Jason Young to get new trial #4

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Does anyone have a picture in the Cracker Barrel showing JY wearing the shirt, jeans and shoes?

Seems to me, I remember some discussion that the jeans he had on were not the same style jeans that were collected by LE. I think they were cargo jeans and the ones in evidence were just regular jeans. If so, why wasn't this brought out in the trials?
 
citygirl said:
I would suggest you take the time to listen to testimony in both trials. As far as the prints on the shoeshine kit? Who cares? How does this have anything to do with the murder? I am sure there were many unidentified prints all over their home.

I do wonder about one thing though. The blood that was found on the door leading to the garage. It was MY's. I assume there was no finger print. Would this indicate that the perp wore a glove?
Click to expand...

I do not have time to go back through the entire trial testimony. I am hearing impaired and really have to work to understand what is being said. I was hoping that I could find the transcripts so that I can peruse them at my leisure, which I do not have much of.

As to the DNA on the shoes or shoeshine kit, why would unidentified DNA be on anything in Jason's closet? It is an anomaly, one of many, for which no explanation has been proffered. There was unidentified DNA on the jewelry box, and on cigarette butts. Those leads went cold and apparently were never pursued further. An investigator should follow up all leads at a murder scene that could possibly have anything to do with the murder. I would want to see if that DNA could be traced to someone who had no business being in the Young's home. Until those DNA leads are identified, it was premature even to charge Jason with the murder.

I have not read any further information on the blood found on the door leading to the garage. If it had been made by a glove, that is something that almost surely could have been determined. I am seeking more information on that.

Glenn
 
Glenn101 said:
I do not have time to go back through the entire trial testimony. I am hearing impaired and really have to work to understand what is being said. I was hoping that I could find the transcripts so that I can peruse them at my leisure, which I do not have much of.

As to the DNA on the shoes or shoeshine kit, why would unidentified DNA be on anything in Jason's closet? It is an anomaly, one of many, for which no explanation has been proffered. There was unidentified DNA on the jewelry box, and on cigarette butts. Those leads went cold and apparently were never pursued further. An investigator should follow up all leads at a murder scene that could possibly have anything to do with the murder. I would want to see if that DNA could be traced to someone who had no business being in the Young's home. Until those DNA leads are identified, it was premature even to charge Jason with the murder.

I have not read any further information on the blood found on the door leading to the garage. If it had been made by a glove, that is something that almost surely could have been determined. I am seeking more information on that.

Glenn
Click to expand...

This is not an easy case by any means, I wouldn't be shocked if this doesn't make it to a 3rd trial.... The state can't use the auto accident as an attempt on Michelle's life, as the investigating officer testified to otherwise, and the gas station attendant's testimony is full of so many inconsistencies, starting with a cash transaction on top of other transactions with people right there at the very same time and place the state wants us to believe Jason Young was!!!

JMO
 
There's nothing legally precluding the state from using any of their witnesses from either trial 1 or 2 if they end up with a 3rd trial. The state, in a separate hearing in 2011, won the motion to include Gracie as a witness. It will be up to a jury to determine which witnesses are credible or not credible or which parts of witness testimony they choose to believe or not believe. None of that will be determined on the Interwebs. Besides, IMO Gracie is not the state's star witness. The star witness was JY himself. He got on the stand and locked himself into a story and any future jury will see his testimony and then hear from other witnesses how what he said conflicted with what was found in evidence, just like in trial #2.
 
Where did I say that they weren't going to call the same witnesses from the previous 2 trials, they can and they most likely will. I see no problem recalling the investigating officer who testified that Jason and Michelle were in a car accident, or Gracie's eye witness account of her encounter with Jason that just can't be true, imo.......She stated that there were no other cars at the station when Jason was there, when clearly the mystery customer had a car, the people who came in a minute before, and the person(people) a minute after had cars, and it's not like the convenience store was located on some street where people walked in and out of. This was located off of a highway, and unless they were riding bikes, or arriving on skateboards, they had to travel to this location in a car, truck, etc.

Jason's testimony had minor flaws, as to when and what he went to his car for. His story of the twig holding the door open, held up literally. and the fact that he didn't use the software to his meeting until the next day instead of that nite, maybe by the time he got back upstairs, he changed his mind or got tired. Did anyone see Jason drive away from the Hampton or back into the parking lot the next morning? There had to be someone who was up early and getting ready to get on the road........
Was Jason able to get his original parking spot back at the hotel with no one seeing him?
 
The pre-trial hearing is when the Judge had to jump in and help Gracie. (May 20, 2011)

Witness Testimony Challenged In Young Case

www.abc11.com/archive/8142246/

"But when asked by the lead prosecutor if she could describe the man she froze and went silent. After a long pause, Dahms said I can't remember exactly".

"The Judge jumped into the questioning and Dahms said it was a white man. But when the Judge asked
her if he was bald or what his hairstyle was, she again seemed unsure"

Also she said she had met with investigators and prosecutors recently, and they told her.
"It's very important...........my testimony"
_________________________________________________________________

This testimony was troubled from the start! JMO
 
Comments have been made about what a bad witness Gracie is, how her story is not believable, how the state should not call her, etc, etc. If there's a 3rd trial, I believe she'll be called again. And, like in the previous times she was on the witness stand, the jury will decide what, if any, part of her testimony is credible.

I happen to believe she did have an unpleasant encounter at 5:27am-ish that fateful morning. There's a cash transaction receipt that backs up someone ordering $20 worth of gas but only getting $15. That is corroboration of details. There were cameras at 4 Brothers, but the cameras weren't working (not Gracie's fault). People who lash out in a transaction, like what Gracie described, have a way of being remembered because most people are cordial and decent. We tend to remember the rude ones, which is something common to humans.

A jury will ultimately decide if the rude customer at that time of the morning was JY or not. BTW, Gracie happens to call everything "a little." She described JY's hair as "little bit of hair" (she did not call him bald), she described her 5'11" son as "little bit taller than me." There was something else she called "little" too that wasn't little in the least. And then she described JY as "little bit taller than me." It's a personal colloquialism she seems to use often to describe people and things. It will be up to the jury in the end.
 
Madeleine74 said:
Comments have been made about what a bad witness Gracie is, how her story is not believable, how the state should not call her, etc, etc. If there's a 3rd trial, I believe she'll be called again. And, like in the previous times she was on the witness stand, the jury will decide what, if any, part of her testimony is credible.

I happen to believe she did have an unpleasant encounter at 5:27am-ish that fateful morning. There's a cash transaction receipt that backs up someone ordering $20.00 worth of gas but only getting $15. That is corroboration of details. There were cameras at 4 Brothers, but the cameras weren't working (not Gracie's fault). People who lash out in a transaction, like what Gracie described, have a way of being remembered because most people are cordial and decent. We tend to remember the rude ones, which is something common to humans.

A jury will ultimately decide if the rude customer at that time of the morning was JY or not. BTW, Gracie happens to call everything "a little." She described JY's hair as "little bit of hair" (she did not call him bald), she described her 5'11" son as "little bit taller than me." There was something else she called "little" too that wasn't little in the least. And then she described JY as "little bit taller than me." It's a personal colloquialism she seems to use often to describe people and things. It will be up to the jury in the end.
Click to expand...

I have never said Gracie shouldn't be called again, so I am not sure where you are getting that from. She most certainly has to be called. Do you have a link to a receipt that shows someone paid $20 but the pump only registered $15.OO????? I know there was no balance sheet that proved Gracie was $5.00 over in her cash register drawer.
I can look up and link Tiki Ingram's(4 Bros Manager) testimony here, so, if you can find that receipt...thanks.
 
Gracie's Boss: Tiki Ingram: June 13, 2011 (only 6 minutes)

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/video/9723180/

Found one thing conflicting about the shift time, she says midnite to 8am, Gracie said midnite to 7:am, but then later in testimony it goes back to 7am again.

Basically, she says she turned over all receipts, debits, credits, cash, they leave a paper trail, not stored on a disc,all the receipts are in the bag,same condition. bag is sealed.

No where does she mention a $20 payment for a $15.00 purchase, so I will wait for your link. Thanks.

ETA/ There could also possibly be a fuel inventory sheet used at gas stations that clerks need to fill out for any discrepancies if the gasoline doesn't match the amount of money collected!!
 
Have begun to re-listen to JY's testimony. He takes every opportunity to discuss his dead wife's faults, IMO. He's really good at it though. He gets the jab in then takes the attitude of an understanding husband.
 
citygirl said:
Have begun to re-listen to JY's testimony. He takes every opportunity to discuss his dead wife's faults, IMO. He's really good at it though. He gets the jab in then takes the attitude of an understanding husband.
Click to expand...

Everyone has faults. It's important in understanding the personalities and the dynamics of relationships. For example, Michelle's father's wife wouldn't allow Michelle in her home because their relationship was so contentious but Jason was welcome anytime he wanted.

I do understand respecting the dead but I think sometimes we go too far with it when we're discussing cases and need to understand everything about the person, good or bad. It does not make the victim a bad person, it is not an attack on them. It is simply necessary to put everything on the table, even about the victim.

We were never allowed to discuss Nancy Cooper's affairs during Brad's trial because it was "attacking" the victim's character. It wasn't at all. It is just important in understanding what was going on, the dynamics of the marriage, the paternity of the child, etc.
 
JusticeFever said:
Gracie's Boss: Tiki Ingram: June 13, 2011 (only 6 minutes)

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/video/9723180/

Found one thing conflicting about the shift time, she says midnite to 8am, Gracie said midnite to 7:am, but then later in testimony it goes back to 7am again.

Basically, she says she turned over all receipts, debits, credits, cash, they leave a paper trail, not stored on a disc,all the receipts are in the bag,same condition. bag is sealed.

No where does she mention a $20 payment for a $15.00 purchase, so I will wait for your link. Thanks.

ETA/ There could also possibly be a fuel inventory sheet used at gas stations that clerks need to fill out for any discrepancies if the gasoline doesn't match the amount of money collected!!
Click to expand...

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/9497848/

here is a link that states :

Wake County Assistant District Attorney Becky Holt said the state has a cash receipt from the store for a gasoline purchase at 5:27 a.m. on the day Michelle Young was killed.
 
Landonsmom02 said:
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/9497848/

here is a link that states :

Wake County Assistant District Attorney Becky Holt said the state has a cash receipt from the store for a gasoline purchase at 5:27 a.m. on the day Michelle Young was killed.
Click to expand...

But, where is an actual receipt that shows $20.00 paid , and only $15.00 pumped?
There should also be a record on the books for an over payment that day at the BP Station.
Tiki Ingrams never testified to anything like that, and the state never asked. The defense did not
even bother to ask her any questions.
Sounds to me that LE is just using a cash transaction that fits the time period, unless one is otherwise provided here showing differently.
I don't think any such proof exists, but nothing about this story would surprise me.
Gracie's description of events do not add up in the least, and her inability to describe Jason by herself in the courtroom amazes me that it was even allowed or admissable.
 
sunshine05 said:
Everyone has faults. It's important in understanding the personalities and the dynamics of relationships. For example, Michelle's father's wife wouldn't allow Michelle in her home because their relationship was so contentious but Jason was welcome anytime he wanted.

I do understand respecting the dead but I think sometimes we go too far with it when we're discussing cases and need to understand everything about the person, good or bad. It does not make the victim a bad person, it is not an attack on them. It is simply necessary to put everything on the table, even about the victim.

We were never allowed to discuss Nancy Cooper's affairs during Brad's trial because it was "attacking" the victim's character. It wasn't at all. It is just important in understanding what was going on, the dynamics of the marriage, the paternity of the child, etc.
Click to expand...
The step mother's feelings don't concern me. Step-mother/step-daughter relationship vs husband & wife. This was MY's loving husband dissing her at every turn, on the witness stand, just to save his hide. Butter could have melted in his mouth. Did you notice the respect he gave to CS and MM and their testimony? Are you aware that MY's father called JY a chameleon? MOO.
 
Madeleine74 said:
Comments have been made about what a bad witness Gracie is, how her story is not believable, how the state should not call her, etc, etc. If there's a 3rd trial, I believe she'll be called again. And, like in the previous times she was on the witness stand, the jury will decide what, if any, part of her testimony is credible.

I happen to believe she did have an unpleasant encounter at 5:27am-ish that fateful morning. There's a cash transaction receipt that backs up someone ordering $20 worth of gas but only getting $15. That is corroboration of details. There were cameras at 4 Brothers, but the cameras weren't working (not Gracie's fault). People who lash out in a transaction, like what Gracie described, have a way of being remembered because most people are cordial and decent. We tend to remember the rude ones, which is something common to humans.

A jury will ultimately decide if the rude customer at that time of the morning was JY or not. BTW, Gracie happens to call everything "a little." She described JY's hair as "little bit of hair" (she did not call him bald), she described her 5'11" son as "little bit taller than me." There was something else she called "little" too that wasn't little in the least. And then she described JY as "little bit taller than me." It's a personal colloquialism she seems to use often to describe people and things. It will be up to the jury in the end.
Click to expand...

This is what we are talking about....a receipt that would show someone paying $20 for gasoline, but only getting $15.00, there has to be a record of that.
 
There is. The register receipts were presented in court. IMO, when Gracie testifies that JY's car was the only one she means AT THE PUMPS. The former client was a minute earlier and had probably driven away. The newspaper man didn't come in every morning for gas. He came for coffee. He was probably not parked at the pumps. I believe Gracie. Her testimony is unshakeable to me. I understand the need to discredit her but it doesn't fly with me. She held her own, she didn't lie, she told it as it was. And she nailed him. MOO.
 
SStarr33 said:
I wonder how the regular that was supposedly in the store got there. On foot?
Click to expand...

No clue, but she said he was a regular customer...later on there was some confusion that it might have been a news delivery person, but that is not what she said at the time, she said a regular customer, so if we are to believe her story , we have to believe this too, although it doesn't matter, no one was ever found to this day.

I will try to find the link sometime this week that the newspaper person was contacted and denied ever witnessing anything like that..I believe the defense presented this information.


And, why in the world would LE ever set up surveillance tapes to find this person and yet never show the tapes to her? How important to their case would this be for someone else to identity Jason Young? And, if he was a regular customer or whoever he was, did he just never come back to the store again? Did he just disappear? Was there a missing person case at the same time in King, NC? :eek:

I am actually interested in all 4 of the eye witnesses accounts, Terry Tiller, Cindy Beaver, and Faye Hinsley as well. . It sounds like I am picking on Gracie, but I am not. I just can't find anything to back
up what she said and it is very frustrating....
 
Loving this . He is addressing calling Meredith about the print out. It dawned on him after his meeting when he went into his computer bag! How convenient! He spoke to MF while at the Cracker Barrel the night before, never mentioned it. He went into his computer bag the night before in his hotel room, didn't dawn on him. I don't believe a word he says. MOO. Now explaining his 28 calls to his mother that morning. 28 calls? A grown married man? Pffffft. MOO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 217 more.
Total: 511 (members: 218, guests: 293)

Online statistics

Members online
218
Guests online
293
Total visitors
511
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,118
Messages
18,249,766
Members
234,539
Latest member
jurassicparkpandaice
Back
Top