Websleuths
Go Back   Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community > Crimes and Trials > Trials > Michelle Young

Notices

Michelle Young Michelle Young, 29 and pregnant was murdered in her North Carolina home. Who killed Michelle?


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-02-2007, 06:20 PM
chicoliving chicoliving is offline
WS Admin
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Chico, CA
Posts: 23,561
Michelle Young, pregnant mom, murdered Part 18

Here ya go!
  #2  
Old 05-02-2007, 06:31 PM
jake jake is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicoliving View Post
Here ya go!
Thanks. I finally saw it.

--Jake
  #3  
Old 05-02-2007, 06:41 PM
jake jake is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 733
Bellgardin vbmenu_register("postmenu_1469708", true);
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 39


Quote:
Originally Posted by jake
I see nothing mysterious or misleading in the posts I made yesterday. Others seem to think I am posting riddles. Not on purpose I'm not:

The "material witness" post? Since several of us saw the house after the police were through, I wonder if our amateur observations make us material witnesses.

LE sees blood on the shower wall: "Jason took a shower after he killed her." I see the blood: "The killer took a shower."

LE sees no bloody footprints: "Meredith was naturally excited and so exaggerated. Means nothing." I see no bloody footprints: "Who was taking care of Cassie and the dog?"

LE sees Michelle's injuries: "Jason was extremely angry about something and went crazy in here." I see the AR of injuries: "Looks like two different weapons and two killers."

"Obstruction" charge? If we "found" things in the house, such as bloody bed linen, bloody socks, etc., are we obligated to give them to LE? I think not, since LE thought those things were not evidence. But I thought I would get another opinion from those of you with more experience than I have.

--Jake






I just bumped this over from thread #17 and answered between paragraphs. I hope this works. --Jake


Material witness-I don't think you would be, but if you would like to read up on this, go to the nc legislature website and read 15A-803-it is good reading. Remember, I've mentioned this before.

I know you would like to think that cops all have a one track mind when it comes to JY, but I highly doubt that's the case. I think they are doing a good job investigating the case and that means looking at JY along with anyone else the evidence points to. No matter who it points to there is going to be someone unhappy about it. Although there are corrupt policeman, there are also corrupt businessmen, lawyers, doctors and even medical software salesmen! LE does not wake every day and wonder what innocent person they can frame and send to jail that day. They are hard-working, honest people who put themselves in danger every day to protect us.

In the beginning I was very critical of LE. Since then I've come to understand why they were so focused on Jason. I still don't like it, and I think their tunnel vision has handicapped them in this investigation. That doesn't mean they're not honest, hard-working people.

I can't imagine what it would be like to find a loved one after they have been murdered. After you have been through a trauma, I imagine your ability to view and describe things in an exactly detailed manner would be hindered. That's why eyewitness testimony can be very unreliable. No one (including you) knows exactly where M was and where she went when she found MY, so it may not be accurate for you to make assumptions upon seeing a crime scene after it's been processed. Just because you saw something in a certain place (or didn't) doesn't mean it was exactly like that right after the murder.

That's true, and I've explained it to posters many times. I don't know what the scene looked like when LE first arrived. Just my opinion, but I think LE didn't see a pristine scene, either. I think the killer(s) did some rearranging.

Doesn't look like two people were there to me and if they were, that just increases the likelihood that there would be foreign DNA. How could there be a huge struggle between 3 people & only MY's DNA was left there? If LE has foreign DNA why aren't they saying so-oh, is it to torture JY? Sounds like you're joining the J. MacDonald school of thought regarding evidence on that one-again.

LE has said nothing about what DNA was found at the scene. Perhaps they found some foreign DNA they can't identify. Perhaps they found print(s) they can't identify. This could help explain why Jason is not behind bars awaiting trial.

It's up to LE to determine what is evidence and what is not. It's not up to you. What may seem important to you may not be and something you deem unimportant may be very important. I still find it very hard to believe you aren't just bringing this up to attack the credibility of LE or to make us believe they just left a bunch of possibly important things just laying around in the hopes that we are all going to say-"The cops are idiots! JY must be innocent!" But then, if JY would have actually spoken with the police to try to help find his wife & son's murderer maybe he would have found out the answer to this question (and some others) already.

