November 17, 1975
Letter to Brian Murtagh from Bernard Segal re: Receipt of Evidentiary Materials
Scans of original letter
Brian M. Murtagh, Esquire
Organized Crime & Racketeering Section
U.S. Dept of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20530
Re: United States v. Jeffrey R. MacDonald
Dr. Mr. Murtagh:
In addition to the grand jury testimony delivered to Charles Bennett on November 11, 1975, I am now in receipt of the following information and materials:
(1) Duplicate sets of blueprints for the MacDonald residence at 544 Castle Drive. These sets contain the designations of the FBI and CID regarding points of evidentiary significance;
(2) A list of all witnesses to be called by the government in its case in chief and certain Jencks Act materials forwarded under cover of your letter RLT; WSL: BMM:1rk over 90-1-7-54 (undated);
(3) A set of 143 photos, which includes a copy of all the "fixing" photos and the autopsy photos in possession of the government, forwarded under cover of your letter BMM: 1rk over 90-1-7-54 (undated)
In reply to your recent inquires we are not prepared at this time to stipulate to the accuracy of the blueprints or to state for the record which photographs, if any, we will seek to exclude as inflammatory. Enclosed please find our completed list of photographs (2 copies) numbering from 1-173. In checking your proposed list for photos #174-250 against the photographs, we discovered several inadvertent numbering errors and certain descriptions which we considered ambiguous. Also, one photograph was missing. According, we have prepared a revised, proposed list of which we are forwarding a copy. You are requested to review our proposed numbering, descriptions, in the included lists. If they are satisfactory, it may then be stipulated that this will be the sole numbering system. By so agreeing of course, the defendant in no way stipulates to the accuracy of the annotations on the photographs, or the accuracy of the photographs themselves. That is, we reserve the right to contest at trial the admissibility, authenticity and accuracy of any photograph.
In my letter of November 12, 1975, I inquired into certain apparent deficiencies in the government's release of Jencks Act material, particularly with regard to scientific notes and lab results.
As both Mr. Malley and I have mentioned to you previously delays in your furnishing us appropriate laboratory notes, methodology, etc., will only delay our expert witnesses' preparation of their reports to us, and we, of course, would consider this to be delay chargeable to the government.
Finally, Mr. Malley informs me that, during his recent visit, he inadvertently left the defense copy of photo #170.1 in your office. Will you forward a copy at your earliest convenience?
Thank you for your continuing cooperation.
Bernard L. Segal