**Verdict Watch** 3-2-2012; deliberations started at 1016am

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
cody100 said:
I imagine the DT and JY are hoping this time to have some jurors like the last ones that voted 8 NG. I am not sure the last jury thought every prosecution was a crusade against an innocent man. I believe they said reasonable doubt existed. That pesky old reasonable doubt again.

I think the PT closed as many holes as possible this time and emphasized what fitted their story. DT probably lost some ground in not being able to put JY, the Charmer, on the stand. IMO, it will be closer this time, and I have no idea what their decision will be.
Click to expand...

I don't doubt at all the last jury did the best they could with the evidence they had. They clearly took it seriously, or they would not have hung.

But there are people out there who think every prosecution involves a railroaded man, and for some people, if the police arrest the guy, well he did it. As I say, I hope the jury sees this for what it is, IMO.
 
Whoever said that he couldn't plan anything?? The only evidence I saw was that he was immature and sometimes procrastinated. He wasn't stupid - he did graduate from NC State and if he was intent on getting away with murder, you know he planned it.

I don't think the leaving on the HP print was intentional (maybe he was on his way out and Cassidy came in) - he never intended to have that traced to him, otherwise why would he go through the trouble of buying some cheap pair of Franklins with cash so they can't be traced to him?


otto said:
Cammy, I think I figured out the shoe problem. The assumption has been that Jason still owned the size 12 Hush Puppies and that he wore them on the night of the murder. We have to assume that the murderer was wearing these shoes when he entered the home. That would mean that Jason brought the shoes with him when he went to the Hotel, put them on and wore them during the initial attack.

As it turns out, he didn't put the Hush Puppies on, he had to have put on a pair of size 10 Franklins if those are the dominant prints - and they are. So, this guy that can't plan anything has suddenly planned wearing size 10 Franklins to the murder, after the murder he puts on an old pair of shoes that may be in the closet so he can make additional prints. He is wearing shoes, has an extra pair in his vehicle and has to buy better shoes for the funeral.

I thought it was weird that the prosecutor mocked Jason for putting his and Michelle's poem in the casket.
Click to expand...
 
Wolfpack said:
The last jury came right on the tails of the BC trial as well. And that had probably even more media attention than this one does. I don't think it's coincidental that there were jurors who may have demanded more of the prosecution after BC's verdict came down. But, removed by almost a year from that case, I don't know that this jury will have that reminder in the back of their head (for better or worse).
Click to expand...

That is true. Plus if any of those jurors saw the BC trial, they would have been turned off by the bias of the judge. JS is extremely fair. I think in general, jurors are requiring more hard evidence these days and less willing to assume different facts add up to guilt. I do not think it is a lack of common sense but rather hearing of innocent people being imprisoned due to false evidence proposed by prosecutors. In addition, the CSI effect definitely plays a factor here as well. Over and over, I hear this familiar phrase: "I think he is guilty, but I do not think there is enough evidence to prove it."
 
cody100 said:
That is true. Plus if any of those jurors saw the BC trial, they would have been turned off by the bias of the judge. JS is extremely fair. I think in general, jurors are requiring more hard evidence these days and less willing to assume different facts add up to guilt. I do not think it is a lack of common sense but rather hearing of innocent people being imprisoned due to false evidence proposed by prosecutors. In addition, the CSI effect definitely plays a factor here as well. Over and over, I hear this familiar phrase: "I think he is guilty, but I do not think there is enough evidence to prove it."
Click to expand...

Just like athletes get stronger and faster, criminals can get smarter. I cannot wrap my head around all the smart criminals (i.e. the ones who are aware of hard physical evidence vs. CE) receiving a free pass...in effect, being rewarded. As criminals get smarter, juries must too.
 
Ok, so I fell really, really behind and just finished with the Prosecution's case last evening. I'm skipping the defense so I don't miss the verdict when it comes in. Is there anything important or shocking or an "oh wow" moment in the defense's case (or cross examination of defense witnesses) that I should watch while waiting for the verdict (either in favor of the pros or the defense, doesn't matter)?

When was the jury released to deliberate?

TIA!
 
I will not be shocked if it comes back NG or hung. There are so many confusing pieces of evidence (look how many posters here, including myself, have had to ask clarification about the shoes, the palm print, CY's diaper, gas mileage/distance, eyewitness confusion, etc.). Many WS'ers have been on this case since it happened and have had YEARS to dissect it, understand it, and obsess over it. These jurors haven't.
 
CP,
they haven't (the jury) even been given instructions yet (starts at 0930 today... judge said yesterday instruction should take 25 minutes)
 
Am I correct that Klink said in closing something to the effect of "the hushp shoes may have been there or were there (crime scene) but JY's feet were not in them? I want to make sure I heard that right. When I go back to listen to it I'm trying to find it without hearing the entire argument. If he did say what I *think* I heard why would Klink say that knowing JY testified that MY gave them away to Goodwill? That threw me for a loop. Maybe I will have to listen to Klink's portion again.

There are some differences between this trial and the last. PT, IMO, presented a better case. I think they did a good job with what they had to work with. There were more men on the last jury. This jury is 8 women..4 men. Not sure if that matters, but I can think of a few reasons I would want equal amount of men and women if I were jy. Most of all, IMO, this time they used JY's testimony against him. The PT poked more holes. Last time PT IMO didn't do a good job at all as far as their cross on him.

