Jason Young to get new trial

[MyBelle]

He killed her. There is no doubt. I hope he hears guilty again and soon.

He didn't receive a fair trial therefore there is doubt and plenty of it, imo.

 

[jova33]

I don't think he was in a rage until the beating started. I think it was well thought out for the most part.

That's the problem, rage killings aren't planned.

Sent from your mom's smartphone

 

[sunshine05]

Yet you believe 16 witnesses 'saw' Nancy Cooper running, even though there was no confirmed sighting of her outside running by anyone who actually knew her.

Are we supposed to discuss other cases here? I don't know if all 16 people saw her but 16 people felt the woman they saw looked enough like her that they phoned police. That is pretty telling to me. I thought it was actually funny that police said "no one who knew her". What is the purpose of the flyers at all? They are for people who saw the missing person, not for people who knew her. It would be highly unlikely that a person who knew would just so happen to be out and about at 7AM and see her, though it could have happened. It doesn't in any way discount the 16 people though. That's a lot of people who felt that they saw her. What if half of them really did? Daniels told a witness that he received information from people who felt 150% certain it was Nancy.



I found Gracie credible in what she told. She described her 5'11" son as "little taller than me." She described her 6' husband as "little taller than me." She seems to use that term fairly often. So that didn't bother me when I heard her use it to describe others with known heights. Okay, so you accept the 5'11 description as "a little taller than me?" There is nothing I can say to convince you that her testimony wasn't the least bit credible. She didn't even know what color his hair was. Balding? It is shameful that the prosecutors put a witness like this on the stand.

I'm going by her trial testimony. I believe she absolutely had an encounter that morning @ 5:30am. She described what she saw, what was said to her, and why she remembered the encounter. She remembered the details of the cash transaction, there was a receipt that corroborated what she said, she remembered what the guy drove in terms of it being a light SUV, she remembered the guy pushing the button at the pump multiple times and describing how she ignored those; she had what I consider a normal recollection of her encounter. Yet she didn't remember that there were transactions a minute after the encounter. Again, the description is a deal killer for me. That added to the gas mileage and receipts as he would have run out of gas before King. How do you explain that one?

According to the testimony, this wasn't a person she waved at as he went by--she had to deal with this guy who cussed her out and threw the $20 at her and no one else, other than 1 drunk woman months before, had ever treated her that way. Yes, she is believable to me, especially as there is a cash receipt that also shows a $15 transaction occurred at the same time, with a $20 used to pay and she had an overage of $5. According to testimony she was able to hold down a job, she was trusted to properly do that job, she was able to follow the rules of her job and provide proper service and transactions and continue to do that consistently. I don't recall seeing the transaction in evidence with a $20 and $5 change issued. Was it?

However, even if I completely throw out Gracie's testimony and pretend she doesn't exist and wipe clean that whole encounter, that doesn't change the totality of the evidence in allowing me to determine guilt BARD. Gracie is just a bit of icing on the cake. She's not the cake, IMO.

What else is there? They certainly did not prove their case.

 

[dgfred]

That's the problem, rage killings aren't planned.

Sent from your mom's smartphone

Not to me. Well planned, tried to strangle, fought hard, (rage) beat head in.

That is the un-planned part IMO.

Then he had some extra stuff to do (dog, clean child, get to bed) that made him rage again at Gracie because his time-table (plans) were getting messed up.

 

[sunshine05]

So 2 five-gallon gas containers.

Now you are being mean to me... if there was another station I knew of I would have reported him long ago

Police checked every single gas station along his route. Believe me, if he had stopped for additional gas, they would have found it.

 

[MyBelle]

Of course I was commenting on the Young case in the Young thread.

Evidence submitted doesn't mean it proved what they wanted it to prove IMO.

Eyewitness testimony didn't seem to be taken over other evidence that he did do it.

If they had proved he wasn't in Raleigh... he would have been found innocent.

There is still zero motive for anyone else IMO.

Evidence is still evidence and it was submitted at both trials. I was responding to your inaccurate comment "That is an intruder that doesn't leave any evidence or have any motive. Just beat a womans head in for the heck of it... and leave the child and dog ok. Maybe just a woman hater?


A motive is not evidence.

JMO

 

[sunshine05]

Not to me. Well planned, tried to strangle, fought hard, (rage) beat head in.

That is the un-planned part IMO.

