State vs Jason Lynn Young 2-8-12

[fran]

no wonder they focused on the papers in the hotel... are they going to go somewhere with the newspapers?/newspaper man?

I don't think the newspaper at the hotel will have anything to do with this incident. But I do think it's new info that they id'd the second witness at the gas station. I thought the first trial they didn't know who he was. I may be mistaken though. I didn't take notes.

My point is, if this is a NEW possible witness, wow~ don't know if it is or not though.

JMHO
fran

 

[NCEast]

They need to address the issue with the height before handing this over to the defense.

Absolutely. I think everybody is holding their breath waiting for that. The prosecution MUST approach it.

 

[Cammy]

Come on defense!!

 

[fromageball]

What is a "reasonable hour"? If he was worried about his meeting, he could have driven another 2 hours and gotten closer, instead of lurking about in stairwells in Hillsville. Interesting concept of time management.

A reasonable hour is different for everyone, obviously. It takes me awhile to unwind, so I would think getting in at 11ish and getting to bed between 12-1 would be reasonable. Then he would get up in time to drive the rest of the way to his meeting.

I would rather drive part of the way and have time to unwind.

Jason could have been thinking the same. Or maybe not, who knows. Hopefully he will testify again and the prosecutors can ask him.

 

[Cammy]

I don't think the newspaper at the hotel will have anything to do with this incident. But I do think it's new info that they id'd the second witness at the gas station. I thought the first trial they didn't know who he was. I may be mistaken though. I didn't take notes.

My point is, if this is a NEW possible witness, wow~ don't know if it is or not though.

JMHO
fran

The newspaper person supposedly died in 2008, what she is saying is all wrong.

She added him at a later date..............the original witness was just a regular customer.

 

[annalyzer]

I don't think the newspaper at the hotel will have anything to do with this incident. But I do think it's new info that they id'd the second witness at the gas station. I thought the first trial they didn't know who he was. I may be mistaken though. I didn't take notes.

My point is, if this is a NEW possible witness, wow~ don't know if it is or not though.

JMHO
fran

is the newspaperman from the gas station also a witness? was he a witness in the last trial?

 

[nursebeeme]

I don't think the newspaper at the hotel will have anything to do with this incident. But I do think it's new info that they id'd the second witness at the gas station. I thought the first trial they didn't know who he was. I may be mistaken though. I didn't take notes.

My point is, if this is a NEW possible witness, wow~ don't know if it is or not though.

JMHO
fran

could the same newspaper man stock both the hotel and the gas station? as they made such a huge deal (was it yesterday?) about what time the newspapers were stocked in the lobby...

 

[gracielee]

Come on defense!!

This isn't a sporting event. It's the murder trial of Michelle and Rylan. An extremely serious crime.

 

[nursebeeme]

The newspaper person supposedly died in 2008, what she is saying is all wrong.

what if this is a different newspaper man? as different papers will have different delivery/persons delivering?

 

[NCEast]

is the newspaperman from the gas station also a witness? was he a witness in the last trial?

No and he wasn't last time. He's dead now so that's a lost lead.

 

[Wyn]

It doesn't matter if Jason "could have" driven the route in that time period. Jason's alibi holds because there is evidence that he checked into the hotel. He doesn't have to account for every second of his time - if the prosecutors want to say that he left the hotel to kill Michelle, they have to prove it. They didn't prove it last time, but maybe they will this time. The gas station clerk didn't sway the first jury and I don't think it will sway the second either.

I'm watching the gas station clerk now(didn't see her testimony during the first trial) and if I were on the jury I wouldn't put too much weight on this testimony. JMO.

Jason's alibi doesn't "hold" because he has no way to prove that he was actually there all night long. There's a reason it's called "circumstantial evidence". The jurors couldn't connect the dots last time, this time with the added information and visual displays, they're being given a virtual road map to his guilt.

So far Gracie is doing an excellent job.

 

[Cammy]

Absolutely. I think everybody is holding their breath waiting for that. The prosecution MUST approach it.

I want the defense to ask them to stand side by side, just like

they were on the same level in the store.

Which they were.

