PDA

View Full Version : Jason will be re-tried October 10


Boodles
07-20-2011, 12:09 PM
Thankfully, the DA has announced that Jason Young will be re-tried after the hung jury in June. Trial date set for October 10.

gracielee
07-20-2011, 12:19 PM
Thankfully, the DA has announced that Jason Young will be re-tried after the hung jury in June. Trial date set for October 10.

$900,000 secured bond. Does anyone know if his family can post that bond for him? I fear the same attorney's will be trying him again. Who else can get up to speed on this case? Something is very wrong with our legal system lately. :(

rockin10
07-20-2011, 12:21 PM
So relieved to hear that he will be retried!!! Really really hoping they get a new prosecutor!!

Boodles
07-20-2011, 12:26 PM
Anyone know what the prosecutor was referring to when he said that some evidence had been disposed of by either Jason or someone on his behalf? Is this new news?

rockin10
07-20-2011, 12:30 PM
"Food Hoarding" Does anyone know anything about this? Also does anyone know who will prosecute this case in October or when we could find out?

gracielee
07-20-2011, 12:33 PM
"Food Hoarding" Does anyone know anything about this? Also does anyone know who will prosecute this case in October or when we could find out?

The news said 'a tentative date' in October, so I'm wondering if that statement lends the possibility for a new prosecutor to join the team, with a possible continuence on the trial date?

ohiogirl
07-20-2011, 12:34 PM
Anyone know what the prosecutor was referring to when he said that some evidence had been disposed of by either Jason or someone on his behalf? Is this new news?

The shoes?

Madeleine74
07-20-2011, 02:50 PM
ONLY $900K bail? That's really low, for 1st degree murder. I can't believe the judge was so lenient. He should have a $2M bail amount! I bet momma will have him out on bail lickety split.

I hope, hope, hope they do NOT allow Becky Holt to be the lead on this next trial. She needs to be dropped down to a consulting role only.

NCEast
07-20-2011, 04:31 PM
OT////I'm sorry to put this here but didn't know what else to do with it. Has anybody else been reading about the Kinston woman, Laura Jean Ackerson, who was supposed to meet her children's father in Wilson and never showed up. Here is the latest report from the N&O just a few minutes ago.
http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/07/20/1357247/missing-kinston-woman-last-seen.html

NCEast
07-20-2011, 04:37 PM
$900,000 secured bond. Does anyone know if his family can post that bond for him? I fear the same attorney's will be trying him again. Who else can get up to speed on this case? Something is very wrong with our legal system lately. :(


After the initial Young hung jury and then the not guilty verdict in the CA trail I'm pretty much thinking it may be time for professional jurors in this country now. I would love to be one. Additionally, I think the term 'reasonable doubt' should be schooled to each jury prior to deliberations.
I am not sure about the bond but I think the mom can put her property up. I'm also thinking that a cash amount against the bond is only a small percentage of the actual amount. Something like 10 percent--so on $900,000 the cash would be $90,000? Is that correct?
I have a migraine, so sorry if I'm difficult to follow. You all know me well enough by now to know that I have horrible migraines very often. Head-on car accident about 20 years ago. So when I don't make any sense, just over look me please.

NCEast
07-20-2011, 04:39 PM
"Food Hoarding" Does anyone know anything about this? Also does anyone know who will prosecute this case in October or when we could find out?

I don't know about the food hoarding other than the kind I do :)
I have connections with the Attorney Generals office in Raleigh and they are all very good friends with the Wake Co. DA's office. I'll see what I can find out. I will die if H C ends up on this case. Die I'm telling you.

NCEast
07-20-2011, 04:41 PM
The shoes?

Just the Fax needs to get his pictures of the motel doors/shrubbery to the DAs office for use in the next trial. They are so much better than the ones used by the prosecutor earlier. The distance between the door JY used to exit/enter the motel and the shrubbery shows very clearly--no way he could have stretched far enough to break off a twig or whatever he called it to hold the door open.

NCEast
07-20-2011, 04:44 PM
The news said 'a tentative date' in October, so I'm wondering if that statement lends the possibility for a new prosecutor to join the team, with a possible continuence on the trial date?

Do we have anybody with some get-up-and-go in the Wake DA's office other than Boz? Since they have tentatively rescheduled the trial so soon I'm scared to death they are going to use the same DAs because they are familiar with the case. I would love for Boz to get involved with his laser gun way of getting things done.
Can't remember the lead detective's name but somebody needs to light a hot fire under him too. His manner of testimony in the first trial left a lot to be desired.

Madeleine74
07-20-2011, 04:52 PM
They must have some decent ADAs in the office besides Boz. Boz is, I understand, one of the ADAs on that new murder trial in which jurors are being selected so it can't be him to back up on Young, I don't think.

Spivey is the lead detective. He needs a couple Red Bulls and then a triple espresso before he takes the stand. And he needs to NOT be paired with B. Holt on the direct.

David Saaks is great and he could be the lead ADA. But they need someone else with some real fire in their belly, someone who can and will connect with a jury and not be so soft and low key, as Becky Holt unfortunately turned out to be. :-( Someone articulate, who doesn't mince words and doesn't do that 'umm, ummmmm, um' thing.

Paging Kelly Siegler! C'mon over from TX and ride this bull! He's a tough one, but you've ridden worse.

NCEast
07-20-2011, 05:07 PM
They must have some decent ADAs in the office besides Boz. Boz is, I understand, one of the ADAs on that new murder trial in which jurors are being selected so it can't be him to back up on Young, I don't think.

Spivey is the lead detective. He needs a couple Red Bulls and then a triple espresso before he takes the stand. And he needs to NOT be paired with B. Holt on the direct.

David Saaks is great and he could be the lead ADA. But they need someone else with some real fire in their belly, someone who can and will connect with a jury and not be so soft and low key, as Becky Holt unfortunately turned out to be. :-(

Paging Kelly Siegler! C'mon over from TX and ride this bull! He's a tough one, but you've ridden worse.

LOL, love your post Madeleine. Your thoughts are my own!
I didn't realize Boz was involved in the current murder case, I guess you mean the 10 month old little girl. I hope they fry that stepfather on the steps of the courthouse.

tarheel8600
07-22-2011, 12:08 AM
"Food Hoarding" Does anyone know anything about this? Also does anyone know who will prosecute this case in October or when we could find out?

Prisoners are not allowed to hoard food because some prisoners make alcohol out of some food, and food is also used as currency to "buy" other things such as stamps, envelopes, hair cuts, personal items, etc.

tarheel8600
07-22-2011, 12:40 AM
$900,000 secured bond. Does anyone know if his family can post that bond for him? I fear the same attorney's will be trying him again. Who else can get up to speed on this case? Something is very wrong with our legal system lately. :(

According to the Transylvania County Tax Assessor website:
Pat Young own 2 pieces of property. One is worth $279,500 and the other is worth $50,000. JY's stepfather has no property in his name in TC. Now, either of them could possibly own property in another county, and I'm not sure whether they do or not.
If this is all the property that is owned, PY obviously cannot put up her property to cover the bond (unless she has others to put up property with her), and $90,000 (10% of the bond) is a lot of money to just give away.

otto
07-22-2011, 06:46 AM
"Food Hoarding" Does anyone know anything about this? Also does anyone know who will prosecute this case in October or when we could find out?

I laughed when I saw that the only violation Jason had in prison was hoarding food. I thought back to how hungry and faint he looked during trial ... and didn't think food hoarding was a good reason for a jail infraction. He looked drawn, pale and hungry, just like Brad Cooper, and we wondered if they were both on drugs during the trial. Maybe they were both hungry. Ms Anthony seemed fiesty and well fed when she was on trial ... not drugged.

otto
07-22-2011, 06:49 AM
Between Jason's siblings, mom and her friends, they can secure $900,000.

I suppose they would be better off coming up with the $90,000 for bail and finding an off shore place to store him.

He caught everyone off guard by testifying. That can't happen twice.

Just the Fax
07-22-2011, 07:45 AM
According to the Transylvania County Tax Assessor website:
Pat Young own 2 pieces of property. One is worth $279,500 and the other is worth $50,000. JY's stepfather has no property in his name in TC. Now, either of them could possibly own property in another county, and I'm not sure whether they do or not.
If this is all the property that is owned, PY obviously cannot put up her property to cover the bond (unless she has others to put up property with her), and $90,000 (10% of the bond) is a lot of money to just give away.

The property bond allows 70% of tax value.
She and others will need to attach property worth $1,275,000.
Pat has land in Buncombe County worth $214,000...total $543,000.
She has 2 close family friends that would gladly offer up their homes to release JLY pending retrial, IMO.

I'll be surprised if they don't spring him by next week.

gracielee
07-22-2011, 12:25 PM
OT////I'm sorry to put this here but didn't know what else to do with it. Has anybody else been reading about the Kinston woman, Laura Jean Ackerson, who was supposed to meet her children's father in Wilson and never showed up. Here is the latest report from the N&O just a few minutes ago.
http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/07/20/1357247/missing-kinston-woman-last-seen.html

I've heard about this one too, NCEast. I don't know if there is a place on WS's to post *new* or ongoing crimes. How to keep up with current details. It certainly sounds like she met extreme foul play.

Madeleine74
07-22-2011, 12:38 PM
Gracie & NCeast,

Email or send a msg to one of the mods and ask them to setup (or show you how to setup) a new thread off of the main forum for this (or any) new case. Give them enough info so they can figure out the best place to put the new thread. Location/name of victim/a few words to describe the case.

BrownRice
07-23-2011, 07:05 AM
I've heard about this one too, NCEast. I don't know if there is a place on WS's to post *new* or ongoing crimes. How to keep up with current details. It certainly sounds like she met extreme foul play.

It's already over in the "Missing" forum.

NC NC - Laura Ackerson, 27, Kiniston/Raleigh, 13 July 2011 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

NCEast
07-23-2011, 09:04 AM
Between Jason's siblings, mom and her friends, they can secure $900,000.

I suppose they would be better off coming up with the $90,000 for bail and finding an off shore place to store him.

He caught everyone off guard by testifying. That can't happen twice.

I hope not but I bet he will--he thinks he snowed the jury the first time, and I suppose he did. But hopefully somebody smart enough can trip him up the second time.
On Dateline last night a man was on trial for murdering his girlfriend. He insisted on taking the stand and it totally backfired on him. Dateline interviewed 3 of the jurors afterward and the main spokeswoman for the jurors said had he not taken the stand they may have found him not guilty. He actually hung himself. Additionally, when the prosecutor found out this man was going to testify in his own behalf, the prosecutor kept him on the stand for 3 days drilling, grilling, and interrogating him--especially asking questions he knew the suspect would not be able to easily answer as they were somewhat surprise questions.
I couldn't help but wonder as I watched that episode if BH could not have tried just a wee bit harder while she had Jason on the stand. The Dateline prosecutor said he was overjoyed--that getting to cross a defendant is rare and a very nice gift. We all know that but too bad the ADA in the first trial couldn't seem to get their mess together when they had the chance.

NCEast
07-23-2011, 09:05 AM
It's already over in the "Missing" forum.

NC NC - Laura Ackerson, 27, Kiniston/Raleigh, 13 July 2011 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=145072)

I'm afraid this is not going to have a good ending. I've been following the WS posts and what little bit the WRAL news is showing. Sounds like the relationship with the ex was volatile even when they were together.

NCEast
07-23-2011, 09:11 AM
OT////As an aside, I have completely and totally weaned myself from the Casey Anthony saga on WS. the talking head programs such as NG, and elsewhere. I don't care what she does, now much money she makes, or what happens to her or any of her family. It took me almost 3 weeks, after the verdict was read on July 5, to finally get to this point and it feels good.

NCEast
07-23-2011, 09:27 AM
The property bond allows 70% of tax value.
She and others will need to attach property worth $1,275,000.
Pat has land in Buncombe County worth $214,000...total $543,000.
She has 2 close family friends that would gladly offer up their homes to release JLY pending retrial, IMO.

I'll be surprised if they don't spring him by next week.

Oh my gosh, I hate to read this. Something in my gut tells me if he is bailed out he will never been seen nor heard from again.

otto
07-23-2011, 01:47 PM
I hope not but I bet he will--he thinks he snowed the jury the first time, and I suppose he did. But hopefully somebody smart enough can trip him up the second time.
On Dateline last night a man was on trial for murdering his girlfriend. He insisted on taking the stand and it totally backfired on him. Dateline interviewed 3 of the jurors afterward and the main spokeswoman for the jurors said had he not taken the stand they may have found him not guilty. He actually hung himself. Additionally, when the prosecutor found out this man was going to testify in his own behalf, the prosecutor kept him on the stand for 3 days drilling, grilling, and interrogating him--especially asking questions he knew the suspect would not be able to easily answer as they were somewhat surprise questions.
I couldn't help but wonder as I watched that episode if BH could not have tried just a wee bit harder while she had Jason on the stand. The Dateline prosecutor said he was overjoyed--that getting to cross a defendant is rare and a very nice gift. We all know that but too bad the ADA in the first trial couldn't seem to get their mess together when they had the chance.

It was said, after Jason's brief cross examination by the prosecutor, that she didn't want to continue asking Jason questions because it only gave him more opportunity to tell lies. What an absurd comment! If he was telling lies, then she should have been able to expose the fact that he was lying to the jury. That is what was required to convict him, but we're supposed to believe that for some reason she didn't want to expose the jury to more lies? Perhaps she was unable to expose him as lying ... perhaps the more he answered her questions, the more the jury doubted he was guilty.

In a second trial, the prosecution will be well prepared to catch Jason in a lie, so there's a good chance he won't testify during Round Two. In fact, I think his only chance at freedom is to put up the $90,000 non-refundable bond and skip town. That's a small price to pay for a life of freedom. There are places he could go where he would never be extradicted to the US.

NCEast
07-23-2011, 04:44 PM
It was said, after Jason's brief cross examination by the prosecutor, that she didn't want to continue asking Jason questions because it only gave him more opportunity to tell lies. What an absurd comment! If he was telling lies, then she should have been able to expose the fact that he was lying to the jury. That is what was required to convict him, but we're supposed to believe that for some reason she didn't want to expose the jury to more lies? Perhaps she was unable to expose him as lying ... perhaps the more he answered her questions, the more the jury doubted he was guilty.

In a second trial, the prosecution will be well prepared to catch Jason in a lie, so there's a good chance he won't testify during Round Two. In fact, I think his only chance at freedom is to put up the $90,000 non-refundable bond and skip town. That's a small price to pay for a life of freedom. There are places he could go where he would never be extradicted to the US.

I have a strong gut feeling he'll run too if he gets out on bail. I guess we'll have to see how much faith his mother has in him. If she has the wherewithal to make bond for him and doesn't, that will say a lot.
I like your thoughts in your first paragraph. The ADA giving him a chance to tell more lies is a prosecutor's dream and sooner or later the jury recognizes the lies and the liar will trip himself over and over. As NCS95 said in the BC trial--he's a lying liar who tells lies. Love it.
However, JY is so blasted arrogant he may not run, may get on the stand a second time, and think he has all his bases covered. I hope he's proven wrong.