Then he had some extra stuff to do (dog, clean child, get to bed) that made him rage again at Gracie because his time-table (plans) were getting messed up.

What do you propose he did with the dog? According the MF he was loose in the house. (Yet no dog waste or bloody prints were found anywhere but no one wants to talk about how that could be possible)

 

[dgfred]

You mean nobody remembered him. If he has the gas in cans too... I don't know. But I do believe you

 

[jova33]

Not to me. Well planned, tried to strangle, fought hard, (rage) beat head in.

That is the un-planned part IMO.

Then he had some extra stuff to do (dog, clean child, get to bed) that made him rage again at Gracie because his time-table (plans) were getting messed up.

Ok, how'd he do it without running out of gas?

Edit: there's no evidence of gas cans. The police actually looked for evidence of gas cans. But even if he did have two five gallon gas cans, where did he fill them up at?

Sent from your mom's smartphone

 

[dgfred]

What do you propose he did with the dog? According the MF he was loose in the house. (Yet no dog waste or bloody prints were found anywhere but no one wants to talk about how that could be possible)

My dog stays mostly where I tell her to. Was the dog allowed upstairs?

I spank her too if she leaves waste in the house... but I can't spank her hard. I love her too much. She is a 13 year old mini-weiner dog named Eve.

 

[dgfred]

Evidence is still evidence and it was submitted at both trials. I was responding to your inaccurate comment "That is an intruder that doesn't leave any evidence or have any motive. Just beat a womans head in for the heck of it... and leave the child and dog ok. Maybe just a woman hater?


A motive is not evidence.

JMO

Not good evidence if the jury doesn't believe it.

"A motive is not evidence" - thanks for letting me know. Jeez.

 

[dgfred]

Ok, how'd he do it without running out of gas?

Edit: there's no evidence of gas cans. The police actually looked for evidence of gas cans. But even if he did have two five gallon gas cans, where did he fill them up at?

Sent from your mom's smartphone

Except for Gracie and the hotel 'things' there is no evidence at all that he made the trip... I was just thinking of different possibilities.

If you have plastic/tarp under the cans what evidence is there going to be of them?

Could he have had them ready for the trip beforehand???

 

[MyBelle]

What do you mean? Well obviously the second jury completely ignored these inconsistencies in the states theory, so yes, he did get a guilty verdict in spite of compelling evidence that he couldn't have possibly made the drive without running out of gas.

http://youtu.be/--Olb3pkoLw

Sent from your mom's smartphone

the second jury completely ignored a huge quantity of compelling evidence. Instead, they obviously went on emotional conjecture which is a real shame for the children in these cases.

JMO

 

[dgfred]

Really? Even if they got it right?

 

[MyBelle]

My dog stays mostly where I tell her to. Was the dog allowed upstairs?

I spank her too if she leaves waste in the house... but I can't spank her hard. I love her too much. She is a 13 year old mini-weiner dog named Eve.

fyi: The dog's bed was in the master bedroom.

 

[dgfred]

Once again I am only mentioning different ideas/speculations... sunshine posted that nobody wanted to talk about the dog so I was trying.

 

[jova33]

Really? Even if they got it right?

My point all along has been, even if he did do it, which no one really knows, he should've never been convicted on the evidence presented in court.

Sent from your mom's smartphone

 

[jova33]

Except for Gracie and the hotel 'things' there is no evidence at all that he made the trip... I was just thinking of different possibilities.

If you have plastic/tarp under the cans what evidence is there going to be of them?

Could he have had them ready for the trip beforehand???

That seems like a pretty fancy shopping list. One tarp, two five gallon gas cans, and a blunt object like a baseball bat...

Sent from your mom's smartphone

 

[dgfred]

Not to me. I have always thought it was the lamp. Heck, the two gas cans could fit in the back seat.

 

[Madeleine74]

Had the jury voted a different way, unanimously, they likely would have been proclaimed to be "brilliant" by those who wanted JY to be found not guilty. A jury tends to be respected by people who agree with their verdict and castigated by those who don't.

I think the jury did the job they were asked to do when they took their oath. They were given the responsibility of deciding guilty or not guilty based on if the state met the legal burden of BARD after sitting there and watching/hearing dozens of witnesses. They came to a unanimous decision. I'd say they found the evidence compelling based on that decision.

If there's a better system it hasn't been shown. Let only judges decide? Get professional jurors? Give a pass for the first spousal murder? (but next time, Mister/Missus you are so going to prison!).