State vs Jason Lynn Young 2-27-12

Status
Not open for further replies.
Very impressive witness. Questions if I'm the prosecution.
1. Did you know Jason and Michelle Young had $1 million life insurance policies at the time of the accident? Objection, relevancy, outside scope of knowledge to investigate an accident.

2. Did you know that Jason Young had left Cassidy Young with family when he and Michelle "went out for coffee" before traveling back to Raleigh? Obviously there were only 2 people in the car. Why would he investigate other absentee members?

3. In your experience, do people sometimes try to fraudulently collect on insurance policies via automobile accidents? not an insurance agent

4. Are you aware that Mr. Young told Michelle Young to "get over it" after losing the baby she was carrying before the accident? Objection, lack of personal knowledge, or relevancy to testimony

5. (An ode to the Jeffrey MacDonald trial cross examinations) Were you present at 5108 Birchleaf the night of Nov. 3, 2006? I don't think the PT will gain any points with this jury by impeaching the credibility of this witness with such flippant and disrespectful questions.

I have nothing further.

bbm and my comments
 
This wittiness sure sounds more then just a traffic cop. Very professional. I believe he will impress the jury and eliminate any doubt it was a deliberate act by JY in a attempt to injure his wife. MOO
 
How exactly does one determine intentional / accidental based on tire tracks?
 
The DT must be worried about this accident. IMO JMO MOO

Since the state implied it was NOT an accident, it is only fair the defense gets to refute it.

And, who better to refute it, than the highway investigation trooper who arrived at the scene...
 
Omg, it was a 55 mile zone, and Jason was only driving 40 miles!!

He is describing the sharpness of the turn.


Jason treated Michelle like complete garbage in so many other ways that this accident is meaningless. <modsnip> What does it have to do with anything?
 
I am sure the jurors know that this man, as much as he should be respected, is not claiming to be an eye witness to the accident. He is only providing information observed and gathered from talking to the Youngs, as evidenced by the fact that he has in his report that both JLY and MY were buckled in. This wasn't the case.
 
It means the accident was just that, an accident !!

This is the state trooper that was called later after the murder and even though he insisted it was an accident, the Pros tried to slide it in as a possible murder attempt.

IMO someone did die as a result of this accident.
 
My opinion only, but for goodness sakes HC get with it already. (sorry for the snark)
 
That is their job.
They can also figure out how fast a car was going through measurements.

They can't tell what was going on with JY, why he ran off the right side of the road to begin with, no way of knowing that unless they interviewed both of the occupants of that car, which they did not.
 
bbm and my comments 5. (An ode to the Jeffrey MacDonald trial cross examinations) Were you present at 5108 Birchleaf the night of Nov. 3, 2006? I don't think the PT will gain any points with this jury by impeaching the credibility of this witness with such flippant and disrespectful questions.

As mentioned, this was a very effective method of question the MacDonald case. That Jason Young specifically left Cassidy behind with his family speaks volumes to me. Add in the recent life insurance boost, it's even more incriminating; of course the most incriminating facts are that relatively soon after Jason Young escalated the life insurance policies to $4 million and Michelle Young ended up dead.
 
HC should let this go, his re-cross is making it look like the States case hinges (in part) on accident vs intentional.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
172
Guests online
1,925
Total visitors
2,097

Forum statistics

Threads
592,843
Messages
17,975,954
Members
228,911
Latest member
boxtobox
Back
Top