Jason Young to get new trial

[Nymeria]

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

O/T
:cheers: Awesome.
I miss that show so badly :tantrum:

Looking forward to Sauls spinoff though!

 

[JusticeFever]

*BBM*

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

They deadlocked at 8-4 Not Guilty.

 

[jova33]

They deadlocked at 8-4 Not Guilty.

First they came back something like 4 for acquittal, 6 undecided. The judge sent them back to deliberations, then they came back8 to 4 in favor of acquittal, and the judge declared a mistrial rather then send them back again.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[TreeClimbingGirl]

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

The appellate court did NOT find any of the bolded to be in error. Read the court ruling. He granted the appeal based on the inclusion of the civil judgement and child custody case. That's it. Cassidy's statement was fine. Using Jason's silence and refusal to cooperate with the investigation was fine. The jury instructions about a possible accomplice were not even brought up in the appeal!

Please provide evidence that judge Stevens declared a mistrial because the jury was "leaning towards acquittal". That is a serious accusation that should have proof to back it up. As I recall the jury was divided 8-4 in favor of not guilty-it's not as if it was hinging on one vote. As I recall the jury said it was hopelessly deadlocked, and that is why a mistrial was declared.

 

[MyBelle]

First they came back something like 4 for acquittal, 6 undecided. The judge sent them back to deliberations, then they came back8 to 4 in favor of acquittal, and the judge declared a mistrial rather then send them back again.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

Did the second jury reach a verdict immediately or did they also have trouble reaching agreement? I can't remember but am curious because it appears the second time around, the biggest issues the appellate court had in their declaration of an unfair trial were the introduction of the civil cases and the Judge allowing it. The Judge is pretty elderly and maybe it is time he retire.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

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..

I do agree with you. Sounds like the entire courthouse decided he was guilty long before he went to trial. I can't remember which Judge signed that search warrant to seize Jason's car but apparently real probable cause wasn't required. Something along the lines of 'I think I see a drop of blood' is all that is needed.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

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.

Being overturned like that and on those reasons will be a very black mark on his legacy. In his younger days, he may have been a great judge but now? He made huge errors.

JMO

 

[jova33]

Did the second jury reach a verdict immediately or did they also have trouble reaching agreement? I can't remember but am curious because it appears the second time around, the biggest issues the appellate court had in their declaration of an unfair trial were the introduction of the civil cases and the Judge allowing it. The Judge is pretty elderly and maybe it is time he retire.

JMO

I think the second jury was a female majority. Not to be sexist, but females make decisions based on emotion, while males make decisions more towards logic.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[MyBelle]

I think the second jury was a female majority. Not to be sexist, but females make decisions based on emotion, while males make decisions more towards logic.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

I'm a female and I didn't see a lot of logic. And apparently the Judge decided it was okay for the female prosecutor to exploit emotion by throwing in the kitchen sink of non-evidence.

 

[TreeClimbingGirl]

I think the second jury was a female majority. Not to be sexist, but females make decisions based on emotion, while males make decisions more towards logic.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

Prefacing a statement with "not to be sexist" doesn't make it not sexist :twocents:

 

[MyBelle]

Prefacing a statement with "not to be sexist" doesn't make it not sexist :twocents:

True but pretending the South isn't a sexist culture does nothing to ensure a fair trial either. I grew up in the South and there was nothing beneficial to my mother insisting my "career" needed to take a back seat when I became pregnant. I had a meddling mother and so did Michelle. This isn't a motive for murder. I've been with my husband for over 40 years.

 

[jova33]

Prefacing a statement with "not to be sexist" doesn't make it not sexist :twocents:

Trust me, the legal system is racist and sexist. If JY were black, he'd be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and we wouldn't be having this conversation about his innocence.
I'm not racist or sexist, but I understand the media and the judicial system plays on these factors. I've seen women get sentenced to three years for murder where a man would get 20, and a white man get 20 years where a black man would get death.

Edit: I've also had black friends who have been through the legal system. One of them was told by his attorney to take a plea because "you're a dark scary black man", even though he was innocent.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[TreeClimbingGirl]

True but pretending the South isn't a sexist culture does nothing to ensure a fair trial either. I grew up in the South and there was nothing beneficial to my mother insisting my "career" needed to take a back seat when I became pregnant. I had a meddling mother and so did Michelle. This isn't a motive for murder. I've been with my husband for over 40 years.

Trust me, the legal system is racist and sexist. If JY were black, he'd be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and we wouldn't be having this conversation about his innocence.
I'm not racist or sexist, but I understand the media and the judicial system plays on these factors. I've seen women get sentenced to three years for murder where a man would get 20, and a white man get 20 years where a black man would get death.

Edit: I've also had black friends who have been through the legal system. One of them was told by his attorney to take a plea because "you're a dark scary black man", even though he was innocent.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

The comment was "females make decisions based on emotion, while males make decisions more towards logic". That is not a statement about "southern culture" or "the legal system", it is a statement about the intrinsic workings of the mind. It is a blanket statement about individual intelligence and decision-making capacity as it relates to gender, and it is false. And it's ridiculous to say it would apply to this case anyways-I seem to recall that both men and women served on the jury, and yet their decision was unanimous.

