Jason Young to get new trial #2

[sunshine05]

My concerns about guilt or innocence have always been based on these 12 elements and I have not in almost 8 years been able to get past them.
1) The timeline is nearly impossible....
2) How in the world anyone can believe Gracie Dahms
3) The manner in which MY was killed, pure rage, heat of the moment
4) Cars seen near or at the residence when he couldn't possibly be there
5) Michelle fought back, there was a struggle, where are the marks on Young.
6) No motive, not an insurance policy he could never cash,
7) All the rumors surrounding the case that just were not true
8) Nothing in his SUV, not a drop of blood, not a hair , not a fiber, not a trace
9) Keith Hicks not being able to see the door was ajar, he went there 2x, once to hang a newspaper on the door and once to put a receipt under the door.
10) No one sees Jason driving away from the hotel @ midnight, no one sees Jason driving back into the hotel the next morning, and no signs of Jason in the lobby, on the grounds, and no other guest or employee sees him that morning. Why? How did he become so invisible? He was seen checking in, he is seen getting on an elevator, he was seen walking down the hallway, how did he get himself and his luggage out of the hotel without being on some camera somewhere in the hotel?
11) The twig worked, that was a risky gamble if it hadn't.
12) Camera had been messed with before, same hotel, same stairwell, same camera.
I have more, but it's been posted over and over by people who have doubts, so, until we learn if there is a trial 3, its just the same thing over and over.

Yes, good list. I'm also bothered by the two sets of footprints that match up with two people in a vehicle at 5:30AM, the red flags in the 911 call and what I perceive as a staged crime scene with the bloody footprints all in one direction. The State failed to prove their case. I can't think of one thing that they presented that convinces me of guilt.

I think we need to really examine the things that just don't fit, like the dog being missing that afternoon after the 911 call and no bloody paw prints in the house.

 

[JusticeFever]

Yes, good list. I'm also bothered by the two sets of footprints that match up with two people in a vehicle at 5:30AM, the red flags in the 911 call and what I perceive as a staged crime scene with the bloody footprints all in one direction. The State failed to prove their case. I can't think of one thing that they presented that convinces me of guilt.

I think we need to really examine the things that just don't fit, like the dog being missing that afternoon after the 911 call and no bloody paw prints in the house.

Thank you, I have more. The thing that bothers me in both this and the Cooper case are the lengths or extremes the state goes to , to show they are bad husbands, digging up anything and everything on them. I get it, now, show me the evidence. I don't care about a search 2 years later for a shirt,,it could be anywhere., You pointed out there was a pair of shoes that were in the SUV that were never inventoried. I missed that one. I do remember some people having trouble with the 911 call and I will try to search for the list on the red flags that were raised.

 

[JusticeFever]

Well with MF there were several inconsistencies. The 911 call and her not even willing to check for vitals, the dog. Her car should've been part of the crime scene and searched there, but it wasn't searched until months after the murder. Her alibi stinks. I'm not saying she did it, but there's more evidence against her than there is against JY.

The things that don't add up for me is that this was supposedly a meticulously planned, down to the minute murder plot that left zero room for error, yet it looks like a rage killing, and he wouldn't have had time to clean CY. I don't know why it wasn't directly asked at either trial, but were her pajamas washed? They visibly did not have blood on them, yet they chemically tested positive for blood. JY wouldn't have had time to wash the pajamas.

Sent from your mom's smartphone

Thank you, I have never really gave the 911 call that much thought, except for trying to hear CY's words. I am going to listen to it again, and I do know I read some other people had trouble with it from the beginning. I will listen to it this weekend.

 

[oenophile]

12) Camera had been messed with before, same hotel, same stairwell, same camera.

I wasn't aware of this. One of the key pieces of CE that pushes me toward guilty is the camera. It would be beyond coincidental for a camera that normally works 24/7 to be turned off just once, and that being the night that JY stays there. But if it had happened before, unrelated to a JY stay, then it is less of a coincidence, and I would probably move to solidly not guilty.

 

[oenophile]

Well with MF there were several inconsistencies. The 911 call and her not even willing to check for vitals, the dog. Her car should've been part of the crime scene and searched there, but it wasn't searched until months after the murder. Her alibi stinks. I'm not saying she did it, but there's more evidence against her than there is against JY.

I don't see inconsistencies with MF. I listened to the 911 call and it seemed absolutely appropriate for what she was witnessing. Just like I think it is wrong to falsely accuse JY, I think it is equally wrong to falsely accuse MF without solid evidence to back up any suspicions.

 

[minor4th]

I'm having trouble understanding how anyone can think this guy's innocent (respectfully, no offense).

Who else would beat a pregnant woman with so many blows?

 

[sunshine05]

Well with MF there were several inconsistencies. The 911 call and her not even willing to check for vitals, the dog. Her car should've been part of the crime scene and searched there, but it wasn't searched until months after the murder. Her alibi stinks. I'm not saying she did it, but there's more evidence against her than there is against JY.

The things that don't add up for me is that this was supposedly a meticulously planned, down to the minute murder plot that left zero room for error, yet it looks like a rage killing, and he wouldn't have had time to clean CY. I don't know why it wasn't directly asked at either trial, but were her pajamas washed? They visibly did not have blood on them, yet they chemically tested positive for blood. JY wouldn't have had time to wash the pajamas.

Sent from your mom's smartphone

I believe her car was visually searched within a week of the crime because it is my understanding that she was able to get her car. I don't believe there was ever a thorough search of the car for blood or DNA. If there was, it wasn't discussed at trial.

I wonder about the pajamas too. If they were washed, it may explain why MF turned over her clothing to police absent the long sleeve pink t-shirt. She gave them that at a later time and said she left it on her when she changed her clothing at Target that day. I find that very odd that she didn't give police all of her clothing at that time. When she did finally give it to police, it had been washed.

 

[sunshine05]

I'm having trouble understanding how anyone can think this guy's innocent (respectfully, no offense).

Who else would beat a pregnant woman with so many blows?

I have trouble with that viewpoint - that only a spouse would commit a brutal murder. There are random murders and non-spousal murders. They do happen. Michael Morton spent 25 years in prison for the murder of his wife but he was innocent all along...it was a random attack.

There's another recent case - Russ Faria in Missouri. He was convicted but it's obvious he is innocent. He was only convicted because he was married to the victim.

 

[sunshine05]

I don't see inconsistencies with MF. I listened to the 911 call and it seemed absolutely appropriate for what she was witnessing. Just like I think it is wrong to falsely accuse JY, I think it is equally wrong to falsely accuse MF without solid evidence to back up any suspicions.

Actually, if you read Tracey Harpster's report on red flags of 911 calls, you will catch several red flags.

Page 23: http://leb.fbi.gov/2008-pdfs/leb-june-2008

 

[jova33]

I don't see inconsistencies with MF. I listened to the 911 call and it seemed absolutely appropriate for what she was witnessing. Just like I think it is wrong to falsely accuse JY, I think it is equally wrong to falsely accuse MF without solid evidence to back up any suspicions.

I wasn't accusing her. I was just saying if she was on trial, there would be a stronger case against her than there was against JY, which isn't really saying much.

Sent from your mom's smartphone

 

[minor4th]

I have trouble with that viewpoint - that only a spouse would commit a brutal murder. There are random murders and non-spousal murders. They do happen. Michael Morton spent 25 years in prison for the murder of his wife but he was innocent all along...it was a random attack.



There's another recent case - Russ Faria in Missouri. He was convicted but it's obvious he is innocent. He was only convicted because he was married to the victim.

It's not JUST because he's the spouse. It is because there is corroborating evidence and motive as well as his behavior following the murder.

If you can find me a case where a pregnant wife was stabbed or beaten repeatedly in her home while her husband - who was supposedly in love with another woman - was away but has a less than certain alibi, then I'll reconsider.

Who do you think killed her if not Jason?

 

[JusticeFever]

Pamela Vitale (Dan Horowitz's wife) was brutally murdered and suspicion fell on Dan. No, she wasn't pregnant. But, the crime was also an overkill and it was a neighbor. Scott Dyleski.

 

[JusticeFever]

I wasn't aware of this. One of the key pieces of CE that pushes me toward guilty is the camera. It would be beyond coincidental for a camera that normally works 24/7 to be turned off just once, and that being the night that JY stays there. But if it had happened before, unrelated to a JY stay, then it is less of a coincidence, and I would probably move to solidly not guilty.

Yes, it did happen before, and Jennifer Marshall * the Hampton Inn hotel manager testified to it.

 

[Landonsmom02]

I wasn't aware of this. One of the key pieces of CE that pushes me toward guilty is the camera. It would be beyond coincidental for a camera that normally works 24/7 to be turned off just once, and that being the night that JY stays there. But if it had happened before, unrelated to a JY stay, then it is less of a coincidence, and I would probably move to solidly not guilty.

JF forgot to mention that the only time it ever happened before was when some kids snuck in for a party. No party was going on this night. The only eerie things that night were the cameras and the door being propped open?

 

[Landonsmom02]

Yes, good list. I'm also bothered by the two sets of footprints that match up with two people in a vehicle at 5:30AM, the red flags in the 911 call and what I perceive as a staged crime scene with the bloody footprints all in one direction. The State failed to prove their case. I can't think of one thing that they presented that convinces me of guilt.

I think we need to really examine the things that just don't fit, like the dog being missing that afternoon after the 911 call and no bloody paw prints in the house.

What gets me about people saying the footprints points away from JY, is the size 12 HP. The same that JY owned. Yet he testified that MY gave them away but then his DT in their closing argument puts them back in the closet? So which was it? How would a perp wear the same size shoes as JY? They can't be his right? I mean he testified that MY gave them away.

 

[JusticeFever]

JF forgot to mention that the only time it ever happened before was when some kids snuck in for a party. No party was going on this night. The only eerie things that night were the cameras and the door being propped open?

Who is JF, and it doesn't matter when or how it happened before, just that it did happen. The camera was tampered with, the same one, the same staircase, the same hotel.

 

[sunshine05]

It's not JUST because he's the spouse. It is because there is corroborating evidence and motive as well as his behavior following the murder.

If you can find me a case where a pregnant wife was stabbed or beaten repeatedly in her home while her husband - who was supposedly in love with another woman - was away but has a less than certain alibi, then I'll reconsider.

Who do you think killed her if not Jason?

What does the pregnancy have to do with this? Everyone testified that he was happy about the new baby and he was a good father.

I don't know who killed her and don't have any suspects. There are a lot of unanswered questions that I wish would be investigated though. The crime remains unsolved.

I don't consider the alibi less than certain because I've made that drive up that way several times and it is a beast. I don't believe someone would choose that location to create an alibi. Plus I don't think he is stupid and to be dependent on propped open doors to maintain an alibi is just ridiculous to me. Anything could have happened - door is pulled shut by Hicks, speeding ticket, risking being seen on video buying gas, flat tire, being seen on HI camera, etc. I just think the State's theory has a LOT of holes in it.

 

[sunshine05]

What gets me about people saying the footprints points away from JY, is the size 12 HP. The same that JY owned. Yet he testified that MY gave them away but then his DT in their closing argument puts them back in the closet? So which was it? How would a perp wear the same size shoes as JY? They can't be his right? I mean he testified that MY gave them away.

Again, how did he get the shoes, assuming they were in his closet? Suppose he's wearing the size 10 shoes to the house that night, steps in blood, leaves a shoe print, then cleans up then goes in closet and gets pair of HP then is stupid enough to step in the blood again? Does that seem plausible at all? I can't imagine a scenario for two different shoe prints, two different sizes except that there were two people there. Also, it is definitely possible that the killer could also wear a size 12 shoe, that is not so uncommon.

 

[tarheellvr]

Again, how did he get the shoes, assuming they were in his closet? Suppose he's wearing the size 10 shoes to the house that night, steps in blood, leaves a shoe print, then cleans up then goes in closet and gets pair of HP then is stupid enough to step in the blood again? Does that seem plausible at all? I can't imagine a scenario for two different shoe prints, two different sizes except that there were two people there. Also, it is definitely possible that the killer could also wear a size 12 shoe, that is not so uncommon.

and this size 12 shoeprint just happened to be an Orbital?????

 

[jova33]

and this size 12 shoeprint just happened to be an Orbital?????

There was three other shoes that were made with that same tread. 190-something Hush Puppy Orbitals were sold in that area.

Sent from your mom's smartphone