Michelle Young~Pregnant Mother NC Part 4

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
raisincharlie said:
PSA,

Not meaning to be argumentative but I truthfully don't think we can assume what time JY left his home on Thursday evening. I say this because all we know is a friend or friends were there to watch GA which airs at 9 EST. This does not exclude the friends from being there for dinner or a few drinks or just a general chat well before the show. JMO, the departure time could be a much broader time frame than we think.

Hi charlie, never considered you argumentative and certainly didn't take this post as argumentative at all.

You're absolutely right.... in a previous post, early on page one or two in this latest thread, I posted MY (as in me, my, lol, not MYoung) TIMELINE guestimate and why I feel he's guilty. Also, we heard friends that had gathered to watch G A witnessed him leave. So, just as we cannot assume so many other details ... I am giving an estimation.

He may have left at 7. However, I don't see a friends arriving to watch a TV prog 2 half hours before it airs. (Grated, MY may have included dinner, which brings us back to new guesswork).

He may have left at 10:30??? Lol.

Thanks for bringing my attention to this, charlie...
 
Samiya said:
Are they still discussing the gay angle over there on CTV?

If so can someone ask J's "friends" who Mr R Schaad is. If they've known him for 'so long' they'd know what the connection is.
Samiya,

I don't know, I don't go there much. I admit to peeking in now and then when pointed that way or after something has been dropped here just to see how long it takes and how twisted it becomes !

Of what I have viewed, I do not recall the name you reference being present or presented, perhaps someone here who goes over to the "dark side" more often will chime in and respond to your question.:)
 
otto said:
Thanks. I was thinking about Ted Bundy. He entered homes quietly, killed women and didn't wake anyone in the house.

About Jason and the media being very quiet, I'm pretty sure he knows that there are discussions about him. That would give him justification to ask the LE not to leak a word to the public. In a way, the discussions at CTV surprise me. Crime forums are a very small part of the internet yet so many people "in the know" are posting. Something about that seems to defeat the odds ... but I don't have any handy stats to say why.

Morning otto: You may be right ... I'll bet JY and fam are reading here, otto. Especially if the 'insiders' are really close to that family. They'll be reporting back or showing each post ...
 
raisincharlie said:
Morning Sweetmop,

I've had the evening and much of this early morning to think about this and do have a few thoughts about the afraid comment:

1. It may not necessarily be fear per say but more not wanting to be involved due to the potential that it will go to court at some point. I think perhaps some people are entirely intimidated by the prospect of appearing in a court.

2. The way court cases are now, defense approaches are always to smear or discredit a witness, someone with even a bit of a smudge might realize it may well become public and turned into a full dump truck of dirt by the time a lawyer is done with them. The public has a tendancy to do this as well i.e. best example Ms. Frey - was any degrading word NOT used in reference to her?

In this case it is obvious that some of the Young's friends would suffer greatly at the hands of a lawyer defending a client for murder (speaking of the gay friends). they may have employers or relatives that do not know and I have little doubt it would come out at a trial.

3. We do know a lawyer lives in the area of the Youngs home (recall Hammer mentioned speaking to him and the lawyer said "there's no jack the ripper in this case"). Then you have CTV removing any an all posts about a juvenille that lives in the neighborhood - while CTV posters can at times be incredibly vicious - did that warrant the removal of ALL posts and notice of banning at just the mention of the name (who is he - Lord Voldemort ?). Something motivated CTV to take the action they took IMO.

Just a few thoughts, as usual I am long winded.

Something happened at the beginning of the mention of the 15 year old. If you ask me, my guess is that a parent became involved and consulted a lawyer. This was posted by "youngsneighbor" on abc: "A few days ago, a person going by the screen-name BirchleafResident posted some accusations and false information regarding the Young murder. Anyone who had read the posts by that person please post here, and if that person is still a member here, post your reasoning for trying to incriminate a child. ...The family has looked over the posts and is deciding on what legal action they will take against the author. If anyone has any information on who created the screen-name BirchleafResident, please post that information here so I can pass it on to the family ... From now on, please do NOT post anything that BirchleafResident had posted about the case, just discuss the topic in general without mentioning details. Just remember that the person going by that screen-name was posting false information. Posted: 11/10/06 10:08 AM " This poster was then informed about similar posts at CTV and within a day, references to the child were removed from CTV.

