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

[~n/t~]

Others can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe so they've gotten into it. I also don't think they need to. It's her hair, under her body, in the commission of a violent murder. I don't see the significance of anything further than that. What do you read into it?

To me, a clump of hair means it was pulled out during a struggle. A lot of hair. My theory has always been that JY had an accomplice and a woman is involved and these things just make me go hmmmm.

Hair pulling is USUALLY done by a woman.

 

[Turnadot]

Agreed a woman is capable of horrific murder, but to me the fact that some of MY's hair was found detached from her head is not an indication of that due to the nature of the beating and strangulation. Anyway, a man could pull hair as easily as a woman during a struggle, if that had been the case.

Regardless of gender, the weapon used to beat the victim can snatch hair out, detach it from the head. And a woman can strangle another if the victim is beaten down and bleeding to death and unable to fight back at that point, so I don't find the facts in the BBM indicates a male killer.

 

[calamityjane831]

We are arguing about dolls? Really?

I know silly to argue about the specific dolls that is what I meant when I stated earlier about being able to see the forest through the trees. I pray the jury can see the bigger picture then some of us on this blog and I mean no offense to anyone just my opinion.

When my son who is now 11 was 2 years old my husband had a heart attack in the car and died and when I pulled into a parking lot to start CPR and then the paramedics came and it was a big scene that my son watched through the window from his car seat. Over just the next couple of weeks only he reenacted the scene a few times... once with stuffed animals and he would say help daddy which is what I told him that was what was happening at the scene and he would smash on bear on top of another stuffed dog which I know was the CPR. Then the other two times he reenacted the same scene with these fisher price family dolls that he had, he didn't use any gender specific dolls he would just say help daddy and smash one doll on top of another. He also for the same couple of weeks whenever he would see a fire truck he would say daddy. For a two year old there brain is growing and learning so much that he forgot about it and even at five years old I asked if he remembered doing that and he said no. Every now and then over the years I asked him if he remembers and he says no so now I don't bring it up anymore.

CY re enacted a scene that was scary to her just as my son did.

 

[gracielee]

To me, a clump of hair means it was pulled out during a struggle. A lot of hair. My theory has always been that JY had an accomplice and a woman is involved and these things just make me go hmmmm.

Hair pulling is USUALLY done by a woman.

Not in my experience. :maddening:

Although we don't know what the weapon was, it could easily have been pulled out by the claw end of the hammer. Since that's the weapon I've imagined. JMO

 

[Wolfpack]

I know silly to argue about the specific dolls that is what I meant when I stated earlier about being able to see the forest through the trees. I pray the jury can see the bigger picture then some of us on this blog and I mean no offense to anyone just my opinion.

When my son who is now 11 was 2 years old my husband had a heart attack in the car and died and when I pulled into a parking lot to start CPR and then the paramedics came and it was a big scene that my son watched through the window from his car seat. Over just the next couple of weeks only he reenacted the scene a few times... once with stuffed animals and he would say help daddy which is what I told him that was what was happening at the scene and he would smash on bear on top of another stuffed dog which I know was the CPR. Then the other two times he reenacted the same scene with these fisher price family dolls that he had, he didn't use any gender specific dolls he would just say help daddy and smash one doll on top of another. He also for the same couple of weeks whenever he would see a fire truck he would say daddy. For a two year old there brain is growing and learning so much that he forgot about it and even at five years old I asked if he remembered doing that and he said no. Every now and then over the years I asked him if he remembers and he says no so now I don't bring it up anymore.

CY re enacted a scene that was scary to her just as my son did.

Thank you for your insight. I am so sorry for your loss, and for what you and your son had to witness.

