State vs. Jason Lynn Young 2-20-2012

[Turnadot]

Originally Posted by luckyme

If he was innocent wouldnt he be scared to death to put her in harms way? He had no idea what the perp was thinking. He almost lost his living child. I would be protecting that child. If i was a juror that would be sticking out in my head. moo

This is a good point, too, IMO.

As a mock juror, what sticks out in my head is that he was a lousy husband, immature husband. That's all I've heard so far wrt his guilt.

CY witnessed her mother's murder, and that's terribly tragic beyond words, but it doesn't point to Jy's guilt or innocence - all it tells me is that poor baby witnessed her mother being beaten to death.

I believe JY is guilty, but I'm waiting on something to confirm it so I would feel comfortable voting that way, if I were on the jury.

[fran]

Originally Posted by Talina

Well, where were you this weekend when we debated this ad nauseum? We could have used your words of wisdom.

Actually, LOL, I was taking a drive for another case.


fran

[luckyme]

uhoh she babysat for cy!!!

[Turnadot]

Originally Posted by thumbtack

not really a change, cuz the chair was in the spanking hand.

Yes, a change. A big change, IMO.

The chair in the spanking hand could give the impression to the jury that CY witnessed her mother being beaten with a chair.

Cynical me says the prosecution, while prepping the witness over the weekend, wanted her to leave the chair out so that the jury wouldn't start to think, 'Where's the chair, then? No chair? Well, then maybe CY didn't actually witness it.'

IMO

[Tipstaff]

Originally Posted by luckyme

I would be kind of scared to send her to daycare out in public. Her mother was brutally murdered and she was left as a witness. I guess JY knew the perp wouldnt come after her. moo

Excellent observation. It would seem very reasonable that CY would be with family and no where near any public place.

[ncsu95]

Originally Posted by ncsu95

That last statement might be the difference in verdicts this time around. Mommy getting a spanking had to come from Jason as an explanation of what he was doing. Very damning testimony.

I know I'm quoting my own post....but I'm sitting here getting pissed off thinking about this. I have a 3 year old (turned 3 in November), so I know about this whole biting thing at that age. I'm sure CY has bitten and was probably given a spanking for biting or told she would be. So CY walks in on daddy beating mommy and he takes her out saying mommy was getting a spanking for biting. How horrible. I know I didn't read/participate in the weekend discussion on this, but this just gets my blood boiling.

[Turnadot]

No matter what end anyone sits on this case, the idea that that poor baby witnessed her mother's brutal murder is beyond heartbreaking, IMO.

[thumbtack]

Originally Posted by Turnadot

Yes, a change. A big change, IMO.

The chair in the spanking hand could give the impression to the jury that CY witnessed her mother being beaten with a chair.

Cynical me says the prosecution, while prepping the witness over the weekend, wanted her to leave the chair out so that the jury wouldn't start to think, 'Where's the chair, then? No chair? Well, then maybe CY didn't actually witness it.'

IMO

could be. or, that dad had a weapon & that was the only prop available for CY to use

[terminatrixator]

Originally Posted by Turnadot

This is a good point, too, IMO.

As a mock juror, what sticks out in my head is that he was a lousy husband, immature husband. That's all I've heard so far wrt his guilt.

CY witnessed her mother's murder, and that's terribly tragic beyond words, but it doesn't point to Jy's guilt or innocence - all it tells me is that poor baby witnessed her mother being beaten to death.

I believe JY is guilty, but I'm waiting on something to confirm it so I would feel comfortable voting that way, if I were on the jury.

You hear is he's a lousy, immature husband, the most important part of this is his wife was murdered, he had the means, the motive and the opportunity. Nobody else in this entire world would have gained from Michelle's murder. The shoes, the blisters, the life insurance policy, everything, every single circumstantial evidence points to Jason. If it was anyone, a thug, a thief, a neighbor, a psycho, there WOULD be evidence pointing away from Jason. There's NOTHING that points away from Jason. Jason is the only logical, possible murderer of Michelle. That's evidence enough in a court of law.

