Jason Young to get new trial

[Landonsmom02]

Which car is that?

An SUV you say?

Whose SUV? MY's?

What proof exists that MY's SUV was used at 5:30am? Fingerprints inside the SUV? Fingerprints on MY's keys? Anything? Is this just imagined to be so because the witness who saw a mom-type SUV at 5:30am cannot (simply cannot) be mistaken? And what about the witness at 3:30am-ish who saw the light colored SUV (not unlike a Ford Explorer as an example) parked at the house?
And if one thinks MF was using MY's SUV, then where did MF park her own car? Wasn't that in the driveway? How could MF's car be missed if it was there and there were lights on outside the house? Witnesses claimed to see an SUV (not a Honda sedan). Where was the Honda?

BBM

Yes how come when people quote a light colored SUV being seen at the home don't correlate that with the white ford explorer that JY drove at the time of the murder? Also what I find weird, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't his SUV a little too clean. I'm mean no hairs at all of MY? I don't ride in my hubby's truck all the time, about twice a week and I know some hairs of mine are there as are our kids. Were her fingerprints even found in there? It seems some evidence of her should be there? Ant not partically from the night of the murder? I mean to me it's just like his fingerprints being at the crime scene. Of course they would because he lived there.

 

[MyBelle]

Common sense goes both ways.

Do you have/know of any other suspects? Why would they beat her like that.

Not sure what point you are trying to make. The only common sense that matters is that of jurors and the Judge, which is what I said.

Why does any killer beat someone 'like that'? What exactly does 'like that' even mean? Ask Jason Williford that question. His victim was in bed and he brutally raped and beat her and left her for dead. Ask the killers of the Petit women that question. They brutally beat, raped and set their victims on fire in their beds, in their own home.

I think it is a huge myth that only a husband is capable of killing "like that."

JMO

 

[Boodles]

*BBM*
Should that not say you believe he was in Virginia?

Or is there definitive proof he was? And if that is the case, why were/are there trials?

I think I should not try to learn facts about this case from this thread maybe :facepalm:
I appreciate opinions and theories, but I need to take more care in taking anything as proven, I guess.

Nymeria, you are right, this is not a good thread from which to learn facts.

Certain posters state things as fact rather than as their own opinion. For example, "Cassidy wasn't hungry." There are many other examples, but I'm not going to waste my time finding them. Those are beliefs and assumptions, not facts. They should be stated as such so as not to confuse other readers. That's TOS, no?

Seeking justice is a good thing, but being blind to circumstances and taking each circumstance as a stand-alone test of guilt is mind boggling, ridiculous and exhausting to refute, in my opinion.

Hopefully, the Court will uphold JY's conviction. Donald Stephens is a great judge and I feel he knows the law. He doesn't like mistakes and do-overs (refer to pretrial decisions in the Ackerson murder case), so is thoughtful when ruling. We'll see, but I have hope that there will be no retrial.

Speaking of which, is there any estimate of the timeframe of the appeal decision? Hopefully it won't be never ending, like the Jeffrey MacDonald decision which sits open down in Wilmington.

 

[sunshine05]

Which car is that?

An SUV you say?

Whose SUV? MY's?

What proof exists that MY's SUV was used at 5:30am? Fingerprints inside the SUV? Fingerprints on MY's keys? Anything? Is this just imagined to be so because the witness who saw a mom-type SUV at 5:30am cannot (simply cannot) be mistaken? And what about the witness at 3:30am-ish who saw the light colored SUV (not unlike a Ford Explorer as an example) parked at the house?

And if one thinks MF was using MY's SUV, then where did MF park her own car? Wasn't that in the driveway? How could MF's car be missed if it was there and there were lights on outside the house? Witnesses claimed to see an SUV (not a Honda sedan). Where was the Honda?

Do you see how you're cherry picking just like the State did? You only trust the 3:30AM sighting of the light colored SUV. Actually there were three independent reports of a light colored SUV Tiller initially told police she saw it at 4-5 and it somehow shifted to 3:30ish but okay. Then Cindy B. sees it with two people inside and no I don't believe she was mistaken based on the details she was able to provide. She seemed very credible at trial. Third, Faye Hinsley reported seeing it, again in the same location a bit later, anywhere from 5-7AM. The two on either side corroborate Cindy's statement. (Compare to Gracie with absolutely nothing to corroborate her sighting of JY)

Was it MY's? That is possible but impossible to know for sure. <mod snip>

 

[nursebeeme]

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/image_gallery/10695856/

isn't the re-trial based on what was included in the trial but should not have been?

re: wrongful death suite, etc?


excuse me if I am wrong in pointing this out (it had nothing to do with evidence really in terms of blood, circumstances, etc)

as for all the personal attacks.. please cease and desist from that. Please and thank you.

