State vs Jason Lynn Young 2-8-12

[Allusonz]

DNA is not a big factor in this case.

The biggest 'gotchas' are:

1. the weird happenings at the hotel that night with the exit door, the camera being first unplugged and then later pushed up to point at the ceiling, which had never happened before,

2. combined with the video of JY walking out at midnight wearing a completely different pullover sweater (a sweater that was never found...not even when police seized his luggage immediately upon his arrival back in Raleigh).

3. The witness ID of JY and his SUV at the gas station at 5:25am where his behavior was so bizarre/angry that the clerk remembered him--he made a strong impression and she got a face to face look at him, corroborated with a cash receipt that shows the purchase of gas at 5:27am

4. No sign of breakin, no robbery of items in the house, MY's purse in plain sight not touched. Only her wedding ring was taken off her finger.

5. A toddler who is not only left alive, but cleaned up and put back to bed, given adult meds to make her sleepy (toddler's DNA is on the dropper that was left on the shelf in her room).

6. The personal type of attack (first strangulation then a beating of over 30 hits) which can only be classified as overkill.

7. Victim was fully clothed in sweat clothes.

8. Shoe prints in the size and type of shoe the husband wore, with an exact sole print ID'd by the FBI. These shoes conveniently went missing. JY claims his wife donated them to charity, but the shoes were only 15 months old. A couple days after the murder JY purchases another pair of shoes, similar, but not exact to the ones he discarded.

9. A water hose outside was left running. Blood of victim found on doorknob leading out to that side door in garage.

10. JY admitted he propped open the emergency exit door at the hotel, but claims he used a twig, not a rock. A landscaping rock was found keeping the door open the next morning. According to the HI personnel this was extremely unusual.

11. JY's hand print found on wall next to his closet, 18 - 20" up from the floor, with his wife's blood splattered around that print, but none of the blood getting on the print (he had his hand on the wall, balancing himself while he beat her to death, as she was on the floor at this point).

12. JY never inquired as to how his wife died, the welfare of his toddler daughter, he refused to speak or listen (the police just asked him to listen at one point and he wouldn't come out of the back bedroom at his sister in law's house). He wouldn't help in any way, never inquired about the progress of the investigation, blocked his daughter from seeing her maternal relatives unless they were closely supervised. Then, access was taken away altogether unless the family would agree to "come out publicly in support of Jason."

13. He defaulted on a civil wrongful death lawsuit, in which he was declared the "slayer" of his wife and a judgement of $15.5 million against him was entered.

14. The Fisher family asked for visitation and a formal schedule. He instead transferred full custody to Meredith. He would not sit for a deposition, answer any questions, or allow himself to be evaluated by a psychologist, so he handed his daughter off.


Those are just 14 items on the list, but that is not a complete list.

I have to disagree. There is alot of DNA.

The problem arises when the DNA is not of over 100 people it was tested against that had been in the home thus there is DNA of unknown individuals.

As well we are talking the DNA on the landscaping rock was LCN DNA as testified in the first trial. What was not disclosed was how many other profiles were found on that one particular landscaping pebble, DNA cannot be "timestamped" thus it could of been deposited at any time. I could sneeze as i walked by you and if something was to of happened to you (which I will pray never does) my DNA would be on your clothes.

There appeared to be a consistent theme throughout the testimony of the first trial.

There is DNA but DNA that does not match JY or MY lets say on the jewellery box.

When dealing with LCN DNA it must be amplified many times over to produce profiles. They were unable to produce a matching profile to JY on the rock. Yes some of his markers namely 2 alleles matched but it probably matched the judge as well

 

[MyBelle]

The deck planks came up empty.
Much speculation that there would be prints to match the Size 10 Franklins, they did not.
Something new to come out of this trial , was there was a rifle kept in the closet.
Was MY trying to get to it?
They never said if it was found......

ETA/ There has been speculation that Jason needed to get in his closet to get clothes,
but there was a laundry basket of clean clothes in the living room , and he may have
kept some old work clothes in the garage.
Testimony from MF stating there were bags of clothes in the garage ready to go to Goodwill.One thing about the laundry, we always wanted to know if she had folded that when SS
was there, or after, we were trying to get a better timeframe.

