Guilty of first degree murder/verdict watch #2

[ladonna]

Judge Looking Into Juror Misconduct

http://www.wral.com/

 

[evelyn24]

There was just breaking news on WRAL about Judge Stephens asking SBI to look into possible Juror misconduct. What does this mean if they find misconduct? Does he get another trial?

Goodness, will this nightmare ever end?! My hope is that it's a false allegation made by some sad sac JY supporter, and believe me they're out there and from reading postings in the comment section on WRAL for example, they're not very happy. All allegations have to be investigated I would assume. Hopefully nothing comes of it.

 

[nursebeeme]

SBI probe into possible juror misconduct - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

I started a thread for this discussion

 

[Wolfpack]

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/story/10820046/

RALEIGH, N.C. — The judge presiding over the murder trial of Jason Young has ordered the State Bureau of Investigation to look into possible misconduct involving a juror who might have talked about the case during deliberations.

<modsnip>

Reporter: Tara Lynn

 

[CeeKer]

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/story/10820046/

 

[dja230]

Say it ain't so.

 

[DrDigger]

surelock-- yup- the same. LOl

 

[Landonsmom02]

I know I am late but GUILTY!!! I keep repeating it. May GOD bless the Fisher's and Cassidy.

 

[gitana1]

Here's the short clip of him saying it:

http://www.wral.com/news/local/video/5743505/#/vid5743505

I saw the whole episode on the web somewhere but I can't find it now.

Man, those guys on camera were real jerks. How do they feel now defending the rights of a murderer? The one young guy referred to the murder of jason's wife as some stupid stuff, or something like that. The manager was very rude. He didn't have to be. He was angry and physically aggressive. And that ball hit the camera on purpose. Wow.

There was just breaking news on WRAL about Judge Stephens asking SBI to look into possible Juror misconduct. What does this mean if they find misconduct? Does he get another trial?

Don't worry too much just yet. The judge is probably just protecting the verdict.

First, there has to be a finding that juror misconduct actually occurred.

If that hurdle is passed, any misconduct has to be found to have materially affected the outcome of the case. It would be very difficult to be granted a new trial on appeal due to later discovered juror misconduct. Here's some info:

• If, as is most often true, the misconduct is not discovered until after the verdict has been rendered, then two strong legal policies tend to restrain efforts to rectify the misconduct:
  
  • The policy that jury deliberations are secret, and only limited inquiry is permitted concerning what went on in the jury room.
  • The policy that once a verdict has been rendered, it is presumed to be a valid final judgment for reasons of judicial economy and repose for the litigants.
• Thus, it is often an uphill battle for a losing litigant to even be permitted to offer evidence of jury misconduct, let alone to be granted a new trial on the basis of it. Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b) shows the difficulty of presenting evidence to “impeach” the jury verdict (and many states have similar laws):
  (b) Inquiry into validity of verdict or indictment. Upon an inquiry into the validity of a verdict or indictment, a juror may not testify as to any matter or statement occurring during the course of the jury's deliberations or to the effect of anything upon that or any other juror's mind or emotions as influencing the juror to assent to or dissent from the verdict or indictment or concerning the juror's mental processes in connection therewith, except that a juror may testify on the question whether extraneous prejudicial information was improperly brought to the jury's attention or whether any outside influence was improperly brought to bear upon any juror. Nor may a juror's affidavit or evidence of any statement by the juror concerning a matter about which the juror would be precluded from testifying be received for these purposes.

http://www.ajs.org/jc/juries/jc_decision_misconduct.asp

 

[ynotdivein]

Bumpity bump.

SBI probe into possible juror misconduct - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

I started a thread for this discussion

 

[CeeKer]

Another juror on HOL with Vinnie.

ETA: The one that said NG at first although she always thought he was guilty.

 

[ynotdivein]

CeeKer! Can you transcribe as best you can for those of us who might be looking in from werk? :innocent: :blowkiss:

 

[gngr~snap]

Foreperson...

Elected FP, we went into room & we had 4 people who volunteered and did a secret ballot.

Extra pressure? I volunteered, I was familiar & comfortable doing it - i was up to the task.

Delib process...

Day 1; took first vote realized we were split down the middle, we started getting our emotions up from having them all bottle up

halfway through the day we started getting structure, how we wanted to proceed, breaking things down

6/6 or 7/5 friday - 7 in favor of guilt end of day friday vs. 5 undecided - no one was in NG column friday afternoon. No one was firmly in the NG for very long, maybe 1 or 2 initially but they moved to undecided pretty quickly

Monday who is on the fence and really talk about their reservations so we could get them off the fence one way or the other - what are your questions, the things that are gnawing at you - lists all over walls, dry erase boards, we read through the law - what it meant, 1st degree, 2nd degree - working in concert -

9/3 10/2 11/1 finally got to unanimous 12/12 then after lunch asked JS for 20 minutes to pray over it and mull over it individually to make sure were all fine with our verdict - took a couple more votes after the break and everyone was sure in their verdict.

It was really good to finally talk to the 11 other jurors to get my questions asked, i was tipping to G by the end of the day friday - hc statement about the puzzle really stuck with me the analogy made sense you don't need all the pieces to see the big picture another juror said look at all these coincidences and the CE, you don't need every piece.

