Appeal filed in jy murder conviction

[Just the Fax]

The 3 Judge panel won't write their opinion after hearing arguments for at least 3-4 months
(Timeline for similar appeals)

 

[Cherry]

Well at least wral is willing to be the pool and give us a live feed.

 

[Madeleine74]

It took about 5 months to get a decision in the Cooper case after oral arguments.

 

[Cherry]

Bumping, Live Feed will start in 20 minutes for Live Hearing
wral.com

 

[Cherry]

Live Feed is ON www.wral.com no audio yet no judges in the room yet.

 

[Cherry]

so the judges say they are going to take a brief recess and wral cuts the feed; the live feed; and already is replaying. They were not finished. Geez.

 

[Just the Fax]

so the judges say they are going to take a brief recess and wral cuts the feed; the live feed; and already is replaying. They were not finished. Geez.

They were finished with the Young hearing. The recess was called before the next appeal was to be called

 

[Chelly]

I'm confused

 

[borndem]

I just saw that. What took them so long? Poor Mrs. Fisher, Meredith and Cassidy, although they knew this was coming.

I followed this trial. I can't find the juror instructions, but no way Judge Stephens said the jury could construe his silence as evidence of guilt! To the contrary, asI recall, because it made me cringe to hear his silence could not be used against him. but the defense must have some basis or that issue to be raised. Does anyone know where I can find a copy of the instructions or can you explain?

We knew the teacher's testimony about the dolls would be one basis for appeal (right to confront accuser grounds).

Anyway, I love Judge Stephens. I trust his judgment.

HiYa, Boods - I'm way late on coming into this, and your request above may have already been answered, but anyway, here is the WRAL livestream of Judge Stephens' charge & instructions to the jury:

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/video/10805888/#/vid10805888

This whole thing angers me -- the evidence was there and this awful man is guilty, guilty, and guilty.

 

[borndem]

The 5th amendment and the right to remain silent means that no person can be compelled to testify against themselves in a criminal proceeding. It doesn't apply to civil cases, and it means nothing in terms of speaking to friends & family as they are not law enforcement. There are some exclusions, such as excited utterances can be used against a person even if/when they've been mirandized (or not).

The fact that JY declined to ever speak to his friends and wouldn't talk to anyone about the murder, including answering the civil subpoena and custody/visitation lawsuit is not a protected right and a logical inference can be made there's a reason he refused to speak to his family, his friends, the civil lawyers and other non-government parties.

A jury can't hold it against a defendant who doesn't get on the stand and testify (although JY did in trial #1 and finally locked himself into a BS story that came back to bite him big time), but they sure can wonder why that same defendant defaulted on civil matters and refused to talk to friends and kept little CY from seeing her aunt and grandma for no good reason. Ahhh but wait...there was a good reason.... turns out little CY was talking about what she saw that fateful night/morning and it was right after that she was spirited away.

bbm

Excellent comments, Maddie!

I don't know about the 5th, but as to my bbm, the defendant is advised that he/she has to answer all questions -- as Brad Cooper was in the custody hearing of his daughters.

Note: IANAL.

 

[Landonsmom02]

They were finished with the Young hearing. The recess was called before the next appeal was to be called

RPD so what is the next step? Months from now we will get an answer??

 

[Just the Fax]

RPD so what is the next step? Months from now we will get an answer??

Yes, it will be 3-5 months before the Judges make their ruling on the appeal.
I like Howard's take...

Cummings said he's optimistic about the appellate ruling.

"I believe that the case against Jason Young was tried free from error, and our office and the Attorney General's office is confident that the Court of Appeals will affirm his conviction," he said.

 

[borndem]

Maybe I had rose-colored glasses over my ears (yes, ears!), but it seemed to me that the judges were not all that impressed with the points that Young's appeal attorney made. The appeal atty. for Young (cannot recall her name) was an effective speaker, IMO, it's just that her argument, IMO, was weak, and the appeal points that were chosen for the appeal were even weaker.

And I think the State's attys. (in spite of the man's hesitation and "um's") were argued better, and the female who defended Judge Stephens' inclusion of Cassidy's play at the center was, IMO, a slam dunk.