I've also said before I am an amateur. After 13 days and 19 professionals, surely no important evidence was left behind in that house. BUT....if ANY evidence was left behind, I believe the Wake County sheriff's department will be terribly embarrassed. Don't you?

--Jake
  #4  
Old 05-02-2007, 07:33 PM
raisincharlie's Avatar
raisincharlie raisincharlie is offline
Racing Doesn't Lie
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Knightsbridge
Posts: 16,831
Jake,

Has LE officially cleared Jason after this 6 month period ? If not, you might want to think about the reasons why LE has not cleared him after all this time.
__________________
Racing Doesn't Lie
  #5  
Old 05-02-2007, 07:44 PM
jake jake is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by raisincharlie View Post
Jake,

Has LE officially cleared Jason after this 6 month period ? If not, you might want to think about the reasons why LE has not cleared him after all this time.
I really can't think of any reasons. And I don't recall ever reading a statement from LE in any murder investigation that says: "This person is no longer a suspect. He is cleared." Have you?

--Jake
  #6  
Old 05-02-2007, 07:47 PM
raisincharlie's Avatar
raisincharlie raisincharlie is offline
Racing Doesn't Lie
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Knightsbridge
Posts: 16,831
Quote:
Originally Posted by jake View Post
I really can't think of any reasons. And I don't recall ever reading a statement from LE in any murder investigation that says: "This person is no longer a suspect. He is cleared." Have you?

--Jake
Yes I do recall hearing of LE officially clearing a POI - not long ago as a matter of fact.
__________________
Racing Doesn't Lie
  #7  
Old 05-02-2007, 08:20 PM
citygirl citygirl is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 491
My impatience is getting the best of me. I believe the GJ met this week . Now, it is Wednesday night , and there seems to be no activity .

I think the husband committed this terrible crime and can't for the life of me understand why there has been no arrest.

Jake, I wish you could enlighten us with some new info , yet everything is the *same old, same old*.

When will this be resolved ?????
  #8  
Old 05-02-2007, 08:35 PM
jake jake is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by citygirl View Post
My impatience is getting the best of me. I believe the GJ met this week . Now, it is Wednesday night , and there seems to be no activity .

I think the husband committed this terrible crime and can't for the life of me understand why there has been no arrest.

Jake, I wish you could enlighten us with some new info , yet everything is the *same old, same old*.

When will this be resolved ?????
Soon, citygirl, soon. BUT.... just five minutes ago I heard that LE apparently has a big leak. I say "apparently" because the info possibly was leaked by someone else. I don't feel at liberty to tell you what was leaked, but it was something given to LE today. I think it will make the news soon. I'll see if I can find out more.

--Jake
  #9  
Old 05-02-2007, 08:45 PM
Stoli Stoli is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by jake View Post
Soon, citygirl, soon. BUT.... just five minutes ago I heard that LE apparently has a big leak. I say "apparently" because the info possibly was leaked by someone else. I don't feel at liberty to tell you what was leaked, but it was something given to LE today. I think it will make the news soon. I'll see if I can find out more.

--Jake
Another mallet thrown in the yard?
  #10  
Old 05-02-2007, 08:53 PM
Stoli Stoli is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 51
Does it have anything to do with this,

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1377240/

and the statement that they did not do a sexual assault test on the fully clothed victim?
  #11  
Old 05-02-2007, 09:21 PM
jake jake is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoli View Post
Does it have anything to do with this,

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1377240/

and the statement that they did not do a sexual assault test on the fully clothed victim?
SNIPPED FROM WRAL++++++++++++++

But a piece of evidence that was missed were tests to determine whether Young was sexually assaulted.

According to the autopsy report, the North Carolina medical examiner never performed any, which means investigators cannot rule out sexual assault as a motive for the crime.

North Carolina medical examiner John Butts said such tests are only performed when there are obvious signs of sexual assault. Investigators would not comment on how that could affect the case


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
  #12  
Old 05-02-2007, 09:24 PM
athy's Avatar
athy athy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: north carolina
Posts: 1,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by jake View Post
SNIPPED FROM WRAL++++++++++++++

But a piece of evidence that was missed were tests to determine whether Young was sexually assaulted.