I do not wish to argue this further. I will just say that comment was insulting to me as a woman, and insulting to the 12 men and women who sacrificed weeks out of their lives to honor their civic duties in this very difficult case, regardless of whether or not you agree with their decision.

 

[MyBelle]

Trust me, the legal system is racist and sexist. If JY were black, he'd be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and we wouldn't be having this conversation about his innocence.
I'm not racist or sexist, but I understand the media and the judicial system plays on these factors. I've seen women get sentenced to three years for murder where a man would get 20, and a white man get 20 years where a black man would get death.

Edit: I've also had black friends who have been through the legal system. One of them was told by his attorney to take a plea because "you're a dark scary black man", even though he was innocent.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

I agree with you. There is much psychology involved which is why there are jury "consultants" engaged in these high profile cases.

 

[jova33]

I agree with you. There is much psychology involved which is why there are jury "consultants" engaged in these high profile cases.

It doesn't always work though. Look at the Zimmerman case. The all female jury wasn't picked on accident. I think it was intentional, but it backfired.

Edit: so I'll admit I was wrong, the gender of the jury doesn't always predict the outcome of the case, but I will say the attorneys will cater differently depending on the gender.

i.e. The daycare workers testimony. It was pretty irrelevant. CY may or may not have witnessed the attack, and she chose a female doll over a male doll as the attacker. What purpose did that testimony have but to play on the emotions of the jury?

Sent from your mom's smartphone

 

[oenophile]

The comment was "females make decisions based on emotion, while males make decisions more towards logic". That is not a statement about "southern culture" or "the legal system", it is a statement about the intrinsic workings of the mind. It is a blanket statement about individual intelligence and decision-making capacity as it relates to gender, and it is false. And it's ridiculous to say it would apply to this case anyways-I seem to recall that both men and women served on the jury, and yet their decision was unanimous.

I do not wish to argue this further. I will just say that comment was insulting to me as a woman, and insulting to the 12 men and women who sacrificed weeks out of their lives to honor their civic duties in this very difficult case, regardless of whether or not you agree with their decision.

I am not a woman, and I agree with you on this 100%, even though I'm not convinced that the verdict was correct.

 

[MyBelle]

It doesn't always work though. Look at the Zimmerman case. The all female jury wasn't picked on accident. I think it was intentional, but it backfired.

Edit: so I'll admit I was wrong, the gender of the jury doesn't always predict the outcome of the case, but I will say the attorneys will cater differently depending on the gender.

i.e. The daycare workers testimony. It was pretty irrelevant. CY may or may not have witnessed the attack, and she chose a female doll over a male doll as the attacker. What purpose did that testimony have but to play on the emotions of the jury?

Sent from your mom's smartphone

I think gender plays more of a role in the perception of information, how it is processed and reacted to. There are generalizations and stereotypes that do hold true, imo. If it didn't, we would not still have accusations about racial profiling or that a juror has concluded a guy is guilty of murder because he's the husband and he's been an adulterer.

JMO

 

[oenophile]

I think gender plays more of a role in the perception of information, how it is processed and reacted to. There are generalizations and stereotypes that do hold true, imo. If it didn't, we would not still have accusations about racial profiling or that a juror has concluded a guy is guilty of murder because he's the husband and he's been an adulterer.

JMO

Unfortunately it is generalizations and stereotypes that caused many people to assume the guilt of both Jason Young and Brad Cooper, regardless of whether they actually committed the crimes of which they were accused.

"Statistics show the husband probably did it" is a self-fulfilling prophesy if you always accuse the husband of doing it.

 

[MyBelle]

Unfortunately it is generalizations and stereotypes that caused many people to assume the guilt of both Jason Young and Brad Cooper, regardless of whether they actually committed the crimes of which they were accused.

"Statistics show the husband probably did it" is a self-fulfilling prophesy if you always accuse the husband of doing it.

That's true but once someone goes from being a member of the public to that of "juror" they are supposed to set aside assumptions and weigh only the evidence. And the Judge is supposed to ensure a fair trial. When nobody seems to follow their sworn duty, cases like Young and Cooper happen. A total waste of time, money and not to mention the penalty to the children who have lost both parents in the years it takes to undo the mess.

 

[JusticeFever]

That's true but once someone goes from being a member of the public to that of "juror" they are supposed to set aside assumptions and weigh only the evidence. And the Judge is supposed to ensure a fair trial. When nobody seems to follow their sworn duty, cases like Young and Cooper happen. A total waste of time, money and not to mention the penalty to the children who have lost both parents in the years it takes to undo the mess.

Both the Cooper and Young trials spent so much time on character assassination.
They each had an affair(s), they were both jerks at times , anything to make the public and the jury hate them. Makes one wonder if it was to divert from lack of motive and evidence?