Further, Judge Stephens, from what little I can find, does not have many of his decisions overturned. I'm hoping that this continues through this appeal...

I don't know that Brad Cooper, for an example, would kill another person, but it is my opinion, and I feel it strongly, that Jason Young would indeed kill someone else. (That is not an appeal point; it's only my point.)

 

[jilly]

Here's WRALs take on the Hearing

http://www.wral.com/nc-appeals-court-hears-jason-young-s-bid-for-new-trial/13208622/

 

[jova33]

hopefully this wrongful conviction gets overturned.

This case was entirely circumstantial, the timeline didn't add up, and the jury's reason for a guilty verdict was ridiculous.

 

[Boodles]

hopefully this wrongful conviction gets overturned.

This case was entirely circumstantial, the timeline didn't add up, and the jury's reason for a guilty verdict was ridiculous.

Yes, it was circumstantial. What's the problem with that? The timeline added up perfectly.

Mostly I wonder, and maybe you have insight, why did he never, ever speak to police? Not even to hear the news. Not to ask a single question. He didn't even ask how his own wife was killed. Why would that be? Oh, that's right...Ryan Schaad advised him to get a lawyer (he was willing to speak with Ryan!!). And then the attorney told him not to talk, not even with the attorney present. Why oh why could that be?

 

[jova33]

Yes, it was circumstantial. What's the problem with that? The timeline added up perfectly.

Mostly I wonder, and maybe you have insight, why did he never, ever speak to police? Not even to hear the news. Not to ask a single question. He didn't even ask how his own wife was killed. Why would that be? Oh, that's right...Ryan Schaad advised him to get a lawyer (he was willing to speak with Ryan!!). And then the attorney told him not to talk, not even with the attorney present. Why oh why could that be?

A lawyer once told me to never talk to police, even if you didn't do anything wrong because you could've done something illegal that you didn't even know was illegal and you would've just confessed to a completely unrelated crime.
You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say CAN and WILL be used AGAINST you.
There's people who are falsely accused and falsely convicted just by their own statements and no other evidence.
Knowing all of this, and knowing the police are building a case against YOU, would you have anything to say to the police?

edit: he heard the news from his friends there. They told him that the cops were asking alot of questions about him, and to get an attorney.

 

[Madeleine74]

I don't see a problem with getting a lawyer; I would probably do the same. However I wouldn't necessarily expect people to think I had no involvement as a result of my lawyering-up. And with that said, I wouldn't fail to find out what happened to my loved one and seek as much info as possible. If I did speak with police I would have my lawyer with me.

Now if I committed a heinous crime like a murder and l was trying to keep myself out of jail, I'd do what JY did. And people would understandably see me as involved in that crime.

And then if I finally got on the witness stand years later and lied my butt off and the jury concluded I was not credible, I'd be convicted because I was guilty. As much as I'd hate that outcome it would be the right verdict.

This was the right verdict for a guy who beat his wife to death and planned it.

 

[jova33]

I don't see a problem with getting a lawyer; I would probably do the same. However I wouldn't necessarily expect people to think I had no involvement as a result of my lawyering-up. And with that said, I wouldn't fail to find out what happened to my loved one and seek as much info as possible. If I did speak with police I would have my lawyer with me.

Now if I committed a heinous crime like a murder and l was trying to keep myself out of jail, I'd do what JY did. And people would understandably see me as involved in that crime.

And then if I finally got on the witness stand years later and lied my butt off and the jury concluded I was not credible, I'd be convicted because I was guilty. As much as I'd hate that outcome it would be the right verdict.

This was the right verdict for a guy who beat his wife to death and planned it.

what did he lie about on the stand? the first jury was hung 8-4 for acquittal

 

[Just the Fax]

what did he lie about on the stand? the first jury was hung 8-4 for acquittal

Well, in round 2 (the one that counted), it was 12-0 for conviction and that jury saw his entire testimony on video. The difference the second time was the state was able to prove his affable tale was full of lies and inconsistencies.