State vs. Jason Lynn Young 2-24-2012

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
I wonder why we didn't hear any specific testimony on the blood spatter. Is that type of expert testimony still on its hiatus in NC court rooms?

It could be that it is there as a void in the blood spatter but couldn't really be presented as such if the ban on that type of testimony is still in place.

Any NC lawyers out there have any current knowledge of this ?

TIA
 
dmaxphil said:
Dilute blood? Blood coagulates and has significant portions that are water insoluble. (meaning you can rinse with water all you like, but portions will remain solid.) These solids would be available somewhere close to surface layer of grass/dirt.
Click to expand...


No blood was found near the hose or anywhere outside, Dmax.

Jason said he had cut the grass that afternoon and used the hose.
 
otto said:
What am I missing here ... why is it so funny that 75 evidence bags were collected from such a large home on an acreage? It doesn't mean that all of the collections contained evidence, only that 75 items were collected and some would be tested. How many evidence bags were collected by investigators?
Click to expand...

What I find hilarious is he collected 75 bags "missed" by LE.

Can't wait for this :D
 
otto said:
BBM

I don't think so either (regarding phrase I bolded). Investigators may have collected 300 evidence bags, but I wouldn't assume that all 300 evidence bags contained evidence that is useful during trial. I don't think that it's all that unusual for 75 items of evidence to be collected for analysis. If only 3 items of evidence were collected, I would wonder why only 3 were collected, but 75 seems quite normal.
Click to expand...

What doesn't seem normal is to say those items were "missed or ignored" by law enforcement. That is a statement of incompetence. LE might have had no interest in those items. He plainly states he is collecting evidence LE missed. That is a judgment, obviously meant to diminish LE.

Now, could he find 75 items he might want to look at. Sure. Did he find 75 items that are "evidence" and that were missed or ignored by LE? I don't think so or the defense would have smoked the state last case instead of a hung jury.

So, for this witness' obviously self serving and misleading statements on his website, he gets a :floorlaugh:
 
Cammy said:
No blood was found near the hose or anywhere outside, Dmax.

Jason said he had cut the grass that afternoon and used the hose.
Click to expand...

Jason also said 'he never was in love with michelle money', & 'he was working on his marriage', & 'he wasn't talking to michelle money during his anniversary dinner with his wife', & 'he was thrilled when michelle got pregnant with CY, and yadda yadda yadda........:seeya:
 
Talina said:
In your theory, when would this have happened? Wasn't CY at day care during the afternoon while JY was supposedly doing this yard work?
Click to expand...
Can not say as a fact, don't know if it was brought up in court as to when she attended day care. OTOH, we don't know what time Jason completed yard work. Unless someone has a link that proves she was not home with daddy, I will stick to MO.
 
Just the Fax said:
What I find hilarious is he collected 75 bags "missed" by LE.

Can't wait for this :D
Click to expand...

Exactly. His brain allows him to know what LE chose not to collect and what they missed. Believe that, or else it's :floorlaugh:
 
Cammy said:
:seeya:

Morning or good afternoon!!

I missed the state's last witness, did they officially rest their case?

I need to read and catch up.
Click to expand...

The last witness was the custody lawyer for the Fishers. Jury is now viewing evidence.

I don't know what was gained by introducing custody information in a murder trial, but I guess it's one of facts pertaining to Jason.
 
Prancy said:
I would think the defense would still put on witnesses who would testify about what they observed at the Young's residence that night and the early morning hours.

Also, I'm dying to know if they will enter the same stipulation with the state again that consisted of an affidavit of what she saw from an elderly neighbor lady. I was told by those in the courtroom that it was read to the jury last time, but WRAL did not record it. Odd IMO, but I really do want to know the details.
Click to expand...

Hi Prancy.....:)

I can not see the defense just resting.....they had a very strong case last time........

I remember that stipulation from the elderly neighbor as well, maybe we will hear more about it this time, hopefully.
 
otto said:
The last witness was the custody lawyer for the Fishers. Jury is now viewing evidence.

I don't know what was gained by introducing custody information in a murder trial, but I guess it's one of facts pertaining to Jason.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Otto.:)

I am getting caught up as fast as I can.....

The defense did not rest, did they?

Please say NO......please, please, please.
 
Talina said:
I wonder why we didn't hear any specific testimony on the blood spatter. Is that type of expert testimony still on its hiatus in NC court rooms?

It could be that it is there as a void in the blood spatter but couldn't really be presented as such if the ban on that type of testimony is still in place.

Any NC lawyers out there have any current knowledge of this ?

TIA
Click to expand...

