Guilty of first degree murder/verdict watch #2

[sureLocke]

The bolded part is absolutely not a fact.

I believe her.

 

[nursebeeme]

The snark stops here peeps. The same rules apply now that were in application during the trial. Please post responsibly.

agree to disagree

 

[Wolfpack]

I believe her.

I know that. And I think many people do believe her. But that doesn't make it a fact that she saw him. Just like there are many people that believe JY, it doesn't make what he says a fact.

I think it is a fact that Gracie encountered someone that morning. It is an inference that it was Jason Young. It is not a fact.

But, I don't think that matters, because the jurors certainly didn't rely on her testimony, for good or bad, (according to their interviews).

 

[gracielee]

Oh, I agree and like I said, I tend to believe Gracie's testimony.

I just don't believe it is a fact that she saw him because there is nothing factual (eg another witness, surveillance video, etc.) to support what she says. That's all I meant in saying it is not fact.

IMO

That's true, but nothing the defense produced IMO disputed her testimony either. Of course they attempted to discredit her as a witness by saying she was 'brain damaged'. IMO, gracie managed to hold down numerous jobs involving customers, computer usage, handling money and coming out *straight* at the end of her shifts, etc. Her memory of the event, less then 72 hours after it occurred was spot on. Me? I couldn't tell you what time I was at Food Lion three days ago, nor what the clerk who rang me up was wearing, and I was never hit by a truck when I was a child either. :moo: I think gracie should be given respect for coming forwards and doing her duty as a citizen by testifying at a trial. I know you respect her, my remarks are simply stated as my opinion. Too many people 'don't want to get involved' because of the way they are treated afterwards, through no fault of their own.

 

[Talina]

That's true, but nothing the defense produced IMO disputed her testimony either. Of course they attempted to discredit her as a witness by saying she was 'brain damaged'. IMO, gracie managed to hold down numerous jobs involving customers, computer usage, handling money and coming out *straight* at the end of her shifts, etc. Her memory of the event, less then 72 hours after it occurred was spot on. Me? I couldn't tell you what time I was at Food Lion three days ago, nor what the clerk who rang me up was wearing, and I was never hit by a truck when I was a child either. :moo: I think gracie should be given respect for coming forwards and doing her duty as a citizen by testifying at a trial. I know you respect her, my remarks are simply stated as my opinion. Too many people 'don't want to get involved' because of the way they are treated afterwards, through no fault of their own.

That is so true. After seeing so many witnesses and jurors treated the way they are by media and social network forums, I think I'd be hesitant to be a witness or a juror.

 

[sureLocke]

So if you think JY is guilty, he would have needed to drive that route during the timeframe the prosecution contended, then why was Gracie mistaken? He just happened to drive by King at that time, and Gracie just happened to have encountered a person as she described? Again, it seems to be a few coincidences to support the defendant.

 

[otto]

Here are some differences between US law and criminal justice in other countries that would have influenced the outcome of the trial had it been held in another country:

It is inadmissable to mention, during trial, whether a suspect spoke with police or not during an investigation. That would include whether a suspect, like Jason, refused to talk with police regarding custody and wrongful death hearings as that would compromise his right to remain silent. There are charter rights that guarantee a right to consult counsel and it is not legal to draw inferences from a refusal to speak to police. It's a bit like saying that a suspect has a right to counsel, but if that person exercises that right to counsel and doesn't speak with police, that can be introduced during trial to influence juror opinion ... a bit like setting a trap such that suspects that remain silent are automatically assumed to be guilty if they refuse to participate in something like a custody dispute if it would interfere with their right to remain silent regarding a murder investigation.

It is not allowed to submit a single photo to a witness for identification and have that identification admitted into evidence. Additionally, because of faulty witness identification, not only is a minimum of a photo lineup required, but also a photo lineup must be given by someone that knows nothing about the case. It is a form of ensuring that there are procedural safeguards in the integrity of the process.

Additionally, character evidence is prohibited for obvious reason. The person's character is not on trial.

Finally, it is unheard of that one judge would hear all legal issues related to one suspect, such as wrongful death, custody, first trial and second trial.

Another point that came up was that evidence was introduced via friends by the prosecution and refuted by an investigator that was a defense witness. The question of elected prosecutors that further their career through successful prosecution of a case came up in terms of whether objectivity can be observed if the prosecutor has a personal (career based) interest in winning the case.

I'm not a lawyer, so I don't want to put this in the legal thread, but I have discussed this case with a very experienced criminal prosecutor and found it interesting to learn about the differences between the NC system and the legal system in other countries . I guess that explains why I have been a bit shocked at some of the legal decisions of the judge and prosecution during this trial.

 

[janesdean]

<modsnip>. That's not the way it works no matter how often you repeat it.