NCEast
07-23-2011, 04:46 PM
GracieLee, I hope you are ok in Johnston County. Just saw that you guys had a horrific storm there about an hour ago....trees down, electrical outages, etc. I know this isn't the proper place to put this but please check in when you can. My Johnston Co. son is at Myrtle Beach and I don't know if I should make the trip there to check on his house or not. Sure hope you, your family, and your property are ok.

otto
07-23-2011, 04:51 PM
I have a strong gut feeling he'll run too if he gets out on bail. I guess we'll have to see how much faith his mother has in him. If she has the wherewithal to make bond for him and doesn't, that will say a lot.
I like your thoughts in your first paragraph. The ADA giving him a chance to tell more lies is a prosecutor's dream and sooner or later the jury recognizes the lies and the liar will trip himself over and over. As NCS95 said in the BC trial--he's a lying liar who tells lies. Love it.
However, JY is so blasted arrogant he may not run, may get on the stand a second time, and think he has all his bases covered. I hope he's proven wrong.

I too think that Jason's next move depends very much on his relationship with mother. If he wants to keep up the facade of an innocenti, he will ask her to put up the $900,000, return for trial, take the stand and, when convicted, will cry persecution for the remainder of his life ... all to keep his relationship with his mother intact (although I suspect she knows the truth). If he's willing to cut the apron strings, or admit to his mother that he's a murderer, he will ask her to gather up $90,000 and have bail posted by an independent. He'll then quietly plan his escape while his mother turns a blind eye, they'll tearfully say their forever goodbyes and he'll bolt.

NCEast
07-23-2011, 05:26 PM
I too think that Jason's next move depends very much on his relationship with mother. If he wants to keep up the facade of an innocenti, he will ask her to put up the $900,000, return for trial, take the stand and, when convicted, will cry persecution for the remainder of his life ... all to keep his relationship with his mother intact (although I suspect she knows the truth). If he's willing to cut the apron strings, or admit to his mother that he's a murderer, he will ask her to gather up $90,000 and have bail posted by an independent. He'll then quietly plan his escape while his mother turns a blind eye, they'll tearfully say their forever goodbyes and he'll bolt.

I too think his mother suspects the truth. I think she would do most anything to 'save' him--but if she puts her property up and he runs will she lose the property and house? I am not sure how that works--thankfully I've never had to be in a position to post bond for anybody.
If she refuses to put the property up then we won't have to ask ourselves any longer where her mindset it. She knows he did it--just as we all do.

otto
07-23-2011, 05:37 PM
One would hope that the family would give him one last taste of freedom between now and October. I too have no idea how bond works, but presumably people get it even if they are destitute ... but maybe not. I read today that Knox's parents applied for a home improvement loan so her stepfather could continue living in Italy and the family could pay for Knox's legal dream team. I guess some families will do anything for their children when it comes to murder. Maybe Jason's mom and sisters could sacrifice everything they've worked for so Jason can flee the jurisdiction. If I were in Jason's shoes, I would run.

NCEast
07-23-2011, 05:43 PM
One would hope that the family would give him one last taste of freedom between now and October. I too have no idea how bond works, but presumably people get it even if they are destitute ... but maybe not. I read today that Knox's parents applied for a home improvement loan so her stepfather could continue living in Italy and the family could pay for Knox's legal dream team. I guess some families will do anything for their children when it comes to murder. Maybe Jason's mom and sisters could sacrifice everything they've worked for so Jason can flee the jurisdiction. If I were in Jason's shoes, I would run.

I am not sure that one sister is willing to help him. She has pretty much been absent throughout this entire ordeal. The only thing that holds me back from a 100 percent feel that he will run is is own self-love, feeling of intelligence, and his arrogance. Since he 'won' the first time, I'm thinking he is thinking he will win the second time too. That's why it's so darn important that the right ADAs be assigned to retry him and I'm afraid it's not going to happen.
As badly as I disliked BC, I can honestly say I dislike JY 100 times more. I can't even stand to look at JY. He gives me the absolute creeps, he looks evil. Michelle Y. was such a beautiful young woman, intelligent, and what she saw in him is beyond me.

otto
07-23-2011, 07:03 PM
I am not sure that one sister is willing to help him. She has pretty much been absent throughout this entire ordeal. The only thing that holds me back from a 100 percent feel that he will run is is own self-love, feeling of intelligence, and his arrogance. Since he 'won' the first time, I'm thinking he is thinking he will win the second time too. That's why it's so darn important that the right ADAs be assigned to retry him and I'm afraid it's not going to happen.
As badly as I disliked BC, I can honestly say I dislike JY 100 times more. I can't even stand to look at JY. He gives me the absolute creeps, he looks evil. Michelle Y. was such a beautiful young woman, intelligent, and what she saw in him is beyond me.

Hard to predict ... Jason may indeed believe that he can be lucky twice. The argument about the gas was a good one, but if the prosecution lays it out properly, that argument will lose its impact. The prosecution focused too much on the fact that Jason wouldn't talk. That has to be completely removed from the argument because it's meaningless ... it can't be used against him and it gave him an easy defense of being afraid of persecution. I didn't believe the gas station attendant ... nothing about what she said matched Jason. All I got from that was that when police showed her a single photo depicting Jason, she said sure, that was the guy that swore at her ... the 5' tall guy.

I came across the Keith Ablow book about Scott Peterson the other day and was about to throw it away without reading it, but today I needed something to read. Keith is careful in how he words things, but I get the distinct impression that he also believes that women that marry men that murder have their own demons that lead them to these types of men. Laci's first boyfriend tried to murder another girlfriend, and then Scott did murder her. That's two for two. I understand that Michelle had her own demons because of her parent's divorce and who knows what else ... but there must have been some mix between Jason and Michelle that drew them together while perhaps simultaneously repulsing them.

panthera
07-23-2011, 07:57 PM
The news said 'a tentative date' in October, so I'm wondering if that statement lends the possibility for a new prosecutor to join the team, with a possible continuence on the trial date?

I would hope so; and I doubt the retrial will actually begin in October. However, at least there will be a retrial!!!

MOO

otto
07-24-2011, 12:42 AM
I would hope so; and I doubt the retrial will actually begin in October. However, at least there will be a retrial!!!

MOO

What reason would there be for delay? Will Jason have a change of lawyer? I doubt the prosecution could request a delay.

NCEast
07-24-2011, 06:57 AM
Hard to predict ... Jason may indeed believe that he can be lucky twice. The argument about the gas was a good one, but if the prosecution lays it out properly, that argument will lose its impact. The prosecution focused too much on the fact that Jason wouldn't talk. That has to be completely removed from the argument because it's meaningless ... it can't be used against him and it gave him an easy defense of being afraid of persecution. I didn't believe the gas station attendant ... nothing about what she said matched Jason. All I got from that was that when police showed her a single photo depicting Jason, she said sure, that was the guy that swore at her ... the 5' tall guy.

I came across the Keith Ablow book about Scott Peterson the other day and was about to throw it away without reading it, but today I needed something to read. Keith is careful in how he words things, but I get the distinct impression that he also believes that women that marry men that murder have their own demons that lead them to these types of men. Laci's first boyfriend tried to murder another girlfriend, and then Scott did murder her. That's two for two. I understand that Michelle had her own demons because of her parent's divorce and who knows what else ... but there must have been some mix between Jason and Michelle that drew them together while perhaps simultaneously repulsing them.


Well said, all of it.

tarheel8600
07-24-2011, 11:04 PM
I'm sure JY's family is doing all they can to arrange bond. I hope it doesn't work out because I worry about other women he may come into contact with and form relationships with. If he is let out for an extended period of time, he will hurt someone else. JY is one scary man.

NCEast
07-25-2011, 07:55 AM
OT///The dismembered remains of Laura Ackerson have been found in Texas. Her ex and his wife have been charged. Makes me sick.

borndem
07-25-2011, 10:49 AM
The shoes?

Yes, that's what I think -- and the shirt -- the one that they tried to duplicate in the birthday party picture up in the mountains.... surely they don't think people are that dayam dumb?? Another little detail that was on our list for the ADAs to cover. This case has got to be solid, solid and rock-hard, guys. Sock it to 'em.

The shoes, the shirt -- anything else?

borndem
07-25-2011, 11:11 AM
The news said 'a tentative date' in October, so I'm wondering if that statement lends the possibility for a new prosecutor to join the team, with a possible continuence on the trial date?

Hi, Glee - :seeya:

They've all "penciled in" the October time frame. I just don't see a new ADA team, but it looks like HC may be more active on it this go 'round. I hope that Saacks will be first chair this time. They won't get another do-over... http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon8.gif

Since the trial is set for only 90 or so days from now, I wonder if the Youngs will try to bond him out....

borndem
07-25-2011, 12:06 PM
ONLY $900K bail? That's really low, for 1st degree murder. I can't believe the judge was so lenient. He should have a $2M bail amount! I bet momma will have him out on bail lickety split.

I hope, hope, hope they do NOT allow Becky Holt to be the lead on this next trial. She needs to be dropped down to a consulting role only.

Hi, M74 - (hmmmm, an M74 sounds like a firecracker -- hmmm!!!)

:fireworks::fireworks2:


ITA with both your statements. For a usually high-bail or no-bail-for-1stDM judge, I was surprised to hear him give any bail at all, and much more surprised that he put the amt at only 900K. For 90 days -- that's an expensive little trip out... And it needs to be a little trip.

The DA guys have GOT to do it right -- Surely Shirley, CW has read them the riot act more than once on this thing. (Could jobs be riding on this one?)

BH needs to stay on the team, yes, but since we probably can't have Boz since it's all new to him and I'm sure he's scheduled-up, but Saacks could bring it off. Please, no BH doing the main stuff. She's sharp, yes, but seems unsure. Is there some method behind this um-er-aah delivery? It's beyond my reasoning...

borndem
07-25-2011, 12:57 PM
I don't know about the food hoarding other than the kind I do :)
I have connections with the Attorney Generals office in Raleigh and they are all very good friends with the Wake Co. DA's office. I'll see what I can find out. I will die if H C ends up on this case. Die I'm telling you.

When was the last time CW himself 1st-chaired a case?

Is Boz up to his eyeballs in cases, too? Especially now that their budget has been cut, they can't hardly start throwing more bodies onto this case. I've seen Jason Waller (Superior Court Rotation) and Jeff Cruden (Probable Cause Rotation), and they were good (not of the um-er-ah ilk, thankfully) and got convictions along with other ADAs (Melanie Shekita was one & she was good), but I didn't see a lot of sparks fly, but they each got their licks in there and brought the ball home.

Anything you can tell us (me, anyway), NCEast, will be more that we (I) know. It would be good to know what the talk on this is... Is it as big a deal to them as it is to us? Certainly it must be so. :waiting:

Oh, JLY is such a crude, cruel, r-neck, juvenile sleazeball, IMHO, of course. He has GOT to pay the price for murdering his poor little pregnant wife and the mother of that sweet little girl. "Daddy did it," grrrrr, indeed. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon8.gif :banghead:

Madeleine74
07-25-2011, 02:03 PM
I understand that Boz is on that new DP case in which the jury pool is going through voir dire now. It could be a 6 week trial, in total. He is not available to work on the JLY case (even if they wanted him to, and he wanted to do it) until his current case is over and that would put the timeframe almost into mid-Sept.

No, I think we're stuck with the existing team, though if Willoughby has any sense at all he'll push Saacks up to first chair and give him a larger % of the state's case in chief as well as a larger % of cross. Of the 3 ADAs on the case Saacks appears to be the most articulate and energetic. They need a serious influx of raw energy and some emotion and some passion. Saacks has it. If the ADAs don't show how powerful their case is and can't convey that to the jury, then why should the jury care?

If they blow it this time they will only have themselves to blame, and what that will do to the Fisher family I don't even want to contemplate.

Their themes of multiple affairs and childish behavior does not seem to have traction with a jury, particularly males. It does not a murderer make in most people's minds, no matter how idiotic JLY's behavior has been.

If they cannot tie him to the scene of the crime in a more clear fashion, the jury isn't going to connect the dots by themselves.

borndem
07-25-2011, 02:35 PM
OT////As an aside, I have completely and totally weaned myself from the Casey Anthony saga on WS. the talking head programs such as NG, and elsewhere. I don't care what she does, now much money she makes, or what happens to her or any of her family. It took me almost 3 weeks, after the verdict was read on July 5, to finally get to this point and it feels good.

I'm right there with you, NCEast -- I'm done with it.

I have had my meal with the Anthony case, no dessert, of course, and I have paid the check, washed my hands, and left the restaurant.

The menu looked great at the beginning, but I didn't like the food -- tasteless for the most part; the big rooster main course was greasy and full of hot air, IMO; the DA salad was very good, but there was not enuff of it; some of the veggy witnesses were very good but there weren't enuff of them; the jury cooks only paid attention to the main course, so everything else was served nearly raw, or they forgot about them; their last course was very hard to chew and it has left a very bad taste in my mouth. What a letdown. I hope to never eat there again. Free at last, and feeling much better. Orlando, no mo'... Back home to NC, huh?!

gracielee
07-26-2011, 04:54 PM
GracieLee, I hope you are ok in Johnston County. Just saw that you guys had a horrific storm there about an hour ago....trees down, electrical outages, etc. I know this isn't the proper place to put this but please check in when you can. My Johnston Co. son is at Myrtle Beach and I don't know if I should make the trip there to check on his house or not. Sure hope you, your family, and your property are ok.

Sorry it took me so long, we are fine here. Lost power for awhile, but did get some well needed rain. If only we could get rid of this heat.

gracielee
07-26-2011, 05:05 PM
Has anyone heard any updates on the JLY bond issue? Or the new DP trial jury? I've not heard anything on either.

Just the Fax
07-28-2011, 08:06 AM
Has anyone heard any updates on the JLY bond issue? Or the new DP trial jury? I've not heard anything on either.

Well, I had to stay quiet...till now.
I was in the original 60 person jury pool for the Capital murder trial for the man that sexually molested and killed his 10 month old step-daughter. Jury selection started 7-18-11 and as of 7-27-11, only 7 jurors are seated (need 16 total).
I have been hanging out in the jury lounge and was finally called in the courtroom for my individual voir dire. Some potential jurors were questioned 2 hours, so I was determined that would not be the case for me. I think I would be a good juror on a murder case...just not this one. After being introduced to the basic facts of the case and the death penalty possibility by the judge, he asked if I could apply the law based on his instructions. I said yes....but, let me explain. I told him I followed the BC case and even did some of my own investigation on JLY. I told him I met the lead defense counsel and knew his law partner. The judge then said, "so you feel because of these circumstances you could not be impartial and serve on this case"? I said, no your honor, I could not be impartial, because I have already formed an opinion. The whole thing lasted less than 10 minutes and I was excused.
The bailiff outside said that was the quickest dismissal so far.