[Turnadot]

Originally Posted by thumbtack

could be. or, that dad had a weapon & that was the only prop available for CY to use

Yes, this could very well be. Good point.

[fran]

Originally Posted by thumbtack

could be. or, that dad had a weapon & that was the only prop available for CY to use

MF already testified there was something large, I believe, that was missing from one of the tables. But she couldn't recall what it was.

Does anyone else remember this?
fran

[Just the Fax]

Originally Posted by Turnadot

This is a good point, too, IMO.

As a mock juror, what sticks out in my head is that he was a lousy husband, immature husband. That's all I've heard so far wrt his guilt.

CY witnessed her mother's murder, and that's terribly tragic beyond words, but it doesn't point to Jy's guilt or innocence - all it tells me is that poor baby witnessed her mother being beaten to death.

I believe JY is guilty, but I'm waiting on something to confirm it so I would feel comfortable voting that way, if I were on the jury.

I have seen a lot of scattered dots.
It is up to the PT to connect these dots during closing arguments.
They did a poor job last time...hope they are prepared this time.

[thumbtack]

Between the judge & lawyers, can't believe all the "ums." would expect it for non-expert witnesses, but, not professionals who speak for a living.

[Bottle Cap]

Originally Posted by ncsu95

I know I'm quoting my own post....but I'm sitting here getting pissed off thinking about this. I have a 3 year old (turned 3 in November), so I know about this whole biting thing at that age. I'm sure CY has bitten and was probably given a spanking for biting or told she would be. So CY walks in on daddy beating mommy and he takes her out saying mommy was getting a spanking for biting. How horrible. I know I didn't read/participate in the weekend discussion on this, but this just gets my blood boiling.

Agreed, its hideous beyond words.

What has continued to piss me off in all this is JY's manner of going about his life as compared and contrasted to his wife's. MY's activities were so genuine, sweet, innocuous, up front and above board. Her idea of fun and socializing was to invite the day care worker/babysitter over to watch Cinderella. JY's idea of fun was having a quickie on the sofa with CAS. To say MY was too good for him is a monstrous understatement.

[fifteen89]

Originally Posted by ncmomof2boys

Does anyone else think JY got a haircut over the weekend? Perhaps he is planning to 'charm us' on the stand in his on testimony...

Good luck with that. I see nothing attractive about him or his facial features at all. Still surprising to me that he was able to have such beautiful women in his life.

[Turnadot]

Originally Posted by terminatrixator

You hear is he's a lousy, immature husband, the most important part of this is his wife was murdered, he had the means, the motive and the opportunity. Nobody else in this entire world would have gained from Michelle's murder. The shoes, the blisters, the life insurance policy, everything, every single circumstantial evidence points to Jason. If it was anyone, a thug, a thief, a neighbor, a psycho, there WOULD be evidence pointing away from Jason. There's NOTHING that points away from Jason. Jason is the only logical, possible murderer of Michelle. That's evidence enough in a court of law.

So far, I've not seen any actual evidence that points to him. Aside from the fact he's was a terrible - POS husband, I've not learned one piece of evidence that puts him in that house beating his wife to death.

Sure, he's the logical killer, but that doesn't mean he did it. There was a case where the most logical possible murderer was the husband, but it wasn't him; it was a neighbour. So for me, I need more than my assumptions based on the only "logical" conclusion, and feelings.

Again, I believe he did it, but that's not good enough for me.

[fredwomble]

Originally Posted by thumbtack

could be. or, that dad had a weapon & that was the only prop available for CY to use

Exactly, nothing more and nothing less. Just as no one believes an old woman in a track suit was giving the "spanking". What's important is that for some reason, Cassidy's impression of what happened was her mommy was spanked, for biting. How could she have come up with that in any other way than having been told it, that is very specific. That she used a chair in the acting out says to me that something was used aside from a "hand" spanking. And that is another awful thing to contemplate, made worse by her witnessing something like this.

