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

Status
Not open for further replies.
JTF, there was no evidence that the size 10 shoes were not worn nor that the foot was not entirely in the shoe. Therefore, your theory is no more true than his foot being completely in the shoe. I always put a Red Flag when such alternate theories are required to explain a coincidence.
 
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.

Was that in testimony? Or just in closing? I must have missed that. I doubt those three things were the "only" activity on the computer that night. Computers log EVERYTHING. Plugging in a battery pack, closing a window, etc.
 
LOL, I think the point in question relates to wearing seatbelts. Would Michelle have any reason to lie to the officer about whether she was wearing her seatbelt? She was there when the report was given and had a responsibility to correct Jason if he lied ... she didn't correct him, so it's fair to assume that it is true that she was wearing her seatbelt.

Well the law is click it or ticket. I assume they were out of the car when the officer got there. If I was asked if we were wearing seat belts and I had tried to cause harm to my wife/husband due to causing an accident, I wouldn't say I asked my wife to remove her seat belt just before the crash.
 
Well the law is click it or ticket. I assume they were out of the car when the officer got there. If I was asked if we were wearing seat belts and I had tried to cause harm to my wife/husband due to causing an accident, I wouldn't say I asked my wife to remove her seat belt just before the crash.

What testimony said he "asked her" to remove her seatbelt?
 
JTF, there was no evidence that the size 10 shoes were not worn nor that the foot was not entirely in the shoe. Therefore, your theory is no more true than his foot being completely in the shoe. I always put a Red Flag when such alternate theories are required to explain a coincidence.

I was just showing you how he could have made the 10 prints, since the discussion has been it would be nearly impossible to wear a shoe 2 sizes smaller.
 
Was that in testimony? Or just in closing? I must have missed that. I doubt those three things were the "only" activity on the computer that night. Computers log EVERYTHING. Plugging in a battery pack, closing a window, etc.

Testimony from Agent Smith
 
Regarding the size 10 shoes. If you look at the photo of JY's foot (don't have a link to it), you can clearly see 4 red blister like marks on his foot - 3 on the side of his foot (one on his little toe) and one on top near his big toe.
 
Testimony from Agent Smith

Alright, in that case, I concede the point. I still think that the internet times cannot be all the computer activity, just from my personal experience. It could just be all "relevant" computer activity. But if Agent testified he didn't access the file, then he must have reason to back it up.
 
Regarding the size 10 shoes. If you look at the photo of JY's foot (don't have a link to it), you can clearly see 4 red blister like marks on his foot - 3 on the side of his foot and one on top near his big toe.

I think, if you could "clearly" see it, then it would have been subject at trial. I don't remember anyone calling attention to "blisters" on his feet. I don't see blisters, I see a normal foot. An ugly foot yes, but normal nonetheless.
 
I think, if you could "clearly" see it, then it would have been subject at trial. I don't remember anyone calling attention to "blisters" on his feet. I don't see blisters, I see a normal foot. An ugly foot yes, but normal nonetheless.

Looking at the 4th photo in the set here: http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/image_gallery/9726547/, you should be able to see them - one on the little toe, 2 more on that side of the foot, and one on the top of his foot, almost in line with his big toe.
 
I think, if you could "clearly" see it, then it would have been subject at trial. I don't remember anyone calling attention to "blisters" on his feet. I don't see blisters, I see a normal foot. An ugly foot yes, but normal nonetheless.

It seems like if he just slid his feet into the smaller 10 size shoes that when he tried to walk in them that the prints would show drag patterns of some kind. And if he actually put his feet inside he would have blisters on his heels also. If he only put the shoe on part ways then wouldnt his heel print have been seen on the back of the shoeprint. It had to be hanging off if he did that, imo.

If he just slid his feet inside and not all the way in the shoes then that seems awfully cumbersome while trying to commit a murder.
 
Well, heck. It's been 6 years. I'm sure she got it confused with a different wreck, a different Memorial Day, a different year. :rolleyes::nevermind:

LOL! Maybe she was thinking of a different imp! ;)
 
I've seen them. I see a normal, ugly foot, with sock marks. Did someone testify that his too small shoes caused blisters?

I don't recall that they did, but you can clearly see the red marks on the foot.

I don't think the PT ever theorized that JY acted alone or "in concert" (they didn't get "locked" into one), so they didn't lead the jury towards either one in the case - they left it open to each jury member to decide on his/her own, which was a smart strategy.
 
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

Agreed, I don't think the jury will dismiss them, I just think their opinion on hush puppy prints will be more important when they decide whether or not JY was at the crime scene. It doesn't matter if he had help or not, imo, since they can convict as long as they think he was there.
 
The reason that the perpetrator in that 48 hours episode wore a size other than his own was to throw off the police, obviously. Being a family member of the victims, he knew that he would be looked at closely. He had to use a size different from his own if he hoped to be eliminated as a suspect. This was also JY's reasoning - he's the victim's husband and knew he would be looked at. He's thinking he shuld wear a size 10 when his size is 12 and hope that nobody believes you left the print. The leaving of the size 12 HP print was not planned, obviously.

Keep in mind that a random stranger killer would NOT bother to try to throw off police with a wrong size shoe and then, why would a stranger random killer bother to change out of his bloody shoes before leaving a crime scene??? Nobody would know who he was!! The only people that would try to throw off police by wearing the wrong size shoe is somebody that the police would look at from the get go - somebody that knew the victim. This is common sense.


And to add just another piece - how would a random stranger KNOW what size shoes would be worn by the resident/owner/husband/significant other.

I can just see the murderer going through the closet checking out shoe sizes and making the adjustment. If it wasn't so serious it would be funny.:banghead:
 
Looking at the 4th photo in the set here: http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/image_gallery/9726547/, you should be able to see them - one on the little toe, 2 more on that side of the foot, and one on the top of his foot, almost in line with his big toe.

Those look like pressure points to me due to how his foot and bone structure is.

And I noticed that the black toenail seems to have been done for some time. It looks like the nail has grown out since that injury.

IMO
 
And to add just another piece - how would a random stranger KNOW what size shoes would be worn by the resident/owner/husband/significant other.

I can just see the murderer going through the closet checking out shoe sizes and making the adjustment. If it wasn't so serious it would be funny.:banghead:

By taking the shoes out of the owner's closet because he couldn't exactly leave in blood soaked shoes of his own?
 
I didn't watch the 48 hours episode. Can you post how he did it? Also, I noticed (from the posts here) that the killer in the 48 hours episode was a size 10 and the prints he made were with a size 12? Is that correct?

I think it would be easy for someone to go from a smaller size to a bigger one but to go from a size 12 to a 10? How would the shoes fit?

imo....Easy. Push the back of the heel down flat and wear the shoes like mules/slip ons.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
187
Guests online
1,522
Total visitors
1,709

Forum statistics

Threads
589,942
Messages
17,928,003
Members
228,009
Latest member
chrsrb10
Back
Top