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

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
~n/t~ said:
I looked up that 48 hour mystery case and they had a heck of a lot of evidence including a receipt of the bat and the shoes he purchased.

I find it interesting that one juror came forward anonymously and it was his lack of his emotion that did it for him/her.

http://news.sportsinteraction.com/poker/jury-finds-poker-pro-ernie-scherer-guilty-of-murder-17892/

Do jurors even look at evidence anymore? I wonder.
Click to expand...

Oh I didnt know that. So they found the receipt where he bought the weapon. Well no wonder he was found guilty.

What other evidence did they have against him? tia

Never mind n/t. I see it now in the link.

However, evidence he could not explain was the nail in the coffin – such as the fact that his phone had been turned off during the murders and that he’d also alledgedly purchased a baseball bat and Nike running shoes at an outlet store in Primm, Nev., hours before his parents’ deaths, which was matched by his credit card records. Moreover, the bat that was used in the crime as well as the sneaker prints found at the scene matched those purchased in Primm

imo
 
mck16 said:
Yes, and they just said the weapon was a childs baseball bat. I had thought about that as a weapon in the JY case. Oh wow. 'He (the investigator) just said one to many coinsidences is not a coinsidence'.
Click to expand...

Where was this crime?
 
BrownRice said:
But if they are athletic shoes that are very flexible and can stretch, I bet you could. If they were dress shoes or a harder type of leather, maybe it would be more difficult. Why don't you go to the shoe store today and do an analysis for us and report back your findings? :)
Click to expand...

LOL, I have actually tried it before accidentally. Absolutely no way. Now to be sure, you need to use a Franklin 10 or two sizes below what you normally wear.
I bet the PT has already tried that in private.
 
oceanblueeyes said:
Oh I didnt know that. So they found the receipt where he bought the weapon. Well no wonder he was found guilty.

What other evidence did they have against him? tia

imo
Click to expand...

To be fair, it was a cash transaction and no video of him. However, he stopped at a gas station and McD's (used his credit card for both), and then there happened to be a Nike Factory store right next to them and the cash transaction was during the time period he was there. How they related it back to the bat was because at the murder scene, there was a little slip of paper that was a warranty for a youth Nike bat (like you get when you open up a package and it falls out - that nobody ever reads!).
 
cody100 said:
LOL, I have actually tried it before accidentally. Absolutely no way. Now to be sure, you need to use a Franklin 10 or two sizes below what you normally wear.
I bet the PT has already tried that in private.
Click to expand...

LOL! I wear a size 7 and there is absolutely no way I could put my size 7 feet in a size 5 shoe.

I wish I could because I see the prettiest shoes in smaller sizes all the time. :)
 
oceanblueeyes said:
Oh I didnt know that. So they found the receipt where he bought the weapon. Well no wonder he was found guilty.

What other evidence did they have against him? tia

imo
Click to expand...

No, actually, they did not find a receipt for those items. IIRC (I saw this case on another show a few weeks ago). What happened was that at the crime scene, the police found a little Nike warranty thingy that comes attached to a Nike bat (assumed it fell off the bat).

The police were able to determine that the son stopped for gas at a particular station at a particular time. They went to that gas station and found out that right next to that gas station was a Nike store. They went to the Nike store, looked through all the purcashes at about the time the son was at the gas station. They were able to see the CASH purchase (wanted to not have a record of the purchase) of a size 12 pair of shoes (same kind that left the blood print), a baseball bat, and gloves - BINGO! His mistake was to have purchased the things right next to where he purchase the gas.
 
cody100 said:
I definitely could not get into a shoe 2 sizes smaller. No way. If it was open heel, maybe. I am an 11 but can't get into a 9. Now I could get into a 13. LOL So, that was one of the differences that I see. I do think that two people can see the same evidence and interpret it differently, neither being more right or more wrong than the other. It is the job of the PT and DT to argue their points effectively, and think both sides did that in JY second trial. While I thought the PT might have been more eloquent, the DT was equally effective but with a different method of delivery.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Your size 11 prints would be clear, because they fit your feet. I think the size 13, which in my experience you'd be dragging a bit because they're big, would not have as clear prints.
 
Yes, LOMom, common sense tells us a random killer that beats a pregnant mother to a pulp in her own bedroom would cerainly not bother to clean upstairs. No, that crazed maniac would have rifled through every drawer and cabinet, instead of moving the victim to desperately get into the husband's closet. He would have tracked blood downstairs and taken MY's wallet and expensive camera left on the counter. Cabinets and drawers opened, looking for silver pieces,ect.

Even Collins had enough sense to suggest this was someone that personally knew the victim. Desperate, he pointed the finger at MF. Thankfully, common sense brings us back to reality and we immediately see how preposterous his theory is. That leaves us with only one personal insider who had the motive and opportunity - Jason Lynne Young.
Sure hope these 8 women and 4 men have common sense.
 