I watched both trials. Last time I would have voted NG ( not bc I don't think he's G but last time the PT left me with too much doubt) this time I would vote G. It will be interesting what this jury does this go around. I personally can't see 12 people agreeing on NG. I can see a hung jury or a G verdict. Who knows! It's impossible to predict what those 12 will decide. They are seeing it in a much different way than we are. They will be given instructions on how they must make their decision. I formed my opinion in a much different way than they will be forming theirs. Knowing that whatever they decide I will respect.

Jmo moo moo moo
 
Elisaa444 said:
Am I correct that Klink said in closing something to the effect of "the hushp shoes may have been there or were there (crime scene) but JY's feet were not in them? I want to make sure I heard that right. When I go back to listen to it I'm trying to find it without hearing the entire argument. If he did say what I *think* I heard why would Klink say that knowing JY testified that MY gave them away to Goodwill? That threw me for a loop. Maybe I will have to listen to Klink's portion again.
Click to expand...

Yep, you heard right! Crazy, eh?
 
Bottle Cap said:
Just like athletes get stronger and faster, criminals can get smarter. I cannot wrap my head around all the smart criminals (i.e. the ones who are aware of hard physical evidence vs. CE) receiving a free pass...in effect, being rewarded. As criminals get smarter, juries must too.
Click to expand...

I think that we expect too much from juries. Remember they are supposed to not know much about this crime, sit there every day taking notes, listening to all of these experts with contradictory opinions. They can not talk about it among themselves until the end. Their limited explanations are by the judge. So, they end up at the end of the long trial with notes and thoughts that must be translated to a verdict. Then we get upset with them that they don't have common sense or aren't smart enough to analyze this case in the same manner that some have been doing every since it happened. But perhaps you are right on smarter. None of us bring a new dog into our home and expect them to be like Fido who has been with us for years. Maybe a brief tutorial for them is the way to go.
 
LOMom said:
Whoever said that he couldn't plan anything?? The only evidence I saw was that he was immature and sometimes procrastinated. He wasn't stupid - he did graduate from NC State and if he was intent on getting away with murder, you know he planned it.

I don't think the leaving on the HP print was intentional (maybe he was on his way out and Cassidy came in) - he never intended to have that traced to him, otherwise why would he go through the trouble of buying some cheap pair of Franklins with cash so they can't be traced to him?
Click to expand...

Yep, and he was still "planning" post-crime when he went out and purchased a pair of copycat hp's since he knew surveillance camera's picked him up wearing them on 11/02.... he planned that too.

JMO
 
The problem for me all along has been the trip timeline and gas.

DT did an excellent job of breaking down the math and making it easy for a juror to understand IMO.

1) To believe he made the trip from Raleigh to Hillsville to Raleigh to King JY would of had to get way better than 20 mpg or have to run tank to empty (22.5 gallons) to get his normal 20mpg avg.

2) There is no record of him getting gas after the King visit (theory), so he would of had to get 30 + mpg to make it to the gas station he actually stopped at later that morning.

3) He would have risked being caught on numerous traffic cameras on I40.

4) He would have risked stealing gas in King.

5) He would have had to average 65mph (risk speeding in portions of trip) to make the trip in around 2.5 hours.

6) If he makes trip in 2.5 hours, JY had 1 hour to strangle and beat MY to death, tear apart closets, throw around ebay and progress papers, grab jewelry, put CY in bathroom, probably get dog out of the way, change clothes, bag all dirty items, clean CY, drug CY, tie up loose ends at scene, and discard dirty clothes somewhere between Raleigh & Hillsville.

Combine all this with the fact that LE has NEVER been able to find a corroborating witness from King gas station (even though there was supposedly a regular customer present that witnessed the entire scene) and it adds loads of doubt.
 
BrownRice said:
Now that I found interesting. I could see 3 scenarios:

1. He had them tucked in an inside pocket for all of his trips and it was not placed in there Thursday when he was packing. (doesn't show G or NG)

2. He packed it specifically for some wishful nighttime activity on his trip. (points more toward NG)

3. He placed them there on purpose to show point #2 above (G)
Click to expand...

Or maybe they were left overs from his trip to FL with MM.
 
BrownRice said:
I will not be shocked if it comes back NG or hung. There are so many confusing pieces of evidence (look how many posters here, including myself, have had to ask clarification about the shoes, the palm print, CY's diaper, gas mileage/distance, eyewitness confusion, etc.). Many WS'ers have been on this case since it happened and have had YEARS to dissect it, understand it, and obsess over it. These jurors haven't.
Click to expand...

Excellent point. There is no way these jurors will be capable of of remembering, balancing and drawing conclusions from all of the evidence and testimony the way many posters here can.

Instead, there will likely be one, two or several pieces of evidence (or testimony) they focus on. Those pieces may or may not be the ones which NG or G in this forum hold to be "key". That's been my observation of jurys in post-verdict interviews/articles.
 
johnfear said:
We should see that in the charge to the jury.

The justice system in NC (and in general, I am sure) runs a weird gambit between trying to make sure major crimes are punished and dealing with "probably innocence". It's a very strange place to have to go to court and Wake County is probably #1 or #2 on the list.

I think the idea is to stay as close to constitutional boundaries as possible but put away as many major crimes/violent offenders as possible.

I couldn't be a part of it from the State/Pros/Judicial side.
Click to expand...

(BBM) Exactly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 46 more.
Total: 3,212 (members: 47, guests: 3,165)

Online statistics

Members online
47
Guests online
3,165
Total visitors
3,212
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,490
Messages
17,969,800
Members
228,789
Latest member
Soccergirl500
Back
Top