According to the autopsy report, the North Carolina medical examiner never performed any, which means investigators cannot rule out sexual assault as a motive for the crime.

North Carolina medical examiner John Butts said such tests are only performed when there are obvious signs of sexual assault. Investigators would not comment on how that could affect the case

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
yes, apparently there were no obvious signs of sexual assault being she was fully clothed.
  #13  
Old 05-02-2007, 09:35 PM
jake jake is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoli View Post
Does it have anything to do with this,

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1377240/

and the statement that they did not do a sexual assault test on the fully clothed victim?
Yep. Someone has been talking to Ms. Lamb. I believe it is someone in LE, but it could possibly be someone else.

I am surprised Ms. Lamb would rely on the AR for her information. There's no way for her to know if LE released a complete AR. But apparently she has a good source who told her no sexual assault test was done.

I've got to wonder why now this interest in a sexual assault test. Before this, I was the only one who showed any interest. Has Ms. Lamb learned something about a possible assault? Or what?

By the way, thank you for the link. For some reason, the story does not show up on WRAL on my computer. Not yet, anyway.

--Jake
  #14  
Old 05-02-2007, 09:41 PM
Stoli Stoli is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by jake View Post
Yep. Someone has been talking to Ms. Lamb. I believe it is someone in LE, but it could possibly be someone else.

I am surprised Ms. Lamb would rely on the AR for her information. There's no way for her to know if LE released a complete AR. But apparently she has a good source who told her no sexual assault test was done.

I've got to wonder why now this interest in a sexual assault test. Before this, I was the only one who showed any interest. Has Ms. Lamb learned something about a possible assault? Or what?

By the way, thank you for the link. For some reason, the story does not show up on WRAL on my computer. Not yet, anyway.

--Jake
I don't believe there was any sexual assault based on the fact that the victim was fully clothed and I'm guessing there were other physical signs that there was no sexual assault but I will agree that it would eliminate that defense argument if the test had been done. I guess if the only thing you're interested in is defending a man whether he be guilty or not, this might be a cause for celebration for you.
  #15  
Old 05-02-2007, 09:41 PM
jake jake is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by athy View Post
yes, apparently there were no obvious signs of sexual assault being she was fully clothed.
A woman is found beaten to death IN HER BEDROOM (for emphasis) and yet no sexual assault test? Wonder how long it takes to do one? Maybe it's just too expensive? Maybe LE already knew the name of the killer?

Hmmmm. I think someone already regrets that decision.

--Jake
  #16  
Old 05-02-2007, 09:42 PM
athy's Avatar
athy athy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: north carolina
Posts: 1,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by jake View Post
Yep. Someone has been talking to Ms. Lamb. I believe it is someone in LE, but it could possibly be someone else.

I am surprised Ms. Lamb would rely on the AR for her information. There's no way for her to know if LE released a complete AR. But apparently she has a good source who told her no sexual assault test was done.

I've got to wonder why now this interest in a sexual assault test. Before this, I was the only one who showed any interest. Has Ms. Lamb learned something about a possible assault? Or what?

By the way, thank you for the link. For some reason, the story does not show up on WRAL on my computer. Not yet, anyway.

--Jake
i think we're more surprised to hear they didn't do one. but i also understand their reasoning, she was still clothed and i've never heard of a rapist reclothing their victim. so i guess they figured it was safe to assume it wasn't needed.
  #17  
Old 05-02-2007, 09:44 PM
Samiya Samiya is offline
Jason, you're pathetic
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoli View Post
Does it have anything to do with this,

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1377240/

and the statement that they did not do a sexual assault test on the fully clothed victim?
I've just come back from posting a comment on that story. It seems rather strange to me that it took 6 months to comment about the no rape kit.

Here is what I posted.

What the ME said is true. There were no 'obvious' signs that Michelle had been sexually assaulted in any form, so no rape kit used. Michelle was found fully clothed, which led to the surmise that she was not sexually assaulted. Sexual assault in regards to motive in homicides extends further than 'obvious signs' on the victim. It possibly could have began with that motive, if the perp is unknown, but turned to homicide when the attacker found Michelle was not going to be a submissive victim. Sexual assault is about power.