In reality, our justice system says Jason doesn't have to prove his innocence. The fact that the prosecution's entire case was focused on his silence and that he hasn't provided the items they claim are missing could be construed as prosecutorial misconduct.


JMO

<modsnip> The Prosecutions entire case was NOT focused on his silence. <modsnip>

 

[otto]

<modsnip> The Prosecutions entire case was NOT focused on his silence. <modsnip>

Jason's silence regarding custody, the insurance and wrongful death action could not have been introdced in a courtroom in some other countries as his right to silence regarding all questions related to the investigation would have been protected. Jason could not respond to custody, insurance of wrongful death without a guarantee that he would not be required to answer questions regarding the death of his wife. In some other countries, Jason would have had that right to silence and all matters related to custody, wrongful death and insurance could have been adjourned until after trial if there had been charges against him prior to the civil actions. It was a bit of a backward situation where custody and wrongful death actions were brought almost to further the criminal investigation ... not really allowed in some countries.

It's a simple difference between legal systems and the rights of an accused.

 

[citygirl]

Jason's silence regarding custody, the insurance and wrongful death action could not have been introdced in a courtroom in some other countries as his right to silence regarding all questions related to the investigation would have been protected. Jason could not respond to custody, insurance of wrongful death without a guarantee that he would not be required to answer questions regarding the death of his wife. In some other countries, Jason would have had that right to silence and all matters related to custody, wrongful death and insurance could have been adjourned until after trial if there had been charges against him prior to the civil actions. It was a bit of a backward situation where custody and wrongful death actions were brought almost to further the criminal investigation ... not really allowed in some countries.

It's a simple difference between legal systems and the rights of an accused.

BUt he doesn't live in another country thus he is subject to the rules and laws in THIS country. This isn't Canada where Carla H. is now free. This is the good ole US of A. The jury has spoken and I accept their ruling.

 

[borndem]

I'm of that same age too. I remember the Manson murders quite clearly. And like you, life was hell for me, though I wasn't on either coast. But for some reason I never identified with the manson girls/type. During that time period I was involved in the Vietnam War peace protests. So I guess in a way my rebellion or pain or disenchantment, had a different direction. Women's rights and stopping the war machine. I had too many friends who didn't come home. And of those who did return, most were *changed* deeply. So although the Manson stuff was shocking and traumatic, I think I was more effected personally by Kent State & the My Lai massacre.

Same here, glee -- I remember burning the bottom of my feet -- big blisters -- because I, and other NCSU students, along with Duke and Carolina students met on the NCSU brickyard and marched down Hillsboro Street to the State Capitol to protest the draft and the war. Our brothers and friends were sent over there before they were old enuff to vote, and they were dying over there. I was barefoot and the street was hot.

Years later I went to the Vietnam memorial in DC and traced the names of 4 friends who came home in boxes from Vietnam. That war changed so many people in so many ways.

Or to put it in words by Simon & Garfunkel:

"Time it was, and what a time it was, it was
A time of innocence, a time of confidences
Long ago, it must be, I have a photograph
Preserve your memories; They're all that's left you"


(quoted from memory)

​

​

I do remember the Manson murders back then, and then the MacDonald family murders occurred not long after and about 40 miles from my hometown -- and I was sucked into "true crime," and have been ever since.

 

[otto]

BUt he doesn't live in another country thus he is subject to the rules and laws in THIS country. This isn't Canada where Carla H. is now free. This is the good ole US of A. The jury has spoken and I accept their ruling.

I still find it highly irregular that a photo of a person and a car can be shown to a witness with serious memory issues and her testimony can be introduced at trial, or that the prosecution introduces rumor testimony rather than that of the attending investigator. There's nothing wrong with having procedural safeguards in a criminal investigation ... seems like an important right. Giving someone the right to remain silent but then, when they remain silent, it is held against them in court, is a bit scary. Having one judge oversee all of the accusations against an accised; familial, civil and criminal, leaves some objectivity to be desired ... but ... each to their own, I suppose.

As for plea deals, I'm sure they are regularly practiced in the United States.

ETA: my friend, the senior criminal prosecutor, said several times that he wished he had practiced in NC because his job would have been so much easier. Not that the criminals weren't still prosecuted, just that it would have been easier with a NC system.

 

[borndem]

Last I heard, Becky Holt had the Grant Hayes case to handle. If this case *goes away* I wonder if GH will be next. There hasn't been any news on that case. I personally wonder what the defense case would be. "It wasn't me?" (thinking of that song by Shaggy).

Really, he ought to confess - they have the goods on him. What's the question? I guess the degree to which Amanda or Grant was the instigator is an issue? No, actually, either way, it's 1st degree murder. I don't get the delay. What a horrific crime that was.