Attacking the crux of the post is fine but attacking the member is not. :nono:

we will see how it plays out yet again for the third time when it happens.

 

[sunshine05]

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/image_gallery/10695856/

isn't the re-trial based on what was included in the trial but should not have been?

re: wrongful death suite, etc?


excuse me if I am wrong in pointing this out (it had nothing to do with evidence really in terms of blood, circumstances, etc)

as for all the personal attacks.. please cease and desist from that. Please and thank you.

Attacking the crux of the post is fine but attacking the member is not. :nono:

we will see how it plays out yet again for the third time when it happens.

The retrial is a result of what was included and should have been inadmissible - civil cases and rulings. If there's a new trial, all evidence (except for the civil cases) will once again be fair game.

Thank you for stopping by here. Much appreciated.

 

[JusticeFever]

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/image_gallery/10695856/

isn't the re-trial based on what was included in the trial but should not have been?

re: wrongful death suite, etc?


excuse me if I am wrong in pointing this out (it had nothing to do with evidence really in terms of blood, circumstances, etc)

as for all the personal attacks.. please cease and desist from that. Please and thank you.

Attacking the crux of the post is fine but attacking the member is not. :nono:

we will see how it plays out yet again for the third time when it happens.

Yes, the decision to grant Young a 3rd trial is because the Judge allowed the wrongful death suit to come in. It has nothing to do with the actual evidence provided in Trial 1 or Trial 2, but things will be different. Jason will have new attorneys.. Wake County's DA position is also up for grabs..so, the Prosecution team may be different as well. There may be witnesses who are no longer around, who knows? NC also has to retry Mike Peterson and Brad Cooper as well, at least one of these 3 could get a plea deal.

 

[nursebeeme]

The retrial is a result of what was included and should have been inadmissible - civil cases and rulings. If there's a new trial, all evidence (except for the civil cases) will once again be fair game.

Thank you for stopping by there. Much appreciated.

you are welcome.

we shall have to see how it plays out the next time around.

 

[MyBelle]

If the Fishers were accusing Jason of killing Michelle, how would you expect them to act?
Besides, after all the things that came out at trial, the Youngs and Fishers, while not necessarily the Hatfields and the McCoys, were not all that close to begin with.

I have to wonder why the Fishers would accuse Jason at all. It was no secret he was out of town. And the last known person with Michelle says she felt they were being watched and was frightened at a time we know Jason was out of town. Those two reasons are why it's quite a leap for anyone to conclude he returned to Raleigh in a premeditated rage. Didn't Michelle's therapist testify that Michelle admitted he wasn't physically abusive? I'm not seeing anything that would lead anyone close to the couple to immediately point to him as a killer. Yet somebody did just that and the cops immediately used tunnel vision on Jason and only Jason.

JMO

 

[Nymeria]

But, the point is, they didn't have one when they said they did or when they seized his SUV..Whether it means anything or not, at this late date, I was just pointing it out.

I asked is it possible that LE asked the family to not touch the SUV, as a search warrant was going to be served, and they respected that request?

And I know they did not HAVE to, but the majority of people in this world would do what LE asks, even in a situation such as that.

 

[MyBelle]

Yes, the decision to grant Young a 3rd trial is because the Judge allowed the wrongful death suit to come in. It has nothing to do with the actual evidence provided in Trial 1 or Trial 2, but things will be different. Jason will have new attorneys.. The state's DA position is also up for grabs..so, the Prosecution team may be different as well. There may be witnesses who are no longer around, who knows? NC also has to retry Mike Peterson and Brad Cooper as well, at least one of these 3 could get a plea deal.

The DA is going to be different? I wasn't aware of that. This will indeed be interesting. The similarities between the Cooper and Young cases are really striking. I didn't follow the Mike Peterson trial.

 

[Boodles]

You must have missed the *unanimous* appeal decision granting Young a new trial.

No, I didn't. The State petitioned the NC Supreme Court to review the appellate court's decision. It's with the Supreme Court.

"The basis of the state's 46-page petition to the Supreme Court deals with legal principles and the appeals court's standard of review in the case, which it contends conflicts with previous rulings of the higher court.