Review CCBI Galloway's testimony. Details of prints and blood found / collected.
 
the couger said:
Can not say as a fact, don't know if it was brought up in court as to when she attended day care. OTOH, we don't know what time Jason completed yard work. Unless someone has a link that proves she was not home with daddy, I will stick to MO.
Click to expand...

The day care worker testified that MY picked CY up on the evening of the 2nd and that it was later than they normally picked her up (it was after 6pm).

I'd say, to me, that proves she was not at home during the afternoon while JY was doing his yardwork.

IMO
 
jrb0124 said:
:eek:hoh:

Sorry JTF, not up to speed on JY - I popped in to BC PM and update the RA thread with a court date.

Without having gone through all of the retrial testimony, etc... I do think JY is at least involved/culpable in the homicide of MY based on the first trial.

The bitter pill, even with a conviction here, may be that JY only serves 20 more years. IMO and specific to this individual, even if is he is innocent (highly doubtful) and still convicted - he deserves at least 20 years behind bars for the way he treated MY.
Click to expand...

He is on trial for 1st Deg Murder which punishment is LWOP. I do not know if lesser charges are included.

Will lesser charges be included? Anybody know?
 
Turnadot said:
That's true, but I gotta say that if the print had created a void, the jury would have their CSI moment, IMO.
Click to expand...

As well they should in my opinion, but there is no way to date when the hand-print occurred. Was it during the commission of the crime, or was it earlier when JY was help MY treat some injury?
 
Madeleine74 said:
Review CCBI Galloway's testimony. Details of prints and blood found / collected.
Click to expand...

Yes, I saw and remember that testimony. That is not the testimony of a blood spatter expert though from what I understand that type of expert testimony to be. I don't recall a lot of detail explanation and testimony regarding blood spatter and the description of how to interpret the spray, velocity, direction, voids, etc and how to understand what, if anything, the spatter can tell us.

That is the type of testimony I am referring to that was missing, IMO.
 
Talina said:
I wonder why we didn't hear any specific testimony on the blood spatter. Is that type of expert testimony still on its hiatus in NC court rooms?

It could be that it is there as a void in the blood spatter but couldn't really be presented as such if the ban on that type of testimony is still in place.Any NC lawyers out there have any current knowledge of this ?

TIA
Click to expand...
Why would a ban be put on blood spatter evidence? Ban on any other evidence in NC?
 
dgfred said:
Bend over near wall, brace hand on wall, punch floor... there ya go. I am 6ft tall and I can do it.
Click to expand...

Bent over with hand on wall at 16", hitting victim on floor with enough force to send spatter on the walls at approximately 16" level (surrounding)....how then did he not get blood on his pants? Or did he? Just wondering.


IMO
 
gritguy said:
What doesn't seem normal is to say those items were "missed or ignored" by law enforcement. That is a statement of incompetence. LE might have had no interest in those items. He plainly states he is collecting evidence LE missed. That is a judgment, obviously meant to diminish LE.

Now, could he find 75 items he might want to look at. Sure. Did he find 75 items that are "evidence" and that were missed or ignored by LE? I don't think so or the defense would have smoked the state last case instead of a hung jury.

So, for this witness' obviously self serving and misleading statements on his website, he gets a :floorlaugh:
Click to expand...

Okay, so he said "missed". That could also have been stated as "left behind" or "not collected". Unless he is saying that he has 75 new items of evidence, I wouldn't interpret it as such. Instead, I understand it in the same way that I would understand that investigators collected 300 items of evidence ... that some of the collections are actual evidence and some of the collections are not relevant.

A tooth from Michelle was "missed" or "left behind" by investigators, so we know that indeed some of the evidence collected after investigators released the scene was indeed "missed". We also know that investigators photographed the bathroom, but had to return because relevant information (scale value) was "missed". Cigarette butts outside the residence were collected after the fact. Investigators may have decided that the butts were not relevant, but maybe they are relevant and they were "missed".
 
otto said:
They were allowed to view the evidence in the courtroom, but not to discuss it while they were viewing it. If they wanted to see evidence during deliberations, they made a request and a decision was made whether it could be viewed. The jury then viewed it in the courtroom, without discussing it in the courtroom, and returned to their deliberations.

It's the very same as in this case.
Click to expand...

That is not correct. In the Cooper case the jury was allowed to view and discuss items of evidence in the jury room. I specifically remember a box of items and the discussion about the deputy collecting the box to return to the room where the evidence was secured or leaving it in the jury room for the night and locking that room.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 79 more.
Total: 1,235 (members: 80, guests: 1,155)

Online statistics

Members online
80
Guests online
1,155
Total visitors
1,235
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,790
Messages
17,958,899
Members
228,607
Latest member
wdavewong
Back
Top