These two crimes will not interfere with each other, Boodles -- Abaroa's case occurred in Durham County, and the Hayes case occurred in Wake County -- assuming neither case will have a change of venue in the other county -- but even if that were to happen, the trial principals will not change, so that won't be a problem.

But yes, the change in Durham County's DA may throw a temporary hitch in the Abaroa case.

Oh! These men who think murder is a "sensible" alternative to divorce -- what is this sociopathic phenomenon?? And when you take a look at Cooper, Young and Abaroa, it is easy to see many similarities in their personalities. Here's hoping the results will be the same, at least.

 

[NCEast]

Same here, glee -- I remember burning the bottom of my feet -- big blisters -- because I, and other NCSU students, along with Duke and Carolina students met on the NCSU brickyard and marched down Hillsboro Street to the State Capitol to protest the draft and the war. Our brothers and friends were sent over there before they were old enuff to vote, and they were dying over there. I was barefoot and the street was hot.

Years later I went to the Vietnam memorial in DC and traced the names of 4 friends who came home in boxes from Vietnam. That war changed so many people in so many ways.

Or to put it in words by Simon & Garfunkel:

"Time it was, and what a time it was, it was
A time of innocence, a time of confidences
Long ago, it must be, I have a photograph
Preserve your memories; They're all that's left you"


(quoted from memory)

​

​

I do remember the Manson murders back then, and then the MacDonald family murders occurred not long after and about 40 miles from my hometown -- and I was sucked into "true crime," and have been ever since.

Boy, you post brought tears to my eyes.
My best guy friend all the way from grade school through h.s. graduation enlisted the day before we graduated and was in boot camp a month later. In November of that same year he was blown up--lost both legs, his arm, much of his face, and untold internal organs. He was hospitalized for 3 years all over Europe and then in the US. He was finally able to come home about 4 years later. Nobody knows the hell that boy endured but I know some of it. We are still very close and I take so much pride pushing him in his wheelchair whenever we go anywhere together. His ravaged body stands for the liberty we all enjoy.
I can't even imagine JY in the military. He seems to be such a huge coward, hiding behind his mama's proverbial apron strings. He was the tough with women but I can easily see him hauling his rear end and running away from a man to man encounter.

 

[otto]

The jury has spoken and I accept their ruling.

"How far should these general or specific cautions go? In R. v. Sokolov [case that resulted in êye witness misidentification changes to ciminal law],142 Mr. Justice Melvyn Green of the Ontario Court of Justice, noting “eyewitness misidentification is probably the greatest single cause of factually wrongful convictions,” stated:

"Eyewitness misidentification has long been regarded as the leading, if not overwhelming, cause of a wrongful conviction.127 In R. v. Hanemaayer, Mr. Justice Marc Rosenberg, speaking on behalf of the unanimous Ontario Court of Appeal, commented on “how flawed identification procedures can contribute to miscarriages of justice and the importance of taking great care in conducting those procedures.”128

...

Its inherent frailties demand that special care must be taken in the assessment of such evidence. Such care, however, does not translate into a rule of exclusion or complete probative negation. It is most certainly not the rule that eyewitness identification evidence — even standing alone — can never ground a proper conviction. The rule, rather, is that the exercise of adjudication in this type of case must be especially cautious.143"

"When meeting with witnesses in serious cases, it is wise, if it is feasible and practical, to have a third party present to ensure there is no later disagreement about what took place at the meeting."

http://www.ppsc-sppc.gc.ca/eng/pub/ptj-spj/ch5.html

Rights that I took for granted, but which were not in place in a NC court ... that confused me during trial.

I suppose I`m still thinking it through ... from beginning to end. Trials that result in living in a cage for life shouldn`t have any monkey business, in my opinion.

 

[janesdean]

Jason Youngs' hometown paper was pretty harsh on him, here's an article reporting his conviction for first degree murder (doesn't sound like they want to claim him as their own)

RALEIGH (AP) &#8212; A Wake County jury has found a Raleigh man guilty of beating his pregnant wife to death in 2006 and then establishing an elaborate alibi to cover his tracks.

Jason Young, a former resident of Brevard and Etowah, was convicted of killing 29-year-old Michelle Young, who was five months pregnant with the couple's second child.

Prosecutors cast the 37-year-old Young as a cheating and abusive husband who drove nearly 200 miles to check into a Virginia hotel before returning home and murdering his wife while their daughter watched. Young said he was out of town on a business trip when his wife was murdered.

The first-degree murder conviction ensures a sentence of life without parole.

