Search results

Those shoes look just like the Hush Puppy Orbital. Isn't it possible these replaced the Hush Puppy shoes he purchased a year and a half before the murder? My shoes go out after a year. Sent from your mom's smartphone

So, there's three different shoes it could've been, not just the Hush Puppy orbital. Edit: and it was unknown hair found in MY's hand or under her and unknown DNA found on the jewellery box. Sent from your mom's smartphone

1) no evidence JY did it. Fingerprints and DNA that did not belong to him were on the camera. 2) he was going to stop by his parents' and wouldn't be home til later. 5) the DNA found at the scene was tested against 24 people, including police. And no offense taken. I've been following this...

I'm just saying that there's just as much evidence linking MF to the murder as there is linking JY, which is none. Sent from your mom's smartphone

There's as much evidence linking MF to the murder as there is linking JY to the murder. Her alibi can't even be verified. There's even more evidence leaning towards some unknown attacker or attackers than there is to JY. There's even a witness who saw a male and female at the residence at a...

Oh, that's what brought up the polygraph talk. I asked the question, "why wasn't MF ever looked at as a suspect?" And someone else stated they thought she'd gone in for a polygraph. Sent from your mom's smartphone

Irrelevant to this case. And if you Google search "Meredith Fisher polygraph" or "... lie detector" it brings up this thread, and a sleuthingforjustice thread where someone was citing another case, where there was a polygraph, and comparing it to the Jason Young case. Sent from your mom's...

Well, I think we can chalk up any mention of polygraphs to the rumor mill. Even if anyone did take one, it's irrelevant to the case. Sent from your mom's smartphone

Lie detectors are a fraud, that's why they're inadmissible in court. The test is just to see if you change your story or admit to lying. The "test" begins when you walk in the door, before they hook you up to the lie detector. He couldn't afford to defend himself and would be compelled to...

Which leads back to, why wasn't she? She had just as much access and motive(or lack of), and her alibi is garbage. Why was JY suspect number one from day one, before they even started investigating. Which is what any semi-intelligent human being would do when they're being investigated. Sent...

Bam. You nailed every point I've been hammering away at since I joined WS. One thing that concerned me was, one of the hairs they found in MY's hand was a partial DNA match to MY, but they just ruled it out as being MY's without further testing. Also, one of the hairs belonged to an...

Second time. First trial the jury was deadlocked. 8 in favor of acquittal Sent from your mom's smartphone

All speculations of motive are just that, speculations with no basis in reality. He didn't want to be married. He cheated and fought with his wife. Yes he cheated, and what couple doesn't fight? There's no evidence that he had any intention of leaving her. He didn't like his mother in law...

It may of had to be filed, but the judge could've ordered it to be held off, which is usually the case. Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

She's reading JY's email extra b****y. Also, so what, he thinks his mother-in-law overstays her welcome and visits too often. He doesn't want her staying too long for thanksgiving, so murder his wife??? Also, I still think the civil trails should've been put on hold until there was a...

For 1 and 2, he was their primary suspect from the get go. They were not trying to help him. I wouldn't talk to the police either. Sent from your mom's smartphone

Most of the time civil suits will be put on hold until the criminal court has found the person guilty, but honorable judge Stevens allowed it to proceed. Sent from your mom's smartphone

The thing is, even if he's been proven innocent in criminal court, he would have to prove his innocence in civil court, which he's already been proven guilty in because he didn't respond to the civil suits against him. Edit: wrongful death suit and custody suit. Sent from your mom's smartphone

I think the first trial was fair. If the second trial was just a rehash of the first trial without the civil court rulings and the daycare worker stuff, the results would've been the same. He'd never get the life insurance even if proven innocent. It'd take millions of dollars to clear his name...

If he had gotten a guilty verdict in the first trial, would you have thought he had a fair trial? Sent from your mom's smartphone