Wolfpack said:
I know if I run a CD program through my computer, it doesn't show up in my internet history. Just saying...
Click to expand...

You don't see what a computer forensics person would see when he/she examines a computer. They would be able to tell what you did on your computer.
 
LOMom said:
You don't see what a computer forensics person would see when he/she examines a computer. They would be able to tell what you did on your computer.
Click to expand...

Actually, I have reviewed forensic exams on computers, and run the same programs on mine. It would show access to the disk drive, at the very least. And by posting the internet logs, that proves nothing. You can certainly access a CD and be on the internet at the same time. Was the demo an internet demo? Or a CD demo? I would think CD in 2006, which is what my Dad used as a drug rep.

You can absolutely tell what someone does on a computer, but you would not see CD activity by running NetAnalysis, which is what that is likely from. You would see it by pulling and analyzing the $MFT.
 
cody100 said:
I definitely could not get into a shoe 2 sizes smaller. No way. If it was open heel, maybe. .
Click to expand...

There were just a few size 10 prints (just so happened to be the clearest)
There is no evidence those shoes were actually worn , much less his foot entirely in the shoe.
 
In the 48 hours case, was the jury told that they could convict if they thought there were 2 attackers but that one was the son? It sounds like there was a lot of solid evidence in that case either way.

I don't think the two sets of shoe prints in this case will matter. The jury can convict even if they think there were two attackers as long as they think JY was one of them.

I doubt they will spend too much time speculating and arguing about the meaning of the size 10 prints since there is no evidence either way - I think the size 12 hush puppys will be the indicator of whether or not JY was there. Then other evidence that isn't as solid could then become more relevant.

So the verdict could go either way - just on this forum some think all the evidence points to JY, while others don't think anything conclusively points to JY.

JMO
 
oceanblueeyes said:
LOL! I wear a size 7 and there is absolutely no way I could put my size 7 feet in a size 5 shoe.

I wish I could because I see the prettiest shoes in smaller sizes all the time. :)
Click to expand...

Seems like you may have fallen for JY's ploy - wear a size small enough that people won't believe he could fit in them.
 
Wolfpack said:
Actually, I have reviewed forensic exams on computers, and run the same programs on mine. It would show access to the disk drive, at the very least. And by posting the internet logs, that proves nothing. You can certainly access a CD and be on the internet at the same time. Was the demo an internet demo? Or a CD demo? I would think CD in 2006, which is what my Dad used as a drug rep.

You can absolutely tell what someone does on a computer, but you would not see CD activity by running NetAnalysis, which is what that is likely from. You would see it by pulling and analyzing the $MFT.
Click to expand...

That's fine, but the 'demo' was on his hard drive, not CD.

11-3-06... 10:34am-11:03am info pulled from local hardrive associated with ChartOne
 
Just the Fax said:
That's fine, but the 'demo' was on his hard drive, not CD.

11-3-06... 10:34am-11:03am info pulled from local hardrive associated with ChartOne
Click to expand...

Great! You just proved my point. It would not show up on internet usage. So, the internet times posted are irrelevant!
 
fromageball said:
In the 48 hours case, was the jury told that they could convict if they thought there were 2 attackers but that one was the son? It sounds like there was a lot of solid evidence in that case either way.

I don't think the two sets of shoe prints in this case will matter. The jury can convict even if they think there were two attackers as long as they think JY was one of them.

I doubt they will spend too much time speculating and arguing about the meaning of the size 10 prints since there is no evidence either way - I think the size 12 hush puppys will be the indicator of whether or not JY was there. Then other evidence that isn't as solid could then become more relevant.

So the verdict could go either way - just on this forum some think all the evidence points to JY, while others don't think anything conclusively points to JY.

JMO
Click to expand...

I am feeling more confident that we may see a verdict by the end of the day tomorrow or Tuesday.

Or at least we may know by then if the jury is having problems agreeing.

I dont think the jury is going to be dismissive of the 10 size shoes though. And there was no evidence entered that JY had help.

IMO
 
Wolfpack said:
Great! You just proved my point. It would not show up on internet usage. So, the internet times posted are irrelevant!
Click to expand...

The internet usage times and activity are not at all irrelevant.
 
Wolfpack said:
Great! You just proved my point. It would not show up on internet usage. So, the internet times posted are irrelevant!
Click to expand...

There was zero hard drive access for ChartOne data Thursday night.
The internet times just show exactly what he was doing on the computer...checking e-mail and looking at sports scores.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 175 more.
Total: 4,422 (members: 176, guests: 4,246)

Online statistics

Members online
176
Guests online
4,246
Total visitors
4,422
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,380
Messages
17,968,226
Members
228,763
Latest member
MomTuTu
Back
Top