State vs Jason Lynn Young: weekend discussion 11-18 Feb 2012

[Lori59]

No case against JY? Let’s see:

MOTIVE:

-JY basically hated MY or at least saw her as a real "ball and chain" who might end in an expensive divorce or continued frustration of his desired lifestyle.
-JY stood to profit from the death of MY: more than a million dollars.
-No one else known had anything to gain from her murder.
-Stated to other woman his regret, and how much it weighed on him, that he was now with MY instead of her.

OPPORTUNITY:

-JY had access to the home, and knew its layout and MY's schedule.
-From the time he exited the hotel at night to his next confirmed location, he had time to travel to Raleigh and back.
-JY seen exiting hotel. He had propped open his room door. He propped open emergency exit door at stairwell. Camera on same door he used is unplugged that evening. Camera is pointed up the following early morning (on his return).
-JY was identified on travel South of the hotel by a gas station attendant during the timeframe the state alleges he’d be returning. Perhaps not a smoking gun, but at least the whiff of gun powder in the air.

EVIDENCE AT THE SCENE:

-Footprints matching JY's relatively rare shoes, and his size.
-CY mentions only her Daddy and Mommy, and no one else, while talking during the 911 call. When asked if she knew what had happened to Mommy, the first word she says is “Daddy.”
-No forced entry.
-CY spared despite witnessing the crime, and in addition apparently cared for shortly after the murder. Dog was sequestered during crime.
-Witness ID's similar vehicle to his at home during the timeframe of murder (other witness may have ID'd a different car as well).
-Murderer apparently cleans self up at the scene (no material evidence downstairs; water hose used) implying being comfortable in the home and willing to spend the time to clean up there rather than where he intended to retreat. Random killer could have cleaned up back at his unknown location, but instead does it hanging out with a child who is a witness?? JY had to return to a hotel that needed to remain sterile – clean up at home.
-Only a few items taken; purse undisturbed, downstairs undisturbed.

ICING ON THE CAKE OF GUILT:

-Outfit JY had on leaving the hotel - the pullover is not in his truck the next day, despite JY's mother saying nothing had been removed at her house besides JY and his blazer.
-The shoes he owned that matched the sole and size of the pattern left at the crime scene are also missing, alleged by JY given away by MY to charity. So a random killer had the same size shoe and same sole pattern? Another unlikely thing you need to believe to let him off.
-Insane call activity the day of the murder.
-Doesn’t contest custody for his daughter, which avoids having to answer for his actions.
-Doesn’t contest wrongful death suit.
-Doesn’t, ever, demonstrate interest in the investigation.
-Quickly starts trying to nail other women.
-No interest in seeing wife decently treated in burial.
-Sequesters CY from F family.
-e-mail to wife includes among the insults the statement “I could kill you.”
-recent web searches dealt with knocking someone out and the value of his home.
-while brutally murdered wife is headed to the grave he tells her mother of how he will have to take a hit on the home.
-prior violence against woman he “loved.”

ARE YOU SERIOUS??

-JY says he propped his room door open at the hotel; and then went back downstairs and outside to smoke. He’s going to leave his luggage in his hotel room with the door unlocked when he could simply take the keycard? That’s crazy. He did it so he could reenter without using the card.
-JY says he needed MF to go by the house to get the print out off the printer before MY saw it. That’s crazy. He had zero regard for his wife and no demonstrated interest in surprising her. His previous night’s phone calls, on top of a couple to MY, apparently involved speaking with his bizarre mistress and telling MF that MY had lied about the fight they had had, and it really wasn’t so bad – he didn’t throw things at her.
-Nasty craigslist activity, using daughter as prop (I don’t have any pictures of just me).

WEAKNESS:

Franklin shoe prints (*cough* blisters on JY’s feet *cough*)
No adult witness to murder

-

this just off the top of my head, i'm sure there's more!

lease: Someone please send this to Cummings. I know it is a long post to quote but I think it is worth it...

 

[Grammy Jean]

No case against JY? Let’s see:

MOTIVE:

-JY basically hated MY or at least saw her as a real "ball and chain" who might end in an expensive divorce or continued frustration of his desired lifestyle.
-JY stood to profit from the death of MY: more than a million dollars.
-No one else known had anything to gain from her murder.
-Stated to other woman his regret, and how much it weighed on him, that he was now with MY instead of her.

