Guilty of first degree murder/verdict watch #2

[Candy_Pickletoes]

The one thing that I am bothered with is that the jury will not speak about their decision. I think, that if you come to a verdict, be it guilty or innocent, then you should be able to stand behind your verdict and state why you voted a certain way. I'm not arguing that the jurors should be questioned, or mocked, or revered for their decision, but I think, in exchange for locking someone away for life (or letting someone free), they should be willing to divulge why they reached the decision they did.

I understand our system is not built this way, but I do think it is a flaw. I know there are many on here, who would have voted Guilty, and would have been able to state proudly why they did so. I would like to hear from the jury the reasons why they have sent a man away for life. Don't get me wrong, I think he is guilty, but it is a hard burden the jurors have, the power to decide this man's life. In exchange for that burden and that power, I think they should be willing to tell the world why.

On a separate note, someone asked in the old thread if there is any reversible error. I don't think Stephens is the type of Judge to leave much room for an overturn on appeal. I think that his most susceptible decisions would have been allowing in the evidence of CY's doll play, and the information on the wrongful death suit. I don't know that it will reach the level of reversible error, since I don't personally think either of those tipped the scales in favor of guilty (other things did that, would be my belief). So, these may be ruled "error", but I'm not sure they will be reversible if they are even error.

I have to respectfully disagree. The jury didn't send JY away for the rest of his life, his actions sent him away for the rest of his life. It's time for JY to take responsibilty for what he did. He didn't have to speak, he had the right to remain silent. Shouldn't the jury afford that same right? JY never had to say a word to anyone, he could have gone through trial #1 with never having opened his mouth to anyone regarding what happened that night. The jury shouldn't have to explain themselves, they were asked to do a job, they did it, and they should be able to go on with their lives without having to speak. JY had the right to remain silent, I think this jury should be afforded that same right.

MOO :Banane35:

 

[Landonsmom02]

Thanks you GOD!!! Justice was finally served today. It's a great day and Michelle can finally rest in peace!

 

[Turtles]

I know that nothing will ever assuage the pain of the loss of Michelle for Linda, Meredith and poor little Cassie, a tiny girl who will never know the warmth of her mother's embrace; what it would have been like to play with Rylan, and look out for him as his big sister. Now she will never have a blood relative until she one day has her own children. But I hope and pray that this justice can in some small way bring them all even the tiniest sliver of peace. I will continue to pray for them because they will never get over this loss. Especially little Cassie who was robbed of a life by a selfish, despicable individual. I think it is beyond disgusting for anyone to opine that Linda somehow benefitted from this since she received some money from the estate. I think Linda Fisher would give every cent and move heaven and earth to be able to hold her daughter again. No parent should have to see their baby daughter brutalized and degraded and broken the way her daughter was. I can't even imagine how one would be able to face the world, having seen the little girl you carried beaten to a bloody pulp, jaw bone protruding from her face, teeth knocked clean out of her mouth. My prayers tonight are for the Fishers. May you find peace. Michelle is holding her son, looking down on you always.

BBM
What a beautiful heartfelt post, thanks button was not enough!

 

[3doglady]

Wolfpack (or any other local lawyers if you are here and know the answer to this) - is it customary for the jury to still be in the jury box after the verdict and hear the judge listen to the DT motion to throw out the verdict and subsequent judge ruling?

I'm glad the jury got to do this but I don't see that happening in other states. I suppose it could be the timing of the sentencing happening right after the verdict with there being no presentencing hearing, etc. but he could have also excused the jury first, then moved on to the other mattes of sentencing.

TIA

Judge Stevens told the jury they were excused if they wanted to leave or could stay for the sentencing, it was their decision.

 

[Wolfpack]

Respectfully BBM

IMO, it's not a flaw at all. Their duty is done. They didn't ask to be on the jury, it was the hand they were given, doing their civic duty. Maybe the jury will be willing to speak about their verdict, but I will not think less of them if they choose to go about their lives and remain private. I would think this way even if the jury had returned a verdict of NG. They should not, in an way, shape, or form, be made to open themselves for public scrutiny.