I did ask him if JLY was still incarcerated and he said yes.:D

borndem
07-28-2011, 12:42 PM
< lots of respectful snipping from Just the Fax post>

I said, no your honor, I could not be impartial, because I have already formed an opinion.

< lots of respectful snipping from Just the Fax post>

JTF, do you think you could ever be a juror on a murder case in Wake County? Truthfully (since you asked!), I'm not so sure that I could -- it would be very difficult since we do get a fair amount of media coverage. And even tho we know it's not necessarily all accurate, altho I think the intent to be so is definitely there, it is often enuff info to enable some of us WS'ers to form an opinion.

And Wake County has been deprived of a good, intelligent, even-minded juror in not having you on the panel. But really, what human could not already have an opinion on this (IMO) slimeball's guilt??

And thanks for sharing that with us, Fax. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon12.gif

happy2binNC
07-28-2011, 01:01 PM
WRAL just issued a breaking news alert saying JLY's parents have posted bond.

"JUST IN: The parents of Jason Young are at the Wake County magistrate's office to put up a $900,000 secured bond for his release. Young is accused of first-degree murder in the 2006 death of his pregnant wife, Michelle. His trial ended in a mistrial last month, and a new trial date is set for Oct. 10."

Just the Fax
07-28-2011, 01:05 PM
A cold blooded killer will soon be on the streets.....LOCK your doors!!!!!

johnfear
07-28-2011, 01:16 PM
I feel like we should make a pool on whether he goes poof.....no?

borndem
07-28-2011, 01:23 PM
WRAL just issued a breaking news alert saying JLY's parents have posted bond.

"JUST IN: The parents of Jason Young are at the Wake County magistrate's office to put up a $900,000 secured bond for his release. Young is accused of first-degree murder in the 2006 death of his pregnant wife, Michelle. His trial ended in a mistrial last month, and a new trial date is set for Oct. 10."


Yep, just saw it, Happy and JTF...

:maddening::loser::banghead::furious::mad::liar::o hwow::pullhair::noooo::sigh::gasp::rant::yuck::rag e::headache::nerves::tsktsk::puke::cursing::thud:

Wyn
07-28-2011, 01:38 PM
A cold blooded killer will soon be on the streets.....LOCK your doors!!!!!


I suppose he'll be bunking with Pat and Gerald again since he has no money, no job, no future. It's them that needs to be worried since they'll be knowingly living with an accused murderer. Talk about a dysfunctional family dynamic!

Think they'll be able to keep an eye on him to protect their "investment"? I think he'll run if he gets the chance. Mexico would be his starting point.

happy2binNC
07-28-2011, 01:46 PM
I feel like we should make a pool on whether he goes poof.....no?

Put me down for "we'll never see him again." He'll head out to Transylvania :dracula: for a while, maybe be seen in public doing "normal" things, and then he'll leave without a trace. :furious:

gorealtors
07-28-2011, 01:56 PM
Seven pieces of property owned by NINE people secured this bond.:waitasec:

happy2binNC
07-28-2011, 02:04 PM
Seven pieces of property owned by NINE people secured this bond.:waitasec:

Wow. So if you add those 9 people to 8 jury members, 2 defense attorneys and Jason himself, that brings us to to a grand total of 19 people who think he's not guilty.



Oh wait, I forgot about MM. Make that 20!

Just the Fax
07-28-2011, 02:22 PM
No shocker.
Pat herself had 2 properties worth almost 1/2 the bond.
The other $500,000 or so was likely home equity from various family friends.

Wyn
07-28-2011, 02:35 PM
No shocker.
Pat herself had 2 properties worth almost 1/2 the bond.
The other $500,000 or so was likely home equity from various family friends.http://registerofdeeds.buncombecounty.org/external/Imaging/V1Viewer.aspx?bImgCycle=True&iImgCycleIdx=0

Just the Fax
07-28-2011, 02:54 PM
http://registerofdeeds.buncombecounty.org/external/imaging/v1viewer.aspx?bimgcycle=true&iimgcycleidx=0

07/27/2011 deed of trust
young, patricia wells
mcintyre, kenneth gerald

buncombe & transylvania counties

happy2binNC
07-28-2011, 03:20 PM
This photo makes me want to :sick:.
http://media2.newsobserver.com/smedia/2011/07/28/14/47/vShgh.Em.156.jpg

Enjoy your freedom while you can, because come October you're going in the slammer for good.

NCEast
07-28-2011, 03:51 PM
WRAL just issued a breaking news alert saying JLY's parents have posted bond.

"JUST IN: The parents of Jason Young are at the Wake County magistrate's office to put up a $900,000 secured bond for his release. Young is accused of first-degree murder in the 2006 death of his pregnant wife, Michelle. His trial ended in a mistrial last month, and a new trial date is set for Oct. 10."

I was so hoping this would not happen. However, it may provide him a chance to run. ....which I kind of hope he does. Then in a month or two he is captured in another state, and then he will have even more huge legal problems that will be almost impossible to overcome. I do not like this man.

NCEast
07-28-2011, 03:55 PM
When was the last time CW himself 1st-chaired a case?



Anything you can tell us (me, anyway), NCEast, will be more that we (I) know. It would be good to know what the talk on this is... Is it as big a deal to them as it is to us? Certainly it must be so. :waiting:

:banghead:

I'm checking on this, waiting for a reply, as I type.

tarheel8600
07-29-2011, 11:41 PM
I feel like we should make a pool on whether he goes poof.....no?

I hope he does run, is tried in absentia, is found guilty, and is hunted down like the dog he is, is captured, and is personally escorted to Central Prison for the rest of his life.

I, like many others in Brevard, do not want the narcissistic, pathological lying, cold-blooded wife and unborn child killer here. He is very unwelcome, and I hope he knows it.

Just the Fax
07-30-2011, 12:05 AM
"Narcissistic, pathological lying, cold-blooded wife and unborn child killer"

That pathetic description of JLY is spot on.

Purdy, ain't he?

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s216/alive695/Capture-17.jpg

otto
07-30-2011, 12:29 AM
If I were in his shoes, I would run.

otto
07-30-2011, 12:49 AM
He sure looks happy in the photos. Does anyone know how bond works? If he shows up for the trial, is it all settled and the properties essentially back in the hands of the family, or does that not happen until the verdict?

BrownRice
07-30-2011, 08:34 AM
He sure looks happy in the photos. Does anyone know how bond works? If he shows up for the trial, is it all settled and the properties essentially back in the hands of the family, or does that not happen until the verdict?

My understanding of how the bail/bond system works (when using a bail bondsman) is you are out the 10% automatically ($90k is their fee in this case). The property deed is returned when JLY shows up for trial. If he runs and they don't capture him, all those people lose their property (I'm sure there's more to it, but that's the gist from what I understand). If they paid the court directly (w/o using bb), they would receive the $ back at trial (less court fees).

NCEast
07-30-2011, 09:16 AM
I'm checking on this, waiting for a reply, as I type.

My contact in the AG's office is on vacation. I hope to hear from her either over the weekend or the first of next week.

terminatrixator
07-30-2011, 10:27 AM
"Narcissistic, pathological lying, cold-blooded wife and unborn child killer"

That pathetic description of JLY is spot on.

Purdy, ain't he?

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s216/alive695/Capture-17.jpg

Very grim reaper-like. He is definitely not attractive and I hope this last taste of freedom makes it so much harder for him when he's locked away forever.

Hung jury doesn't = innocent.
Not guilty doesn't = innocent

I hope this next jury can understand critical thinking and how to connect the dots. Seem there are too many jury's lately that have a case of the CSI all wrapped up with a smoking bow in 60 minutes fever.

borndem
07-30-2011, 12:05 PM
I feel like we should make a pool on whether he goes poof.....no?

Fear, I think his cockiness and Narcissism vs. his urge to flee, will win, and he'll stick around. He was so close the first time, and I think he feels that his good defense lawyers will win it this time. (And he could be right.)

Further, I think that we will NOT see him on the witness stand this time. The ADAs were given a free shot at goal, and they blew it. They won't get a chance to do the cross-exam the right way this go 'round. The ADAs have another chance to show his guilt, and if they blow it again, he will laugh and stand up & walk out. And possibly, IMO, kill again since he's still the same person he was in 2008. And he loves his mama's good cookin'.....

I think a lot of the chance for the State to win rides on jury selection, and, as so many of us have agreed, for that jury to understand what "reasonable doubt" means. I think the quote below sums it up nicely and in a few words:

"Circumstantial evidence...is like a rope. And each fact is a strand of that rope. And as the prosecution piles one fact upon another we add strands and we add strength to that rope. If one strand breaks...the rope is not broken. The strength of that rope is barely diminished. Why? Because there are still so many other strands of almost steel-like strength that the rope is still more than strong enough to bind these...defendants to justice. That's what circumstantial evidence is all about."
- Vincent Bugliosi, Outrage: The Five Reasons Why O.J. Simpson Got Away With Murder

Of course, this is all in my humble opinion....http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon11.gif

borndem
07-30-2011, 12:15 PM
I'm checking on this, waiting for a reply, as I type.

Many thanks, NCEast -- and I'm like you, but torn just a bit, in almost hoping that he will skip, and be found. Then, even his family might be done with him. He is such a slimeball (IMO). I do not like him, either. He is arrogant and evil, and that is a very, very dangerous combination. And one we WSers know well. :banghead: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon8.gif:maddening:

borndem
07-30-2011, 12:29 PM
Very grim reaper-like. He is definitely not attractive and I hope this last taste of freedom makes it so much harder for him when he's locked away forever.

Hung jury doesn't = innocent.
Not guilty doesn't = innocent

I hope this next jury can understand critical thinking and how to connect the dots. Seem there are too many jury's lately that have a case of the CSI all wrapped up with a smoking bow in 60 minutes fever.

BBM

Well stated, Trixator. This "all or nothing" jury attitude (that's how it seems to me, anyway) is a severe problem for any prosecution to overcome. And I think your theory on it is spot-on.

It's perfectly shown in the Anthony verdict -- a case in point -- they didn't convict on any of the homicide-related charges -- not even neglect.

Black or white -- no gray. On or off. Yes or no. Up or down. Left or right. We do not live in a binary world, other than computer machine language. Will we ever get it?!

tarheel8600
07-30-2011, 12:33 PM
I hope the next time around, the ADA introduces the email exchanges between JLY and his sister, Kim.

I hope he is asked what he meant in the part of his email statement that said, "His (his lawyer's) only concern is for me and that hopefully there will NEVER be an arrest." I think a grieving husband would have added that he hopes that an arrest of the actual murderer(s) would be forthcoming. Of course, if you are the murderer, this might not be what you would want to write.

I'm sure he will say that he meant that HE would never be arrested in this case, but that is not what he wrote. His version of what he meant could easily be discredited because he never once indicated that he ever hoped the murderer(s) of MY and Rylan would be brought to justice. In fact, he never demanded justice for his murdered family to anyone.

Additionally, I'm sure putting Kim on the stand was discussed, but I'm sure she has been told to either support her brother or stay out of it and keep her mouth shut.

Just the Fax
07-30-2011, 01:49 PM
Fear, I think his cockiness and Narcissism vs. his urge to flee, will win, and he'll stick around. He was so close the first time, and I think he feels that his good defense lawyers will win it this time. (And he could be right.)

Further, I think that we will NOT see him on the witness stand this time. The ADAs were given a free shot at goal, and they blew it. They won't get a chance to do the cross-exam the right way this go 'round. The ADAs have another chance to show his guilt, and if they blow it again, he will laugh and stand up & walk out. And possibly, IMO, kill again since he's still the same person he was in 2008. And he loves his mama's good cookin'.....

snipped

Of course, this is all in my humble opinion....http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon11.gif


I disagree bordem....he has to take the stand again.
How else will the jury know about Michelle "giving the shoes to Goodwill", going to the desk to get a paper and "smoke a cigar" outside? He will have to tell us about propping the room door to explain why no key card was used.
Of course he screwed up by saying he broke off a twig to prop the stairwell exit door. The bush is too far for that to be true. He was stupid by not just saying he used a rock (had his DNA). For his story to be true, the jury must believe the camera was tampered with twice in 12 hours and someone else happened to prop the exit door with a rock.

Hopefully Saacks handles the cross in round 2.

borndem
07-30-2011, 05:16 PM
If I were in his shoes, I would run.

Maybe -- but not in those size 10 Franklin's!!!!! :python: ...... .:behindbar..... :escape:.....:beamup:..... :back:........ :takeoff:



........:pullhair:.......:no:......:pinocchio:.... .:loser:

borndem
07-30-2011, 05:36 PM
I hope the next time around, the ADA introduces the email exchanges between JLY and his sister, Kim.

I hope he is asked what he meant in the part of his email statement that said, "His (his lawyer's) only concern is for me and that hopefully there will NEVER be an arrest." I think a grieving husband would have added that he hopes that an arrest of the actual murderer(s) would be forthcoming. Of course, if you are the murderer, this might not be what you would want to write.

I'm sure he will say that he meant that HE would never be arrested in this case, but that is not what he wrote. His version of what he meant could easily be discredited because he never once indicated that he ever hoped the murderer(s) of MY and Rylan would be brought to justice. In fact, he never demanded justice for his murdered family to anyone.

Additionally, I'm sure putting Kim on the stand was discussed, but I'm sure she has been told to either support her brother or stay out of it and keep her mouth shut.

BBM
Correct-a-mundo, 'Heel - She has been away from it, baby and all.

But, as we know, subpoenas speak softly and carry a Big Stick. Either somehow just introduce the email, or put her on the stand and have her read the whole darn thing. At least subpoena her & scare her and her mama a tad. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon10.gif

Maybe she's been busy making another little nest for her Wonderful Brother (could this be possible? Hmmmm...)

I wonder if they tried to introduce it the first time, and somehow it got ruled-out? Oh, the opportunities were there, folks, yes they were.... as we all know -- we made a dayam list of 'em.....http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon8.gif Pardon my attitude, folks...

otto
08-01-2011, 12:48 AM
My understanding of how the bail/bond system works (when using a bail bondsman) is you are out the 10% automatically ($90k is their fee in this case). The property deed is returned when JLY shows up for trial. If he runs and they don't capture him, all those people lose their property (I'm sure there's more to it, but that's the gist from what I understand). If they paid the court directly (w/o using bb), they would receive the $ back at trial (less court fees).

Thanks ... I guess I'm wondering if he could show up for trial, the property would be returned, and then the day before the verdict - if he was worried - he could then flee and the families would not lose their property.

BrownRice
08-01-2011, 08:12 AM
Thanks ... I guess I'm wondering if he could show up for trial, the property would be returned, and then the day before the verdict - if he was worried - he could then flee and the families would not lose their property.