Oh, and it was trash day the next am, so it is also possible MY took some out to the road,
or let Mr. G out, and did not lock the door right away.
That is a big house, someone could have come in and waited in the bonus room or crawl space.

IMO

BBM. It is entirely possible Jason's shoes were in that bag. I am a bit puzzled why Meredith knew there was a bag going to Goodwill in that garage but her comment supports Jason's testimony.

JMO

 

[Lynx]

I have to disagree. There is alot of DNA.

The problem arises when the DNA is not of over 100 people it was tested against that had been in the home thus there is DNA of unknown individuals.

As well we are talking the DNA on the landscaping rock was LCN DNA as testified in the first trial. What was not disclosed was how many other profiles were found on that one particular landscaping pebble, DNA cannot be "timestamped" thus it could of been deposited at any time. I could sneeze as i walked by you and if something was to of happened to you (which I will pray never does) my DNA would be on your clothes.

There appeared to be a consistent theme throughout the testimony of the first trial.

There is DNA but DNA that does not match JY or MY lets say on the jewellery box.

When dealing with LCN DNA it must be amplified many times over to produce profiles. They were unable to produce a matching profile to JY on the rock. Yes some of his markers namely 2 alleles matched but it probably matched the judge as well

One of the best and most accurate post on this thread.

Do you think the defense may attack the evidence harder this time?

 

[MyBelle]

One of the best and most accurate post on this thread.

Do you think the defense may attack the evidence harder this time?

You didn't ask me but I sure do!! As well they should. Trying to push off DNA from a random rock is more than misleading.

JMO

 

[Madeleine74]

The DNA that was found (and not identified to anyone else) does not, in any way, absolve JY of the murder.

All those other things happened on that one day. And the fact that JY's handprint was positively ID'd and there was blood spatter around that print, but not on the print itself, is strong circumstantial evidence that the blood castoff happened at the same time a hand was on that wall, bracing the perp.

DNA, as you know, can only include or exclude a donor if you have enough alliels to make that determination and the sample is not degraded or contaminated. It doesn't tell you when it got there, only that it did get there at some point.

Was every person who ever visited that house both before and during the Young's ownership ID'd and tested? Were the fingerprints of every person who ever was in that house before and during the time the Youngs lived there taken? No and No.

 

[Lynx]

You didn't ask me but I sure do!! As well they should. Trying to push off DNA from a random rock is more than misleading.

JMO

Hello MyBelle!

The rock was a piece of evidence that was sent to LabCorp. I always wondered why the state did this? Especially since it was not even a close match as testified in the 2011 trial by LabCorp employee Sean Weiss.

:waitasec:

 

[otto]

Otto once again I must agree with you.

As I go through various threads it seems I continue to see a pattern with posts where if you side with statistics you will be right that percentage of time.

Statistics though is not evidence.

ETA Like you pointed out in a previous post which I as well agreed with, 3 alleles of LCN DNA was laughed out of the Amanda Knox trial.

I will be interested to see if it is testified once again that of the 3 alleles one was considered to be "noise" commonly referred to as a stutter thus there were not 3 alleles only 2 alleles.

It was also stated in the first trial that based on probability percentages it was more apt to be a person of hispanic heritage.

There are similarities that cannot be denied. People in the neighborhood were looking at each other when this first happened.

In the first trial, there was a big production about the night audit clerk cutting the tape. This time, there was no evidence bag, no tape cutting and no rock. The night audit clerk said that he didn't know if the rock he saw two days later was the same rock he kicked out of the door, but it was in the same direction. Two - three days had passed with an average of 30-35 people per day. Somewhere between 60 and 100 people came and went from the hotel, but the police theory is that this particular rock did not move and was not touched at all during a period of 3 days ... with 60-100 guests + staff in the building.

 

[MyBelle]

The DNA that was found (and not identified to anyone else) does not, in any way, absolve JY of the murder.