One piece of evidence stuck out to her - the baby, Cassidy, the fact that someone would take that much time to clean up the baby after committing a brutal crime like that just didn't point to that many people - if it was random who would come in there and do that. That was my feeling. Did not take into account what the DC worker said. The evidence said Cass was cleaned up PERIOD. It was based on the fact that child was clean and someone did it - in my mind the only person to have the compassion & fore thought to do that was Jason. JY cared more about that baby - i think he underestimated this was his plan, he didn't account for what could go wrong IMO. He didn't know what to do when that child got around her mother, he didn't know what to do - he didn't know what the outcome was going to be.

Speaking to LE - I can understand, there's a lot of feeling about LE about how they hone in on stuff - i very much agree with they probably honed in on him - if i had committed a crime, if i didn't like the person i committed the crime against, i'm going to make it that i'm not involve din any of this . if jy didn't kill his wife, he should have presented everything they asked for. he should have presented the shirt, the shoes - he didn't he couldn't. i understand theres no fps or dna from jy, but there isn't from anyone else either.

testify - well after seeing the pt evidence, im not sure him testifying would have helped him. he would have had to fill in a lot of holes from his first testimony - damned if you do - damned if you don't. Cassidy was cleaned up! he couldn't produce a shirt or shoes - even if the shoes were given away you couldn't produce the shirt - it just didn't make any sense!

People who aren't serious about JY get off of it! It's a serious responsibility. It's a very, very important part of our system and shouldn't be taken lightly.

sorry for any typos!

I also heard this on TV this morning.

"First poll on Friday - all 4 men voted guilty "
post214
Guilty of first degree murder/verdict watch #2 - Page 9 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

Maybe I heard wrong?

 

[CeeKer]

Juror 5. Women.

She was the NG at first although she always thought he was guilty. She wanted to be sure they were meeting reasonable doubt and the evidence presented would meet that test. Vinnie says "that is what you're supposed to do"

Vinnie asks her about:

CY being clean: Spent a lot of time discussing that. Asked eachother "who would take the time to clean and change" Had to be someone who loved her.

JY at the HI: They didn't believe Cigar. He hated smoking per testimony and no one was presented to show he did smoke. 30 degree temp/winds so they didn't find him going out plausible to smoke and read. Being on computer prior to going to desk for USA today and the fact anything he'd want to read would be online anyway, made her not believe. [she doesn't finish her sentences so this is hard]

Vote: took votes immediately and then about 2 or 3 votes a day.

Hush Puppies: She thinks strong possibility he was wearing them because of the CB. And those shoes were unacccounted for.

She doesn't remember them ever being "deadlocked".

She said the the experience was "not bad!".

 

[CeeKer]

CeeKer! Can you transcribe as best you can for those of us who might be looking in from werk? :innocent: :blowkiss:

Sorry it took me awhile. My daughter came in and interupted me (the nerve of her! LOL)

 

[BrownRice]

Goodness, will this nightmare ever end?!

That was exactly my first thought. Geez, enough already.

 

[otto]

It would be near impossible to commit suicide in your first few weeks at Central. Suicide watch is mandatory for everyone who comes in, and is part of processing. Sometimes it's as many as 6-8 weeks before they get a cell of their own and clothing of their own, and out of the in between business.

There's no such thing as "forever and ever in a cage" here, as rehabilitation and hope are factors in criminal justice. I don't really understand the concept behind permanently imprisoning people. However, given that forever and ever in a cage is what people like Cooper and Young are facing, I personally don't understand why they bother staying alive.

 

[sureLocke]

I believe in Brad's case its a wonder for him how high his forehead will go and for Jason I believe its the intrigue of learning new d-tricks; he will soon find out he's not the only wild and crazy guy with a few tricks up his sleeve.

 

[terminatrixator]

There's no such thing as "forever and ever in a cage" here, as rehabilitation and hope are factors in criminal justice. I don't really understand the concept behind permanently imprisoning people. However, given that forever and ever in a cage is what people like Cooper and Young are facing, I personally don't understand why they bother staying alive.

If these guys don't believe in Divorce as option, I highly doubt suicide is a great option. Most don't admit their guilt ever...and will go to their death without admitting it. They also believe that somehow, someway they are going to end up getting out eventually and the hope of the appeal. It will be a long long time until death is a viable option for them.

 

[OneLove]

I am sorry that I do not have these answers. I only know about the trip I posted about. MM had moved to Myrtle Beach then the sisters took their memorial trip there and MM found out about it and coincidentally showed up to where they were and tried to make nice like nothing ever happened. It really disturbed the sisters.

Maybe, just maybe, these two hit it off because they have self-absorbed sociopathy in common?

It seemed so weird that during her testimony, she seemed to feel entitled to goo goo Jason under Michelle's nose, felt entitled to bring him to her husband's home and bed while he was away, and felt entitled to show up uninvited to the sister's gathering in Myrtle Beach after Michelle's murder.

The fact that she testified in court that she NEVER asked Jason if he killed Michelle tells me everything I need to know. IMO, if she had any doubts, she would have said something along the lines of "please tell me you didn't do this". Not EVER asking is akin to saying she knew he DID do the deed. IMO. And her glib affect seems to say that she was ok with it. IMO

So......what caused her to have such tremendous passive-aggressive anger toward Michelle that she would continue to harbor smug indignation toward her even AFTER Michelle's horrible death? What is within her that she could continue to be enamored with a brutal, stone-cold murderer? She seemed to "blame" law enforcement for putting an end to their love affair by threatening her with complicity. If she believed JASON was a "catch", I just cannot fathom what goes on in her head.