He is considered out on bond during the entire trial (he has to show up every day). So if he skips town, even on the last day of trial, they lose the property. With the last trial, the 8-4 for acquittal was pretty surprising. I have to assume he didn't expect it either, so he may go into this pretty cocky with no reason to run.

Madeleine74
08-01-2011, 10:37 AM
Given it's the exact same team, presenting the same case, he probably has reason to feel cocky. I don't know if the state can learn from its mistakes...or even if they feel they made mistakes to learn from. Yep, I'm worried.

borndem
08-01-2011, 10:48 AM
He is considered out on bond during the entire trial (he has to show up every day). So if he skips town, even on the last day of trial, they lose the property. With the last trial, the 8-4 for acquittal was pretty surprising. I have to assume he didn't expect it either, so he may go into this pretty cocky with no reason to run.

BBM
ITA - BRice - That's why I stated earlier on this subject, that I thought he was cocky enuff to stick around and get acquitted this time... http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon8.gif But he doesn't just have to show up this first day of the trial -- he's still under court jurisdiction, even tho he is innocent until proven guilty and until the case is closed.

And let me thank you again for your legal explanations of this & other things that help those of us who perhaps know a little but not a lot about the inner workings of the court system. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon7.gif

borndem
08-01-2011, 11:20 AM
I disagree bordem....he has to take the stand again.
How else will the jury know about Michelle "giving the shoes to Goodwill", going to the desk to get a paper and "smoke a cigar" outside? He will have to tell us about propping the room door to explain why no key card was used.
Of course he screwed up by saying he broke off a twig to prop the stairwell exit door. The bush is too far for that to be true. He was stupid by not just saying he used a rock (had his DNA). For his story to be true, the jury must believe the camera was tampered with twice in 12 hours and someone else happened to prop the exit door with a rock.

Hopefully Saacks handles the cross in round 2.

Thanks, JTF, for the reply, and now I must agree with you -- he doesn't have any other witnesses to say what needs to be said in the questions/situations you describe. So-o-o-o, we'll see, we'll see.

The Fishers, especially Michelle, need relief in this thing, and they need justice, simple justice.

otto
08-03-2011, 12:28 AM
He is considered out on bond during the entire trial (he has to show up every day). So if he skips town, even on the last day of trial, they lose the property. With the last trial, the 8-4 for acquittal was pretty surprising. I have to assume he didn't expect it either, so he may go into this pretty cocky with no reason to run.

Thanks ... that's what I was wondering. He may well be cocky, but I suspect that prosecutors will have all their ducks in a row this time around. I wonder if he will read here ... wasn't he reading some forum discussions before?

No Coincidence
08-08-2011, 07:23 AM
Thanks, JTF, for the reply, and now I must agree with you -- he doesn't have any other witnesses to say what needs to be said in the questions/situations you describe. So-o-o-o, we'll see, we'll see.

The Fishers, especially Michelle, need relief in this thing, and they need justice, simple justice.

I honestly just cannot fathom this monstrosity. I just want to pull the blankets over my head and wail, although I heard that doesn't actually fix anything.

I was under the impression that anything that was said by witnesses in the last trial can be used in this trial. For example, the prosecution can simply tell the jury that JLY said he was smoking a cigar, but he actually doesnt even smoke, or think, or use hotel keys, or rocks. You get the idea.

So, from what I'm reading here, JLY could completely change his story, and keep on trucking? Why would he need to restate what he already said if everything said at the first trial is auto-evidence? Or are we assuming that what he said last time will be used in conjunction with pictures/new evidence to merely show he was lying before... to dismantle his character even more (is that even possible? I can't believe I am even typing this right now). Maybe I am not grasping this do-over process.... help needed and appreciated.

Borndem, JTF, Tarheel, Madeline, Otto, and East------ HELP! I'm stuck in Michigan and I have failed at google-ing this chaos.

PS. Keep me updated if there is an exact date for this redo trial, I honestly might just come down and wear my terrible, horrible, no good, very bad, shirt. <<"he gave up his daughter instead of explaining he was "smoking a cigar and getting a paper". He doesnt smoke, and had no means for fire. COINKY DINK?>>

MyBelle
08-08-2011, 05:59 PM
I honestly just cannot fathom this monstrosity. I just want to pull the blankets over my head and wail, although I heard that doesn't actually fix anything.

I was under the impression that anything that was said by witnesses in the last trial can be used in this trial. For example, the prosecution can simply tell the jury that JLY said he was smoking a cigar, but he actually doesnt even smoke, or think, or use hotel keys, or rocks. You get the idea.

So, from what I'm reading here, JLY could completely change his story, and keep on trucking? Why would he need to restate what he already said if everything said at the first trial is auto-evidence? Or are we assuming that what he said last time will be used in conjunction with pictures/new evidence to merely show he was lying before... to dismantle his character even more (is that even possible? I can't believe I am even typing this right now). Maybe I am not grasping this do-over process.... help needed and appreciated.

Borndem, JTF, Tarheel, Madeline, Otto, and East------ HELP! I'm stuck in Michigan and I have failed at google-ing this chaos.

PS. Keep me updated if there is an exact date for this redo trial, I honestly might just come down and wear my terrible, horrible, no good, very bad, shirt. <<"he gave up his daughter instead of explaining he was "smoking a cigar and getting a paper". He doesnt smoke, and had no means for fire. COINKY DINK?>>

A retrial starts from scratch. I bet he doesn't testify next trial. The burden of proof is still on that ADA and I thought she was incompetent.

dgfred
08-09-2011, 12:11 PM
It starts from scratch but evidence is evidence whether used in the first trial or not IMO. I think he might testify again thinking it worked in the first trial... being he pulled No Coincidence's blanket over the jurors eyes :maddening: .

MyBelle
08-09-2011, 03:47 PM
It starts from scratch but evidence is evidence whether used in the first trial or not IMO. I think he might testify again thinking it worked in the first trial... being he pulled No Coincidence's blanket over the jurors eyes :maddening: .

I don't blame this one on the jury. Sorry.

dgfred
08-09-2011, 04:21 PM
Oh I blame the jury, HIM, and the prosecution for not presenting the case to prove guilt. Alot of blame to go around IMO.

No Coincidence
08-12-2011, 11:12 AM
Oh I blame the jury, HIM, and the prosecution for not presenting the case to prove guilt. Alot of blame to go around IMO.

DG, I totally agree with you. It's not any one person/peoples fault. Where I fault the jury is for expecting a bow on the package like in CSI shows. There aren't always fingerprints,hairs, and video footage showing the incident. Its kind of up to common sense and a good thorough view of normalcy to decide how reasonable it is for set events to occur/not occur.

He was seen leaving the hotel and never coming back in because the cameras were moved for the first time in TWELVE YEARS! He is an absolute complete and udder slimeball. For the jury to believe him when he said he was smoking is asinine, especially after what the prosecution presented as MORE than enough evidence to ruin his credibility and integrity as a person.

I understand they have to prove he went home, but when the jury displays that they do not think it's proven beyond a reasonable doubt they are showing that they put more faith in the word of JY than in the gas station attendant. HONESTLY, who has more of a reason to lie?! She does not benefit either way, and in fact it would do her quite a disservice to have to testify, be questioned, miss work and probably pay. Common sense is literally null and void in court any more.

It just is not possible to prove rationality around a circumstance, it is something that it takes critical thinkers to really delve into and analyze on their own. If this case was a rope, the gas mileage would be a thread breaking- but it doesn't make all the other threads of MURDER snap too. The burden of proof that the pros hold is a strand short, but still a rope. Given that he could have driven anywhere, gotten gas anywhere, had it with him, met someone, any number of things, leaves possibility, not proof 100%, but combined with the rest its beyond a reasonable doubt. Just because they really fudged up that aspect by avoiding/omitting doesn't cut the rope in 2.

ADA was bad in delivery and connecting the dots, and I really don't know how MF and LF can forgive them for not really banging on certain parts of the drum. Also, some evidence wasn't explicitly there, such as finger prints, because it was his own house, wife, kid, dog, stuff, they were everywhere. Truthfully, the lack of no other prints wasn't emphasized enough, and that's where the prosecution's delivery faltered. I wish they would walk into the house of a random number of people and test a room for hairs/prints/ miscellaneous dna evidence of humans being there. It'd be interesting to know how many unknown hairs there were in comparison to unknown prints. Hairs can transfer from anywhere. If that isn't obvious enough, then make it obvious. Combine these missing lines between the dots with a CSI skewed perception of what guilty looks like, and we have a hung jury.

No Coincidence
08-12-2011, 11:41 AM
I don't blame this one on the jury. Sorry.

I don't blame the jury entirely, BH is a mess, but see below if you think they honestly applied reasonable doubt appropriately.

Definition of COMMON SENSE (Merriam Webster Dictionary)
Sound and prudent judgment based on a simple perception of the situation or facts.


“It is a thousand times better to have common sense without education than to have education without common sense.”
~Robert Green Ingersoll

“One pound of learning requires ten pounds of common sense to apply it.”
~Persian Proverb quotes

tarheel8600
08-12-2011, 07:06 PM
Just an update here in Brevard. There have been no sightings of JY since being bonded out. That's probably because he and his family know that people here believe he is guilty as he!!.

And I do blame the jury. There is no way to reasonably explain his leaving the hotel in clothing that was never recovered, security camera unplugged, security camera plugged back in by maintenance and then moved, and no keycard recording of his re-entering his hotel room. Really?? All of this happens on the one night in his life that his wife is murdered?? IMHO, I think there were 8 idiots on the jury.

MyBelle
08-15-2011, 03:46 AM
Just an update here in Brevard. There have been no sightings of JY since being bonded out. That's probably because he and his family know that people here believe he is guilty as he!!.

And I do blame the jury. There is no way to reasonably explain his leaving the hotel in clothing that was never recovered, security camera unplugged, security camera plugged back in by maintenance and then moved, and no keycard recording of his re-entering his hotel room. Really?? All of this happens on the one night in his life that his wife is murdered?? IMHO, I think there were 8 idiots on the jury.

I have family (sis+) in Brevard and they don't agree with you that Jason is guilty. Jason is there according to them and has been seen all around town and many folks like him and his family. Plus, the testimony was that the hotel camera was plugged back in and there are no missing clothes and that fits with the majority of not guilty verdict.

Please don't trash the jury and call them idiots just because they don't see it the same way you do. These trials are complicated. All the jury bashing is getting carried away imo.

otto
08-15-2011, 04:01 AM
I have family (sis+) in Brevard and they don't agree with you that Jason is guilty. Jason is there according to them and has been seen all around town and many folks like him and his family. Plus, the testimony was that the hotel camera was plugged back in and there are no missing clothes and that fits with the majority of not guilty verdict.

Please don't trash the jury and call them idiots just because they don't see it the same way you do. These trials are complicated. All the jury bashing is getting carried away imo.

I haven't caught up with the thread yet, but the jury is the selected peer group that makes a decision. I have some serious reservations about what happened recently in Florida, but the trial of Jason Young was nothing like that. There were some serious questions about the gas station witness, the mileage that he apparently had, gas purchases and who was seen at the house in the morning after the murder ... there was some arm waving by the prosecution during his trial and most importantly, when the prosecutor had a chance to cross examine the accused, the prosecutor said that she didn't want to ask him questions because she would only be giving him an opportunity to tell more lies. That was about the strangest remark to pop out of a prosecutor's mouth because revealing the lies is her job .. if they were lies, was she not able to reveal that, or what? Why was the prosecutor, in this case, basing the case on the fact that he wouldn't speak and when she had the opportunity to ask him anything she wanted under oath, she crumbled because she couldn't expose his lies? It's almost absurd.

otto
08-15-2011, 04:12 AM
Just an update here in Brevard. There have been no sightings of JY since being bonded out. That's probably because he and his family know that people here believe he is guilty as he!!.

And I do blame the jury. There is no way to reasonably explain his leaving the hotel in clothing that was never recovered, security camera unplugged, security camera plugged back in by maintenance and then moved, and no keycard recording of his re-entering his hotel room. Really?? All of this happens on the one night in his life that his wife is murdered?? IMHO, I think there were 8 idiots on the jury.

If he stepped out to smoke a cigar and left his hotel door propped open, and the outsie door propped with a branch, then there would be no keycard recording. Also, the doors weren't functioning properly so no keycard was needed for the outside door. The cameras were tampered with, but it had happened before.

He went to his room, changed, went to the front desk, grabbed a newspaper and a water bottle, went out for a smoke, went back to his room, came down around 6:30 AM, got lost on the way to an appointment, phoned mom about 37 times and then fell to his knees when he was told about the murder. I think the mistake was that he said something about his son first ... not his wife. He can always have more children with his wife, so presumably that should be the more important person to him. Instead, during trial, we heard that he was in the recliner babbling about his unborn son ... that doesn't make sense to me.

otto
08-15-2011, 04:15 AM
I don't blame the jury entirely, BH is a mess, but see below if you think they honestly applied reasonable doubt appropriately.

Definition of COMMON SENSE (Merriam Webster Dictionary)
Sound and prudent judgment based on a simple perception of the situation or facts.


“It is a thousand times better to have common sense without education than to have education without common sense.”
~Robert Green Ingersoll

“One pound of learning requires ten pounds of common sense to apply it.”
~Persian Proverb quotes

The Jury was Spot On! There were serious weaknesses in the prosecution's case which became painfully apparent when the prosecution had an opportunity to cross examine Jason Young under oath in the courtroom and they stepped down. It is an absolute gift to a confident prosecution to have a suspect under oath, but what we saw was a floundering prosecution that caved and backed down. What's a jury supposed to think? I would think that the case was built on toothpicks.

otto
08-15-2011, 04:21 AM
The more I look through the thread, the more I see that the jury is being attacked for their verdict. In the Brad Cooper case, the jury was Spot On and in this case, the jury pool was the same. How is it possible that the peer group could be Spot On one day, and be completely whacked the next? I don't believe it. The Cooper case was strong, this case was weak. It has nothing to do with the jury, and the case has nothing in common with the Anthony case - simply because the lawyers in NC observed the rules of law. It's hard to accept that the case was weak, but it was. There were holes all over the place and when the defense lawyers closed with the mileage calculations, they were right.

otto
08-15-2011, 04:24 AM
It starts from scratch but evidence is evidence whether used in the first trial or not IMO. I think he might testify again thinking it worked in the first trial... being he pulled No Coincidence's blanket over the jurors eyes :maddening: .

I doubt he'll testify at a second trial. The first trial was based on the claim that Jason wouldn't talk ... so he talked. In the next trial it would be wise not to mention the fact that he wouldn't talk as implicating guilt ... so talking wouldn't be to his benefit.