"Discretionary review is warranted because the decision of the Court of Appeals conflicts with decisions of this Court and because the case involves legal principles of major significance to the jurisprudence of the state," the attorney general's office said wrote in its filing.

http://www.wral.com/attorney-general-petitions-nc-supreme-court-to-review-young-appeal/13572542/

 

[Nymeria]

You must have missed the *unanimous* appeal decision granting Young a new trial.

Exactly WHEN is that going to be????

I need a time frame if I am going to get up to speed on this dang case.
I will admit I have put off watching trial 1 because I suspect I will have a long, long time to do this over the next year (and other trials have jumped to the forefront!).

Has there been any news on the date of the new trial??? TIA!

 

[Nymeria]

The DA is going to be different? I wasn't aware of that. This will indeed be interesting. The similarities between the Cooper and Young cases are really striking. I didn't follow the Mike Peterson trial.

I hope it is Boz Zellinger!
He is an excellent DA.

 

[sunshine05]

I have to wonder why the Fishers would accuse Jason at all. It was no secret he was out of town. And the last known person with Michelle says she felt they were being watched and was frightened at a time we know Jason was out of town. Those two reasons are why it's quite a leap for anyone to conclude he returned to Raleigh in a premeditated rage. Didn't Michelle's therapist testify that Michelle admitted he wasn't physically abusive? I'm not seeing anything that would lead anyone close to the couple to immediately point to him as a killer. Yet somebody did just that and the cops immediately used tunnel vision on Jason and only Jason.

JMO

Well, if you recall, MF mentioned him even in the 911 call and early conversations with police - mentioned he was out of town and that they would fight and "oh, I see where this is going..." It's a little similar to Jessica Adam immediately pointing the finger at Brad and police ran with that too.

 

[JusticeFever]

I asked is it possible that LE asked the family to not touch the SUV, as a search warrant was going to be served, and they respected that request?

And I know they did not HAVE to, but the majority of people in this world would do what LE asks, even in a situation such as that.

According to Heather's testimony (Jason's sister) she said they had a search warrant and instructed them to put their things back in the SUV. Mrs, Young also testified to the same thing, I don't believe she was allowed to even have her medicine.
Another thing about the SUV though, Jason brought it back to Raleigh, if he had something to hide, any evidence at all to connect him to the murder, why bring the SUV back? And, this is a little out there, but why not run? He never ran, not even when he was out on bail and things looked bleak. That says a lot to me.

 

[nursebeeme]

who picked a cherry? :seeya::seeya::seeya::seeya:

talk about the case, not about each other and certainly let us not dwell on if a member points something out that they find interesting and call it.. well.. cherry picking. CARRY ON.

:nurse:​

 

[nursebeeme]

Now for the actual facts:

1. Boz is being backed by an organization that has made monetary contributions to his campaign. That organization happens to be against Lorrin Freeman. That organization has campaigned against Lorrin Freeman in a way that has raised ire. If they didn't back Boz they would back someone else running. That organization would still be against Lorrin Freeman and would still have made whatever ads they made against Lorrin Freeman. I don't think it would matter who they backed; they still were going to campaign against Lorrin Freeman.

2. The Cooper trial was overturned because of a judicial error. The judge made the error and it was enough of an error for the 3 appellate judges to decide to overturn the case. And specifically the argument at the appellate level was what constitutes a "forensic" expert and how did the judge decide that the proffered expert did not qualify.

1) needs a link (note: this is about the case not about politics)

2) needs a link

 

[JusticeFever]

On July 25, 2007, a search warrant was issued for Michelle's SUV and this is why:

"Due to the situation with the child's bloodied footprints versus the clean condition of the child's feet when found; the confusion over the keys to the decedent's vehicle and how they came to be placed on the kitchen counter, and Meredith Fisher's keys being found on the hood of the decedent's vehicle, it is believed that the 2000 Lexus RX300 could have been used to transport the child from the scene. If this was the case, there may have been transference of blood from the scene to the vehicle using the child for conveyance"
_________________________________________________________________________________

 

[Madeleine74]

The links are at WRAL, nurse.

www.wral.com

For Both of them.

For item #1: http://www.wral.com/state-employee-group-s-ads-in-wake-da-race-called-dishonest/13592680/

"The State Employees Association of North Carolina has endorsed Assistant District Attorney Boz Zellinger in the Democratic primary but targeted his opponent, Lorrin Freeman, in a recent mailer." "
SEANC director Dana Cope said Thursday that his group is getting into the race because the Wake County district attorney prosecutes state government corruption cases. "It looks like bail bondsmen were trying to buy her office in order to make sweetheart deals among themselves. We can't stand that in state government," Cope said.


For item #2: (see Cooper trial threads and wral.com for the court's ruling)