 

[Pocono Sleuther]

It doesn't matter if Jason "could have" driven the route in that time period. Jason's alibi holds because there is evidence that he checked into the hotel. He doesn't have to account for every second of his time - if the prosecutors want to say that he left the hotel to kill Michelle, they have to prove it. They didn't prove it last time, but maybe they will this time. The gas station clerk didn't sway the first jury and I don't think it will sway the second either.

I'm watching the gas station clerk now(didn't see her testimony during the first trial) and if I were on the jury I wouldn't put too much weight on this testimony. JMO.

Yes it does matter that he could make the drive within that timeframe. It adds to reasonable doubt of the jury. Same goes for him not being able to account for his time. The mere fact that he checked in to the HI does nothing to establish a solid alibi. Its not as if hes on camera laying poolside the entire evening. He IS unaccounted for during the time his wife was murdered. That goes to reasonable doubt. Forget the other 'odd' instances of magical self moving vid cams and propped doors...the jury is not stupid enough to take all of these pieces and not see the larger picture they create. If the last jury had, he would have been found NG!

 

[distracted 1976]

The newspaper person supposedly died in 2008, what she is saying is all wrong.

She added him at a later date..............the original witness was just a regular customer.

The murder was in 2006. Am I confused? She said the newspaper guy was a regular customer who came in often for coffee before his routes. I don't see how she changed something.

Overlook me if I am being an idiot. I know nothing about the case and am only listening to the trial. I would be a perfect juror!

 

[otto]

The newspaper person supposedly died in 2008, what she is saying is all wrong.

She added him at a later date..............the original witness was just a regular customer.

She's so sure it was the newspaper guy today, but last time, as you say, she didn't know who was in the store and couldn't remember a lot of things. Interesting switch. I guess she may have been "rehabilitated".

 

[Cammy]

Jason's alibi doesn't "hold" because he has no way to prove that he was actually there all night long. There's a reason it's called "circumstantial evidence". The jurors couldn't connect the dots last time, this time with the added information and visual displays, they're being a virtual road map to his guilt.

So far Gracie is doing an excellent job.

Considering she just told a whole new story about the witness?

 

[Cammy]

She's so sure it was the newspaper guy today, but last time, as you say, she didn't know who was in the store and couldn't remember a lot of things. Interesting switch. I guess she may have been "rehabilitated".

They need to get her last testimony ready !!

This may not be pretty.

 

[Bottle Cap]

A reasonable hour is different for everyone, obviously. It takes me awhile to unwind, so I would think getting in at 11ish and getting to bed between 12-1 would be reasonable. Then he would get up in time to drive the rest of the way to his meeting.

I would rather drive part of the way and have time to unwind.

Jason could have been thinking the same. Or maybe not, who knows. Hopefully he will testify again and the prosecutors can ask him.

I dunno. If I'm going to stop so I can get out of the car and unwind, I don't know as my primary activity of unwinding is going to consist of going back outside and getting right back into the vehicle I was trying to get out of by checking in. Maybe that's just me.

 

[Cammy]

The murder was in 2006. Am I confused? She said the newspaper guy was a regular customer who came in often for coffee before his routes. I don't see how she changed something.

Overlook me if I am being an idiot. I know nothing about the case and am only listening to the trial. I would be a perfect juror!

In the first trial , she described the witness in the store as a regular customer who came in every am and had coffee.

She never said it was a newspaper person.

Sometime later she said the newspaper person may have been there TOO.

When they went to locate him, it was said he had died.

This is awful.

Det. Spivey will be asked about this as well, as he and Becky Holt went personally to see her.

 

[gracielee]

The murder was in 2006. Am I confused? She said the newspaper guy was a regular customer who came in often for coffee before his routes. I don't see how she changed something.

Overlook me if I am being an idiot. I know nothing about the case and am only listening to the trial. I would be a perfect juror!

You aren't being an 'idiot'. Some people, regardless of what she says, don't believe Gracie. Some of us find her to be perfectly credible. Especially when one reads her earliest to the crime statement she gave. Spot on for a witness to a non-event in her mind. Meaning she didn't actually witness a crime, in her mind, simply extremely rude and obnoxious behavior by a customer.