it's very difficult. It's hard for me to describe to you what it's like to sit and talk about it.
So, when this came up, I asked Dr. Sadoff and he said, unless there was an overwhelming need for clarification of facts that he would recommend against it.
JUROR: Well, that's what I'm asking for. It looks to me like there would be an overwhelming need for it at this point. And that is why I'm asking you if it would shed some light on it? The other people in the house that you would say something that would tell us something on that part. Or if you're innocent by all means I hope that's what it says.
A Yeah, but you've got to understand the risk that I'm running. I'm running the risk of -- you know -- like a psychotic breakdown. I -- I don't -- I don't know what went on in this room for the last six months. But you've got to understand what it looks like from my viewpoint.
You people know what went on, you know the questions that were asked of the people up here. I don't know that. I do know how it looks to us and how it has looked from day one to us. And there's a one-sided picture to that story, why I'm here; and what the length of time is for; and what each delay is for; and why the prosecutor has lunch with one of the chief investigators who commits perjury on the stand, you know, this has a lot of meaning to us, a one-side view to us. We don't see the other side of it. We don't see the potential benefit, you know, of an amytal interview. You know just -- it's like when they asked me if I wanted to take a polygraph and I said, yes. And Mr. Grebner seemed so surprised. And I said, give me a polygraph. And then, of course, then it wasn't possible.
JUROR: Have you ever at any time in the last five years taken anything similar to a polygraph test or a polygraph test?
A I'm not supposed to answer that. But let me answer it. We had a lot of discussions, you know, about it with people. Okay, but nothing useful, no. That is the best -- I'm not even supposed to answer that.
JUROR: Well, it helps us. Everything we know helps.
A Well, you've got to understand that looks questionable from my viewpoint. I'm not -- you know, I'm not stating that you are doing something. I'm saying that the turn of events that -- this sort of investigation takes every time is always one way from our viewpoint. And we just don't see the potential benefit of that outweighing its usefulness. I just, you know --
JUROR: Well, that is what I thought she was trying to say because if I were in your place and there was anything that I could do to get these people off my back I'd do it. Even if I had a nervous breakdown. That's what you're going to have anyway if you don't get it out of your system.
A You sound like my mother now.
JUROR: I didn't mean that. But, you know, to have somebody pounding at me at the time. I couldn't stand it. Even if I had to be sick a while to recall it, you know, to get it all out.
JUROR: If you have been able to withstand it mentally for the past five years and you withstood it the date it happened, what would be the difference?
A Well, I would like -- that was my question.
JUROR: Being strong minded, and strong willed, and intelligent and you can take a lot of this and a lot of that. And you have done it so far. Why can't you do it in one more instance?
A You know, we haven't discussed it very much since we discussed it in August here. I really haven't discussed it with Bernie. We just stuck by what Dr. Sadoff told us originally. That he didn't recommend it. And really, you know, it hasn't been a part of our, you know, our defense or plan at all. You -- obviously, I take it now that you people have been discussing it a lot. But we haven't been in that same situation. If you follow what I'm saying.
JUROR: Well, I don't think Mr. -- Dr. Sadoff and Mr. Segal is in your position either.
A Yeah, but at least they are trying to help me.
JUROR: Well, we really haven't discussed it at great length. But we feel like that there is no answer to the crimes and we felt like this would shed some light on it from your viewpoint. We really haven't discussed it.
MR. WOERHEIDE: I might say just for the record that when the Army psychiatrists were here they said that they had discussed among themselves the desirability of having a sodium amytal test and they felt it would be useful.
A Yeah, I asked them though, Mr. Woerheide, --
MR. WOERHEIDE: And at that time the subject was discussed with Dr. Sadoff and he objected to it on your behalf and so it was not done.
A Yeah, but that was a lot of -- let me just give you a little background. There was a lot of things going on then. And one of them was, I asked the psychiatrist why he wanted a sodium amytal interview. And he said he was doing a study on homicides. And he wanted to do a sodium amytal interview to make me one of his study group.
Now, that didn't seem very legitimate at all for me to run that risk. To be one of his study group, you know, I write medical papers too. But that isn't a legitimate risk for me to undergo because he was in the middle of a study.
It wasn't even, you know, they never really formally approached me about an amytal interview at all. I know they discussed it with Sadoff.
So, I was lying on the damned couch talking about my dreams and he pops the question about an amytal interview and I say, why do you want to do it. And he tells me he wants to do a study. Well, I'm not going to be the subject of another study.
I have had the entire U. S. Army, and F.B.I., and C.I.D. studying me for five years. I don't need another study.
JUROR: Dr. MacDonald, --
A Yes, ma'am.
JUROR: -- would you -- on behalf of the grand jury, would you submit to this for us?
A I'd have to talk to Bernie. That really scares me. I'll tell you.
JUROR: I'm sure that it does.
MR. WOERHEIDE: Well, I know what Mr. Segal's answer is going to be. The same answer that he gave before.
JUROR: Seems to me that if a person -- any given person is entirely innocent of anything that he would willingly submit to any kind of a test known to the scientific world -- would submit to it, if he is entirely innocent of it. What harm could it do --
A Well, it might be --
JUROR: (Interposing) -- to toss it around.
A Well, in my particular case it can do me a lot of harm. That wasn't a routine evening, you know. Well, I'm not going to argue that one with you.