It seems reasonable to suspect the husband, even the police have made that much obvious. Suspecting the child next door, without any evidence, does seem over the top. We need to keep in mind that all the rumours about the 15 year old stem back to this one poster.
 
PolkSaladAnnie said:
Hi charlie, never considered you argumentative and certainly didn't take this post as argumentative at all.

You're absolutely right.... in a previous post, early on page one or two in this latest thread, I posted MY (as in me, my, lol, not MYoung) TIMELINE guestimate and why I feel he's guilty. Also, we heard friends that had gathered to watch G A witnessed him leave. So, just as we cannot assume so many other details ... I am giving an estimation.

He may have left at 7. However, I don't see a friends arriving to watch a TV prog 2 half hours before it airs. (Grated, MY may have included dinner, which brings us back to new guesswork).

He may have left at 10:30??? Lol.

Thanks for bringing my attention to this, charlie...
You can't imagine a bunch of ladies getting together a few hours before Drs MacDreamy and Mac Steamy or whatever their names are appear on a tv screen ? My eyes have told me it happens ! I resign myself to the barn during this time!:D
 
Hey Charlie- I didn't take your post as argumentive either. JY could have left at anytime, even during the show... I tend to believe that LE has done a lot of legwork because I would love to believe that they are tracking gas receipts (who leaves town with an empty tank?)... there HAS to be something out there to narrow down a timeline. Also, the phone calls that JY made, if the calls were placed to a "landline", every call made from every phone goes through a "central office". From what I remember working at the phone company, long before caller ID or any technology was available, a central office is a place where all your calls are entered into and then "sent" to the phone number you are calling. (I don't make much sense probably) I would also guess that any calls placed from cell phones have some "checkpoint" where they are transfered to wherever they are going (like the towers, etc...). While none of JY's actual calls have been reported to the media or otherwise, I have no doubt that LE has a very detailed list.

I wish someone would gather some new info. (Like Greta or Nancy G.).... I so want this to be solved.
 
charlie, wonder what you make of my response, below, to strach, earlier?

PolkSaladAnnie said:
I was reading your theory, strach, about the problem marriage and Jason taking more than was required for an overnight trip (heck, I'm flying overnight to London soon, for 2 days/2 nights; it's business, MUCH colder & I am ONLY taking a cabin bag and my handbag). Kudos to you :clap: as you hit on something. I thought about what you wrote and wondered if that's another reason JY's with his parents: he'd PLANNED not to be around Raleigh for a while and took what he might need *ahead* of time.

Whether it's because of a problem marriage or whether it was part of his 'plan'. He had NO reason to g back. He took what was needed; Michelle's family had Cassie initially - so THEY would have packed wee Cassi's stuff.

Jason is AVOIDING that house. And your post dropped another penny into our wishing well...
 
These threads are moving FAST!! All I did was get up for 5 min and bam, more posts. I'm afraid I'm never going to catch up. :(
 
raisincharlie said:
You can't imagine a bunch of ladies getting together a few hours before Drs MacDreamy and Mac Steamy or whatever their names are appear on a tv screen ? My eyes have told me it happens ! I resign myself to the barn during this time!:D

We don't get this show here: only seen one or two stars interviewed on various shows. Recently learned Dr. Mc Dreamy is his REAL ONSCREEN name but when I heard Dr. Mc Dreamy, I honestly thought it was a play on Dr. Feel Good...
 
otto said:
<snipped for space>

It seems reasonable to suspect the husband, even the police have made that much obvious. Suspecting the child next door, without any evidence, does seem over the top. We need to keep in mind that all the rumours about the 15 year old stem back to this one poster.
Thanks Otto - appreciate the information.

I agree that suspecting a 15 year old might be over the top, however a recent case involving a 16 year old was a darn nasty brutal beating to death of an innocent woman. So it is not unheard of by any means. This to me is a problem - we do not know when posters pop up if they are legit or not. It is why I am always going to the back of the room when they show up. Never know if they are legit or not. Then again, this poster may have had a very valid point and may have been expressing what they believed based on reason to believe if they actually lived in the neighborhood. Why they would do so on a public forum however is lost to me, go to the police.