MyBelle
08-15-2011, 03:47 PM
The more I look through the thread, the more I see that the jury is being attacked for their verdict. In the Brad Cooper case, the jury was Spot On and in this case, the jury pool was the same. How is it possible that the peer group could be Spot On one day, and be completely whacked the next? I don't believe it. The Cooper case was strong, this case was weak. It has nothing to do with the jury, and the case has nothing in common with the Anthony case - simply because the lawyers in NC observed the rules of law. It's hard to accept that the case was weak, but it was. There were holes all over the place and when the defense lawyers closed with the mileage calculations, they were right.

I agree with you about the jury-bashing on this case. It was a very weak case to begin with and the jury could not ignore those mileage calculations no matter how big a jerk he was to his wife. I think it would have been easy to convict him if he didn't have the out-of-town alibi.

Just the Fax
08-15-2011, 04:46 PM
I doubt he'll testify at a second trial. The first trial was based on the claim that Jason wouldn't talk ... so he talked. In the next trial it would be wise not to mention the fact that he wouldn't talk as implicating guilt ... so talking wouldn't be to his benefit.

Well then, how will jury hear about going out to 'smoke a cigar' and read the USA Today?
The explanation about the HP shoes going to goodwill?
The reason he parked on the side of the building, instead of in front?
Why the net searches for "head trauma knockout"?

Just like round 1, he has to testify, imo.

Just the Fax
08-15-2011, 04:50 PM
I agree with you about the jury-bashing on this case. It was a very weak case to begin with and the jury could not ignore those mileage calculations no matter how big a jerk he was to his wife. I think it would have been easy to convict him if he didn't have the out-of-town alibi.

IMO, the case was very strong....problem is the state presented a very weak case. Hopefully, they learned from their many mistakes, received some good tips from other lawyers and will slam dunk trial 2.

BTW, those mileage calculations could be easily explained.
The state just dropped the ball.

Just the Fax
08-15-2011, 04:52 PM
The more I look through the thread, the more I see that the jury is being attacked for their verdict. In the Brad Cooper case, the jury was Spot On and in this case, the jury pool was the same. How is it possible that the peer group could be Spot On one day, and be completely whacked the next? I don't believe it. The Cooper case was strong, this case was weak. It has nothing to do with the jury, and the case has nothing in common with the Anthony case - simply because the lawyers in NC observed the rules of law. It's hard to accept that the case was weak, but it was. There were holes all over the place and when the defense lawyers closed with the mileage calculations, they were right.

Are you the same otto from the Cooper case :waitasec:

Madeleine74
08-15-2011, 05:08 PM
LOL JTF.

The case is and can be a strong one, IMHO. But in the hands of stuttering, bumbling "ummm...umm...um" ADA, and her reticence for righteous confrontation, the <modsnip> gets the upper hand.

And don't even get me started on them leaving out so many items of evidence during their direct. There's more there than they presented!


(note to mods: 'slayer' is the legal term given to Jason Young after he lost the wrongful death suit in 2009)

tarheel8600
08-15-2011, 05:50 PM
I have family (sis+) in Brevard and they don't agree with you that Jason is guilty. Jason is there according to them and has been seen all around town and many folks like him and his family. Plus, the testimony was that the hotel camera was plugged back in and there are no missing clothes and that fits with the majority of not guilty verdict.

Please don't trash the jury and call them idiots just because they don't see it the same way you do. These trials are complicated. All the jury bashing is getting carried away imo.


How does the testimony that the hotel camera was plugged back in fit with a not guilty verdict? I think it implies guilt because it was unplugged in the first place. The unplugging of a hotel security camera doesn't happen to be a common occurrence according to the hotel staff. Also, after it was plugged back in, it was then tilted up by someone who REALLY must not have wanted to be seen on a camera. Wonder who was staying at the HI that night who didn't want to be seen?? Did another guest's spouse get murdered that night??

As far as the clothes are concerned, the shirt he was seen wearing in the hotel video surveillance around midnight was NOT in his luggage or his vehicle when he returned to Raleigh. Where did it go??

Maybe I shouldn't have called the 8 jurors idiots. It wasn't nice, and the prosecution certainly did not put on a stellar performance during the trial. Sorry if I offended anyone.

I do believe that JY is guilty, and I haven't talked with anyone here who feels differently. If he's been seen all around town, he's done a really good job of keeping it quiet. But then again, he's really good at keeping quiet...........

borndem
08-15-2011, 06:59 PM
LOL JTF.

The case is and can be a strong one, IMHO. But in the hands of stuttering, bumbling "ummm...umm...um" ADA, and her reticence for righteous confrontation, the <modsnip> gets the upper hand.

And don't even get me started on them leaving out so many items of evidence during their direct. There's more there than they presented!


(note to mods: 'slayer' is the legal term given to Jason Young after he lost the wrongful death suit in 2009)

Yessirino, Mad74! Where were the "What about ....." 's in the Young :chicken:x-exam? The missing clothes/shoes he wore, his bruised and blistered feet, her purse left on the floor in the kitchen, the dog vs. the two "robbers," his not returning the calls from MIL the day after with a precious child & a pregnant wife & her not answering his calls that am, no forced entry w/Michelle there by herself with a child at night not locking everything down, taking the time to overkill her but only taking a few items, and so on.......:waitasec:.......:anguish:...http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon8.gif...:banghead:

Talk about ahh-er-umming... I'll wager that JLY :loser:would've outdone even BH in his er-umms. :eek: Could he be that glib-ad-lib? .:liar:.......(Talk about he!! freezing over, but possible nevertheless, IMO).

:jester::princess:...Fairyland scenario: Boz on the firing line with Mr. Young. :tears:

MyBelle
08-16-2011, 04:00 PM
How does the testimony that the hotel camera was plugged back in fit with a not guilty verdict? I think it implies guilt because it was unplugged in the first place. The unplugging of a hotel security camera doesn't happen to be a common occurrence according to the hotel staff. Also, after it was plugged back in, it was then tilted up by someone who REALLY must not have wanted to be seen on a camera. Wonder who was staying at the HI that night who didn't want to be seen?? Did another guest's spouse get murdered that night??

As far as the clothes are concerned, the shirt he was seen wearing in the hotel video surveillance around midnight was NOT in his luggage or his vehicle when he returned to Raleigh. Where did it go??

Maybe I shouldn't have called the 8 jurors idiots. It wasn't nice, and the prosecution certainly did not put on a stellar performance during the trial. Sorry if I offended anyone.

I do believe that JY is guilty, and I haven't talked with anyone here who feels differently. If he's been seen all around town, he's done a really good job of keeping it quiet. But then again, he's really good at keeping quiet...........

an unplugged camera in a hotel hours away isn't proof of murder. It was plugged back in before Young could have returned from Raleigh. Could have been unplugged for any number of reasons such as staff wanting a smoke break or somebody sneaking in unregistered guests. The manager testified it happened before.

The prosecution can't prove Young returned to Raleigh. The shirt he wore isn't important if they can't prove he returned and they didn't.

MyBelle
08-16-2011, 04:08 PM
Well then, how will jury hear about going out to 'smoke a cigar' and read the USA Today?
The explanation about the HP shoes going to goodwill?
The reason he parked on the side of the building, instead of in front?
Why the net searches for "head trauma knockout"?

Just like round 1, he has to testify, imo.

His lawyer is too smart to let him testify again. The burden is still on the state to prove he returned to Raleigh. They didn't accomplish that the first time around and I think they'll fail in round two.

Madeleine74
08-16-2011, 04:59 PM
The camera wasn't just unplugged and then plugged back in again. BTW, testimony was that the camera had not been tampered with in many years, so the fact that it happened on this very night, the night of MY's murder, has got to make you scratch your head. By itself it isn't proof of a murder....it's a link in the chain of circumstantial evidence. You have to wonder who, exactly, for the first time in many years would want/need to not be seen leaving thru that very door around midnight? And then who, exactly, would not want to be seen again coming thru that door somewhere around 6:30am?

Also, about 20 to 30 min after the camera had been plugged in and reset by maintenance, *someone* then pushed the camera up towards the ceiling. It wasn't the maint. guy. The camera was reset around 5:50am and by 6:30am that camera was again moved so whoever was coming in would not be seen.

Coincidence or something else altogether?

borndem
08-16-2011, 05:45 PM
The camera wasn't just unplugged and then plugged back in again. BTW, testimony was that the camera had not been tampered with in many years, so the fact that it happened on this very night, the night of MY's murder, has got to make you scratch your head. By itself it isn't proof of a murder....it's a link in the chain of circumstantial evidence. You have to wonder who, exactly, for the first time in many years would want/need to not be seen leaving thru that very door around midnight? And then who, exactly, would not want to be seen again coming thru that door somewhere around 6:30am?

Also, about 20 to 30 min after the camera had been plugged in and reset by maintenance, *someone* then pushed the camera up towards the ceiling. It wasn't the maint. guy. The camera was reset around 5:50am and by 6:30am that camera was again moved so whoever was coming in would not be seen.

Coincidence or something else altogether?

Dear Wake County:

I understand that the ADAs are still trying to try the Young case and are having a hard time understanding why they failed the first time around. It seems to me that the prosecutors need a first-class first-chair.

I know of a cracker-jack individual who has been involved in many Wake County first-degree murder trials for the last several years. In fact, she was quite astute in the recent Cooper conviction. She had followed the case from the start and showed amazing instinct and legal and technical expertise. I sincerely and desperately recommend this feisty feline-like formidable female fire-brand to lead the prosecution's case. Again, this is a case she has followed from its first day.

Most importantly, her speech is flawless -- she doesn't know the cloying, disturbing, lost-sounding, molto lento, wandering and drive-a-jury-crazy syllables, "umm," "er," or "ahh" which put the first Young trial in the shi-, um, er, ahh, (now isn't that absolutely irritating?) trash-can.

Her name is Madeline74 and she may agree to do it pro bono if the wine glass on the ADA table is always full of her favorite flavor. A real deal, this one.

Please respond to her at Websleths. You know how to find us.

Sincerely,
borndem

jerseygirl48
08-16-2011, 07:04 PM
... Also, about 20 to 30 min after the camera had been plugged in and reset by maintenance, *someone* then pushed the camera up towards the ceiling. It wasn't the maint. guy. The camera was reset around 5:50am and by 6:30am that camera was again moved so whoever was coming in would not be seen.

Coincidence or something else altogether?

Hi, I'm a relative newbie to this case (followed it, but not as closely as I would have liked). I'm really confused about the camera/exit door part of things. I remember watching the testimony of the night manager when he said he pulled the rock out of the door. Wasn't that when he first discovered that the camera had been unplugged? What am I missing in the sequence of events:

#1) Can completely believe that JY unplugged the camera upon exit and put the rock in the door.
#2) Night manager notices the camera is not working.
#3) Night manager investigates .... finds rock in door ... removes rock.
#4) Night manager goes with maintenance man to plug the camera back in.
#5) JY returns and turns the camera away so he can get back upstairs without being seen ??

I must have something wrong in the sequence -- otherwise, how did JY get back in (once the rock was removed) and turn the camera without being seen on camera. Wouldn't the door have been locked? Even if unlocked, didn't the camera face the door and therefore would have caught him coming back in once it was plugged back in?

Thanks in advance if someone can straighten me out on this!

Madeleine74
08-16-2011, 07:18 PM
SPEWWWW @ Borndem.

AS IF!

Besides, JTF is the resident expert on the Young case, so he should have a seat at the DA's table.

Madeleine74
08-16-2011, 07:20 PM
jerseygirl,

Apparently that backdoor was either unlocked by the time he came back or the key card mechanism didn't work...the perp got lucky, as he did in so many aspects of this case, and he was able to open the door and walk in. By walking in from outside, he was in back of the camera and he jumped up and moved the camera so it then pointed up to the ceiling. That allowed him to enter the stairwell without being detected and walk up to his room on the 4th floor.

jerseygirl48
08-16-2011, 08:26 PM
jerseygirl,

Apparently that backdoor was either unlocked by the time he came back or the key card mechanism didn't work...the perp got lucky, as he did in so many aspects of this case, and he was able to open the door and walk in. By walking in from outside, he was in back of the camera and he jumped up and moved the camera so it then pointed up to the ceiling. That allowed him to enter the stairwell without being detected and walk up to his room on the 4th floor.

Thanks Madeleine. I'm still confused. I thought that particular door didn't have a key card opening and remained locked (from the outside) at all times. Thought I heard that there were two doors right next to each other -- one, the stairs/fire exit (with no keycard) and one that required a keycard after hours and put one squarely in the eye of a camera (same camera where he's seen leaving to go to the car).

I also thought the camera in the stairs faced the door -- are you saying it faced upward (toward the stairs)? Was he seen coming down those stairs at any point? I'm trying to understand when/how he had the opportunity to unplug it. In my mind, I thought he went down the stairs -- the camera pointed toward the door --- and he unplugged the camera to ensure he wasn't seen exiting the building.

Believe me -- I don't believe all the "coincidences" that happened that night. I just need to fully understand the door/camera side of things to remove all of my reasonable doubt!! :)

Madeleine74
08-16-2011, 08:48 PM
There was another door, a glass door next to the steel door. That door is the one that was either unlocked or the key card reader didn't work (I forget which). So he apparently came in through that regular glass door, which by 6:30am was unlocked. The camera is at that door (not the steel door), and normally pointed down the hall. Coming in, he would have been behind the camera.

borndem
08-16-2011, 09:23 PM
SPEWWWW @ Borndem.

AS IF!

Besides, JTF is the resident expert on the Young case, so he should have a seat at the DA's table.


:floorlaugh:

Dayam -- I can never git it ri-i-i-ight the first time... http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon11.gif

Yes, you're the one who's correct -- I know the Young case is his passion as Cooper was yours, as mine is Taft (when it happens...or not...).

Again, I defer to your wisdom on this one as well. But you WOULD be GOOD, my WS friend.

Oohh, couldn't you just imagine JTF sitting at that table, looking into JLY's :loser:little beady eyes and firing a few at him? Oh, better than chocolate!!http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon10.gif

MyBelle
08-17-2011, 12:15 AM
The camera wasn't just unplugged and then plugged back in again. BTW, testimony was that the camera had not been tampered with in many years, so the fact that it happened on this very night, the night of MY's murder, has got to make you scratch your head. By itself it isn't proof of a murder....it's a link in the chain of circumstantial evidence. You have to wonder who, exactly, for the first time in many years would want/need to not be seen leaving thru that very door around midnight? And then who, exactly, would not want to be seen again coming thru that door somewhere around 6:30am?

Also, about 20 to 30 min after the camera had been plugged in and reset by maintenance, *someone* then pushed the camera up towards the ceiling. It wasn't the maint. guy. The camera was reset around 5:50am and by 6:30am that camera was again moved so whoever was coming in would not be seen.

Coincidence or something else altogether?

Doesn't matter because the prints lifted from the camera did not belong to Jason Young. The camera really became unimportant the moment the night clerk testified he removed the rock from the door at a time that was before Young could have returned from Raleigh.

Opportunity wasn't proved. His return would have required him to enter through a regular exit door and all were covered by working security cameras. The only way Young could have killed his wife is if he had someone else do it while he was at the hotel.