JUROR: Well, one of the psychiatrists that come to talk with us said, that they felt that it might make you have a nervous breakdown. But they thought that they could handle that better than --
A (Interposing) Yeah, they can handle it. But how about me?
JUROR: Well, they thought they could make you handle the whole situation better, too.
JUROR: Dr. MacDonald, are you right-handed or left-handed?
The best thing I can say is I'll talk to Bernie about it. Apparently, it sounds like, you know, it's really wanted. Let me talk to him and see what he says.
JUROR: Well, I know you are running a risk. I understand that you could have a nervous breakdown and I'm sure it would take you a long time to get over it. But I think in your own mind it would help you.
Say if this ended today, right here, you'd still probably have questions the rest of your life that you'd never know. And it would help you in that respect. I mean there are two ways of looking at that. As a matter of fact, there are a dozen ways of looking at it.
MR. STROUD: Any other questions?
FOREMAN: No, that seems to be it. No one else?
MR. STROUD: You want to discuss that with Mr. Segal and see if he wants to --
A I might as well.
MR. WOERHEIDE: While you're out there maybe you'll want to take a fifteen or twenty minute break. I thinnk Mr. -- you might inform Mr. Segal that while he is here in town and it is convenient Mr. Stroud would like to ask him a few questions before the grand jury as a witness concerning the incident when you were stopped to take some hair from you and all that sort of thing.
A Right, do I --
MR. WOERHEIDE: The grand jury has heard testimony from other witnesses about it.
A I'll bet. Do I get the courtesy of any kind of indication of where we are going and how long it's going to take?
MR. WOERHEIDE: Well, we're getting towards the end, Dr. MacDonald, and the grand jury will vote on the thing in due course, and you will find out sometime thereafter. That is all I can say. I can't predict anything or at this time give you a specific time. That is all I can say.
Shall we take our break, Mr. Foreman?
(Witness leaves the room)
(Fifteen Minute Break)
(3:00 p.m., January 21, 1975)
(Dr. MacDonald, the witness, returns to the stand.)
EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WOERHEIDE:
Q (Mr. Woerheide) Dr. MacDonald, you were to consult with your attorney, Mr. Segal, and as to certain matters asked you by members of the grand jury. Do you have a response you wish to make at this time?
A Right. I discussed this suggestion from the grand jury that I submit to a sodium amytal interview. I discussed it with my attorneys and upon their advice I want to say this.
"In the past I have been advised that considering the horrible events that happened on February 17, 1970, it would be extremely dangerous for me to be examined under sodium amytal. I have been warned it could lead to a psychotic episode which in ordinary terms means a nervous breakdown. For that reason, I have been unwilling to consider such a procedure.
"However, I very much appreciate the feelings of the grand jury in this matter. Despite my genuine fears about the dangers that this presents, I state now that I am willing to submit to a sodium amytal interview if the following problems can be satisfactorily dealt with.
"1. I want to receive the current advice of Dr. Robert L. Sadoff who has with me since February, 1970 and in whom I have great trust as to whether submitting to such an examination would have a great potential of permanent mental harm to me.
"Let me say that my confidence in Dr. Sadoff is not just because he's known me and worked with me in the past. He is a psychiatrist of outstanding reputation in the United States and he has been used by the federal government and by federal courts in criminal cases. He is also past president of The American Forensic Psychiatric Association."
That was number one. Wanting to receive the current advice.
"2. The arrangements for who should administer the examination, under what circumstances should be a matter agreed to jointly by Dr. Sadoff and responsible government doctors. My reluctance to submit to this type of examination is not because I have any fear that my answers will do anything other than what I have told you here, the truth.
"But my fear has been for serious and permanent mental harm. It would do me no good to submit to such an examination, be freed of the charges against me by the grand jury, and then have to live my life with permanent mental illness. Crippling me and making me a burden on my friends and family.
"I have tried in part to overcome the loss of my family by working as a physician which is what I do for a living.
"As a person with a permanent mental illness, I would be deprived of even that opportunity for a normal future."
Q All right, well, I take it you will contact Dr. Sadoff and then be further in touch with us?
Q Well, we'll expect to hear from you.
Now, any other questions?
Q (Mr. Woerheide) Can you contact Dr. Sadoff by telephone?
A He's on the telephone right now, I think.
Q All right. Why then we probably can expect to hear from you later this afternoon, is that correct?
A I hope so.
Q All right.
MR. STROUD: Is Mr. Segal prepared to come in and testify?
A He's ready, right.
FOREMAN: Thank you, Doctor, for this response to the grand jury's questions.
A Would you like me to leave this?
FOREMAN: Would you like to enter this as a response to our question?
MR. WOERHEIDE: Yeah, let's make that MacDonald Exhibit 32.
(MacDONALD EXHIBIT 32, 1-21-75, MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
DR. MacDONALD: Am I dismissed or am I still on call? It doesn't make any difference.
MR. WOERHEIDE: Well, you can just tell us, we'll be around here, informally.
DR. MacDONALD: Okay, thank you.
MR. STROUD: If you will ask Mr. Segal to come in?
Webmaster note:The original stenographer's misspellings of Sodium Amytol, Pruitt and Doulthett were corrected to sodium amytal, Pruett and Douthat, respectively, in this transcript.