OPPORTUNITY:

-JY had access to the home, and knew its layout and MY's schedule.
-From the time he exited the hotel at night to his next confirmed location, he had time to travel to Raleigh and back.
-JY seen exiting hotel. He had propped open his room door. He propped open emergency exit door at stairwell. Camera on same door he used is unplugged that evening. Camera is pointed up the following early morning (on his return).
-JY was identified on travel South of the hotel by a gas station attendant during the timeframe the state alleges he’d be returning. Perhaps not a smoking gun, but at least the whiff of gun powder in the air.

EVIDENCE AT THE SCENE:

-Footprints matching JY's relatively rare shoes, and his size.
-CY mentions only her Daddy and Mommy, and no one else, while talking during the 911 call. When asked if she knew what had happened to Mommy, the first word she says is “Daddy.”
-No forced entry.
-CY spared despite witnessing the crime, and in addition apparently cared for shortly after the murder. Dog was sequestered during crime.
-Witness ID's similar vehicle to his at home during the timeframe of murder (other witness may have ID'd a different car as well).
-Murderer apparently cleans self up at the scene (no material evidence downstairs; water hose used) implying being comfortable in the home and willing to spend the time to clean up there rather than where he intended to retreat. Random killer could have cleaned up back at his unknown location, but instead does it hanging out with a child who is a witness?? JY had to return to a hotel that needed to remain sterile – clean up at home.
-Only a few items taken; purse undisturbed, downstairs undisturbed.

ICING ON THE CAKE OF GUILT:

-Outfit JY had on leaving the hotel - the pullover is not in his truck the next day, despite JY's mother saying nothing had been removed at her house besides JY and his blazer.
-The shoes he owned that matched the sole and size of the pattern left at the crime scene are also missing, alleged by JY given away by MY to charity. So a random killer had the same size shoe and same sole pattern? Another unlikely thing you need to believe to let him off.
-Insane call activity the day of the murder.
-Doesn’t contest custody for his daughter, which avoids having to answer for his actions.
-Doesn’t contest wrongful death suit.
-Doesn’t, ever, demonstrate interest in the investigation.
-Quickly starts trying to nail other women.
-No interest in seeing wife decently treated in burial.
-Sequesters CY from F family.
-e-mail to wife includes among the insults the statement “I could kill you.”
-recent web searches dealt with knocking someone out and the value of his home.
-while brutally murdered wife is headed to the grave he tells her mother of how he will have to take a hit on the home.
-prior violence against woman he “loved.”

ARE YOU SERIOUS??

-JY says he propped his room door open at the hotel; and then went back downstairs and outside to smoke. He’s going to leave his luggage in his hotel room with the door unlocked when he could simply take the keycard? That’s crazy. He did it so he could reenter without using the card.
-JY says he needed MF to go by the house to get the print out off the printer before MY saw it. That’s crazy. He had zero regard for his wife and no demonstrated interest in surprising her. His previous night’s phone calls, on top of a couple to MY, apparently involved speaking with his bizarre mistress and telling MF that MY had lied about the fight they had had, and it really wasn’t so bad – he didn’t throw things at her.
-Nasty craigslist activity, using daughter as prop (I don’t have any pictures of just me).

WEAKNESS:

Franklin shoe prints (*cough* blisters on JY’s feet *cough*)
No adult witness to murder

-

this just off the top of my head, i'm sure there's more!

Can you do closing arguments? I just continue to hope and pray the PT lays all of this out there in a strong emotional articulate manner.

 

[gritguy]

Johnfear, that's a well put rebuttal.

If there weren't arguments for both sides then there shouldn't be a trial!

 

[johnfear]

Johnfear, that's a well put rebuttal.

If there weren't arguments for both sides then there shouldn't be a trial!

Have you noticed these seem to be the ones that get "live-streamed" to the masses 'round bout these days?

Thanks for your insightful post.

 

[Grammy Jean]

Since I now have audio for WRAL (Love my son &#9829, and didn't watch the first trial...
Which witness was the most important for the defense team and which for the pros. last triall. I am curious and have free time today to watch. Thank you in advance

Doesn't matter to me if you think him guilty, innocent, or are sitting on the fence.

(But please no shoes! LOL I know way too much about Hush Puppies now.

)

Again I am so happy you have audio. I think you should watch Mamma Young She tells some adorable little stories (sarcasm) in trying to be a character witness. Not sure she helped the DT but it is insightful. Also for DT watch I think her name was Cynthia Beaver. If you do watch her testimony tell me what you think. I think she was confused about the date.

 

[~n/t~]

I'm looking forward to Monday to find out what is allowed to come in. I'm a little confused, and I'm hoping the dt won't have too much room with cross to muddy things up, and add more confusion for the jurors. Since we know cy's actions are coming in, I hope the pt will put a lot of emphasis on the chair. The chair shows a weapon was likely used, which would explain jy not having cuts, bruises, etc...