Madeleine74
08-17-2011, 12:40 AM
How do you know the perp wasn't wearing gloves when the camera was unplugged or moved?

His prints not being on the camera does not prove he didn't move the camera, one can only say that there was no physical evidence found that proved he touched that camera. But there is some DNA linking him to the rock that was in the door. Not a definitive match, no, but 3 of his DNA markers were found on that rock.

It comes down to how much coincidence can there be before one begins to think "hey, that's a lot of coincidences in one night/morning, the very night that guy's pregnant wife is brutally murdered."

No Coincidence
08-17-2011, 03:05 AM
Doesn't matter because the prints lifted from the camera did not belong to Jason Young. The camera really became unimportant the moment the night clerk testified he removed the rock from the door at a time that was before Young could have returned from Raleigh.

Opportunity wasn't proved. His return would have required him to enter through a regular exit door and all were covered by working security cameras. The only way Young could have killed his wife is if he had someone else do it while he was at the hotel.

Ohhh, ok, MyBelle. Now that you've said that I think its true. Not. The door he used was unlocked, when he came back in, and tilted the camera up in that stairwell. Youre absolutely right that the prints lifted were not conclusive, but I am afraid you are sadly mistaken when you are evaluating each piece of evidence individually. If anything else he said (or was presented) actually suggested he was in the hotel all night, there might be some substance in your argument. Unfortunately, he was recognized by a clerk between home and the hotel in the middle of the night. Also, there is absolutely no video footage of him leaving the hotel in the morning after the event. He said he ate breakfast there.... I'm sorry, I must have missed the part where he actually was ANYWHERE he said he was. Forgive me for looking at the night as a whole, I'd hate to offend anyone for doing exactly what the judge said should be done when analyzing the evidence.

No Coincidence
08-17-2011, 03:31 AM
Thanks Madeleine. I'm still confused. I thought that particular door didn't have a key card opening and remained locked (from the outside) at all times. Thought I heard that there were two doors right next to each other -- one, the stairs/fire exit (with no keycard) and one that required a keycard after hours and put one squarely in the eye of a camera (same camera where he's seen leaving to go to the car).

I also thought the camera in the stairs faced the door -- are you saying it faced upward (toward the stairs)? Was he seen coming down those stairs at any point? I'm trying to understand when/how he had the opportunity to unplug it. In my mind, I thought he went down the stairs -- the camera pointed toward the door --- and he unplugged the camera to ensure he wasn't seen exiting the building.

Believe me -- I don't believe all the "coincidences" that happened that night. I just need to fully understand the door/camera side of things to remove all of my reasonable doubt!! :)

JLY had 2 doors at the end of the stairwell. Door 1 was a glass, often used, regular entrance hotel door. It would have needed a keycard, but maintenance, the hotel sign, and office staff testified that this door automatically unlocked at 6am, and thus would not have required a keycard to enter. The 2nd door was the all steel door to the right of the glass door. This entered directly into the stairwell. My understanding is that the camera was ABOVE the glass door, facing the hallway. I mistook the angle when I first heard the evidence, that the camera was pointed AT the door. This is not the case, from what I have deduced.

The reason why he was even on the camera having to explain his trip to the desk was a LAST MINUTE ERROR on his part. He got turned around and exited from the wrong stairwell (there were 2, one on each side of the hotel), making it absolutely necessary to come up with an alibi and ask for the newspaper. This is because the unplugged camera was on the opposite side so he had now been filmed in a place he thought he already took care of. Had he come down the correct stairwell he would have exited through the steel door and gotten into his car, no hiccups.

When he came down the wrong stairwell, he was forced to make contact with the front desk, and proceed on to the correct stairwell. When he got into the correctly formatted stairwell, he put the rock in the door and moved on with his night. When he got back from the trip home he noticed the camera had gotten plugged back on (Maintenance man) and he tilted it up. Presumably so he would not be on film coming back in, and also he could tell that someone noticed he had unplugged the camera... so he didnt want to unplug it again and create a ruckus.

I hope this helps. Also, here is the original thread in which we all discussed the camera/view/leaving hotel incident in great detail.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=139531&highlight=plugged+unplugged+camera&page=12

jerseygirl48
08-17-2011, 05:35 AM
Thanks no coincidences. Much clearer in my head now. I was missing the fact that there would have been a way into the staircase from the first floor, i.e., he entered through the side glass doors (likely unlocked at that time) and then slipped into the staircase (missing the first floor hallway camera), pushed the camera up, etc.

Were there cameras in the fourth floor hallways that should have showed him coming or going?

I wonder if any of the jurors grappled with the same questions. Perhaps the Prosecution needs to outline how he could have missed the cameras, along with mileage/gas explanation, in their closing arguments in October.

Just the Fax
08-17-2011, 07:30 AM
Thanks no coincidences. Much clearer in my head now. I was missing the fact that there would have been a way into the staircase from the first floor, i.e., he entered through the side glass doors (likely unlocked at that time) and then slipped into the staircase (missing the first floor hallway camera), pushed the camera up, etc.

Were there cameras in the fourth floor hallways that should have showed him coming or going?

I wonder if any of the jurors grappled with the same questions. Perhaps the Prosecution needs to outline how he could have missed the cameras, along with mileage/gas explanation, in their closing arguments in October.

Excellent question jerseygirl!
Yes, this is the actual camera aiming at the elevator of the 4th floor. Perhaps that is why he used the east stairwell at midnight, as he knew that 4th floor hall camera would catch him in the hall (tamper-proof).

I guess he did not notice the first floor camera above the glass exit door?

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s216/alive695/cameraonupperfloors.jpg

Just the Fax
08-17-2011, 07:43 AM
His lawyer is too smart to let him testify again. The burden is still on the state to prove he returned to Raleigh. They didn't accomplish that the first time around and I think they'll fail in round two.

JLY will do what he wants....always has, always will.

Just the Fax
08-17-2011, 07:48 AM
an unplugged camera in a hotel hours away isn't proof of murder. It was plugged back in before Young could have returned from Raleigh. Could have been unplugged for any number of reasons such as staff wanting a smoke break or somebody sneaking in unregistered guests. The manager testified it happened before.

The prosecution can't prove Young returned to Raleigh. The shirt he wore isn't important if they can't prove he returned and they didn't.

Yes they did.
The proved a pair of HP shoes he owned were in blood at the scene (missing)

They proved a witness saw his SUV and identified his face at 5:30AM buying gas, 45 minutes south of his hotel.

They proved the NY delivery girl saw a light colored SUV parked at the home around 3:30AM

They proved the shirt he was seen wearing at 12AM (2 1/2 hours before the murder) was missing the next day.

No Coincidence
08-17-2011, 11:07 AM
Originally Posted by MyBelle View Post
an unplugged camera in a hotel hours away isn't proof of murder. It was plugged back in before Young could have returned from Raleigh. Could have been unplugged for any number of reasons such as staff wanting a smoke break or somebody sneaking in unregistered guests. The manager testified it happened before.

The prosecution can't prove Young returned to Raleigh. The shirt he wore isn't important if they can't prove he returned and they didn't.

What you aren't understanding MyBelle, is that the prosecution is using the shirt as part of the proof, and youre saying the case has to be proven first for it to have significance. You are missing a couple of very very important aspects: The understanding to look at the evidence as a whole and not individual "one offs", and the ability to infer ( to derive logical conclusions from premises known, or assumed to be true). A valid form with true premises will always have a true conclusion.

No Coincidence
08-17-2011, 11:24 AM
Nice work, JTF.

There was absolutey no motive for anyone else aside from JLY, as the purse was left untouched on the kitchen floor.

Also, they did not find a cutter, any trace of cigars, or a lighter at the scene of him "smoking a cigar", or in his belongings. Now I understand this isn't his job to prove, but lack of evidence is evidence- and that is clear right here.

Gracie had absolutely no reason or motive to lie about the night she saw Jason Young. She is a gas station attendant with a memory of people who disrespect her. I wonder if they dusted the gas pump for prints at all when Gracie came forward... its a long shot I'm sure but wouldn't that have been a nice cushion.

No one leaves their hotel rooms propped open with valuables inside (ie: laptop) while they go outside and smoke and read the paper. It just doesnt make any sense. Especially since his reasoning for staying quite a distance from the meeting the next morning was that his plan was to drive until he was exhausted and couldn't drive any further. Not that doesnt sound like somebody who would stay up to read and smoke, does it? If he had that energy, he would have just driven to his ultimate destination! This is asinine.

Lets mention that he wouldn't have known the door was going to stay propped open until after he walked out--- making it completely irrational for him to have walked out without his key. I'm guessing (using a few brain cells and common sense) that there wasn't a sign on the door that said, "This door is weird and doesnt lock when it's closed. I hope you enjoy your very unsafe and unsecure stay."

Oh, and one last thing- He gave up 15 Mil and custody of his daughter to keep from incriminating himself. I understand that it is ones own right not to testify against oneself, but IMO he lost every ounce of self worth, respect, integrity, and validity the day he gave up Cassidy. How can anyone listen to anything that comes out of his mouth after the prosecution team proved his word is worth less than sand.

icefun
08-17-2011, 11:39 AM
you go girl...........they key here is they need to find a jury that knows that real life isn't CSI TV.....If the courts had to have video/computer evidence on every crime.....there wouldn't be any criminals - they would just all walk free.

So, North Carolinian's...let's grow a brain and some common sense and get this monster behind bars for all our sakes.

No Coincidence
08-17-2011, 12:51 PM
you go girl...........they key here is they need to find a jury that knows that real life isn't CSI TV.....If the courts had to have video/computer evidence on every crime.....there wouldn't be any criminals - they would just all walk free.

So, North Carolinian's...let's grow a brain and some common sense and get this monster behind bars for all our sakes.

#1- Jury with common sense and inference skills.
#2- Prosecution that can put together a sentence. Specifically without "um and uhhh" in it. Must think critically and quickly.
#3- JTF replaces all members of prosecution team.

borndem
08-17-2011, 01:02 PM
How do you know the perp wasn't wearing gloves when the camera was unplugged or moved?

His prints not being on the camera does not prove he didn't move the camera, one can only say that there was no physical evidence found that proved he touched that camera. But there is some DNA linking him to the rock that was in the door. Not a definitive match, no, but 3 of his DNA markers were found on that rock.

It comes down to how much coincidence can there be before one begins to think "hey, that's a lot of coincidences in one night/morning, the very night that guy's pregnant wife is brutally murdered."

BBM - Indeed, Mad74.

He invented (while his pants were on fire up there on the stand, BTW) the use of the stick in the door instead of the rock simply (and weakly, IMO) because of those 3 markers on that rock. :liar:

And, of course, it was not pointed out, nor shown, that there was not a shrub close enuff for him to reach for a stick as a prop while holding the door open ... <sigh> ... Just like JTF's snapshot of the door and the shrubs did show. I remember it... Too bad the prosecutors/detectives didn't have that shot. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon9.gif

borndem
08-17-2011, 01:10 PM
JLY had 2 doors at the end of the stairwell. Door 1 was a glass, often used, regular entrance hotel door. It would have needed a keycard, but maintenance, the hotel sign, and office staff testified that this door automatically unlocked at 6am, and thus would not have required a keycard to enter. The 2nd door was the all steel door to the right of the glass door. This entered directly into the stairwell. My understanding is that the camera was ABOVE the glass door, facing the hallway. I mistook the angle when I first heard the evidence, that the camera was pointed AT the door. This is not the case, from what I have deduced.

The reason why he was even on the camera having to explain his trip to the desk was a LAST MINUTE ERROR on his part. He got turned around and exited from the wrong stairwell (there were 2, one on each side of the hotel), making it absolutely necessary to come up with an alibi and ask for the newspaper. This is because the unplugged camera was on the opposite side so he had now been filmed in a place he thought he already took care of. Had he come down the correct stairwell he would have exited through the steel door and gotten into his car, no hiccups.

When he came down the wrong stairwell, he was forced to make contact with the front desk, and proceed on to the correct stairwell. When he got into the correctly formatted stairwell, he put the rock in the door and moved on with his night. When he got back from the trip home he noticed the camera had gotten plugged back on (Maintenance man) and he tilted it up. Presumably so he would not be on film coming back in, and also he could tell that someone noticed he had unplugged the camera... so he didnt want to unplug it again and create a ruckus.

I hope this helps. Also, here is the original thread in which we all discussed the camera/view/leaving hotel incident in great detail.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=139531&highlight=plugged+unplugged+camera&page=12


:goodpost:

jerseygirl48
08-17-2011, 07:25 PM
You guys rock! Sure hope the prosecution can explain the "camera situations" the same way you do!

One more question. Someone upthread said he gave up 1.5Mil? What's that all about? Insurance he didn't claim or something???

borndem
08-17-2011, 07:31 PM
#1- Jury with common sense and inference skills.
#2- Prosecution that can put together a sentence. Specifically without "um and uhhh" in it. Must think critically and quickly.
#3- JTF replaces all members of prosecution team.

AMEN to that!!

tarheel8600
08-17-2011, 08:36 PM
You guys rock! Sure hope the prosecution can explain the "camera situations" the same way you do!

One more question. Someone upthread said he gave up 1.5Mil? What's that all about? Insurance he didn't claim or something???

No Coincidence posted that JY gave up 15(fifteen)Mil and his daughter. He was referring to the WDS that Linda and Meredith Fisher filed against JY. He didn't show up in court to defend himself so he could avoid being deposed. The North Carolina judicial system officially named JY the "slayer" of MY, and the Fishers were awarded this amount. This paved the way for Meredith to file for visitation rights to see Cassidy. A couple of weeks later, JY voluntarily gave up primary custody of his daughter to again avoid being deposed. Meredith didn't go into this thinking she would get custody of Cassidy, but she did.

Even before the WDS, JY never filed for Michelle's life insurance of 1Mil because he would have had to answer questions to do that. JY no hable ingles at the time, apparently.... What parent who faced the responsibility of raising a young child alone would willingly give up that much financial security? Only a parent who had something to hide, I believe, would do that. It suggests a consciousness of guilt. It's not like JY was ever described as an unselfish person. Everything I heard about him from testimony indicates he was an extremely self-absorbed man - having to be center-of-attention even if he had to do "tricks" in front of others to get that attention. He hesitated none to use any woman he could for his own pleasure. He cared nothing for his wife or the other women - only for himself was JY ever concerned.

Avoidance was this slayer's primary defense mechanism until he took the stand at trial. This is why I believe the ADAs weren't ready for him. They thought he'd never speak.

Well, he did speak. And, IMO, he will again. I just hope they're ready this time.

jerseygirl48
08-17-2011, 09:27 PM
Thanks Tarheel. I knew about the WDS and Meredith's surprise custody. I must have skipped over the part about a $15MM award. I did not know about his failure to claim $1MM life insurance. Wow .... just wow ... I couldn't agree more on the consciousness of guilt aspect.

tarheel8600
08-17-2011, 11:38 PM
Thanks Tarheel. I knew about the WDS and Meredith's surprise custody. I must have skipped over the part about a $15MM award. I did not know about his failure to claim $1MM life insurance. Wow .... just wow ... I couldn't agree more on the consciousness of guilt aspect.

