Page 1 of 38 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 1135

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    sipping coffee at the Purple Rose Theatre
    Posts
    53,171

    **Verdict watch weekend discussion thread** 3/3-4/2012

    Deliberations began Friday at 1016am and we are officially on verdict watch! Deliberations will not continue until Monday...
    _____


    This thread is for weekend discussion of the case.


  2. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to nursebeeme For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    The beautiful roundabout of Context, Veracity, and JUSTICE
    Posts
    11,428
    You can hold back from the suffering of the world. You have free permission to do so and it is in accordance with your nature.
    But perhaps this very holding back is the one suffering you could have avoided.
    Franz Kafka

    Be not simply good. Be good for something.
    HDT


  4. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to ynotdivein For This Useful Post:


  5. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,969
    Thanks for the new thread ... bringing my comment from the other thread over as I would like to hear how others interpret this list

    I don't think there is absolute proof that Jason was or was not involved. What I see is a prosecution theory where all sorts of circumstantial points have been strung together to reinforce the theory that Jason is guilty.

    What has the proseuction presented:

    - an unplugged camera that cannot be connected to Jason
    - a questionable gas attendant witness that added new information to her testimony after she admittedly didn't remember anything about the customer in her store
    - prints in places that should match Jason, but don't
    - a theory about medicine with nothing to connect the medicine to Jason or the child (no evidence she was drugged)
    - two pair of shoes but no explanation why Jason would wear size 10 shoes to commit a strangulation murder
    - a motive of millions of dollars but at the same time Jason knew that as a suspect he could not claim the millions
    - allegations of a prior murder attempt and an accident investigator that attended the scene stating that everyone was wearing a seatbelt, that it was an accident in a place where accidents had happened before
    - adultery
    - dishonesty about the adultery
    - sexual dysfunction in the marriage
    - two people that participate in loud verbal disagreements in public
    - an unhappy marriage
    - a missing shirt, missing worn out hush puppy shoes, missing size 10 shoes
    - a husband that was advised not to speak to police because he was immediately considered a suspect
    - some investigation into possible suspects at a nearby trailer park that did not produce any leads
    - vehicles seen at the property from 3:30 or 4 AM until about 6 AM.
    - porch and driveway lights on (could have been left on the from the night before)
    - missing items but no insurance claim for those missing items
    - a poor planner that fails to calculate the amount of gas required to make the 510 mile trip but plans other details such as two pair of shoes for a strangulation murder
    - an unfaithful husband that was in contact with his mistress before and after the murder, making no attempt to hide his frequent contact with his mistress
    - no video surveillance on the 10 cameras at the hotel showing all of Jason's movements (morning activity)
    - an unplugged camera
    - no murder weapon
    - a child that acts out the murder with play figures and identifies the mother figure, but not the figure that is "spanking" the mother figure for "biting" (she was familiar enough with both parents to identify both of them if the father was involved)

    Did I miss anything? I don't see the above as proof of murder. It appears to be the case that investigators assumed that Jason was guilty and that they looked for circumstances that would support their theory.


  6. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to otto For This Useful Post:


  7. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    ... It appears to be the case that investigators assumed that Jason was guilty and that they looked for circumstances that would support their theory.
    That's what I fear too Otto. If you look hard enough you can find links. Whenever Internet history comes up in these cases, for example, I shudder to think what assumptions would be made about me if my Internet history was presented a certain way. On another Internet board, my avatar is Frances McDormand holding a gun In a Fargo shot. One day, someone accused me of being a gun toting redneck! I've never held a gun in my life - I just love that movie! I like Pulp Fiction too - perhaps if I change to Uma Thurman I could be viewed as a heroin addict ... I think I'd like that better than a gun toting redneck! But, I digress ...

    I think we all bring different life experiences to the table. Some of us just think that there's a decent chance he didn't do this ....


  8. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to jerseygirl48 For This Useful Post:


  9. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    Thanks for the new thread ... bringing my comment from the other thread over as I would like to hear how others interpret this list

    I don't think there is absolute proof that Jason was or was not involved. What I see is a prosecution theory where all sorts of circumstantial points have been strung together to reinforce the theory that Jason is guilty.