Who knows, there could be a very valid reason why a 15 year old home has had so many different owners...JMO.
 
raisincharlie said:
Thanks Otto - appreciate the information.

Who knows, there could be a very valid reason why a 15 year old home has had so many different owners...JMO.

True - perhaps it is simply a bad Karma home?

Now I have to chuckle again, charlie ... 15 years change ownership ... because of a child? Even 13 years ago, what could a 2 year old do to drive folk out? Pee on their daffodils? I do agree with otto, going for a 15 yo where there's no solid foundation is over the top. Lord, Geragos & Anonymous co has some believing Laci was transported in shopping trollies up to Berkely. To me, it all boils down to being cornered and bringing out ANY rubbish that may or may not be true about a 3rd pary - just to make it fit.

JMHO...
 
Boyz_Mum said:
Hey Charlie- I didn't take your post as argumentive either. JY could have left at anytime, even during the show... I tend to believe that LE has done a lot of legwork because I would love to believe that they are tracking gas receipts (who leaves town with an empty tank?)... there HAS to be something out there to narrow down a timeline. Also, the phone calls that JY made, if the calls were placed to a "landline", every call made from every phone goes through a "central office". From what I remember working at the phone company, long before caller ID or any technology was available, a central office is a place where all your calls are entered into and then "sent" to the phone number you are calling. (I don't make much sense probably) I would also guess that any calls placed from cell phones have some "checkpoint" where they are transfered to wherever they are going (like the towers, etc...). While none of JY's actual calls have been reported to the media or otherwise, I have no doubt that LE has a very detailed list.

I wish someone would gather some new info. (Like Greta or Nancy G.).... I so want this to be solved.
Boyz Mum,

I agree with you, I believe the police by now have received all the data from phone companies (same with credit card companies) and have gone through it or in the process of doing so. If a cell phone is involved (and was turned on) I would venture to wager they have a very clear picture of route traveled and location of where calls were made from. So I would say yes there is a very detailed list developed or at least in the process.
 
PolkSaladAnnie said:
True - perhaps it is simply a bad Karma home?

Now I have to chuckle again, charlie ... 15 years change ownership ... because of a child? Even 13 years ago, what could a 2 year old do to drive folk out? Pee on their daffodils? I do agree with otto, going for a 15 yo where there's no solid foundation is over the top. Lord, Geragos & Anonymous co has some believing Laci was transported in shopping trollies up to Berkely. To me, it all boils down to being cornered and bringing out ANY rubbish that may or may not be true about a 3rd pary - just to make it fit.

JMHO...
You whiz on my daffies and I dare say you will hear about it !

Assume for one moment the poster was legit - what if they themselves had had some trouble with said person ? Are you saying it should be ignored ? What if the fort in the woods is full of bones belonging to missing neighborhood pets ? Not saying it is so by any means - I am saying it is possible. Neighbors do tend to know the problems in their neighbor hoods and since the police raised the question, why not respond ? I can't ignore there is a possibility in fairness, nor is it safe to assume any longer that persons under 18 are incapable of such atrocity. JMO

Perhaps five owners in 15 years is just bad karma !
 
It will be interesting to see what happens to the house. Will Jason move back in? He might have to sell it to pay for his attorney. I don't think to many people will be interested in buying it.
 
raisincharlie said:
You whiz on my daffies and I dare say you will hear about it !

Assume for one moment the poster was legit - what if they themselves had had some trouble with said person ? Are you saying it should be ignored ? What if the fort in the woods is full of bones belonging to missing neighborhood pets ? Not saying it is so by any means - I am saying it is possible. Neighbors do tend to know the problems in their neighbor hoods and since the police raised the question, why not respond ? I can't ignore there is a possibility in fairness, nor is it safe to assume any longer that persons under 18 are incapable of such atrocity. JMO

Perhaps five owners in 15 years is just bad karma !

I agree Charlie, if it didn't have bad karma before, it sure does now.
 
I was finally able to see what that "BirchleafResident" said about this kid. Some chick copied and pasted it into her own group on Yahoo and I've saved it on file.

