Jason Young to get new trial #4

Status
Not open for further replies.
Please stop bickering. If something is being disputed, please link it up. Please do NOT claim anything as a fact unless you link it. If you are not going to link it, then it's just your opinion and recollection of what was said at the previous trials.

Salem
[modsnip :)]
 
[modsnip]

We do not discuss family members that have not been named as a suspect or speculate upon them. If the theory comes up in the third trial we can go there at that time discussion-wise.

This is a re-trial for the fact that the wrongful death suite was introduced in the trial. We do not know what influenced the last jury in their decision. Until the next trial occurs and a new jury is seated and hears all the factual evidence links need to be provided in what you post as a fact and anyone not named a suspect or person of interest is off limits for discussion.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/third-trial-ordered-for-north-carolina-man-in-wifes-2006-killing/
 
The more I see the photos the more confusing it is. Look at Photo 9, a photo of the exterior, where the state says the hose was left on from 3-4am until 1:30 the next afternoon...Are you kidding me? That would have left a larger puddle than that! There would have been water all the way down the path, not just a small spot like that.
And, MF said she could hear the hose running when she got there.

Unless someone gave Mr. G a drink of water from that hose,,,,,but, wait, Mr. G had to be in the house , it was freezing cold out that night! Temps dropped to freezing, and I doubt he was in the garage either.

Maybe she heard something when she walked through the garage ... hard to say.

 
Regarding the floorplans, I have been using the ones that were posted (linked upthread) on the Frictionpowered website. There is a mistake in those plans. That is, the child's bedroom is mis-labelled. The child's bedroom is in fact right next to the bathroom. I have made the correction in the bottom illustration. I also enhanced the red in the top photo to see if red could be seen on the carpet. Additionally, I lightened the room to see whose room it was.



This is the correct layout for the second floor.



Was the carpet in the child's room tested for blood, or was it a visual inspection?

The closet in the child's room is also placed on the wrong wall ... might tweak the plans later.

Otto, is there a way to magnify or highlight the floor area near the dresser and trash can in CY's room? That looks like a diaper on the floor.
 
Here's the correction to the floorplan regarding the child's bedroom

 
Regarding the garbage next to the dresser in the child's room ... and it does look like a diaper on the floor.

 
Looks like a tiny diaper, not something for a 2.5 year old.
 
I am puzzled about the hose.....and how the state tried to tie that in as a piece of a puzzle.
It is just something else that doesn't fit.
 
I am puzzled about the hose.....and how the state tried to tie that in as a piece of a puzzle.
It is just something else that doesn't fit.

Just looks to me like the o ring has degraded and it is leaking.
 
Just looks to me like the o ring has degraded and it is leaking.

Yeah, the nozzle looks broken or missing..and look at all the leaves on the grass.
I think its safe to say Mr. G wasn't outside all night, poor dog would have froze.
 
Regarding the garbage next to the dresser in the child's room ... and it does look like a diaper on the floor.


It certainly does look like a pull up to me. That is what my 5 grammy kids have done while wearing a night time pull up, they get up and take it off, then put pj bottoms back on. I could see CY doing this when she woke up.
 
It certainly does look like a pull up to me. That is what my 5 grammy kids have done while wearing a night time pull up, they get up and take it off, then put pj bottoms back on. I could see CY doing this when she woke up.

The testimony is that she was unable to put her pants back on. That she would typically remove the diaper (not pull-ups at night) and stay that way until MY dressed her.
 
I am puzzled about the hose.....and how the state tried to tie that in as a piece of a puzzle.
It is just something else that doesn't fit.

The hose testimony is completely bizarre! I have to wonder how investigators got it into their heads that a dripping hose after a day of working in the yard meant that someone had a shower under the hose in the back yard when the temperature was near freezing ... but investigators actually believed some version of this, and tested the soil for blood.

In my opinion, it demonstrates how investigators approached the investigation. They looked at something like a dripping hose, and somehow tried to tie it to Jason and imply that it illustrated his guilt. It's like the rock that propped open the door. Jason had no reason to use a rock to prop open a door, yet because there was a rock propping open a door on the night of the murder, investigators did a DNA analysis of the rock in an attempt to connect it to Jason and illustrate his guilt. It clearly demonstrates that investigators had tunnel vision, and then they set about proving their theory.
 
The testimony is that she was unable to put her pants back on. That she would typically remove the diaper (not pull-ups at night) and stay that way until MY dressed her.

I could have sworn it was a pull up she wore. That is a night diaper that most kids wear once they stay dry during the day.n I will try to find a link. Also that is the age most kids are learning to dress themselves. So it's always possible that when CY had all that time in the morning and no one there to help her get dressed she learned how to put her pj bottoms on herself. I claim this to be just as reasonable as the theory that someone removed her from the house took her somewhere and laundered her pj's and brought her back to the house. IMO
 
I am puzzled about the hose.....and how the state tried to tie that in as a piece of a puzzle.
It is just something else that doesn't fit.

What do you mean they TRIED to tie it in as evidence? It's something that they found upon examining the scene. Are you saying that they shouldn't have mentioned ?
 
I am puzzled about the hose.....and how the state tried to tie that in as a piece of a puzzle.
It is just something else that doesn't fit.

What do you mean they TRIED to tie it in as evidence? It's something that they found upon examining the scene. Are you saying that they shouldn't have mentioned it ?
 
The testimony is that she was unable to put her pants back on. That she would typically remove the diaper (not pull-ups at night) and stay that way until MY dressed her.
Do you remember who gave that testimony? I would think it would have to be MF that testified to that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
195
Guests online
1,644
Total visitors
1,839

Forum statistics

Threads
589,953
Messages
17,928,195
Members
228,015
Latest member
Amberraff
Back
Top