    What has the proseuction presented:

    - an unplugged camera that cannot be connected to Jason
    - a questionable gas attendant witness that added new information to her testimony after she admittedly didn't remember anything about the customer in her store
    - prints in places that should match Jason, but don't
    - a theory about medicine with nothing to connect the medicine to Jason or the child (no evidence she was drugged)
    - two pair of shoes but no explanation why Jason would wear size 10 shoes to commit a strangulation murder
    - a motive of millions of dollars but at the same time Jason knew that as a suspect he could not claim the millions
    - allegations of a prior murder attempt and an accident investigator that attended the scene stating that everyone was wearing a seatbelt, that it was an accident in a place where accidents had happened before
    - adultery
    - dishonesty about the adultery
    - sexual dysfunction in the marriage
    - two people that participate in loud verbal disagreements in public
    - an unhappy marriage
    - a missing shirt, missing worn out hush puppy shoes, missing size 10 shoes
    - a husband that was advised not to speak to police because he was immediately considered a suspect
    - some investigation into possible suspects at a nearby trailer park that did not produce any leads
    - vehicles seen at the property from 3:30 or 4 AM until about 6 AM.
    - porch and driveway lights on (could have been left on the from the night before)
    - missing items but no insurance claim for those missing items
    - a poor planner that fails to calculate the amount of gas required to make the 510 mile trip but plans other details such as two pair of shoes for a strangulation murder
    - an unfaithful husband that was in contact with his mistress before and after the murder, making no attempt to hide his frequent contact with his mistress
    - no video surveillance on the 10 cameras at the hotel showing all of Jason's movements (morning activity)
    - an unplugged camera
    - no murder weapon
    - a child that acts out the murder with play figures and identifies the mother figure, but not the figure that is "spanking" the mother figure for "biting" (she was familiar enough with both parents to identify both of them if the father was involved)

    Did I miss anything? I don't see the above as proof of murder. It appears to be the case that investigators assumed that Jason was guilty and that they looked for circumstances that would support their theory.
    Thanks for bringing your post over. A few you didn't mention that I think are some of the strongest pieces of CE are:

    -Cassidy was picked up and carried to bathroom, cleaned up, and diaper removed (no stranger would do that)
    -The shirt he was wearing when he left the hotel at midnight (that there is video proof of) was not on his person the next day, in his car, or in his luggage....so where is it? And the HP shoes?
    -Sister in law was called by JY(for the first time EVER) to go INTO their home ASAP to get a print out on the printer. (he needed her to rescue CY and discover the body).
    -Cameras tampered with at 11:20pm, shortly after JY arrived and shortly before he left the hotel. Retampered with at 6:37am when lines up perfectly with the timeline of JY's return to the hotel. Mind you the cameras haven't been tampered with in YEARS!
    -Doors that JY would use at hotel were propped open so key card wasn't needed.
    -Spontaneous trip to Brevard that was out of the way. (He didn't want to go straight home until someone had found the body.)
    -"Robber" walked right by MY's pocketbook TWICE and didn't steal from it!
    -OVERKILL stongly indicates someone who knew the victim and did not like them.
    -No forced entry, dog not harmed and left in house, CY not harmed....again, very likely not a stranger who did this.

    In my opinion, JY is either the unluckiest guy in the world for all of the coincidences or he had something to do with the murder of MY. (Just my respectful opinion). I do appreciate the dialog from either side of the fence, so I'm always open to hear both arguments. IMO, it's a good thing none of us at WS are on this jury b/c it seems most of us have our heels dug in and can't be budged! There's no way I would switch to NG with the evidence at hand, but I may be willing to compromise with the NG side to 2nd degree even though I feel it's first degree. For the record, I am stubborn. I hope the jurors aren't (unless of course they are on the G side ) JMO


  10. The Following 19 Users Say Thank You to CGW For This Useful Post:


  11. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,969
    Quote Originally Posted by CGW View Post
    Thanks for bringing your post over. A few you didn't mention that I think are some of the strongest pieces of CE are:

    -Cassidy was picked up and carried to bathroom, cleaned up, and diaper removed (no stranger would do that)
    -The shirt he was wearing when he left the hotel at midnight (that there is video proof of) was not on his person the next day, in his car, or in his luggage....so where is it? And the HP shoes?
    -Sister in law was called by JY(for the first time EVER) to go INTO their home ASAP to get a print out on the printer. (he needed her to rescue CY and discover the body).
    -Cameras tampered with at 11:20pm, shortly after JY arrived and shortly before he left the hotel. Retampered with at 6:37am when lines up perfectly with the timeline of JY's return to the hotel. Mind you the cameras haven't been tampered with in YEARS!
    -Doors that JY would use at hotel were propped open so key card wasn't needed.
    -Spontaneous trip to Brevard that was out of the way. (He didn't want to go straight home until someone had found the body.)
    -"Robber" walked right by MY's pocketbook TWICE and didn't steal from it!
    -OVERKILL stongly indicates someone who knew the victim and did not like them.
    -No forced entry, dog not harmed and left in house, CY not harmed....again, very likely not a stranger who did this.

    In my opinion, JY is either the unluckiest guy in the world for all of the coincidences or he had something to do with the murder of MY. (Just my respectful opinion). I do appreciate the dialog from either side of the fence, so I'm always open to hear both arguments. IMO, it's a good thing none of us at WS are on this jury b/c it seems most of us have our heels dug in and can't be budged! There's no way I would switch to NG with the evidence at hand, but I may be willing to compromise with the NG side to 2nd degree even though I feel it's first degree. For the record, I am stubborn. I hope the jurors aren't (unless of course they are on the G side ) JMO
    There is no evidence that the child was carried to the bathroom. I think the testimony is on day 4 where the investigator discusses a special machine that was purchased to reveal bloody prints on the carpet between the bedroom and the bathroom. There is no evidence that someone was in the bathroom with the child ... only evidence of the child, a child that was capable of using the taps and the sink and who mentioned the washcloth during the 911 call.

    Clothes he was wearing when he arrived in Raleigh were never requested so we don't know for certain what shirts he was wearing.

    If Jason needed Meredith to rescue his daughter, he would have called first thing in the morning ... not noon.

    Suppose the camera was not tampered with in the morning. Suppose Jason was seen entering the hotel at 6:37 ... wouldn't it be easier to say that he had to get something from the car - like his tie - than to tilt the camera again?

    If the room door was propped open at 4 in the morning, the night audit clerk should have noticed it when he slid the receipt under the door or placed the newspaper on the doorhandle.

    He admitted propping the exterior door open with a twig ... and it's been verified as successful way to prop the door. It's like the search for head trauma on the computer ... it's been verified as being connected to an actual accident (something the prosecution would have known because they had Michelle's email - yet prosecutors put a sinister spin on it to twist the facts)

    He had plans to pick up furniture from his parent's home, a known fact right after the murder.

    "Robber" may have gone up the bonus room steps, thinking people were still up and on the main floor (lights on throughout the house), completely missing the purse in the kitchen.

    Violent attack may have been result of Michelle fighting back during strangulation. Bedroom door handle set was damaged at some point and had to be replaced through insurance.

    Garage exterior people-door was routinely left unlocked ... no need for key to enter home. Daughter of Christa Worthington also left unharmed after stranger- murder.

    I switched from guilty to not-guilty after the first trial ... I'm still open minded, but the more I look at it, the harder it is for me to believe that the prosecution is objective.


  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to otto For This Useful Post:


