The one thing that I am bothered with is that the jury will not speak about their decision. I think, that if you come to a verdict, be it guilty or innocent, then you should be able to stand behind your verdict and state why you voted a certain way. I'm not arguing that the jurors should be questioned, or mocked, or revered for their decision, but I think, in exchange for locking someone away for life (or letting someone free), they should be willing to divulge why they reached the decision they did.
I understand our system is not built this way, but I do think it is a flaw. I know there are many on here, who would have voted Guilty, and would have been able to state proudly why they did so. I would like to hear from the jury the reasons why they have sent a man away for life. Don't get me wrong, I think he is guilty, but it is a hard burden the jurors have, the power to decide this man's life. In exchange for that burden and that power, I think they should be willing to tell the world why.
On a separate note, someone asked in the old thread if there is any reversible error. I don't think Stephens is the type of Judge to leave much room for an overturn on appeal. I think that his most susceptible decisions would have been allowing in the evidence of CY's doll play, and the information on the wrongful death suit. I don't know that it will reach the level of reversible error, since I don't personally think either of those tipped the scales in favor of guilty (other things did that, would be my belief). So, these may be ruled "error", but I'm not sure they will be reversible if they are even error.
I don't find it to be a flaw because of safety issues. As others have said, we are compelled as citizens to serve on juries. It is not voluntary. My privacy is sacrosanct. I wouldn't want every potential nut out there or disgruntled friend or family member knowing my name and face and be able to track me. That's what happens once they speak publicly. They are protected until then.
But, as an attorney, you know that usually in jury trials, at least a few of the jurors will stay behind and talk to counsel and explain their reasoning. It helps the side that did not prevail, understand why.
Does the Young family have any contact with Cassidy? Visits? Please tell me no....
Now that he is going to prison, they will be unlikely to see Cassidy unless Michelle's family allows it. jason cannot compel such visits and grandparent rights are next to nothing. However, in many states, a convicted person may retain visitation rights and be able to force visitation with the child, at the prison! I suppose if jason did that and prevailed in such a request, he could have his parents there at the same time.
Ultimately, though, it's really going to be up to Michelle's family to determine if Cassidy maintaining a relationship with her father's family is in her best interest. There is bad blood and I believe jason's mother acted poorly and covered for her son. But Cassidy may love grandma and want to see her. It's a tough issue.
I'm local to the case and I was a "NG person".
I've been following it since they found Michelle's body, and the really sad thing is that Jason has being blamed since that first newscast.
I partially blame the defense because they didn't try to get the trial out of Wake County. The people here are notorious rubber stampers on perceived domestic murder cases, no matter what the evidence.
I guess at this point I feel like he will lose appeal, since I think the only 2 things he has to push are the instruction that they could consider an accomplice, and the addition to Murder 2 on the verdict sheet when the prosecution case clearly implied Murder 1 and Murder 1 only. The jury could not have, by law, voted him guilty of Murder 2, because if they believed the theory, it was premeditated. Murder 2 was added as a safety net because they thought it may serve as a good safety net in case there needed to be a compromise between a potentially hung jury.
I really hate this state, and I am glad I left Wake County a few years back. It's scary.
Also, to all who think he's guilty - Are any of you concerned that the case is closed when it's obvious that 2 people were involved (whether Jason was one of them is irrelevant) - someone got away with murder.
I'm not from Wake county, North Carolina or anywhere near there. I did not watch either trial and only read posts on here and posts by friends of Jason on a blog, describing his character and stating they were either unsure of his guilt or could not believe it. Instead, I decided he was guilty pretty much immediately after reading posts that indicated that:
1. He never talked to investigators.
2. He never asked what happened to his wife and unborn child.
3. He never talked to investigators.
4. He never asked what happened to his wife and unborn child.
5. He
never talked to investigators.
6. He
never asked what happened to his wife and unborn child.
Add to that that he had motive (affairs, insurance), the opportunity (clear ability to get in and out of his hotel without detection, apparent tampering of the hotel video and security door, timeline allowed him to drive back, kill wife and go back to area of hotel), and the means (his wife was likely sleeping when overpowered and jason is not a weak or small person), and my feeling was solidified.
Then, I hear:
1. how a gas station attendant testified he purchased gas in an area and at a time that indicated he was not in the hotel all night, nor in the hotel area all night
2. how jason wrote e-mails indicating that he believed this would all blow over
3. how he refused to fight for custody of his child which would have forced him to answer questions
4. how he had shoes a year before the murder that matched bloody prints, and that looked similar to shoes he was wearing at the hotel, but that were not found in his luggage when he returned
5. how he called his SIL repeatedly, and unusually, the morning of the murder, to go into his house to get something (which points to wanting the body to be discovered before he was due home and for Cassidy to be discovered before too long),
6. how he had been violent with an ex girlfriend, and;
7. how he had been having an affair and intense marital problems and indicated the marriage was "done".
I was not influenced one bit by Wake county politics, media, nothing. I analyzed the facts as described repeatedly by posters here, as well as the inconsistencies, like the size 10 shoe prints, and possible innocent explanations by people who felt there was reasonable doubt, for everything I felt pointed to his guilt.
To me, this is a pretty overwhelming case against jason young. Everything points directly to him except those size 10 shoes, really and neighbors spotting cars at the house. But there are often discrepancies and inconsistencies in these cases that can never be explained.
For example, in scott peterson's case, a neighbor reported seeing a van near the home and a woman who looked like Laci walking a dog that morning. These things are not unusual.
But when looking at the totality of the evidence, as long as the inconsistencies do not definitively rule out guilt and as long as they are outweighed by that which points reasonably to guilt, I am not swayed by them and I believe it is not really reasonable to be swayed by them.
So, to my lawyer brain, it's not the defense's fault or the media's fault that jason young was found guilty today. It's his fault. IMO, he set that train a rollin' when he viciously beat his pregnant wife to death. The evidence is clear to me and paints a definite picture.
Finally, I do not think the size 10 shoe prints prove there was an accomplice, for the reasons many on here have listed. I will add that spousal murder is most often a solitary act.
ETA: Welcome to Websleuths and I hope you keep posting! It's good to have opposing viewpoints around here!