[Turnadot]

Originally Posted by Just the Fax

I have seen a lot of scattered dots.
It is up to the PT to connect these dots during closing arguments.
They did a poor job last time...hope they are prepared this time.

Same here. I hope the jury sees it the prosecutions way.

[Pocono Sleuther]

Originally Posted by fifteen89

Good luck with that. I see nothing attractive about him or his facial features at all. Still surprising to me that he was able to have such beautiful women in his life.

He has a serious case of weasely rat face. I, personally, can't stand when they zoom on him. He always looks like he's ready to pounce on his next victim.

[SailorMoon]

Forgive me for jumping in late here, but is he out on bond and has he been the entire time? Who has the kids now? Thanks.

[distracted 1976]

Originally Posted by fran

MF already testified there was something large, I believe, that was missing from one of the tables. But she couldn't recall what it was.

Does anyone else remember this?
fran

I do! I do!

[luckyme]

Originally Posted by Tipstaff

Excellent observation. It would seem very reasonable that CY would be with family and no where near any public place.

Originally Posted by Turnadot

So far, I've not seen any actual evidence that points to him. Aside from the fact he's was a terrible - POS husband, I've not learned one piece of evidence that puts him in that house beating his wife to death.

Sure, he's the logical killer, but that doesn't mean he did it. There was a case where the most logical possible murderer was the husband, but it wasn't him; it was a neighbour. So for me, I need more than my assumptions based on the only "logical" conclusion, and feelings.

Again, I believe he did it, but that's not good enough for me.

Yes, It only takes on juror. I bet if hes allowed to walk we will see him in the news again. moo

[terminatrixator]

Sorry the beginning of the sentence doesn't make much sense lol.

I get a bit frustrated, and it shows, with what the general public expects, as far as evidence in cases of homicides where the significant other is the suspect.

There has been a lot of murders and public trials over the last twenty years. There's a ton of murder mystery shows, forensic shows, Trut, ID, all of these shows have demonstrated what gets looked at after a murder occurs. It makes planning and premeditating a lot easier. When the murderer lives in the same home, it's a lot harder to prove because what DNA would you be expecting. Their DNA is everywhere, the ability to plan and premeditate, is a lot different than in other cases.

Jason Young was aware of the case against Michael Peterson, he was aware of the murder of Janet Abaroa, two murders that occurred before Michelle Young. Learn, adapt, change things up. He's also a sociopath, not just a cad, a bad husband, a jerk. Sociopaths have the ability to premeditate, everything was on his side.

Everyone needs to look at the entirety of the case. Common sense and the ability to connect the dots seems to have become lost in the world with so many 60 minute CSI shows.

[fran]

FWIW, remember, it's not 'one' piece of evidence that convicts a person, especially in a circumstantial case. It's the totality of the evidence.

I believe that once the jurors begin deliberations, when they begin to make their guilty or innocent columns, they'll be overwhelmed by the 'guilty' coincidences.

It's like a BIG puzzle, one piece fitting into the other.

JMHO
of course,
fran

[Turnadot]

Originally Posted by fredwomble

Exactly, nothing more and nothing less. Just as no one believes an old woman in a track suit was giving the "spanking". What's important is that for some reason, Cassidy's impression of what happened was her mommy was spanked, for biting. How could she have come up with that in any other way than having been told it, that is very specific. That she used a chair in the acting out says to me that something was used aside from a "hand" spanking. And that is another awful thing to contemplate, made worse by her witnessing something like this.

She could have come to that conclusion from her own experiences. My son does it all the time.

A lady in a store got upset at the register (huffing, yelled) because the cashier was too slow. Later in the car, my son told me the lady was mad because she couldn't have any candy.

Children come up with all kinds of things filtered through their own experiences.

IMO