  13. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    There is no evidence that the child was carried to the bathroom. I think the testimony is on day 4 where the investigator discusses a special machine that was purchased to reveal bloody prints on the carpet between the bedroom and the bathroom.
    (In viewing the photos of the bathroom, the bloody prints are hardly faint. They obviously came from feet saturated in blood. Had she walked from the bedroom to the bathroom they would have been faint IMO. Plus, the carpet should have darker bloody prints. Check out the threshold where the hall carpet meets the bathroom. You can see where the person who carried her to the bathroom put her down "too soon" and her heels left dark marks on the carpet! There would have been clear prints on the carpet if she had walked and not been carried!)
    There is no evidence that someone was in the bathroom with the child ... only evidence of the child, a child that was capable of using the taps and the sink and who mentioned the washcloth during the 911 call.
    (I don't know that anyone was with her or not in that bathroom...to me it doesn't matter either way. I think the most important part is she was carried....so I'll throw ya a bone and concede that point)
    Clothes he was wearing when he arrived in Raleigh were never requested so we don't know for certain what shirts he was wearing. (Testimony from eyewitnesses said he was wearing a light colored sweater. This was from MF and his own mother...don't know what more you need on that matter)If Jason needed Meredith to rescue his daughter, he would have called first thing in the morning ... not noon.(I have my own theories that he was assuming that her doctor's office, workplace, and CY's daycare would have called him when they didn't show up for appointment and work which would have started his process to find out why. That didn't happen, so he had to use the MF getting the print out. I also think had he called MF first thing in the am he knows that would have looked suspicious eventually.)
    Suppose the camera was not tampered with in the morning. Suppose Jason was seen entering the hotel at 6:37 ... wouldn't it be easier to say that he had to get something from the car - like his tie - than to tilt the camera again? (That wouldn't have worked b/c he wouldn't have been seen going outside. Don't forget that the maintenance man fixed the tampered with camera around 5am. When JY returned from the murder and saw the rock was removed from the door he realized that the camera may have been fixed so he needed to approach it carefully to point it away from catching him coming in!)
    If the room door was propped open at 4 in the morning, the night audit clerk should have noticed it when he slid the receipt under the door or placed the newspaper on the doorhandle. (It's not like the door was wide open. The door was still "flush" with the door frame, just not connected. I don't know that I would notice that if I was making mass delieveries to numerous hotel room doors.)
    He admitted propping the exterior door open with a twig ... and it's been verified as successful way to prop the door. It's like the search for head trauma on the computer ... it's been verified as being connected to an actual accident (something the prosecution would have known because they had Michelle's email - yet prosecutors put a sinister spin on it to twist the facts)
    (There's JY's DNA on the rock that the hotel worked kicked out from the propped open door....direct evidence. I think JY did see an accident, but he just used that as a way to explain those computer searches once he became aware of the evidence in discovery. Those search terms sure wouldn't be ones I would use if trying to find out about an accident I witnessed.)
    He had plans to pick up furniture from his parent's home, a known fact right after the murder. (Correct me if I'm wrong WS posters, but it was a last minute decision for him to go there. Even the msg. he left MY that morning was that he decided to go to Brevard to see his Mom, Heather and Joe and come back Saturday morning since he had just found out from Ambrose that they weren't coming on Friday night!)
    "Robber" may have gone up the bonus room steps, thinking people were still up and on the main floor (lights on throughout the house), completely missing the purse in the kitchen. (Prosecution pointed out in photos that the purse was on the floor....basically at the foot of the steps and could be seen from any way the "robber" came in.)
    Violent attack may have been result of Michelle fighting back during strangulation. Bedroom door handle set was damaged at some point and had to be replaced through insurance. (???which door handle set? MY's blood was contained to bed and floor by bed...she didn't make it to the door IMO).
    Garage exterior people-door was routinely left unlocked ... no need for key to enter home. Daughter of Christa Worthington also left unharmed after stranger- murder. (That same door had a BIG red sticker that stated the house had a security system...check it out in the photo....not very inviting to a "robber", but wouldn't be a problem for someone who knew if it would be on or not)
    I switched from guilty to not-guilty after the first trial ... I'm still open minded, but the more I look at it, the harder it is for me to believe that the prosecution is objective.
    I gladly welcome you back to the other side of the fence if you find any of my points compelling.

    I (of course) have a differing opinion on those points above (mine are in red). Maybe I can convince you to change your mind, maybe not....but I can try I imagine this is pretty much what the jurors did on Friday and will be doing on Monday. I'm a licensed private investigator so I do try to stay objective. It's an occupational hazard if I don't. I enjoy my work and like to think I have a good vision for piecing things together, which is why once I've seen all the pieces and feel I have the answers it's hard to change my mind. I've said it before on these boards that the worse thing in the world would be to send an innocent man to jail. That's why I don't take it lightly when I say with certainty beyond a reasonable doubt that Jason Lynn Young killed his wife!


  14. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to CGW For This Useful Post:


  15. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    111
    Quote Originally Posted by CGW View Post
    I gladly welcome you back to the other side of the fence if you find any of my points compelling.