IMO What an accusatory post, which is why it went on a forum. Little wonder that his parents went off their nut over it. After being done over it I don't suppose any of the forum mods over there would've given the lawyer the posters details?
 
raisincharlie said:
You whiz on my daffies and I dare say you will hear about it !

Assume for one moment the poster was legit - what if they themselves had had some trouble with said person ? Are you saying it should be ignored ? What if the fort in the woods is full of bones belonging to missing neighborhood pets ? Not saying it is so by any means - I am saying it is possible. Neighbors do tend to know the problems in their neighbor hoods and since the police raised the question, why not respond ? I can't ignore there is a possibility in fairness, nor is it safe to assume any longer that persons under 18 are incapable of such atrocity. JMO

Perhaps five owners in 15 years is just bad karma !

charlie, if they have trouble with the person, then they know this is a child. Either the disgruntled neighbours call child services, LE or whatever and investigate it. But to post this stuff on the internet against a CHILD is not only counter-productive, it goes against the core principals of American citizens that call out to "protect our children". This is a minor; if he/she has anti social behaviour problems - then perhaps there are mental issues involved. In which case, I believe such information is even more privileged - as I mentioned before (and of course all of this is my own opinion), unless there has been an identifiable case that's arisen or an arrest - then to lambaste this child across the Internet linked just does not make me confortable.

Needless to say, I am MORE than sure that, after the post otto gave us (thanks otto - great stuff) ... then those parents KNOW what some are feeling and we can only pray that they are taking comments seriously and having teir child evaluated. For their child and for the community...


JMO. charlie ... You're too darn good a poster for me to whizzle on your daffs, darlin... so I mean no harm. Just wish the Jasonites hadn't brought this up; if any truth therein LE would be AS QUIET about it. Karma, indeed. You know - what goes around comes around

Maybe the Jasonites will one day have a son :eek: that's a menace to society! What goes around, comes around. Be sure of that ...
 
packerdog said:
It will be interesting to see what happens to the house. Will Jason move back in? He might have to sell it to pay for his attorney. I don't think to many people will be interested in buying it.

Until this case is solved I don't think he can sell it .... it's not his to sell right now, is it/
 
PolkSaladAnnie said:
charlie, if they have trouble with the person, then they know this is a child. Either the disgruntled neighbours call child services, LE or whatever and investigate it. But to post this stuff on the internet against a CHILD is not only counter-productive, it goes against the core principals of American citizens that call out to "protect our children". This is a minor; if he/she has anti social behaviour problems - then perhaps there are mental issues involved. In which case, I believe such information is even more privileged - as I mentioned before (and of course all of this is my own opinion), unless there has been an identifiable case that's arisen or an arrest - then to lambaste this child across the Internet linked just does not make me confortable.

Needless to say, I am MORE than sure that, after the post otto gave us (thanks otto - great stuff) ... then those parents KNOW what some are feeling and we can only pray that they are taking comments seriously and having teir child evaluated. For their child and for the community...


JMO. charlie ... You're too darn good a poster for me to whizzle on your daffs, darlin... so I mean no harm. Just wish the Jasonites hadn't brought this up; if any truth therein LE would be AS QUIET about it. Karma, indeed. You know - what goes around comes around

Maybe the Jasonites will one day have a son :eek: that's a menace to society! What goes around, comes around. Be sure of that ...
PSA,

I do not disagree with you in principal. I do not understand why anyone who is actually in the know would come to a public forum with such information especially about a minor. I have a few ideas but to avoid negativity will not say a word.

If this poster was an imposter or defender spewing garbage, I do hope they have been hunted down and dealt with accordingly. I also agree with CTV for pulling all posts related to the subject. However if it is the truth, it should be pursued by appropriate authorities, not ignored by the authorities because it involves a minor. This path is also protective of our children. JMO

P.S. I should have put a :D after the daffies comment - I was joking with you.
 
raisincharlie said:
PSA,

P.S. I should have put a :D after the daffies comment - I was joking with you.

I Knowwwww that, charlie, dear. :dance: :dance:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
213
Guests online
326
Total visitors
539

Forum statistics

Threads
608,002
Messages
18,232,996
Members
234,272
Latest member
ejmantel
Back
Top