All those other things happened on that one day. And the fact that JY's handprint was positively ID'd and there was blood spatter around that print, but not on the print itself, is strong circumstantial evidence that the blood castoff happened at the same time a hand was on that wall, bracing the perp.
DNA, as you know, can only include or exclude a donor if you have enough alliels to make that determination and the sample is not degraded or contaminated. It doesn't tell you when it got there, only that it did get there at some point.

Was every person who ever visited that house both before and during the Young's ownership ID'd and tested? Were the fingerprints of every person who ever was in that house before and during the time the Youngs lived there taken? No and No.

BBM. That "fact" about the blood spatter around a print was used to obtain a search warrant years ago but since then the experts doing blood spatter analysis were fired for lying in other trials and helping convict totally innocent people.

JMO

 

[otto]

SS said she felt like someone was watching them, kind of a creepy feeling, but she was so unnerved she asked MY to walk her outside to her car, which was right in the driveway.

Weird.....then she testifed about the trailer park in the back.
The Youngs had purchased their home in spring/summer and all the trees were in bloom, and they did not notice it....
But, when fall came and the leaves started falling, the trailer park became visible and MY was not happy.

I thought that was weird too. If she was a bit scared, Michelle was probably more creeped out. Didn't SS say that Michelle was uncomfortable living so far out of the city?

There is a trailer park through the trees behind the house. Police questioned people in the area but came up empty.

 

[otto]

Omg, if you follow the prints to the top of the stool, they prints match perfectly.

She did stand on that stool , but then what?

On another note, I can see why LE came back years later to measure all those prints.

Investigators had to request an additional search warrant to return to the house to measure the bathroom tiles and give the footprints a measure of scale.

If I were to guess, I would say that she stood on the step stool, she used the water, the prints on the floor and smudges on the wall seem like more blood than one would expect from wearing socks and stepping in blood once (unless water was added). If she removed the socks before she went to the bathroom, that would explain the absence of footprints between the bedroom and bathroom. Perhaps the footprints at the entrance to the hallway were from her looking out and then going back into the bathroom ... maybe pushing the door closed a bit. There's no need for a "drugging" theory with this scenario. If her father did it, he simply left and she stayed in the bathroom for a while before crawling into her parents bed ... waiting for her father (on his side of the bed).

Was there a shoe found in the bed or not? There's been a reference to a photo ... I would like to see it but need a link.

I think the investigators or prosecution tried to make this too complicated.

 

[otto]

The deck planks came up empty.
Much speculation that there would be prints to match the Size 10 Franklins, they did not.
Something new to come out of this trial , was there was a rifle kept in the closet.
Was MY trying to get to it?
They never said if it was found......

ETA/ There has been speculation that Jason needed to get in his closet to get clothes,
but there was a laundry basket of clean clothes in the living room , and he may have
kept some old work clothes in the garage.
Testimony from MF stating there were bags of clothes in the garage ready to go to Goodwill.

One thing about the laundry, we always wanted to know if she had folded that when SS
was there, or after, we were trying to get a better timeframe.

Oh, and it was trash day the next am, so it is also possible MY took some out to the road,
or let Mr. G out, and did not lock the door right away.
That is a big house, someone could have come in and waited in the bonus room or crawl space.

IMO

A rifle was kept in Jason's closet? That would explain why his closet was interfered with and hers was not. Do you have a link or some context for this?

So no prints matching the size 10 shoe that Michelle purchased at a bargain discount shop? Even if there were prints on the deckboards, they could not be matched to Jason without some thread weaving it together. Is there is no connection between Jason and the deck board print, or no connection between the deckboard prints and the shoes at the murder scene?

It's a big house - the obvious way to sneak into the house is through the garage, up the stairs and into the office, then bedroom.

 

[otto]

They would have had to stand out in the hallway, because as you say, there is not a mixture of prints....

But, if they did that, how could they reach her to clean her?

Those prints on the stool mean she stood up on that and was at the sink.

What happened next, I don't know.

And, how do the marks get on the wall?