I believe that the attack on Michelle was intentional, that she was the target of her attacker and that the intention her death. It is also painfully obvious that her attacker was very inexperienced, had most certainly never killed before, and had no idea 'what it takes' or how long it takes to strangle a person, let alone 'what it takes' to beat a person to death. The perp's 'rage' I see as rage at himself for not being able to perform a task that to him should have been 'easy'.....to strangle Michelle and get out fast.

People need to have faith in Donnie Harrison and his team. The FBI honestly couldn't do much more than what Donnie is doing now. A homicide like that of Michelle is one of those where it can't be solved overnight. In the world outside crime tv, it just rarely happens and when they are, the evidence is there or the perp caves in and tells all. Michelle's case is a hard case and a sensitive case due to her daughter being found at the scene. In a case such as this, there is no room for mistakes. It has to be right, and it has to be right the FIRST time.

RIP Michelle, may your light shine forever in the eyes of your daughter and those who love you.

Samiya
  #18  
Old 05-02-2007, 09:45 PM
jake jake is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoli View Post
I don't believe there was any sexual assault based on the fact that the victim was fully clothed and I'm guessing there were other physical signs that there was no sexual assault but I will agree that it would eliminate that defense argument if the test had been done. I guess if the only thing you're interested in is defending a man whether he be guilty or not, this might be a cause for celebration for you.
"guilty or not"? NOT is all I have ever said.

I will celebrate when someone is arrested, tried, and convicted.

--Jake
  #19  
Old 05-02-2007, 09:45 PM
Samiya Samiya is offline
Jason, you're pathetic
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,004
LOL> ok, who got CTV forum closed?

Some people just can't help themselves!

Sami
  #20  
Old 05-02-2007, 09:49 PM
athy's Avatar
athy athy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: north carolina
Posts: 1,625
very good post to them Sami, and CTV is opened again though not much going on over there.

also, i would imagine if she had been sexually assaulted there would have been signs of bruising on her thighs, they seem to show up even more after death from what i understand. no bruising, no signs.
  #21  
Old 05-02-2007, 09:54 PM
Samiya Samiya is offline
Jason, you're pathetic
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by athy View Post
i think we're more surprised to hear they didn't do one. but i also understand their reasoning, she was still clothed and i've never heard of a rapist reclothing their victim. so i guess they figured it was safe to assume it wasn't needed.
The blood patterning on her clothes would be a tell tale sign of whether or not those clothes were on during the attack or put on her afterwards.

Sami
  #22  
Old 05-02-2007, 09:55 PM
jake jake is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by athy View Post
i think we're more surprised to hear they didn't do one. but i also understand their reasoning, she was still clothed and i've never heard of a rapist reclothing their victim. so i guess they figured it was safe to assume it wasn't needed.
And the defense argument is going to be: the killer raped her, forced her to put her clothes back on, then beat her to death.

--Jake
  #23  
Old 05-02-2007, 09:58 PM
jake jake is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 733
Something else Ms. Lamb revealed in her story not generally known: LE has started another round of interviews. This is probably common when a case reaches a brick wall.

--Jake
  #24  
Old 05-02-2007, 09:59 PM
Samiya Samiya is offline
Jason, you're pathetic
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by jake View Post
And the defense argument is going to be: the killer raped her, forced her to put her clothes back on, then beat her to death.

--Jake
I sure hope the Defense can find a case to quote so that they have an 'argument' that it can and has happened before.

Rapists usually leave after raping a woman. When they do kill afterwards the victim is always either naked or partially clothed. But there is always a sign of the victim having been raped.

Sami
  #25  
Old 05-02-2007, 10:00 PM
Samiya Samiya is offline
Jason, you're pathetic
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by jake View Post
Something else Ms. Lamb revealed in her story not generally known: LE has started another round of interviews. This is probably common when a case reaches a brick wall.

--Jake
It is also common to re-verify statements made previously.

Sami
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


© Copyright Websleuths 1999-2012 New To Site? Need Help?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:04 AM.

Advertisements

Pre-Order Imperfect Justice: Prosecuting Casey Anthony today!