You have great questions, jg48. I think your questions about the video surveillance at the HI and the positions of the cameras should be addressed at the retrial. It may clear things up for some jurors.

Until I read your recent posts, I've been perplexed at the first jury's verdict. Your questions, though, have allowed me to think about how people who didn't know much or anything about the case would've considered things. I've been aware of the case since Nov. 2006 when it was first reported. I formed my opinion of his guilt after the no-show during the WDS and custody hearings. That pretty much convinced me that JY was in "CYA" mode.

The prosecution needs to hammer home:
1. The "odd" occurrences at the HI on the night that Michelle was murdered
2. The no forced-entry into the home
3. JY's ridiculous theory that it was easier to break off a twig from a bush several feet away to keep the exit door from closing than to take his keycard with him to regain entry into the HI TWICE
4. JY's remarkable decision that it was simpler to leave the door to his room open and his valuables unsecured than to use a keycard to open the door TWICE
5. The disappearance of clothing that JY says has nothing to do with the murder
6. JY's selfish behavior, i.e. multiple affairs, changing plans at the last minute with no thought of how his wife would feel about it, his email tantrum when he had to watch his daughter while MY worked and his decision to just take Cassidy to the pool and drink beer, his hope that MM was pregnant with his child instead of her husband's child
7. JY's email to his former fiancee declaring his undying love
8. The car accident in Brevard in which JY was driving and MY was a passenger a few months before MY's death
9. JY's missing shoes
10. JY's comment to his friend that the only thing worse than being married to MY would be to be divorced from her
11. JY's comment 2 months before the murder that he was done with it (the marriage)
12. Cassidy's life was spared, yet MY was brutally beaten over 30 times
13. JY's refusal to help police to even identify what might be missing from the house (if someone were innocent, I would think that identifying missing items from the house might help that person to verify his innocence as missing items would probably show up in a pawn shop or somewhere else and lead the police down the true murderer's path)
14. JY's first-ever time he asked MF to go to his house to retrieve something for him
15. JY's claim that he was looking to buy something for his wife for their anniversary, which was over a month late
16. JY's constant use of his cell phone the day after the murder until his MIL calls 4 times starting around 1:30 pm and he refuses to answer or call her back (cell phone records show he retrieved the messages she left him and that it was urgent for him to call her back)

These are just 16 things off the top of my head that JY will never be able to overcome if the prosecution will get a backbone, show some passion, and give the taxpayers of NC what they pay for - JUSTICE. The prosecution has to make an argument that people can believe. There are too many coincidences in JY's version of events - jurors should be seen just shaking their heads at the line JY has tried to feed them.

I live in JY's hometown and my family and friends live here, too. I don't want him here because I believe he will do this again if given the opportunity. There probably has been a war going on inside JY for a long time, and on the night of MY's murder, his evil side was unleashed. Once unleashed, evil will remain unleashed.

MyBelle
08-18-2011, 01:26 AM
Yes they did.
The proved a pair of HP shoes he owned were in blood at the scene (missing)

They proved a witness saw his SUV and identified his face at 5:30AM buying gas, 45 minutes south of his hotel.

They proved the NY delivery girl saw a light colored SUV parked at the home around 3:30AM

They proved the shirt he was seen wearing at 12AM (2 1/2 hours before the murder) was missing the next day.


I watched the testimony and know they did not prove the shoes he owned were the same shoes that left the bloody print.

I didn't find the witness very credible. She seemed more than a little confused about details and the cops never did find the "regular" she claimed was also a witness.

I believed the NY delivery person when she said she saw the light-colored SUV. Jason owned a white SUV. I don't know too many folks who don't say white when they mean white.

No shirt was proved missing in any of the testimony I watched and it doesn't matter to me because I don't believe they proved he ever left the hotel premises that night at all.

They did prove the print left on the camera did not belong to Jason Young. When there is as much reasonable doubt as is in this case, no jury is going to agree to convict.

JMO.

jerseygirl48
08-18-2011, 06:35 AM
Tarheel --

I watched most of the online trial hearings shortly after the CA trial as an experiment. I was reeling from the CA verdict -- kept asking myself how the "Pinellas 12" could have missed the obvious (still struggling with that :().

I was aware of the JY trial, but didn't keep up as both trials were occurring at the same time and I was invested in the CA trial. Decided to watch the JY trial after the fact to see how I would have voted if I was a juror. I intentionally did not research here -- wanted to see only what the jurors saw.

I'm embarrassed to say that I too would have voted not guilty. For me, it was a matter of thinking, "he probably did it, but I can't put someone away for the rest of his life based on the doubts (reasonable???) I have." The items that bothered me: #1 cameras, #2 gas station witness (she came off as angry and wanting to exact revenge on SOMEONE, but was it really JY?), #3 shoes, #4 Post Office worker. I could go on, but suffice it to say the prosecution never addressed my concerns about those items.

Afterwards, I told my friends and family about the experiment and how it helped me understand what occurred in the CA trial ... how I "knew" JY was guilty, but didn't feel the prosecution proved it ... and, although I still STRONGLY disagree with the Pinellas 12, it made it a little bit easier to understand what happened in the CA case.

As much as I LOVED (and still do) the prosecution team in the CA trial, I think they (and a lot of people) shared some of the same misplaced faith as the JY prosecution team. It all seems SO OBVIOUS to those who follow the story from the beginning. Holes are not discussed -- everyone is expected to see that the signs of guilt so far outweight the doubts that there is no way they will not be swayed. In retrospect, I think both were outdone by superior closing statements by the other side. Cheney Mason presented a brilliant chart about reasonable doubt in the CA closing -- the prosecution didn't address it.

Both teams failed to address the weaknesses head-on. Jurors need to be told that is OKAY to have questions about X, Y, Z ... but still be convinced beyond reasonable doubt if A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P point to GUILT. I heard one prosecutor give an example of a puzzle -- when one or two pieces are missing, you still know it's a cat when it's done.

Anyway, thought I'd explain where I was coming from. My research here on this thread has been an attempt to heal. But now, I'm invested, and hopefully won't miss a minute of the second trial.

-- JG

borndem
08-18-2011, 11:06 AM
You have great questions, jg48. I think your questions about the video surveillance at the HI and the positions of the cameras should be addressed at the retrial. It may clear things up for some jurors.

Until I read your recent posts, I've been perplexed at the first jury's verdict. Your questions, though, have allowed me to think about how people who didn't know much or anything about the case would've considered things. I've been aware of the case since Nov. 2006 when it was first reported. I formed my opinion of his guilt after the no-show during the WDS and custody hearings. That pretty much convinced me that JY was in "CYA" mode.

The prosecution needs to hammer home:
1. The "odd" occurrences at the HI on the night that Michelle was murdered
2. The no forced-entry into the home
3. JY's ridiculous theory that it was easier to break off a twig from a bush several feet away to keep the exit door from closing than to take his keycard with him to regain entry into the HI TWICE
4. JY's remarkable decision that it was simpler to leave the door to his room open and his valuables unsecured than to use a keycard to open the door TWICE
5. The disappearance of clothing that JY says has nothing to do with the murder
6. JY's selfish behavior, i.e. multiple affairs, changing plans at the last minute with no thought of how his wife would feel about it, his email tantrum when he had to watch his daughter while MY worked and his decision to just take Cassidy to the pool and drink beer, his hope that MM was pregnant with his child instead of her husband's child
7. JY's email to his former fiancee declaring his undying love
8. The car accident in Brevard in which JY was driving and MY was a passenger a few months before MY's death
9. JY's missing shoes
10. JY's comment to his friend that the only thing worse than being married to MY would be to be divorced from her
11. JY's comment 2 months before the murder that he was done with it (the marriage)
12. Cassidy's life was spared, yet MY was brutally beaten over 30 times
13. JY's refusal to help police to even identify what might be missing from the house (if someone were innocent, I would think that identifying missing items from the house might help that person to verify his innocence as missing items would probably show up in a pawn shop or somewhere else and lead the police down the true murderer's path)
14. JY's first-ever time he asked MF to go to his house to retrieve something for him
15. JY's claim that he was looking to buy something for his wife for their anniversary, which was over a month late
16. JY's constant use of his cell phone the day after the murder until his MIL calls 4 times starting around 1:30 pm and he refuses to answer or call her back (cell phone records show he retrieved the messages she left him and that it was urgent for him to call her back)

These are just 16 things off the top of my head that JY will never be able to overcome if the prosecution will get a backbone, show some passion, and give the taxpayers of NC what they pay for - JUSTICE. The prosecution has to make an argument that people can believe. There are too many coincidences in JY's version of events - jurors should be seen just shaking their heads at the line JY has tried to feed them.

I live in JY's hometown and my family and friends live here, too. I don't want him here because I believe he will do this again if given the opportunity. There probably has been a war going on inside JY for a long time, and on the night of MY's murder, his evil side was unleashed. Once unleashed, evil will remain unleashed.


:goodpost: :clap: Very good list, tarheel! Thanks for putting it in one spot for us.

The only items that I would add to the list would be:

1. Where was the dog during this over-kill attack by strangers?
2. How does JY explain the blisters and bruise on his foot (feet)? Perhaps he wore the $10.00 Dollar General size 10 Franklins to portray a 2nd person at the "break-in." (I've seen this before when I sold shoes while on my summer jobs in HS. It can only come from wearing too-short shoes.)
3. Why was her purse left behind on the kitchen floor by 2 burglars? And why, if they had time to stand there and deliver 30+ blows to this woman, did they not take more time to steal more items?

Perhaps others might offer more, but as is, it's a good and thorough list and should be sent ASAP to the ADAs on this case. If they had pursued it the first go-round, JY would be in Central Prison :behindbar TODAY and for life. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon8.gif .... :furious: ... :maddening:

Thanks again for taking the time to compile and share it with us!

tarheel8600
08-18-2011, 04:12 PM
:goodpost: :clap: Very good list, tarheel! Thanks for putting it in one spot for us.

The only items that I would add to the list would be:

1. Where was the dog during this over-kill attack by strangers?
2. How does JY explain the blisters and bruise on his foot (feet)? Perhaps he wore the $10.00 Dollar General size 10 Franklins to portray a 2nd person at the "break-in." (I've seen this before when I sold shoes while on my summer jobs in HS. It can only come from wearing too-short shoes.)
3. Why was her purse left behind on the kitchen floor by 2 burglars? And why, if they had time to stand there and deliver 30+ blows to this woman, did they not take more time to steal more items?

Perhaps others might offer more, but as is, it's a good and thorough list and should be sent ASAP to the ADAs on this case. If they had pursued it the first go-round, JY would be in Central Prison :behindbar TODAY and for life. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon8.gif .... :furious: ... :maddening:

Thanks again for taking the time to compile and share it with us!

Thank you, Borndem. These absolutely should be added to the list! Wasn't there another incident between the car accident and the murder where JY and MY were out on a boat and MY went overboard and struggled to make it back to the boat? I can't remember if that was testimony or something I just read somewhere.

borndem
08-18-2011, 05:30 PM
Thank you, Borndem. These absolutely should be added to the list! Wasn't there another incident between the car accident and the murder where JY and MY were out on a boat and MY went overboard and struggled to make it back to the boat? I can't remember if that was testimony or something I just read somewhere.

Hi, 'heel -:seeya:- I do remember the car "accident" where they wound up in the river and she ultimately ended up losing the baby she was carrying.... but I can't recall a boating accident -- but I do have holes in my memory, probably because I try to keep up with so many of these awful crimes and Pieces OS who commit them. I'll try better to recall and look around.... Ohh, he's so repulsive -- a sick, selfish freak IMHO. :maddening:

NCEast
08-19-2011, 07:26 AM
OT/////Brad Cooper case on Dateline tonight. Very interesting article in this morning's N&O, link below.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/08/19/1421747/cooper-defense-cost-340000.html

Good Morning All!!

Just the Fax
08-19-2011, 11:15 AM
Looks like the Cooper trial strained the court budget big time. Too bad JLY was tried few weeks after this fiasco. Probably a reason it was a=so short and substantiated.....there was little money left in the budget. Howard Kurtz took us taxpayers for a ride with the wasted hours he billed.....sigh.

==================================================


Indigent Defense Services, formed by the state to oversee and ensure legal representation for those who cannot otherwise afford it, paid $340,507 in expenses and fees to Howard Kurtz and Robert Trenkle, the two lawyers appointed to the case. Of that total, $233,116 went to Kurtz, who was paid for 2,429 of the 2,921 hours he billed for during his three years on the case.

Why so expensive?

Thomas Maher, head of Indigent Defense Services, said the money spent on the Cooper defense was among the most he remembered, particularly for a case where prosecutors were not pursuing the death penalty. A recent study of capital cases showed that only 1 percent of the cases cost more than $200,000 for Indigent Defense.

-snip-

Maher said it can be difficult to calculate the true cost of a case because prosecutors and police, who draw state salaries, rarely keep track of the hours they spend on a specific case.

Lorrin Freeman, the Wake County clerk of courts, said the cost for the Cooper jury was $25,940, the highest she could recall in recent history. Toward the end of the trial, jurors sent the judge a note expressing their frustration with how protracted it had been. In the note, jurors asked the judge to urge lawyers to make better use of their time.

By comparison, the jury for the trial of Jason Young, another Wake County man accused of killing his wife, cost the courts $8,530.


Read more: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/08/19/ ... z1VTS833kH

borndem
08-21-2011, 12:53 AM
OT/////Brad Cooper case on Dateline tonight. Very interesting article in this morning's N&O, link below.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/08/19/1421747/cooper-defense-cost-340000.html

Good Morning All!!

Thanks for letting us know, East! I thought it covered a lot of ground in the time slot given -- it hit most of the main aspects of the case and showed personal comments and lots of good scenes & pictures. Pretty well-balanced reporting, IMO. It was nice to see one of the heroes, Detective (IIR his title C) Daniels, again. What an amazingly skilled lawman.

I thought KL's comments, when asked what they have told the girls about their parents, were good, especially considering the ages of the girls.... Paraphrasing, "A bad man hurt NancyMom and she is in Heaven; the bad man is in jail for what he did to her. Daddy is on a long business trip sleeping in a tent and has no phone." That's about enuff for their young brains to absorb, considering their ages. They planted the thought about Mommy being in Heaven, and about the bad main being in jail for what he did to their mommy, thereby setting the stage for when they will have to explain more, especially to the older child. She will want to know more soon, IMO.

And the scene at the end with KristaMom and the girls waking down the path shows how much they have grown. No babies, they -- now.

