State vs Jason Lynn Young: weekend discussion 11-25 Feb 2012

[octobermoon]

Well I knew this would happen. I'm going out of town Wed and will miss the trial the rest of the week. If the DT finishes their case on Thursday will both sides give closing arguments on Friday? That means the jury will have the weekend between closing arguments and deliberating. Anyone know?

I think so.

Enjoy your trip.

I heard here hotels have wifi

 

[3doglady]

I think so.

Enjoy your trip.

I heard here hotels have wifi

Thanks Unfortunately I won't have much free time to watch. Fortunately I will have time to read enough of your comments to catch up. :rocker:

 

[octobermoon]

I hate getting pulled over, I just got a ticket a few back weeks, and it showed up online with all my other speeding tix.

:innocent:, I swear.

O/T but I am a housekeeper and once ended up on base (military) and didn't have a pass. OMG I was shaking in my boots when they pulled me aside. That time they did look in my trunk which was full of bleach, ammonia, scrubbing bubbles,mops...... I was skeered. They were very kind and told me to turn around and never ever get lost onto base again. (they had big guns!!!)

 

[Wolfpack]

And I hope it lasts for two days as WP has suggested.:seeya:

Yes! Just think about how long some of the witnesses were on the stand being crossed in the BC trial. Three days for one of the detectives! If the DEFENDANT doesn't have as many questions to answer as the detective, that's sad. I'm sure Websleuths alone could come up with enough questions to fill half that time with cross alone. Direct, Cross, Redirect, Recross, until who knows?

 

[sureLocke]

Yep, toast.
But I think he wants to.

JMO

I agree, its his narcissistic personality. He cant let this opportunity go by. You could see in the first trial, he was in his element.

 

[borndem]

I read a few pages back where someone disputed the HP testimony because the guy from HP said it wasn't a "match." That scares the heck out of me. Because that person obviously did not listen to the testimony, they are hanging a conclusion on a buzz word.

For clarity, the witness said it was not possible to *match* because by definition, you would need the original shoe to *match* it to the prototype. Since the shoe is *missing* it cannot be compared to the prototype, so the best they can say, using their standards, is that it is "consistent with."

Goodness, if someone can't *get* that, what else might they not *get*? I hope the jury is better able to assimilate information.

I think jury selection standards need to be revised, and I am serious. Instead of asking whether one has heard of a case (if one hadn't heard of this case, one would be very uninformed, that is, oblivious to their community), they ought to test for aptitude and ability to *reason, that is, make reasonable conclusions*. And they should have to pass a test for "it's boring but the juror can stay awake." Because that juror(s?) who are nodding off needs to be gone.

smh

rbm

I, too, like so many of us, Boodles, worry about all the things you've said. "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit," and so on. So, since it's not a "match" and is only "consistent with," well, then, we have to toss that piece of evidence. And we've seen it on this forum, and I certainly think we have seen it with other verdicts, and very likely with the 1st JY trial. Why isn't "consistent with" a reasonable conclusion?

There can't always be a DNA-to-DNA comparison on every single piece of evidence, nor can we always see that 2nd transparency laid on top of the 1st and see a perfect line-up with them -- and with our own eyes (Wow!!). Sometimes the 2nd piece of evidence is, um, somehow, um, not available. And it is just so very disappointing if we don't have that fingerprint that was found by using the clear plexiglass rectangle in the smoke from the Super-glue. Dull, dull, dull.

Surely this phenomenon is occurring more and more often in every courtroom where circumstantial evidence is presented. And surely, those concerned with fair and effective jurisprudence are worrying at least as much as we are... Aren't they?

ETA: And the misunderstanding of "reasonable doubt" is a big problem, but maybe that one is for another time...

As for the sleeping juror -- a serious question -- Has anyone seen a juror excused because of excessive sleeping?

I'll stop now...

 

[Just the Fax]

I would place the bet the defense will rest Wednesday.
Very possible we will have a verdict Friday afternoon.

 

[Cammy]

Yep, toast.
But I think he wants to.

JMO

Jason would be very foolish to do so.
There is nothing that stands out that needs his explanation.
By playing his testimony, the Jurors got to see him.

