Appeal filed in jy murder conviction

Status
Not open for further replies.
I just saw that. What took them so long? Poor Mrs. Fisher, Meredith and Cassidy, although they knew this was coming.

I followed this trial. I can't find the juror instructions, but no way Judge Stephens said the jury could construe his silence as evidence of guilt! To the contrary, asI recall, because it made me cringe to hear his silence could not be used against him. but the defense must have some basis or that issue to be raised. Does anyone know where I can find a copy of the instructions or can you explain?

We knew the teacher's testimony about the dolls would be one basis for appeal (right to confront accuser grounds).

Anyway, I love Judge Stephens. I trust his judgment.
 
It looks like there are a number of good legal reasons for a retrial:

"The day care workers' testimony was not introduced in Jason Young's first trial, and ... [Judge] Stephens should not have allowed it in the second.

... Stephens' decision to allow testimony about a $15.5 million wrongful death lawsuit and about a custody dispute over Cassidy Young violated Jason Young's right to a fair trial.

... Stephens should not have instructed the jury that it could consider Jason Young's "failure to talk to friends and family as substantive evidence of guilt."

"Instructing the jury that it could infer guilt from Mr. Young's silence was error so fundamental that the jury probably would have returned a different verdict had it not been permitted to do so,"

http://www.wral.com/jason-young-appeals-conviction-in-wife-s-2006-beating-death/12720156/
 
I just saw that. What took them so long? Poor Mrs. Fisher, Meredith and Cassidy, although they knew this was coming.

I followed this trial. I can't find the juror instructions, but no way Judge Stephens said the jury could construe his silence as evidence of guilt! To the contrary, asI recall, because it made me cringe to hear his silence could not be used against him. but the defense must have some basis or that issue to be raised. Does anyone know where I can find a copy of the instructions or can you explain?

We knew the teacher's testimony about the dolls would be one basis for appeal (right to confront accuser grounds).

Anyway, I love Judge Stephens. I trust his judgment.

I'm not sure where to find the instructions. Try WRAL website, they covered both trials. I too was under the impression they couldn't hold his silence against him, because of the 5th.
 
It looks like there are a number of good legal reasons for a retrial:

"The day care workers' testimony was not introduced in Jason Young's first trial, and ... [Judge] Stephens should not have allowed it in the second.

... Stephens' decision to allow testimony about a $15.5 million wrongful death lawsuit and about a custody dispute over Cassidy Young violated Jason Young's right to a fair trial.

... Stephens should not have instructed the jury that it could consider Jason Young's "failure to talk to friends and family as substantive evidence of guilt."

"Instructing the jury that it could infer guilt from Mr. Young's silence was error so fundamental that the jury probably would have returned a different verdict had it not been permitted to do so,"

http://www.wral.com/jason-young-appeals-conviction-in-wife-s-2006-beating-death/12720156/

The "right to remain silent" applies when you have had the Miranda Rights read to you when you have been arrested. He was never arrested until the Grand Jury came back with a Guilty Verdict how many years after the fact. In all that time, he spoke to NO ONE about his dead wife, not even LE when asked. I don't understand how that was a "fundamental error" for the judge to instruct inferring guilt.
Plus this is interesting...
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...eme-court-bombshell-no-right-to-remain-silent
 
Yeah, the judge did not say that JY's silence to family or friends was substantive evidence of guilt. Shouldn't an appeal be factual?

Here is the judge's charge to the jury. Warning, you will have to view his ugly mug.
Jury instructions
 
The "right to remain silent" applies when you have had the Miranda Rights read to you when you have been arrested. He was never arrested until the Grand Jury came back with a Guilty Verdict how many years after the fact. In all that time, he spoke to NO ONE about his dead wife, not even LE when asked. I don't understand how that was a "fundamental error" for the judge to instruct inferring guilt.
Plus this is interesting...
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...eme-court-bombshell-no-right-to-remain-silent

From the linked article, one judge said: "he should have affirmatively “invoked” his right to not answer questions." That's essentially what Young did. He told friends and family that, per his lawyer's advice, he was not prepared to discuss anything related to his wife's murder.

The appeal objection is this: "Stephens should not have instructed the jury that it could consider Jason Young's "failure to talk to friends and family as substantive evidence of guilt."

Is it reasonable to infer guilt based on the failure of a murder suspect to discuss the facts of the case with friends and family?

I also have problems with a day care employee (one with no formal training in child psychology) that was suddenly deemed qualified to present and interpret play activities of a two year old child. That, to me, seems bizarre. There is also the question of whether new evidence can be introduced in a re-trial. Is that allowed? Was it allowed because the child was on the witness list in the first trial?
 
Yeah, the judge did not say that JY's silence to family or friends was substantive evidence of guilt. Shouldn't an appeal be factual?

Here is the judge's charge to the jury. Warning, you will have to view his ugly mug.
Jury instructions

Did the judge say that juror's could infer guilt based on the fact that Jason did not discuss the murder with friends and family?
 
I have no doubt that Jason Young is guilty of the urder of his wife, Michelle Fisher.

When I expected justice, I discovered that the NC system has an unusual law that allows for the defendant to be discrebited before evidence is presented. That is what happened with Jason Young and Brad Cooper. The defesnce was permitted to enter neighbors as character witneses, and they're opinions about the facts of the case were allowed as testimony. That biassed the jury against the defendant. Even if the judge is lenient towards the defense, it does not undo street gossip.
 
Based on similar appeals time-lines, look for the Attorney General response brief in early November, 2013.
The NC Court of Appeals will then review and either render a decision or schedule oral arguments (likely January 2014)
 
I have no doubt that Jason Young is guilty of the urder of his wife, Michelle Fisher.

When I expected justice, I discovered that the NC system has an unusual law that allows for the defendant to be discrebited before evidence is presented. That is what happened with Jason Young and Brad Cooper. The defesnce was permitted to enter neighbors as character witneses, and they're opinions about the facts of the case were allowed as testimony. That biassed the jury against the defendant. Even if the judge is lenient towards the defense, it does not undo street gossip.

It is ok for them to give their opinions... the jurors have to decide if it is relevant.

The defense should absolutely show that these were their opinions.
They could also put on others that could show the opposite.

An intelligent juror should know the difference with street gossip.
 
So has everyone read the State's response? Thoughts?

I tried to read it all and think the State makes sense saying that jason young gave up custody of his child so that he could not be deposed in the wrongful death suit and then tailored his testimony in the first trial after studying all the discovery which was given to the defense. His credibility became the issue.
 
The "right to remain silent" applies when you have had the Miranda Rights read to you when you have been arrested. He was never arrested until the Grand Jury came back with a Guilty Verdict how many years after the fact. In all that time, he spoke to NO ONE about his dead wife, not even LE when asked. I don't understand how that was a "fundamental error" for the judge to instruct inferring guilt.
Plus this is interesting...
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...eme-court-bombshell-no-right-to-remain-silent

BBM.

That's wrong. The right to remain silent is a basic legal right which applies 24/7, it doesn't suddenly appear when a suspect is Miranda'd. The police are required to read the Miranda warning just in case a suspect doesn't know their rights, but those rights exist all along independently of whether you've been read a Miranda warning.
 
The 5th amendment and the right to remain silent means that no person can be compelled to testify against themselves in a criminal proceeding. It doesn't apply to civil cases, and it means nothing in terms of speaking to friends & family as they are not law enforcement. There are some exclusions, such as excited utterances can be used against a person even if/when they've been mirandized (or not).

The fact that JY declined to ever speak to his friends and wouldn't talk to anyone about the murder, including answering the civil subpoena and custody/visitation lawsuit is not a protected right and a logical inference can be made there's a reason he refused to speak to his family, his friends, the civil lawyers and other non-government parties.

A jury can't hold it against a defendant who doesn't get on the stand and testify (although JY did in trial #1 and finally locked himself into a BS story that came back to bite him big time), but they sure can wonder why that same defendant defaulted on civil matters and refused to talk to friends and kept little CY from seeing her aunt and grandma for no good reason. Ahhh but wait...there was a good reason.... turns out little CY was talking about what she saw that fateful night/morning and it was right after that she was spirited away.
 
OK; Breaking news, wral has responded; they are the pool camera, hearing begins at 9:30am tomorrow morning.

I think we should still have the Dec Trials Thread....even if it's just for hearings...but we can follow along this way as well.

Let's hope that it's denied.....:grouphug:

Maybe we could have a sticky for the hearing? Thank you!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
90
Guests online
606
Total visitors
696

Forum statistics

Threads
589,919
Messages
17,927,642
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top