 

[otto]

Well I'm 60 years old, and I wouldn't peg that doll to be a woman. As I said earlier, I never bought my granddaughter that 'grandma doll'. It certainly looked nothing like me. And my granddaughter, who is now five, wouldn't peg her to be 'her grandma' either. 'Grandma has long brown hair and never wears jogging suits.' 'Grandma usually has jeans on.' :seeya:

Today's grandma may wear jeans, but the stereotype from 15+ years ago may have been different. For some reason, educational toys for toddlers designed a couple of decades ago have a white haired grandma wearing sweats.

 

[Madeleine74]

"According to the Justice Department, roughly one in 10 homicides are committed by women. And when women kill, their victims are more likely to be someone close to them, like their children, boyfriends or spouses."

"Women are different in whom, how and why they kill," said James Alan Fox, a criminologist at Northeastern University. "The victims are younger, they're more often related to them, they kill with means other than guns.

"The traditional female role is a nurturer, not a murderer. Extreme violence is far more alien to females than to males," he added. "When a murder is committed by a female, it's more likely to be self-defense or can reflect some sort of mental illness."



http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=7326555#.T0E7u3lfRZE

 

[Turnadot]

Making the attacker of MY into a female is, IMHO, one of those stretches that defies logic and common sense and ignores all the other evidence that points only to a male. Start with the shoe prints in blood.

Arguing for a female attacker is being contrary and oppositional when there is no evidence supporting it.

You still have to explain all the HI hijinks the same night that MY's skull is bashed in. Those propped doors, tampered cameras, missing sweater, missing shoes do not suddenly go away when a woman as killer is alleged.

I'm not arguing for a female attacker in this case; I'm only arguing that the manner in which MY was killed isn't indicative of a male killer.

I believe JY killed MY, I'm just thinking about the jury trying to connect the dots and what the defense may try and insinuate during their C.I.F.

 

[Turnadot]

"According to the Justice Department, roughly one in 10 homicides are committed by women. And when women kill, their victims are more likely to be someone close to them, like their children, boyfriends or spouses."

"Women are different in whom, how and why they kill," said James Alan Fox, a criminologist at Northeastern University. "The victims are younger, they're more often related to them, they kill with means other than guns.

"The traditional female role is a nurturer, not a murderer. Extreme violence is far more alien to females than to males," he added. "When a murder is committed by a female, it's more likely to be self-defense or can reflect some sort of mental illness."



http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=7326555#.T0E7u3lfRZE

What a woman is more likely to to doesn't mean a thing to me, to be quite honest.

 

[calamityjane831]

Thank you for your insight. I am so sorry for your loss, and for what you and your son had to witness.

Thank you Wolfpack.

 

[gracielee]

I know silly to argue about the specific dolls that is what I meant when I stated earlier about being able to see the forest through the trees. I pray the jury can see the bigger picture then some of us on this blog and I mean no offense to anyone just my opinion.

When my son who is now 11 was 2 years old my husband had a heart attack in the car and died and when I pulled into a parking lot to start CPR and then the paramedics came and it was a big scene that my son watched through the window from his car seat. Over just the next couple of weeks only he reenacted the scene a few times... once with stuffed animals and he would say help daddy which is what I told him that was what was happening at the scene and he would smash on bear on top of another stuffed dog which I know was the CPR. Then the other two times he reenacted the same scene with these fisher price family dolls that he had, he didn't use any gender specific dolls he would just say help daddy and smash one doll on top of another. He also for the same couple of weeks whenever he would see a fire truck he would say daddy. For a two year old there brain is growing and learning so much that he forgot about it and even at five years old I asked if he remembered doing that and he said no. Every now and then over the years I asked him if he remembers and he says no so now I don't bring it up anymore.

CY re enacted a scene that was scary to her just as my son did.

So sorry for your traumatic loss. Hopefully, certain insights will help this jury. Life experiences and common sense are what's needed IMO.

 

[Madeleine74]

I'm only arguing that the manner in which MY was killed isn't indicative of a male killer.

The experts would disagree with you, starting with the U.S. Justice Dept, along with seasoned criminologists. This was the most violent scene witnessed by hard core investigators--their words.