Right but then as a juror, you would want to know where is the "bite" mark? I think. CY said biting.

 

[Allusonz]

The case in my mind has tilted from what you need to believe to convict him to what unlikely things you need to believe to let him off.

- you have to believe the wife gave away his shoes that match the crime scene, yet a random killer wore the same size and sole pattern shoe
- you have to believe he left his hotel room unsecured for the purpose of having a smoke.
- you have to believe that CY's references to her father when asked what happened to her mother don't relate to what happened to her mother.
- you have to believe the pullover he wore the murder night, shown on camera, innocently disappeared from his truck despite there being no reason, other than it was evidence, for it having done so - the rest of his luggage that he had been seen with was present in the vehicle.
- you have to believe the gas station attendant who said she saw and talked with him, didn't (and you might).
- you have to believe he was really concerned about MY finding out that he might buy her a purse, that he was really worried about that as a reason to have MF come to the house ASAP.

Instead of needing to believe, it seems to me you have to go on a campaign of unbelief to let him off. Granted, the defense has yet to go so I mean only at this point of the trial and IMO.

No matter what I think on a personal basis for me when I go into a case I need a prosecution team to be able to connect the dots.

It is not about what I think of the individual. I may think the individual is a saint, moron, or a murderer.

In this case there are some areas that I am having some issues with that I believe the jury may as well.

First the PT has to connect JY from the hotel to the home.

1. Sorry the testimony of Gracie is simply unrealiable.
2. The rock means nothing and although it has been posted over and over here that JY's DNA matched the rock the reality is it did not match him and there are multiple profiles on it.
3. There is a mssing shirt supposedly but when I look at the video from the hotel I see 2 very different shirts being worn.
4. Security camera being fooled around with once again cannot be shown to be JY no matter how hard they tried to tie it to him.
5. DNA at the home. There is no DNA that puts him as the murderer.

Contrary to what has been posted here about a plam print in the middle of blood spatter is simply incorrect. It is above the blood spatter.

It has been posted the bottom of these shoes are RARE when in fact they are not. They are EXCLUSIVE to shoes made by a company called Hush Puppy and are found on at least 3 of the shoes they make. They are a popular shoe which many people purchase.

I am concerned that LE focused so much on one person that they did not adequately investigate other avenues.

Whenever I see this happen my radar goes WAY up.

Yes many cases have been tried on CE but usually there has been one thing that ties it in for me. So far the prosecution has not been able to do that for ME. We still have a ways to go but frankly I think I now have more questions than answers.

They could not tie the shoes to JY as both otto and I have stated due to the wear pattern.

I get that there are probably family members posting here or people very close to this case. I still have to look at the evidence that is presented and so far for me there are still to many holes that I need filled as this is how the jury is going to view it.

 

[~n/t~]

My guess is the defense will continue to refer to the "spanking" doll as the grandmother doll. Becky or whomever is doing direct and redirect need to continue to HAMMER THE POINT that there were ONLY THREE HUMAN dolls and the third was dressed in full medical scrubs. In fact maybe that doll should be there too. What if he "doctor doll" has dark brown or black hair? Certainly she wouldn't select that for daddy!

Bingo. Why aren't they showing the third doll?

 

[octobermoon]

Johnfear,
You nailed it for the defense. And Klinkosum (sp?) is one sharp, talented Attrny. At least he comes across that way to me. I like his style even though I feel JY is guilty.
I bet he will say exactly what you have. I can see why this ended in a hung jury last time.

IMO The PT are not the best. IMO The presentation is disjointed, dragged out to the nth degree and the ummms, errrrs , just one minute judge, ummm........ has to be tiring to the jury. BH jumps from thing to the next and totally misses driving home key points.

This is all MOO from watching the trial. The PT could be doing a better job.

 

[Allusonz]

Since I now have audio for WRAL (Love my son &#9829, and didn't watch the first trial...
Which witness was the most important for the defense team and which for the pros. last triall. I am curious and have free time today to watch. Thank you in advance

Doesn't matter to me if you think him guilty, innocent, or are sitting on the fence.

(But please no shoes! LOL I know way too much about Hush Puppies now. )

I am betting that you will never want to look at another pair of Hush Puppies again in your life :giggle:

The testimony though was important.