Maybe she put water on her feet, got water on her hands ... hard to say. It seems a little gorry to look at the prints to try to figure out what happened with the child from the time of the murder until the following day after lunch ... but that is a major consideration in whether the suspect is guilty.

It looks like there was blood on the step stool as well as the floor. The original media release photo has been modified and the color is a little distorted - especially the green on the side of the step stool.

Take the step stool, the child's prints, the absence of any other prints, the mess left behind, the socks ... the big picture ... it looks like she was alone in the bathroom for a while ... not because she was locked in the bathroom. When she left, she went to where she hoped her father would find her.

A 2 year old would not understand what happened, but a 2 year old also doesn't want to get in trouble ... with a complete inability to perceive what had happened, even though she tried to fix it with bandaids, a 2 year old is sometimes afraid of getting in trouble and may first mention the name of someone that they believe can solve the situation. For a two year old, their parents are their world ... they can fix anything. If the child mentioned her father first, and then mentioned that someone was in the house, a "he", it's not enough.

 

[otto]

Trying to catch up on todays testimony. As there has been much said with respect to what was actually on the 911 call and if anything had been redacted did CY state that "daddy did it"?

Alot of meetings this week so have not had a chance to listen to the testimony yet.

The tape can be heard at the beginning of day 2 of the second trial. It had to be replayed because the prosecution had some problems playing it in it's entirety the first time.

I understand that there are some inaudible portions re the transcript.

Meredith testified that the child mentioned her dad and then talked about "he" in terms of the murder.

 

[otto]

BBM. That "fact" about the blood spatter around a print was used to obtain a search warrant years ago but since then the experts doing blood spatter analysis were fired for lying in other trials and helping convict totally innocent people.

JMO

I didn't read about blood spatter around a hand print in any court documents. There was a hand print on the door molding on his walk in closet, about 2 feet above the floor, but that could not be associated with the murder.

State forensics experts being fired for lack of training, and other irregularities resulting in 190 questionable convictions, should be a continued concern until the lab has demonstrated integrity. Maybe they can do that in the Mike Peterson trial.

 

[Elisaa444]

I don't see him as a buffoon... but not exactly smart either.

I will consider him one lucky-something-or-other if he isn't found guilty.

I can't get over the gas station video not working... HOW LUCKY IS THAT?
I mean, not inside OR outside they were not working... what a dangerous place to work late at night. A clerc could get killed, with no witnesses would that person ever be caught?

His activities (both on video and NOT on video) at the hotel, his calls that day to mom and girlfriend, his missing clothing, the fax-getting call for her to be found, the footprint, his missing shoes, etc... it goes on and on IMO.

I agree. What ALL of these things are just merely coincidences??? Come on. IMO, To say any other person(s) killed (over killed) a pregnant Michelle other than jy himself
means you have to explain away a long list "coincidences" AND you have to creatively twist many aspects of this case but problem is ....for me... It still doesn't make sense when you put it all together.

Occam's razor.


* moo moo moo jmo jmo...etc*

 

[Bottle Cap]

I don't know how many of you have or have had a 2 year old, but there's no way she cleaned her own feet and didn't make a ginormous splodgy bloody smeary mess of that bathroom. There's no way a 2 year old embarking on such a messy task would have left cleanly defined footprints all over the bathroom with water and towels involved. That's even a feat for an adult, to get her cleaned up in the midst of all that and not make a bigger mess. And it's impossible for me to believe a 2 year old dried her feet so perfectly as to not leave any further smears.

The bloody smears on the bathtub are exactly where you'd expect them to be if someone laid her down on the rug to take her diaper off.

 

[fromageball]

The DNA that was found (and not identified to anyone else) does not, in any way, absolve JY of the murder.

Was every person who ever visited that house both before and during the Young's ownership ID'd and tested? Were the fingerprints of every person who ever was in that house before and during the time the Youngs lived there taken? No and No.

The unidentified DNA in the Young residence, along with the two sets of foot prints are enough to introduce reasonable doubt.

Then factor in the lack of any evidence that JY actually left the hotel grounds that night.

The gas station clerk wasn't credible yesterday and her testimony will probably be completely discredited today.