I'm viewing on Tapatalk, so if it's not showing up for some reason, just direct me to the discussion thread and delete this. Thanks.
Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk
The only problem is jewellery is pretty worthless at a pawn shop. Diamonds are really worthless, jewellery stores mark them up 300%, so a $10,000 ring is only going to get you somewhere less than a grand.
My theory is it was a botched robbery. They had to kill Michelle. Maybe Michelle knew...
Also, I like the comment about this killing took a long time, and by the time the blood would be dry by the time the killer left.
IF JY committed the murder, he wouldn't have that much time at all.
Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk
Unidentified DNA. Two or three were hers, one was a partial match, some they couldn't get a viable DNA sample, and then there was a couple that had unidentified DNA,
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
I had an acquaintance who did a B&E in broad daylight while high on LSD. He figured the people were at work. The wife came home and threatened to call the cops on him. He grabbed a kitchen knife and cut her up pretty bad. She didn't die. This was in like '96 and I still think he's in prison.
So...
The garage door was broken, and they didn't lock the door to the mud room. I don't lock the door to my mud room, and if my garage door was broken, I might forget to lock it.
I'll admit to this now because I'm sure any statute of limitations on B&Es I committed 15+ years ago has run out. We...
JY also had receipts for cigars from before the murder. So either he had a time machine and went back in time to purchase cigars, or he's such a criminal mastermind, that he occasionally purchased cigars so that years later he could use smoking a cigar as an alibi when his wife is murdered...
Howdy. To anyone just joining the conversation, many of the folks here believe that Jason Young is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and there's no evidence to the contrary, while a few people believe there's too many inconsistencies with the prosecution's case and there is evidence that raises...
Not bright red, probably dark brown. In the pictures of the pajamas, where parts were cut out for testing, there's areas that look yellowish, like washed blood stains to me.
As I said previously, I don't understand why the defense never asked the lab guy if the pajamas had been washed. From my...
Even if the answer is, "They could have been washed but we can not say exactly," that raises reasonable doubt.
How else could they test positive for blood, but be "shockingly clean"?
Sent from your mom's smartphone
The problem with the idea that the pajamas were washed is that the question is never asked during trial. Why? There's no visible blood on the pajamas, but they chemically tested positive in several areas for blood, why is it no one asked, "could they have been washed?"
I can draw conclusions all...
That, practically the same, evidence led to a hung jury the first time, and an overturned conviction the second time.
The only thing the jury heard differently was the civil suits and the daycare workers. And that it was too cold and windy to smoke a cigar.
Sent from your mom's smartphone
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.