Any thoughts from anyone else about the Dateline show?

ps -Thanks also to JTF for letting us know about the show as well. And yes, the DT and some other administrative factors did rack up quite a large amount of spending.

And I agree, no wonder the Young trial was busting bad down the train track at breakneck speed. And the re-trial will occur in the same fiscal year, I assume. At least the bulk of the research has already been done.

The next Young trial should take about 4--5 days. (!!) http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon9.gif It's a shame that Lady Justice may have to operate on a shoestring budget, IMO. Blood and turnip time. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon9.gifhttp://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon8.gif

This is JMHO.

Madeleine74
08-21-2011, 11:58 AM
Hi Borndem,

You might get more discussion about the Dateline segment if you post your thoughts in the Nancy Cooper Dateline thread. Not sure how many JLY case followers are interested in and watched the Cooper trial.

borndem
08-21-2011, 12:42 PM
Hi, Madeline74 -

:rolleyes: Now that's a good idea....:doh: ..... I'll go over there to see the comments.

;)

NCEast
08-22-2011, 11:45 AM
Thanks for letting us know, East! I thought it covered a lot of ground in the time slot given -- it hit most of the main aspects of the case and showed personal comments and lots of good scenes & pictures. Pretty well-balanced reporting, IMO. It was nice to see one of the heroes, Detective (IIR his title C) Daniels, again. What an amazingly skilled lawman.

I thought KL's comments, when asked what they have told the girls about their parents, were good, especially considering the ages of the girls.... Paraphrasing, "A bad man hurt NancyMom and she is in Heaven; the bad man is in jail for what he did to her. Daddy is on a long business trip sleeping in a tent and has no phone." That's about enuff for their young brains to absorb, considering their ages. They planted the thought about Mommy being in Heaven, and about the bad main being in jail for what he did to their mommy, thereby setting the stage for when they will have to explain more, especially to the older child. She will want to know more soon, IMO.

And the scene at the end with KristaMom and the girls waking down the path shows how much they have grown. No babies, they -- now.

Any thoughts from anyone else about the Dateline show?

ps -Thanks also to JTF for letting us know about the show as well. And yes, the DT and some other administrative factors did rack up quite a large amount of spending.

And I agree, no wonder the Young trial was busting bad down the train track at breakneck speed. And the re-trial will occur in the same fiscal year, I assume. At least the bulk of the research has already been done.

The next Young trial should take about 4--5 days. (!!) http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon9.gif It's a shame that Lady Justice may have to operate on a shoestring budget, IMO. Blood and turnip time. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon9.gifhttp://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon8.gif

This is JMHO.

What I saw was well balanced and fair. And then the 10:30 commercial came on and I fell asleep. Was so upset when I woke later and realized I missed the second half.
This is not meant to be political, so please understand......but I think the state of NC is making huge, HUGE, mistakes in cutting funding for both the criminal justice/judicial systems and education. No trial should be run through as quickly as possible because of the lack of money to prosecute properly and thoroughly. We made jokes (sort of) a couple of weeks about when the news report revealed that the prosecutors were having to answer their own phones in the Wake Co. DA's office. That's just so very sad and priorities in this state should be resorted and realigned.

tarheel8600
08-22-2011, 04:22 PM
What I saw was well balanced and fair. And then the 10:30 commercial came on and I fell asleep. Was so upset when I woke later and realized I missed the second half.
This is not meant to be political, so please understand......but I think the state of NC is making huge, HUGE, mistakes in cutting funding for both the criminal justice/judicial systems and education. No trial should be run through as quickly as possible because of the lack of money to prosecute properly and thoroughly. We made jokes (sort of) a couple of weeks about when the news report revealed that the prosecutors were having to answer their own phones in the Wake Co. DA's office. That's just so very sad and priorities in this state should be resorted and realigned.


NCEast,
You are exactly right!!

johnfear
09-15-2011, 01:42 PM
Retrial delayed until next year. They are saying January, which means April to May start time.

Just the Fax
09-18-2011, 05:00 PM
Retrial delayed until next year. They are saying January, which means April to May start time.

If they originally had it on the October docket, January is very possible.
Of course, that assumes the court reporter can find time to transcribe the testimony from the first trial.

otto
09-18-2011, 05:20 PM
I watched the testimony and know they did not prove the shoes he owned were the same shoes that left the bloody print.

I didn't find the witness very credible. She seemed more than a little confused about details and the cops never did find the "regular" she claimed was also a witness.

I believed the NY delivery person when she said she saw the light-colored SUV. Jason owned a white SUV. I don't know too many folks who don't say white when they mean white.

No shirt was proved missing in any of the testimony I watched and it doesn't matter to me because I don't believe they proved he ever left the hotel premises that night at all.

They did prove the print left on the camera did not belong to Jason Young. When there is as much reasonable doubt as is in this case, no jury is going to agree to convict.

JMO.

After seeing what the prosecution had to offer in the trial, I too now have doubts about this case. I was absolutely convinced for a very long time that he was guilty, but if that is true, why was the prosecution's argument so weak? I also wondered by the Judge didn't tell the jury to go back and try again ... could he have been concerned that one more try would result in a not guilty verdict?

I can't think of any other reasonable suspect or any reason why Michelle would be murdered, but the case against Jason was very weak.

Just the Fax
09-22-2011, 07:18 AM
After seeing what the prosecution had to offer in the trial, I too now have doubts about this case. I was absolutely convinced for a very long time that he was guilty, but if that is true, why was the prosecution's argument so weak? I also wondered by the Judge didn't tell the jury to go back and try again ... could he have been concerned that one more try would result in a not guilty verdict?

I can't think of any other reasonable suspect or any reason why Michelle would be murdered, but the case against Jason was very weak.

Their argument was weak.
The evidence pointing to guilt was powerful.

otto
09-22-2011, 02:45 PM
Their argument was weak.
The evidence pointing to guilt was powerful.

Powerful evidence, weak argument suggests to me that it was the wrong prosecutor. Prosecutors are most definitely not looking to online forums or the general public for their strategies and tactics ... I hope. If they did, it would suggest that they are completely unable to do their jobs. If it is the same prosecutor trying the same case, the only difference will be that the defense has tipped their hand and now the prosecutor has more ammunition. In some respects, this does seem to go against the philosohpy of double jeopardy, as it gives the prosecution a distinct advantage in terms of knowing their mistakes and having another go at it. For all fairness to be observed, everything from the first trial should be tossed out, but I understand that now everything from the first trial can also be used against the suspect. I don't see a big problem with the twig in the door. It's a little farfetched, but not impossible. I see huge problems with the clerk's identification and the gas mileage. I see problems with the "propped open hotel room door" because the newspaper drop off on the door handle would most likely have inched the door open.

I can now understand why police were looking into the possibility of an accomplice and why they raised the point in the judge's instructions. There are obstacles in the theory that Jason doubled back home, but he still remains the most likely suspect. The argument seemed to be that he double back and murdered his wife, and if he didn't double back then someone else murdered his wife under his instructions ... but that person is completely unknown and there is no evidence of that accomplice.

The prosecution's argument reminds me of the suspect's common defense: "I didn't do it, but if I did it was an accident, and if it wasn't an accident it's because the victim made me do it, and the latest ... the police, prosecutors, forensic experts, media, lawyers and everyone is out to get me."

NCEast
10-10-2011, 05:43 PM
Powerful evidence, weak argument suggests to me that it was the wrong prosecutor. Prosecutors are most definitely not looking to online forums or the general public for their strategies and tactics ... I hope. If they did, it would suggest that they are completely unable to do their jobs. If it is the same prosecutor trying the same case, the only difference will be that the defense has tipped their hand and now the prosecutor has more ammunition. In some respects, this does seem to go against the philosohpy of double jeopardy, as it gives the prosecution a distinct advantage in terms of knowing their mistakes and having another go at it. For all fairness to be observed, everything from the first trial should be tossed out, but I understand that now everything from the first trial can also be used against the suspect. I don't see a big problem with the twig in the door. It's a little farfetched, but not impossible. I see huge problems with the clerk's identification and the gas mileage. I see problems with the "propped open hotel room door" because the newspaper drop off on the door handle would most likely have inched the door open.

I can now understand why police were looking into the possibility of an accomplice and why they raised the point in the judge's instructions. There are obstacles in the theory that Jason doubled back home, but he still remains the most likely suspect. The argument seemed to be that he double back and murdered his wife, and if he didn't double back then someone else murdered his wife under his instructions ... but that person is completely unknown and there is no evidence of that accomplice.

The prosecution's argument reminds me of the suspect's common defense: "I didn't do it, but if I did it was an accident, and if it wasn't an accident it's because the victim made me do it, and the latest ... the police, prosecutors, forensic experts, media, lawyers and everyone is out to get me."

I agree that the prosecution came off as appearing extremely weak. My personal opinion was that it was the ADA, not the evidence. The evidence could have been put to the jury with so much more passion, the cross of Jason could have been done differently and with a hard-hitting impact. Oh, I still get upset when I think about how she blew that cross.

I MISS YOU GUYS TERRIBLY AND CAN'T WAIT FOR ANOTHER TRIAL TO START SO WE CAN SPEND MORE TIME ON HERE TOGETHER! I thought the Aboroa trial should have begun by now? Or has it and I'm totally out of the loop?
I hope each of you is well.

icefun
10-26-2011, 09:41 AM
Bumping you, Michelle....you are remembered and justice will be served in January 2012....

Boodles
10-28-2011, 12:09 PM
To anyone who may know: what happened? I thought the re-trial was to be held this month (Oct)?

Skittles
10-28-2011, 03:31 PM
The trial was delayed until January. See this thread:

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=149198

Madeleine74
10-28-2011, 04:14 PM
Hi Skittles! Nice to 'see' you here. :-)

Landonsmom02
11-16-2011, 11:03 AM
Bumping for Michelle and Rylan.......forever in our thoughts!:heartbeat:

NCEast
12-14-2011, 12:16 PM
http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/story/10499496/
Jason Young's retrial set for Jan. 17...a week later than originally scheduled.
Merry Christmas everyone!

Just the Fax
12-14-2011, 07:40 PM
.....Look for opening statements around 2-1-12

borndem
12-14-2011, 08:44 PM
http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/story/10499496/
Jason Young's retrial set for Jan. 17...a week later than originally scheduled.
Merry Christmas everyone!

Thanks, NCEast, for the info. It's good to hear from you again. Missed ya, Sleuth-buddy.

I've been over on the Eve Carson murder trial. Oh, what good-fer-nuthin's those two are. The worst. At least one of 'em is already in the Federal Kooler for life. Now we've got to get the next one lifed-out. It should be over in about a week or wk. and a half. No souls have they, just a lot of stoopids and cruelty.

Anyway, I miss all you folks -- :seeya: Hi to you all.

And Merry, :sleigh: merry Christmas :christmastree: and Happy Hanukkah :menorah: to you all.

See you in January, unless you wanna begin the Laurence Lovette trial (Eve Carson case) in about the 7th inning on WRAL live-stream. Plenty of bad stuff to go around. A very small crowd of us is hovering and shaking our heads over it. A good DA and so far, very reasonable DT. Horrible defendant, but what would you expect?

Any other good cases kicking right now??


http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon10.gif

gorealtors
12-16-2011, 07:44 AM
Check out the latest search warrants:


http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/story/10506572/

gorealtors
12-16-2011, 07:46 AM
More from the News and Observer:

http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/12/16/1713768/officials-seize-bank-records-as.html

otto
12-16-2011, 08:19 AM
Isn't that interesting. Until now, I was under the impression that investigators had already reviewed the financial records. The link is from yesterday and investigators are now asking for financial records from 2004 - 2008? I think that some of us have been waiting for the other shoe to drop with the finances in the investigator's heads ... Michelle, with a promising career and solid work history, was pregnant with her second child and planned to reduce her work schedule ... and income. Jason was out of work and had an unstable work history. Michelle had adjusted her schedule to accomodate parenting. There was also an unexpected termination of a previous birth (a few months before Rylan was conceived) due to an irregular vehicle accident while going for coffee more or less in Jason's Moms' backyard and where he grew up.

It has been claimed repeatedly that Jason was in a good financial situation when his pregnant wife was bludgeoned in the head 10-20 times in her bedroom; that he owned both a townhouse and the family home. It appears that Michelle was carrying the financial load for the family, not Jason. Jason was not only freeloading, but blowing his income paying for vacations with his mother and sister (leaving his wife and child at home). Search warrants executed after the murder include the collection of questionable photos from Jason's vacations where he does not appear to be committed to his marriage. The photos were from shortly before the murder, shortly before he had a trist or two with other women, shortly before he played ring swallowing games and ... other photos

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t189/zed0101/gravesite.jpg

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t189/zed0101/headstone.jpg

When asked about his wife's murder, he said "you're asking about that?"
http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t189/zed0101/JYMyBad2.jpg
(wral.com)

How does that work ... there's no appeal on a not guilty verdict ... but if the prosecution is losing, they can force a mistrial by flunking the cross examination ...and thereby gather more information to prosecute the second time around? ... but? ... so both prosecution and defense can present new information during appeal, or is the appeal restricted to what has already been presented?

ncsu95
12-16-2011, 09:54 PM
How was Jason out of work? He was on a business trip when he came home and killed her.

otto
12-17-2011, 10:56 AM
How was Jason out of work? He was on a business trip when he came home and killed her.

My mistake ... trying to remember the work history ... but wasn't he unemployed in the summer before the murder? I think he had only been working for a couple of months when Michelle was murdered. Then he was unemployed again.

Madeleine74
12-17-2011, 11:45 AM
Happy Holidaze everyone.

Need to gear up before I can take another one of these knuckle biting trials. This murder was so heinous and cruel; the thought of him getting away with it.... shudder.

borndem
12-17-2011, 01:43 PM
Happy Holidaze everyone.

Need to gear up before I can take another one of these knuckle biting trials. This murder was so heinous and cruel; the thought of him getting away with it.... shudder.




Hiya, Mad74
:websleuther:

Yeah, rest up, refresh, and then put on your hip-waders :soldier: and your anti-slime suit :yuck:; pick up your bs-meter :shakehead:and your special hard-earned butterfly-wings and jump into it.:saber: We gotta see this :liar: homicider put behind :behindbar for LWOP this time. :censored:

PS -- Love your black cat!!:cat:

borndem
12-18-2011, 06:17 PM
http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/story/10499496/
Jason Young's retrial set for Jan. 17...a week later than originally scheduled.
Merry Christmas everyone!

:wave:And a Merry:santahat: Christmas to you, NCEast!! :xmastree:

We've got to get him this time -- our last chance, most likely. I assume we've got the same PT this go-round. I hope they've all been having tacks and nails for breakfast every day so they can shoot them back at Jason & Co. Grrrrrrr. And I hope they've packed their um-er's in a box and burned 'em. I'm ready for a fight!

Landonsmom02
12-19-2011, 12:05 PM
Hoping and Praying that January 2012 brings justice to Michelle and Rylan!!!!!!