Again, JMO

I completely understand your side of the argument (and citygirl posted something similar). I don't think they should be forced to come forward and list their reasons, but I wish they would take it upon themselves to do so. My thoughts would be the same for either verdict. Perhaps its just my experience as an attorney, but putting countless hours into a case, and then having a decision made by someone else, and not knowing *why*, can drive you bananas.

ETA: To be clear, as I have stated countless times, I am not wanting to take the right of silence away from anyone, not even the jury, but I wish they would be willing to state why they made their decision. I am not asking they be forced, or have to sit down and "explain themselves" like they have done something wrong, but I do wish that at least one would step forward and say "this is why we voted the way we did."

 

[karengo]

I understand the jury decision not to speak but like many , I would love to know how they reached to their decision. Maybe they will need some time and will make an appearance one day. I see this case and trial on Dateline or 48 hours in the not too distant future or maybe even ID channel.

I thought I read Dateline producers were in the courtroom Friday.

 

[Turnadot]

I completely understand your side of the argument (and citygirl posted something similar). I don't think they should be forced to come forward and list their reasons, but I wish they would take it upon themselves to do so. My thoughts would be the same for either verdict. Perhaps its just my experience as an attorney, but putting countless hours into a case, and then having a decision made by someone else, and not knowing *why*, can drive you bananas.

Yes, I too am appreciative when a jury chooses to speak out about their verdict, and perhaps they will, in time.

IMO

 

[Bottle Cap]

This is the face of domestic violence that people struggle not just to understand, but to even believe when they see it. I said it in a previous post...it's not just some drunk guy staggering around <modsnip>, taking potshots at his <modsnip> wife for having burnt the meatloaf.

It's your neighbor, smiling at you from the mailbox. Somebody you work with. The woman in a track suit jogging with her baby, the guy who goes to work in a suit. DV isn't black eyes and drunken potshots. It's the process of methodically dismantling another human being by whatever means are available. Verbal abuse, emotional abuse, sexual, financial, physical...even courts can be used to abuse. (To wit, the BC case where NC ended up on trial. That is exactly what an abuser does - turns it all back around on their target, and a court can certainly facilitate that process.)

There is an overwhelming wall facing people who are victims of DV, and that is the disbelief of others.

The signs whoosh over the heads of so many at lightening speed. But they're there. We (and by we I mean a substantial chunk of the WS community) could see it clearly in both the BC and JY cases, but there are bezillions of people out there who can't see it. Can't take a person's word for it because it doesn't fit the stereotype. Pshaw it because there's no black eye or broken nose. Believe the abuser, because he or she is so very good at what they do - hey, they roped their victim in, right? Their victims actually loved them at some point.

NC tried to leave. MY would have tried it had she had the chance. People see this in retrospect, possibly, but does someone really have to be dead before its apparent? We need to have some kind of societal zero tolerance attitude, as we do for child abuse, on this sort of thing. We need to do a better job of teaching our kids what constitutes abuse. You can't always see it, but that doesn't mean it isn't there. And it will escalate until it IS visible.

For the folks watching this trial who can't see the DV in any of this outside of a severe beating, there is all sorts of info out there you can read. Red flags, patterns of behavior, the power wheel. The subtleties are myriad. The perpetrators are wily.

I'm so pleased about this verdict, but lord have mercy, the cases just keep coming. I hope people pay attention to this one. I hope at some point courts and juries send a clear message that they're wise to the tricks of the likes of BC and JY and will make them pay for having the audacity to think they can get away with it. We have to be savvier than they are. I think the courts are catching up (i.e. recognizing that courts can actually be a tool of an abuser). Everybody else needs to catch up too.

 

[Madeleine74]

I thought I read Dateline producers were in the courtroom Friday.

Dateline, 20/20, and TruTV producers were in there.