It was Young's second trial after a jury deadlocked in June 2011. In March 2009, a civil court judge in Raleigh ruled that he was responsible for Michelle Young's death and ordered to pay her family more than $15 million.

http://www.blueridgenow.com/article...esident-found-guilty-of-killing-pregnant-wife
__________________

 

[otto]

These two crimes will not interfere with each other, Boodles -- Abaroa's case occurred in Durham County, and the Hayes case occurred in Wake County -- assuming neither case will have a change of venue in the other county -- but even if that were to happen, the trial principals will not change, so that won't be a problem.

But yes, the change in Durham County's DA may throw a temporary hitch in the Abaroa case.

Oh! These men who think murder is a "sensible" alternative to divorce -- what is this sociopathic phenomenon?? And when you take a look at Cooper, Young and Abaroa, it is easy to see many similarities in their personalities. Here's hoping the results will be the same, at least.

Will there be a problem with blood evidence taken at the time of the murder and analyzed under the supervision of analyst that was behind an awful lot of questionable convictions?

 

[otto]

Boy, you post brought tears to my eyes.
My best guy friend all the way from grade school through h.s. graduation enlisted the day before we graduated and was in boot camp a month later. In November of that same year he was blown up--lost both legs, his arm, much of his face, and untold internal organs. He was hospitalized for 3 years all over Europe and then in the US. He was finally able to come home about 4 years later. Nobody knows the hell that boy endured but I know some of it. We are still very close and I take so much pride pushing him in his wheelchair whenever we go anywhere together. His ravaged body stands for the liberty we all enjoy.
I can't even imagine JY in the military. He seems to be such a huge coward, hiding behind his mama's proverbial apron strings. He was the tough with women but I can easily see him hauling his rear end and running away from a man to man encounter.

He`s not in Argentina, and he had plenty of opportunity to go there with his daughter instead of prison, so he must have some allegiance to family.

 

[otto]

Jason Youngs' hometown paper was pretty harsh on him, here's an article reporting his conviction for first degree murder (doesn't sound like they want to claim him as their own)

RALEIGH (AP) &#8212; A Wake County jury has found a Raleigh man guilty of beating his pregnant wife to death in 2006 and then establishing an elaborate alibi to cover his tracks.

Jason Young, a former resident of Brevard and Etowah, was convicted of killing 29-year-old Michelle Young, who was five months pregnant with the couple's second child.

Prosecutors cast the 37-year-old Young as a cheating and abusive husband who drove nearly 200 miles to check into a Virginia hotel before returning home and murdering his wife while their daughter watched. Young said he was out of town on a business trip when his wife was murdered.

The first-degree murder conviction ensures a sentence of life without parole.

It was Young's second trial after a jury deadlocked in June 2011. In March 2009, a civil court judge in Raleigh ruled that he was responsible for Michelle Young's death and ordered to pay her family more than $15 million.

http://www.blueridgenow.com/article...esident-found-guilty-of-killing-pregnant-wife
__________________

It`s understandable that he would be a pariah in his home town. In terms of chiseling away his reputation, custody came first, backing him into a corner - he had to talk about the murder or lose custody of his child Then the civil suit, again, there he had to answer questions about the murder or forfeit. The insurance policy was the same ... he could answer questions related to the murder or forfeit. He forfeited. Then the 15 million fine and slayer label ... also ... he was given the choice to answer questions about the murder or forfeit, then the harassment at work by what his lawyers called internet vigilantes, then the charges, the hung jury, bail, then the conviction and life in a cage. The jury`s conclusion that if he had produced clothing he was not asked to produce, he would be a free man, is bizarre. Each and every time he needed to remain silent, he was cornered and had little choice but to forfeit unless he was willing to answer questions related to the criminal investigation. W

We know that even a custody lawyer could be asking questions provided by police (Cooper case), so he had no choice but to remain silent, or forfeit. When he forfeited in situations unrelated to the murder, that forfeiture was allowed in trial for jury consideration ... that he chose to remain silent.

Is that right ... silence = forfeiture = assumption of guilt?

It was well known early on in the case that there were serious problems with the investigation.

Presenting unrelated character evidence during a murder trial is probably one of the more unusual legal tactics I`ve ever witnessed.

 

[borndem]

So does Hudson hold the same position in Durham Co. as Judge Stephens, or is he simply a judge running for office? I can't believe Aboroa doesn't even have a trial date yet. Is the defense asking for continuances or is this a DA hold-up, do you know?

Looks like he is, glee:

The Honorable Orlando F. Hudson, Jr. is the Senior Resident Superior Court Judge. Judge Hudson received his Doctor of Juris Prudence from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. In 1989 he became a Superior Court Judge serving until 1995 when he became the 14th Judicial District's senior resident judge. Prior to serving on the Superior Court bench, Judge Hudson served as a District Court Judge for five years, an Assistant District Attorney in Durham, an Assistant Public Defender in Fayetteville, and practiced law for two years with a private firm.

http://www.nccourts.org/County/Durham/Staff/Superior.asp