 

[Turnadot]

The experts would disagree with you, starting with the U.S. Justice Dept, along with seasoned criminologists. This was the most violent scene witnessed by hard core investigators--their words.

I don't really care, it's irrelevant to this trial because the defense team can insinuate MY's killer was a p'd off woman and that MY's murder was not indicative of a man, woman are capable, blah blah blah, stats don't mean a thing, etc, and the jury may swallow it, despite hundreds of experts saying the contrary.

After the Anthony trial, I am never again shocked at the BS that juries buy into.

 

[LyndyLoo]

Okay..Im going to insert a question here in regards to likelihood of a female doing this horrific murder.

Question is capability is only part of equation..So Do you truly believe any women involved in Michelle's life had all the other elements, opportunity and means to sneak in house, quiety go upstairs without waking child or dog much less Michelle? Then it would have to be a women who knew this dog, child and house so well, could settle said child, dog placed away from scene, and clean up removing garbage medicating child, and escape.??

Then, who female wise would have a motive to remove Michelle from the family. I do believe all females who may want to have been ruled out..and there was no history of neighbour disputes nor Michelle having any conflicting relationships..

Thought I would just put some food for thought. Then apply that same rationale to any person male or female who fit similar circumstances..

Me believes that no stranger would have knowledge, and relationships either..Leaving a living witness points directly to relationship of some sort with dog and child. Course thats how I look at the evidence so far.

 

[Just the Fax]

I don't really care, it's irrelevant to this trial because the defense team can insinuate MY's killer was a p'd off woman and that MY's murder was not indicative of a man, woman are capable, blah blah blah, stats don't mean a thing, etc, and the jury may swallow it, despite hundreds of experts saying the contrary.

After the Anthony trial, I am never again shocked at the BS that juries buy into.

What woman could this possibly be?

MY had no enemies (Ms Money had an alibi).

 

[gritguy]

Okay..Im going to insert a question here in regards to likelihood of a female doing this horrific murder.

Question is capability is only part of equation..So Do you truly believe any women involved in Michelle's life had all the other elements, opportunity and means to sneak in house, queity go upstairs without waking child or dog much less Michelle? Then it would have to be a women who knew this dog, child and house so well, could settle said child, dog placed away from scene, and clean up removing garbage medicating child, and escape.??

Then, who femle wise would have a motive to remove Michelle from the family. I do believe all females who may want to have been ruled out..and there was no history of neighbour disputes nor Michelle having any conflicting relationships..

Thought I would just put some food for thought. Then apply that same rationale to any person male or female who fit similar circumstances..

Me believes that no stranger would have knowledge, and relationships either..Leaving a living witness points directly to relationship of some sort with dog and child. Course thathow I look at the evidence so far

This female would also be leaving size 12 or 10 prints as well!

 

[Just the Fax]

This female would also be leaving size 12 or 10 prints as well!

....both mens style shoes.

 

[LyndyLoo]

This female would also be leaving size 12 or 10 prints as well!

She would also have or own a SUV white in colour that was parked out front of house at 330AM that morning...There is so much circumstantial evidence that points to just one person that had motive, means and opportunity..yep

ETA~~ Im not even going to mention..the lack of cooperation by hubby dearest...Behavior also plays into "Consciousness of Guilt" as well!!

 

[gritguy]

What woman could this possibly be?

MY had no enemies (Ms Money had an alibi).

It would have to be a goth (with very big feet), because there's no indication from anybody that any woman was going to personally gain from MY's murder, or that any woman had any reason to be enraged at her. And this woman would have had to be responsible for the only clump of hair dislodged during a brutal beating with a weapon, and leave no hair of her own behind.

Did the defense team cross to the point the hair was pulled out? It'd be interesting to know the exchange on that.

 

[dmaxphil]

I see dmaxphil left....perhaps working on the photo enhancement?

Sorry, wife wanted to do some grocery shopping. Reading through thread now and will see if anything can be done with hall photo.