 

[gritguy]

Glad to see the verdict.

JY murdered his wife and unborn son. It's ok to remember them now; dissecting JY's lies or trying to defend the fantasies he spun to explain himself are efforts now moot.

JY counted on everyone agreeing Michelle and Ryan weren't worth the effort to remember. He was wrong. They still matter and what could be done for them - the conviction of their killer - has been done.

I'm chiming in from a long way away from Wake county today, but I am glad the news made it down to me.

 

[waltzingmatilda]

I just saw the judge read the verdict on JVM and JLY had NO reaction at all. It was like he expected to be found guilty. I think he knew the gig was over. MOO

wm

 

[ynotdivein]

Beth Karras mentioning on JVM that the jurors asked to review 12 items of evidence earlier today, were shown 11 items. I would like to know what those items might have been. And I fully respect the jurors' requests for privacy and am ok with not ever knowing for sure.

 

[Candy_Pickletoes]

I completely understand your side of the argument (and citygirl posted something similar). I don't think they should be forced to come forward and list their reasons, but I wish they would take it upon themselves to do so. My thoughts would be the same for either verdict. Perhaps its just my experience as an attorney, but putting countless hours into a case, and then having a decision made by someone else, and not knowing *why*, can drive you bananas.

ETA: To be clear, as I have stated countless times, I am not wanting to take the right of silence away from anyone, not even the jury, but I wish they would be willing to state why they made their decision. I am not asking they be forced, or have to sit down and "explain themselves" like they have done something wrong, but I do wish that at least one would step forward and say "this is why we voted the way we did."

BBM - My apologies, I think we were posting at the same time. I, too, would love to pick their brains, however always respect their privacy.

A question, I thought that in many cases the jury did speak to each side after a verdict....I guess I'm wrong about that? I didn't think they talked publicly, just to each team.

If I ever serve on a jury, I would be willing to speak to each attorney but would never be willing to discuss my decision making with the general public.

 

[hindsight2020]

I know this has been said before, but I need to say it again. . .I was most impressed with Judge Stephens!

He was poignant and succinct in laying down the hammer when addressing the convicted murderer! Way to go Judge!

 

[pjcitizen]

Anybody know if Gracie was on Vinnie's show? I didn't see her on there but I might have missed it.

 

[JustJax]

Goofy people that phone in to the shows...everyone knows they have to turn their tele's down because of the delay...:doh:

 

[gracielee]

Wolfpack (or any other local lawyers if you are here and know the answer to this) - is it customary for the jury to still be in the jury box after the verdict and hear the judge listen to the DT motion to throw out the verdict and subsequent judge ruling?

I'm glad the jury got to do this but I don't see that happening in other states. I suppose it could be the timing of the sentencing happening right after the verdict with there being no presentencing hearing, etc. but he could have also excused the jury first, then moved on to the other mattes of sentencing.

TIA

From what I understood the judge to say, he gave them that choice. And those who wanted to stay for the verdict and sentencing, did stay.

 

[Wolfpack]

A question, I thought that in many cases the jury did speak to each side after a verdict....I guess I'm wrong about that? I didn't think they talked publicly, just to each team.

This does happen, but not always. I know that very few, if any, of the cooper jurors spoke to either side. Maybe 1, if that?

 

[waltzingmatilda]

Anybody know if Gracie was on Vinnie's show? I didn't see her on there but I might have missed it.

I didn't see her pjcitizen but I was distracted for part of his show. A snip of Gracie's testimony was just shown on JVM. I am so glad the jury believed her testimony. She may have problems, I dunno, but I don't think Gracie is dumb. JLY's face is memorable, IMO.

 

[gracielee]

Yes, I too am appreciative when a jury chooses to speak out about their verdict, and perhaps they will, in time.

IMO

I didn't hear that they would *never* speak. I heard the judge to say they wanted to be left alone for a couple days. And then he gave the jurors the option to speak or not speak. He simply said to the press, leave them alone for today, they want to go home and not speak today.