    I (of course) have a differing opinion on those points above (mine are in red). Maybe I can convince you to change your mind, maybe not....but I can try I imagine this is pretty much what the jurors did on Friday and will be doing on Monday. I'm a licensed private investigator so I do try to stay objective. It's an occupational hazard if I don't. I enjoy my work and like to think I have a good vision for piecing things together, which is why once I've seen all the pieces and feel I have the answers it's hard to change my mind. I've said it before on these boards that the worse thing in the world would be to send an innocent man to jail. That's why I don't take it lightly when I say with certainty beyond a reasonable doubt that Jason Lynn Young killed his wife!
    Then who did?


  16. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post


    "Robber" may have gone up the bonus room steps, thinking people were still up and on the main floor (lights on throughout the house), completely missing the purse in the kitchen.
    snipped by me,

    mighty brave robber. not saying that it's impossible, but there's a reason that most burglaries happen during the day while people are at work. if a robber is willing to go into a house suspecting that the homeowners are not only home but still awake, you would think they would be armed with a weapon to immediately kill if a confrontation should occur. not risk getting shot themselves or having to spend time and struggle to strangle and beat somebody to death. and not being familiar with the house, how would they know if there was more than one staircase, or how much time they had to clean up so well that only 1 smear of blood was found downstairs? maybe the lights were on b/c her husband was on the way home? again, mighty, mighty brave. or highly doubtful.
    just my opinion - apply as needed


  17. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to ohstopit For This Useful Post:


  18. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    510
    Quote Originally Posted by ohstopit View Post
    snipped by me,

    mighty brave robber. not saying that it's impossible, but there's a reason that most burglaries happen during the day while people are at work. if a robber is willing to go into a house suspecting that the homeowners are not only home but still awake, you would think they would be armed with a weapon to immediately kill if a confrontation should occur. not risk getting shot themselves or having to spend time and struggle to strangle and beat somebody to death. and not being familiar with the house, how would they know if there was more than one staircase, or how much time they had to clean up so well that only 1 smear of blood was found downstairs? maybe the lights were on b/c her husband was on the way home? again, mighty, mighty brave. or highly doubtful.
    But it happens.... I live in Columbus, Ohio & in the past yr home invasions during the night has been increasing.. And they have been violent... The lastest one was Feb 24.... A 65-year-old man who awoke to a pummeling Friday morning as he was thrown down a flight of stairs and kicked.


  19. The Following User Says Thank You to SteelerGirl43 For This Useful Post:


  20. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    4,882
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post

    I don't think there is absolute proof that Jason was or was not involved. What I see is a prosecution theory where all sorts of circumstantial points have been strung together to reinforce the theory that Jason is guilty.

    It appears to be the case that investigators assumed that Jason was guilty and that they looked for circumstances that would support their theory.
    Yes otto, a very long string of CE, when taken in it's entirety, shows JLY murdered MY. IMO, far beyond a reasonable doubt.

    "Looked for circumstances" to support their theory?
    Ahh, yea they sure did. Those circumstance were not made up, they happen to be fact. Should all that damning evidence be ignored because LE focused on him? Not sure what your point is?


  21. The Following 18 Users Say Thank You to Just the Fax For This Useful Post:


  22. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,826
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    Thanks for the new thread ... bringing my comment from the other thread over as I would like to hear how others interpret this list

    I don't think there is absolute proof that Jason was or was not involved. What I see is a prosecution theory where all sorts of circumstantial points have been strung together to reinforce the theory that Jason is guilty.

    What has the proseuction presented:

    - an unplugged camera that cannot be connected to Jason
    - a questionable gas attendant witness that added new information to her testimony after she admittedly didn't remember anything about the customer in her store
    - prints in places that should match Jason, but don't
    - a theory about medicine with nothing to connect the medicine to Jason or the child (no evidence she was drugged)
    - two pair of shoes but no explanation why Jason would wear size 10 shoes to commit a strangulation murder
    - a motive of millions of dollars but at the same time Jason knew that as a suspect he could not claim the millions
    - allegations of a prior murder attempt and an accident investigator that attended the scene stating that everyone was wearing a seatbelt, that it was an accident in a place where accidents had happened before
    - adultery
    - dishonesty about the adultery
    - sexual dysfunction in the marriage
    - two people that participate in loud verbal disagreements in public
    - an unhappy marriage
    - a missing shirt, missing worn out hush puppy shoes, missing size 10 shoes
    - a husband that was advised not to speak to police because he was immediately considered a suspect
    - some investigation into possible suspects at a nearby trailer park that did not produce any leads
    - vehicles seen at the property from 3:30 or 4 AM until about 6 AM.
    - porch and driveway lights on (could have been left on the from the night before)
    - missing items but no insurance claim for those missing items
    - a poor planner that fails to calculate the amount of gas required to make the 510 mile trip but plans other details such as two pair of shoes for a strangulation murder
    - an unfaithful husband that was in contact with his mistress before and after the murder, making no attempt to hide his frequent contact with his mistress
    - no video surveillance on the 10 cameras at the hotel showing all of Jason's movements (morning activity)
    - an unplugged camera
    - no murder weapon
    - a child that acts out the murder with play figures and identifies the mother figure, but not the figure that is "spanking" the mother figure for "biting" (she was familiar enough with both parents to identify both of them if the father was involved)

    Did I miss anything? I don't see the above as proof of murder. It appears to be the case that investigators assumed that Jason was guilty and that they looked for circumstances that would support their theory.
    !!

    This theory that Jason could squeeze his size 12 feet in a Size 10 hightop athletic shoe to purposely leave prints is not plausible.

    The Size 10 shoe impressions were the ones that were more obvious and it was stated those were the shoes that would have more blood on them, so, therefore those were the shoes the murderer had on.

    To suggest someone can walk in shoe sizes 2 sizes too small, should have been demonstrated by the state, if that is what they think.

    Jason was sitting right there,why not ask him to put on the Frankins?

    Home experiments with someone's foot sticking out of the back of the shoe is not reasonable either.

    The Size 10 shoes are probably what is going to be the most discussed and debated in the deliberation room.

    So, who do they belong to?


  23. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Cammy For This Useful Post:


  24. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,969
    From the other thread ...

    Quote Originally Posted by gritguy View Post
    Wait, Fred you're saying a brutal killer who is there to rob and knows just where to find a wallet without leaving blood evidence of looking for it and who prefers some jewelry to others but yet who DOES NOT tamper with or take MY's purse is an unlikely scenario?

    You're saying that waiting until 6 months after the murder to say, "But wait it was burglary there were some things missing" could merely be an attempt to protect the hiding son?

    If you're saying that, if that's what you're saying - I AGREE!
    Investigators knew right away that the rings were missing because they had the body and Meredith was communicating with them. They also knew about the missing tooth container through Meredith (this was a family heirloom). It was later that the wallet with $500 was noticed mising. There was no 6 month delay before investigators knew that items were missing from the master bedroom.


  25. The Following User Says Thank You to otto For This Useful Post:


  26. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    4,882
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    From the other thread ...



    Investigators knew right away that the rings were missing because they had the body and Meredith was communicating with them. They also knew about the missing tooth container through Meredith (this was a family heirloom). It was later that the wallet with $500 was noticed mising. There was no 6 month delay before investigators knew that items were missing from the master bedroom.
    It was up to the homeowner to file an inventory of missing items "stolen" from the home. The fact no personal property was claimed in addition to $27,000 property damage is highly suspect.


  27. The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to Just the Fax For This Useful Post:


  28. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,969
    Quote Originally Posted by Just the Fax View Post
    It was up to the homeowner to file an inventory of missing items "stolen" from the home. The fact no personal property was claimed in addition to $27,000 property damage is highly suspect.
    It really doesn't matter who has to notify the insurance company that items were mssing from the home. The point is that investigators were well aware of missing items right after the murder ... there was no six month delay.


Page 1 of 38 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. **Verdict Watch** 3-2-2012; deliberations started at 1016am
    By nursebeeme in forum Michelle Young
    Replies: 734
    Last Post: 03-03-2012, 12:30 PM
  2. Replies: 773
    Last Post: 02-20-2012, 10:49 AM
  3. State vs Jason Lynn Young: weekend discussion 11-12 Feb 2012
    By nursebeeme in forum Michelle Young
    Replies: 227
    Last Post: 02-13-2012, 07:12 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •