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

[otto]

OR, how about this: the jury will believe or disbelieve based on their own determination of credibility or believable situation based on their own life experiences with remembering details or not - regardless of whether it is a PT or DT witness.

I disagree ... I think that if a witness has presented contradictory testimony, then the witness is discredited.

 

[kantoo]

It might be something as simple minded as whether a female figure is a male, or it might come down to which eye witness really saw something on the night in question.

So which female figure in this trial is a male?

I'm not missing All My Children so much at this point, lol.

Do tell.

 

[Talina]

She is indeed an honest woman, but because of her brain injury, which was given a prognosis of having some functioning at the level of a 2 year old, she can be subjected to suggestion, just like a 2.5 year old.

I've seen it posted already that is suggested that perhaps the re-enactment by CY with the dolls is possibly due to suggestions.

I think the Judge was very careful in his own questioning of the day care worker whether or not she or anyone else had any conversations with CY that day regarding anything that could have attributed to her acting this out with these dolls. He apparently was satisfied with what he heard and decided to allow not only the description of the re-enactment but also the recitals of what CY said to her.

I am not going to question the ruling of the judge and what his knowledge, experience or law he used to base his decision on as he has way more experience that I do regarding this type of thing and he said it was his opinion that this was a re-enactment based on a traumatic event in CY's life and he felt its probative value outweighed the prejudicial nature of the testimony.

IMO

 

[Talina]

I disagree ... I think that if a witness has presented contradictory testimony, then the witness is discredited.

I didn't see any witness being discredited so far in this trial - by either side.

If you are saying based on your view of the first trial and this trial, and in your opinion a witness is discredited, then that is a different story.

This jury is not privy to what happened in the first trial and are judging this trial by this testimony - not comparison unless one side or the other pulls transcripts and enters contradictory evidence to discredit. I have not seen that happen so far in this trial.

 

[otto]

wow, i'd like to see a link for that

She testified to it herself. The prognosis was that she would have some brain functioning at the level of a 2 year old ... with memory being the specific area effected.

 

[otto]

So which female figure in this trial is a male?

I'm not missing All My Children so much at this point, lol.

Do tell.

Have you followed the testimony from the daycare employee?

 

[Talina]

She is indeed an honest woman, but because of her brain injury, which was given a prognosis of having some functioning at the level of a 2 year old, she can be subjected to suggestion, just like a 2.5 year old.

Where on earth did that come from? Was that in this trial? I definitely missed that testimony.

IMO

 

[heidisams]

Yet we aren't supposed to believe Gracie, because some friend of her's mentioned a murder in Raleigh, what, a hundred miles away from her? She said 'she let it go in one ear and out the other', cute remark from a brain-damaged woman. I use it often myself. :fence: And three days after the murder, she identified JLY as the customer who cussed her out and threw money at her, in the exact time frame he would have been passing her establishment. Not know at all, why she was asked about this man. While the neighbor comes up with her *detailed* account the following Tuesday. After having LE in her neighborhood for nearly a week?

I agree, to me, Gracie seems to be very honest and (I don't want this to come out wrong) not real worldly. She seems almost naive and probably quite content in her little corner of the world. I don't think she heard about this murder, learned the details, and then came up with a story in the hopes le would drop in and question her... And I definitely don't see her inserting herself in the hopes of getting her 15 minutes...

 

[gracielee]

She testified to it herself. The prognosis was that she would have some brain functioning at the level of a 2 year old ... with memory being the specific area effected.

She stated that to show she far exceeded all the doctors prognosis at the time she was run down by a drunk driver at the age of seven years old. The sweet little girl, lying in the road, telling her daddy 'she was sorry and wouldn't ever do it again.'

I'm appalled at how she is being portrayed here. I think it's nasty, down right cruel. And were it one of my grandchildren taking shots at Gracie, they'd be in a big time out right about now.

 

[kantoo]

Have you followed the testimony from the daycare employee?

Good lord, you are shooting off in a hundred directions. I had no idea you were talking about Cassidy. I was still talking about the other witness who thought she saw 2 cars out in front of the house early am.

 

[Talina]

She testified to it herself. The prognosis was that she would have some brain functioning at the level of a 2 year old ... with memory being the specific area effected.

I heard something totally different than you are saying you heard. I heard her to say that her mom was told she'd be a vegetable and would/could be 20 yrs old but never advance beyond the age of a 2 yr old.

She then kinda laughed and gave the indication that clearly that prognosis was far from correct.

 

[otto]

I've seen it posted already that is suggested that perhaps the re-enactment by CY with the dolls is possibly due to suggestions.

I think the Judge was very careful in his own questioning of the day care worker whether or not she or anyone else had any conversations with CY that day regarding anything that could have attributed to her acting this out with these dolls. He apparently was satisfied with what he heard and decided to allow not only the description of the re-enactment and the recitals of what CY said to her.

I am not going to question the ruling of the judge and what he knowledge, experience or law he used to base his decision on as he has way more experience that I do regarding this type of thing and he said it was his opinion that this was a re-enactment based on a traumatic event in CY's life and he felt it probative value outweighed the prejudicial nature of the testimony.

IMO

The daycare employee has no idea what the child heard. It's not just that day ... it's the days between the murder and the last day that the child attended daycare. Personally, I'm a little shocked that the child was sent to daycare under the circumstances ... murder in the family.

The objection was something with the constitution ... #6 and #14 ... but it's a fair ruling. I think the defense made the wrong argument ... they should have argued that the statement should only be entered in its entirety as they could then demonstrate that the child was rambling. By excluding the post-nap testimony, the jury has a focused description from the daycare worker ... who may only have documented certain statements and actions ... no cows, barn and fruit rollups in the pre-nap testimony.

 

[enzeder]

Knowing Jay, that pullover is red with a white chest stripe.
(Black is the lamp base beside his right hand)
The hall photos appear black, but it must be the camera and lighting.....MOO

I lightened the pic a little and did a 'smart sharpen' in GIMP. Still not very clear though.

 

[otto]

Where on earth did that come from? Was that in this trial? I definitely missed that testimony.

IMO

She testified to it herself in the second trial ... prognosis of some functioning at the level of a two year old, memory function is her specific disability and she has received gov't compensation for this disability since she was hit by a milk truck ... some kind of truck. She seemed to actually believe that her brains were spilled on the pavement, scooped up and tucked back into her head - that's what she testified to.

 

[gracielee]

The daycare employee has no idea what the child heard. It's not just that day ... it's the days between the murder and the last day that the child attended daycare. Personally, I'm a little shocked that the child was sent to daycare under the circumstances ... murder in the family.

.

Take that up with the Young family, as they were the ones who had control of CY. Remember, both Linda & Meredith Fisher testifed 'they weren't allowed any 'alone time' with CY, once the young's hit town.

 

[otto]

She stated that to show she far exceeded all the doctors prognosis at the time she was run down by a drunk driver at the age of seven years old. The sweet little girl, lying in the road, telling her daddy 'she was sorry and wouldn't ever do it again.'

I'm appalled at how she is being portrayed here. I think it's nasty, down right cruel. And were it one of my grandchildren taking shots at Gracie, they'd be in a big time out right about now.

I'm looking at the testimony ... I believe that her testimony was placed in question because of her contradictory statements and brain injury.

 

[otto]

Good lord, you are shooting off in a hundred directions. I had no idea you were talking about Cassidy. I was still talking about the other witness who thought she saw 2 cars out in front of the house early am.

I don't know anything about the two morning witnesses. They both saw something, but they disagree about the time and specifics.

 

[Talina]

The daycare employee has no idea what the child heard. It's not just that day ... it's the days between the murder and the last day that the child attended daycare. Personally, I'm a little shocked that the child was sent to daycare under the circumstances ... murder in the family.

The objection was something with the constitution ... #6 and #14 ... but it's a fair ruling. I think the defense made the wrong argument ... they should have argued that the statement should only be entered in its entirety as they could then demonstrate that the child was rambling. By excluding the post-nap testimony, the jury has a focused description from the daycare worker ... who may only have documented certain statements and actions ... no cows, barn and fruit rollups in the pre-nap testimony.

Personally, I totally see why the judge ruled against the post nap conversation. It seemed disjointed to me and could or could not have had anything to do with the outside doll play acting. We do not know how much time had lapsed between the two and to suggest that the two are somehow connected is a far stretch IMO without more to go on than what we know right now. Even if we knew more or had witnessed it ourselves, I don't think we could be 100% sure what CY was talking about. Heck she could have just been rambling about several things on her mind after waking from a dream. Who knows.


IMO

 

[Talina]

She testified to it herself in the second trial ... prognosis of some functioning at the level of a two year old, memory function is her specific disability and she has received gov't compensation for this disability since she was hit by a milk truck ... some kind of truck. She seemed to actually believe that her brains were spilled on the pavement, scooped up and tucked back into her head - that's what she testified to.

I heard that testimony and have relistened to it since that day. I just did not hear the same thing you did. She didn't say she believed that about her brain she said she was told that. I suppose one could surmise she believed it but I really think we should stick to what she said. I think there is a lot of interpretation and not so accurate restatements of actual testimony where this particular witness is concerned.

IMO

 

[otto]

I heard something totally different than you are saying you heard. I heard her to say that her mom was told she'd be a vegetable and would/could be 20 yrs old but never advance beyond the age of a 2 yr old.

She then kinda laughed and gave the indication that clearly that prognosis was far from correct.

Agreed .. she was told that the prognosis was that she would have some functioning at the level of a 2 year old. She identified that disability as memory related. She's not like a 2 year old that tumbles down the stairs and pushes boundaries (terrible twos), she's like a two year old in memory functioning, but otherwise holds a menial job and presents professionally in court.