I have these truly cool designer straight jackets (spelling is TM'd) and a private asylum in the caribbean so will give you one of these straight jackets and hope you enjoy it lol

 

[Just the Fax]

Bingo. Why aren't they showing the third doll?

CY knows what a white coat Dr with an assumed stethoscope looks like.
This character would more resemble her father.

 

[johnfear]

The only doctor doll that comes in scrubs I can find that is in that approximate size range from 2006 is a Ken doll, doctor doll and it has very long curly blonde hair. There are earlier dolls with brown hair (mostly from the mid 1990s) that have the plastic hair and would not be similar to JY at all. They almost have the appearance of not being caucasian. I am basing my search on what the lady said: Scrubs, doctor, male, doll. Assuming it's somewhere in the 2002-2006 range time-wise.

Anything else I've come across seems to be a little too cartoony or stuffed animal like.

 

[~n/t~]

Seriously - we're worried about the media "stalking" him? Well - since he wasn't granting interviews or using the media to put pressure on the police to find his wife's killer - how the heck else are ya gonna get a statement from him?

here's a novel idea - how about the following - said with sadness and genuine concern: "I'd really like the police and you all to focus on finding who murdered Michelle" - that kind of thing might get boring for the media to hear, or - maybe an appropriate reaction might make it look like he gave a rat's patootie. Sorry to interrupt your b-ball game, dude - but - in case you forgot - someone beat and strangled your wife in your home. Aren't you worried that if CY saw something - the killer will come back and tie up a loose end?

Oops - never mind.

LOL....I'm definitely not worried that they were stalking them. I presented an alternate point of view as to why he may have said what he said.

 

[Just the Fax]

jf, these were small 'doll house' size figures...not barbie and ken.

 

[~n/t~]

CY knows what a white coat Dr with an assumed stethoscope looks like.
This character would more resemble her father.

That's a big assumption considering we have no idea what the other doll looked like or even had a stethoscope. I heard white scrub. No features were revealed, fwiw.

 

[Just the Fax]

That's a big assumption considering we have no idea what the other doll looked like or even had a stethoscope. I heard white scrub. No features were revealed, fwiw.

What would a toy Dr. look like for you?
Use some imagination

 

[cityslick]

If there is another mistrial or a NG verdict, as much as everyone will want to blame the jury, I think you still would have to put it on the PT. The way to win a case is highlight specific points (in testimony, opening and closing statements), and continue to drive home those points, over and over again. Drive home the fact that the shoes are somewhat uncommon. Drive home the fact that the camera hasn't been tampered with in over 10 years. Drive home the fact that the outfit he's wearing on the camera hasn't been found.

If these things are not done, then don't blame the jury on the verdict. There is a reason the first trial was a mistrial, 8-4 in favor of not guilty and it wasn't because they were stupid or not paying attention. Drive home the key points, and you get the guilty verdict.

 

[cityslick]

What would a toy Dr. look like for you?
Use some imagination

The thing is, if she would of used the doctor doll, wouldn't everyone be saying, of course she used that one, it's the 'male' doll?

 

[johnfear]

jf, these were small 'doll house' size figures...not barbie and ken.

Thanks, and these are Loving Family above no?

2006 could have been an African American female doll (assuming the Loving Family Playskool/Fisher Price setup), an African American Male doll, a blonde mail or a red headed female. (Trying to link to pics)

The more recent dolls have a dark haired male.

ETA: Just to clarify, you can look at the most recent rounds of dolls under the fisher-price name. In order to get dolls prior to this time, it seems they have a Playskool or Playschool name brand attached to them in toy catalogues. You can find a few examples of the gramma above on ebay and as you can see from the toys fisher price site, you can get any shape color or size you want now. I'm trying to narrow it down to figure out why it wasn't sitting on the stand with the pros saying. This is the male doll or whatever.

 

[Grammy Jean]

Johnfear,
You nailed it for the defense. And Klinkosum (sp?) is one sharp, talented Attrny. At least he comes across that way to me. I like his style even though I feel JY is guilty.
I bet he will say exactly what you have. I can see why this ended in a hung jury last time.

IMO The PT are not the best. IMO The presentation is disjointed, dragged out to the nth degree and the ummms, errrrs , just one minute judge, ummm........ has to be tiring to the jury. BH jumps from thing to the next and totally misses driving home key points.

This is all MOO from watching the trial. The PT could be doing a better job.

I agree about BH and also HC is just as bad. I do feel they are laying it out better than last time. Also I still think of the CA case and feel the PT of LDB and JA could not have been any stronger. I felt they were top notch yet the jury still couldn't see it their way. So of course we will just have to wait and see.