I really think it is going to go down to closing arguments.

 

[Wolfpack]

Well I knew this would happen. I'm going out of town Wed and will miss the trial the rest of the week. If the DT finishes their case on Thursday will both sides give closing arguments on Friday? That means the jury will have the weekend between closing arguments and deliberating. Anyone know?

The State may have a rebuttal case too, which would take up Friday. And if closing were Friday morning, I bet they would come back and start deliberating Friday afternoon before the weekend got underway.

 

[Cammy]

Thanks Unfortunately I won't have much free time to watch. Fortunately I will have time to read enough of your comments to catch up. :rocker:

We will miss you.
Have a safe trip.

We won't have a verdict until Friday March 9th, imo.

 

[Wolfpack]

rbm

snipped

As for the sleeping juror -- a serious question -- Has anyone seen a juror excused because of excessive sleeping?

A judge will not hesitate to excuse a juror for sleeping. Could be just resting his eyes though? A lot of people do that if they're concentrating. There was one juror who looked like she was asleep during Cooper trial, but if you looked closely, she was still taking notes and all.

 

[octobermoon]

Jason would be very foolish to do so.
There is nothing that stands out that needs his explanation.
By playing his testimony, the Jurors got to see him.

I really think it is going to go down to closing arguments.

I agree it would be foolish of him to do so, but I bet he wants to.
I disagree about things he or his team need to explain. We will just
have to wait and see what the DT presents.

 

[Cammy]

O/T but I am a housekeeper and once ended up on base (military) and didn't have a pass. OMG I was shaking in my boots when they pulled me aside. That time they did look in my trunk which was full of bleach, ammonia, scrubbing bubbles,mops...... I was skeered. They were very kind and told me to turn around and never ever get lost onto base again. (they had big guns!!!)

Omg, you must have been terrified.

The worst for me was during spring break in Mexico,
a drunken wedding on a beach, several bottles of tequila,
trying to cross the border with a new name that
didn't match my passport .

Jails even overnite are not fun.
Parents coming to get you is even worse.

:floorlaugh:

 

[octobermoon]

I agree, its his narcissistic personality. He cant let this opportunity go by. You could see in the first trial, he was in his element.

I can't think of the name of the musical, but the guy was selling band equipment ... Oh gosh, but that is what kind of salesman he is.

And the NP!!!! His whole fake crying/recovery was something to see.

 

[Cammy]

I agree, its his narcissistic personality. He cant let this opportunity go by. You could see in the first trial, he was in his element.

I think Jason had more to prove the first time around.
First, it was a gutsy move to begin with.
No one saw it coming,least of all the Pros.

Now, they are so ready for him, he would be crazy to do so.

They are still so mad at him for catching them off guard.

I bet you BH and HC have a list ready this time.

IMO

 

[Just the Fax]

I still can't see how the DT plans to fill 4 days (assuming defendant does not testify).
Other than a few extra character witnesses (paid ), I can't imagine who they could call that would take another 2 1/2 days :waitasec:

 

[octobermoon]

Omg, you must have been terrified.

The worst for me was during spring break in Mexico,
a drunken wedding on a beach, several bottles of tequila,
trying to cross the border with a new name that
didn't match my passport .

Jails even overnite are not fun.
Parents coming to get you is even worse.

:floorlaugh:

:what:

LOL


(we better get back on topic before we get kicked out )

 

[octobermoon]

I still can't see how the DT plans to fill 4 days (assuming defendant does not testify).
Other than a few extra character witnesses (paid ), I can't imagine who they could call that would take another 2 1/2 days :waitasec:

75 bags of evidence missed or ignored

 

[Madeleine74]

I saw that older male juror who was falling asleep the day I was there. He was nodding off a lot. Not taking notes.

Then there was another one (an alternate I think/hope) who never took one note and was picking his nose at one point. uke: I certainly hope HE doesn't get on the jury that deliberates.

 

[Cammy]

I agree it would be foolish of him to do so, but I bet he wants to.
I disagree about things he or his team need to explain. We will just
have to wait and see what the DT presents.

I think the defense is up to something...:wink: