Jason Young to get new trial

[MyBelle]

Couldn't agree more. He's either guilty as heck or the most unlucky man in the world to have all these "coincidences" point at him.

What coincidences point to JY? I'm not sure of your point. It is a coincidence that there were two different bloody shoe prints? Or foreign DNA? Or that his daughter appeared shockingly clean even though she spent hours with her mother's bloody corpse?

 

[Madeleine74]

That's the real value of circumstantial evidence. In order to consider a case, you can't (and should not) take each piece of evidence and question it in a vacuum. It's only when the pieces are considered in totality that a picture either emerges or fails to clearly emerge.

The inability (or outright refusal, as commonly happens) to understand circumstantial evidence is but one issue. People who say, "oh it's just a circumstantial case" fail to realize that 99% of all cases are "just circumstantial cases." If you read the legal definition of circumstantial vs direct evidence you'll see why. Two types of evidence are considered "direct" evidence: eyewitness to the crime (or a video of the crime being committed) or confession by the perp. That's it! Everything else, even all forensic evidence, is considered "circumstantial evidence." Now, which do you think is more common especially in a criminal case?

Those who are able (and willing to) take all the pieces of evidence presented in a case and consider them together and in totality are the ones who get it and understand the process. Those are the instructions given in criminal cases. In contrast, each piece of evidence, by itself, and without any consideration of any other of piece of evidence in a case, can often be reasoned away as a mere coincidence.

How many coincidences does it take before you finally admit to yourself, "oh c'mon, no one is THAT unlucky! This is beyond mere coincidence."

 

[JusticeFever]

Well, something must have went wrong, because we are headed to Trial 3 !

 

[borndem]

The two different, bloody shoe prints in the bedroom were obvious and collected as evidence. Yet how is it that there was not a trail of those shoe prints beyond the bedroom? If the killer was so careless about prints in one room, why weren't there shoe prints outside of that room? That one has me puzzled.

LE's theory, based on the evidence found & items not found, was that the killer got clothing & another pair of shoes from the JY's bedroom closet. LE could tell that MY's body was moved in order for someone to have access to JY's closet. The killer probably put the shoes on when he left the murder room, cleaned up a bit, and changed clothes elsewhere before he left. He put the gloves and everything he had been wearing during the killing in a trash bag, went outside to wash off whatever needed it just to be sure, left the hose running just a bit to wash away the blood, took off & left. Dumped the garbage bag somewhere. That's why the clothes & shoes were never found. A pretty darn good plan, IMO.

 

[MyBelle]

LE's theory, based on the evidence found & items not found, was that the killer got clothing & another pair of shoes from the JY's bedroom closet. LE could tell that MY's body was moved in order for someone to have access to JY's closet. The killer probably put the shoes on when he left the murder room, cleaned up a bit, and changed clothes elsewhere before he left. He put the gloves and everything he had been wearing during the killing in a trash bag, went outside to wash off whatever needed it just to be sure, left the hose running just a bit to wash away the blood, took off & left. Dumped the garbage bag somewhere. That's why the clothes & shoes were never found. A pretty darn good plan, IMO.

The shoe prints were different sized shoes. I don't know of anybody who purchases shoes two sizes too small.

 

[borndem]

The shoe prints were different sized shoes. I don't know of anybody who purchases shoes two sizes too small.

Someone with a pretty good plan who wanted to get away with murder.

 

[JusticeFever]

LE's theory, based on the evidence found & items not found, was that the killer got clothing & another pair of shoes from the JY's bedroom closet. LE could tell that MY's body was moved in order for someone to have access to JY's closet. The killer probably put the shoes on when he left the murder room, cleaned up a bit, and changed clothes elsewhere before he left. He put the gloves and everything he had been wearing during the killing in a trash bag, went outside to wash off whatever needed it just to be sure, left the hose running just a bit to wash away the blood, took off & left. Dumped the garbage bag somewhere. That's why the clothes & shoes were never found. A pretty darn good plan, IMO.

And all that, but walked away without a scratch?

 

[jova33]

LE's theory, based on the evidence found & items not found, was that the killer got clothing & another pair of shoes from the JY's bedroom closet. LE could tell that MY's body was moved in order for someone to have access to JY's closet. The killer probably put the shoes on when he left the murder room, cleaned up a bit, and changed clothes elsewhere before he left. He put the gloves and everything he had been wearing during the killing in a trash bag, went outside to wash off whatever needed it just to be sure, left the hose running just a bit to wash away the blood, took off & left. Dumped the garbage bag somewhere. That's why the clothes & shoes were never found. A pretty darn good plan, IMO.

JY wore the smaller shoes to try and conceal the fact that it was him. Then he changed his shoes because they were not comfortable, but he forgot that he just murdered someone right there and stepped in the blood.

Or, the other theory is that he wore one pair of shoes on his hands and the other on his feet and walked around the crime scene on all fours to create the appearance someone else was there.

/sarcasm

It's as ridiculous as it sounds.

Sent from your mom's smartphone

 

[MyBelle]

It's as ridiculous as it sounds.

Sent from your mom's smartphone

I totally agree.

 

[sunshine05]

Re: circumstantial evidence - the problem in this case is that the CE is not fact based. It's not verified and therefore must be discarded. I would never consider CE in a vacuum.

The camera stuff - someone's prints are on the camera - not JY's. He is never seen approaching the camera just before it's handled. IF his prints were on the camera, then yes it counts as CE.

Gracie's testimony - She described him as short and balding in a pre-trial hearing. Her brain injury is such that her memory can't be trusted. NC now has stricter guidelines in place for eyewitness identification because it's clear that showing a person one photo and asking "Did you see this person"? can't be trusted. Her testimony is not CE. If she was shown a photo line-up of 6 photos and selected JY, and if there was surveillance video of him at the station that morning, then it would be CE.

CE only counts if it is fact based. It wasn't in this case.

There is CE that C. Young wasn't alone all those hours though.

 

[Nymeria]

Thanks for the reminder. Also relevant is the FACT that the Judge committed serious errors.

Can you break down the errors committed by Judge Stephens for me?
I would like to watch for them as I view these trials.

I have watched him in a couple trials this year (Both of the Hayes') and I have to say I thought he was an amazing Judge. Many times I said I wished he could preside in other trials (AZ trials, to be exact!).
I am curious as to what he has done wrong in JY's trial(s).

TIA


PS- Was Judge Stephens reprimanded or anything of that nature by the court system for whatever he did wrong?

 

[sunshine05]

Can you break down the errors committed by Judge Stephens for me?
I would like to watch for them as I view these trials.

I have watched him in a couple trials this year (Both of the Hayes') and I have to say I thought he was an amazing Judge. Many times I said I wished he could preside in other trials (AZ trials, to be exact!).
I am curious as to what he has done wrong in JY's trial(s).

TIA


PS- Was Judge Stephens reprimanded or anything of that nature by the court system for whatever he did wrong?

I'd recommend reading the appeal decision to understand his errors as well as watching the oral arguments.

http://appellate.nccourts.org/opinions/?c=2&pdf=30999

http://www.wral.com/news/video/13208515/#/vid13208515

The main error was the admittance of the civil case judgements. This was unprecedented. They were not included in the first trial that resulted in a hung jury 8-4 in favor of not guilty.

I lost all respect for this Judge when he chose to express his personal opinion after the verdict was read. This case simply wasn't clear cut and for him to make those statements was very unethical in my opinion. It cemented my thoughts that he was biased.

 

[jova33]

Can you break down the errors committed by Judge Stephens for me?
I would like to watch for them as I view these trials.

I have watched him in a couple trials this year (Both of the Hayes') and I have to say I thought he was an amazing Judge. Many times I said I wished he could preside in other trials (AZ trials, to be exact!).
I am curious as to what he has done wrong in JY's trial(s).

TIA


PS- Was Judge Stephens reprimanded or anything of that nature by the court system for whatever he did wrong?

He allowed the civil suits to be entered as evidence against JY. He allowed the daycare workers testimony even though that should be considered hearsay. He instructed the jury to consider JY had an accomplice when coming to a verdict even though there was no such evidence of an accomplice to JY. He should've recused himself after serving as the judge in the civil suits. He should've ordered a delay on the civil suits until after the criminal case against JY had ended. He declared a mistrial after the first trial instead of sending the jury back to deliberations for a third time when the jury was leaning towards acquittal.

Sent from your mom's smartphone

 

[Nymeria]

I bookmarked the links you gave Sunshine, I will watch the vid and read the PDF later tonight.

The answer might be in either of those....but WAS Judge Stephen reprimanded?
TIA again.

I have to admit I am having trouble reconciling that he did all of the things jova33 mentions in the above post without careful consideration.
He seems to me to be a really thoughtful and by the book judge.

 

[Nymeria]

He allowed the civil suits to be entered as evidence against JY. He allowed the daycare workers testimony even though that should be considered hearsay. He instructed the jury to consider JY had an accomplice when coming to a verdict even though there was no such evidence of an accomplice to JY. He should've recused himself after serving as the judge in the civil suits. He should've ordered a delay on the civil suits until after the criminal case against JY had ended. He declared a mistrial after the first trial instead of sending the jury back to deliberations for a third time when the jury was leaning towards acquittal.

Sent from your mom's smartphone

*BBM*

Did the jury actually voice that in court?
That they were leaning towards acquittal???

 

[sunshine05]

I bookmarked the links you gave Sunshine, I will watch the vid and read the PDF later tonight.

The answer might be in either of those....but WAS Judge Stephen reprimanded?
TIA again.

I have to admit I am having trouble reconciling that he did all of the things jova33 mentions in the above post without careful consideration.
He seems to me to be a really thoughtful and by the book judge.

No, it doesn't really work that way. There is no one to reprimand him. The appeals court listens to arguments and then issue a decision based on whether or not his rulings were proper.

Public officials - police, prosecutors and judges are rarely ever called out for misconduct that contributes to an unfair investigation and trial. When they are, they are given a slap on the wrist. It has created an environment for abuse of power because they are rarely held accountable. It is happening everywhere.

 

[MyBelle]

I'd recommend reading the appeal decision to understand his errors as well as watching the oral arguments.

http://appellate.nccourts.org/opinions/?c=2&pdf=30999

http://www.wral.com/news/video/13208515/#/vid13208515

The main error was the admittance of the civil case judgements. This was unprecedented. They were not included in the first trial that resulted in a hung jury 8-4 in favor of not guilty.

I lost all respect for this Judge when he chose to express his personal opinion after the verdict was read. This case simply wasn't clear cut and for him to make those statements was very unethical in my opinion. It cemented my thoughts that he was biased.

I've always questioned the Clerk of the Court's appointment of Michelle's mother to facilitate the wrongful death lawsuit. At that point in time, Jason had not been charged and Michelle had a Will.

JMO

 

[jilly]

Can you break down the errors committed by Judge Stephens for me?
I would like to watch for them as I view these trials.

I have watched him in a couple trials this year (Both of the Hayes') and I have to say I thought he was an amazing Judge. Many times I said I wished he could preside in other trials (AZ trials, to be exact!).
I am curious as to what he has done wrong in JY's trial(s).

TIA


PS- Was Judge Stephens reprimanded or anything of that nature by the court system for whatever he did wrong?

T

The fact that his ruling was overturned by the Appeal Crt was reprimand enough. If that is what you are asking. No Judge wants wants that.

 

[TreeClimbingGirl]

O/T-

Treeclimbinggirl, is that Walter White in your av?
It looks like him but it is a bit small, hard to be sure.

Sorry I was catching up on other threads and hadn't visited this one :blushing: It is indeed!

 

[JusticeFever]

Judge Stephens signed the first of many search warrants for Young, presided over both criminal trials and the civil trial , so I think it would be safe to say he had his mind made up about Jason Young long before he ever walked into his courtroom..