GUILTY KY - Trey Zwicker, 14, beaten to death, Louisville, 11 May 2011 #2

[oceanblueeyes]

However JG confessed.

It is not unheard of where someone else takes the fall for someone.

 

[Cappuccino]

He was in court to give his plea. He gave a statement saying he was guilty and of the animal abuse and that was it. Short. The Judge accepted the plea after Gouker advised his lawyer he was going to plea even though the lawyer was totally opposed to it.

You could tell in the JY case they had no evidence against Gouker linking him to the crime when they questioned him. Only his words. They still couldn't get him to give details on how he did it. He said he couldn't remember.

There was no evidence entered that JG was involved in the murder of TZ. He didn't want anything to come out so he made sure he pled three days before his son's case started.

There were more things pointing away from him that he wasn't even there when TZ was murdered.

But his gangsta style performance fooled the jury into believing he was the one who did it. He told Josh's aunt at the first of this year he was going to save his son by pleading guilty himself.

IMO

What was Gouker in court for when he pleaded guilty to Trey's murder?

 

[aa9511]

OMG guys....so sad....I wasn't able to come on here over the weekend but heard the verdict and my heart just sank!!!!!!!!!! I feel so bad for the family...they got one but not the other....now one of their son's killers is walking away free to live his life.

I was thinking about this over the weekend...going through what the jury might have thought...and I think I understand where they came from. Even though it's obvious to me that Josh Young either did it or helped do it, they had no evidence on him other than people's words and the fact that he had to have basically done it by default, b/c Gouker's story of killing him/timeline/opportunities had many, many holes in it. But I guess just ruling out that Gouker didn't do it doesn't necessarily prove that Josh Young did it. And the witnesses....I'm assuming the jurors didn't really believe any of them or at least find them credible....so they could not really convict him based on someone's word that they might not even believe.

As far as Gouker's story...I was just thinking....he said he and Trey were watching tv or playing games or something, then he saw that Trey had eaten his plate of leftovers, and he got mad, lured him to the creek and killed him. So I don't get why the prosecution didn't press him on the fact that Amanda said that she got mad at Trey for being awake at 10:30 b/c it was a school day the next day....so why would she have let him stay awake until that late? Amanda was awake until 1:00....she would have seen Trey in the living room and send hiim upstairs back to bed. And if she did see him sitting there with Gouker, why would she lie about it?? I don't understand...did the jury not even believe Amanda?? It's so obvious that Gouker is lying about what happened that night. Why would he need to lie if he already confessed and is sentenced to life?? He's lying b/c he's hiding Josh Young's involvement in it, that's why.

Have there been any statement/interviews with any of the jurors?

 

[aa9511]

I just hope he goes back to his previous foster home, gets plenty of therapy, and has a chance to get an education and make something out of his life. He had everything going against him in life given who his parents were, but I'd like to thing he has a chance in life with the right support and environment.

Hmmm...nice idea, but here's what I see happening...

Josh Young will pretend to be a good kid for about a year. Then...slowly the visits to his dad will begin. Jail talks and what-not. This is gonna basically negate any benefit of his foster family. So in the end, he's gonna be as dangerous and before.

 

[aa9511]

Jason Riley ‏@jasonrileyCJ 23s
Prosecutor Elizabeth Jones Brown disappointed but not surprised. Says they knew it was a tough case. "Heartbroken" for Trey's family.

I don't mean to be the Monday-morning quarterback...but oh well here goes...the prosecution could have done a much better job of their questioning with Gouker on the stand. When they and the defense finished I was like, what?? That's it??? I mean, they had spent the ENTIRE time in the case up to that point talking about Gouker. And both sides still talked about him quite a bit after his testi-phony.

Prosecution should have pushed him more to give the details of the murder. They just let him get away with basically not saying much about the actual murder or how he did it, even though he had already "confessed" to it! I can imagine Juan doing it...can u imagine how many details Juan would have asked him? I mean, the murder was everything obviously. If he says he can't "remember," they should have just kept asking him details, his response to every one would have either been "I can't remember," or he would have give contradictory answers to show he was lying. A lot of "I can't remember" would also mean he's lying.

It wouldn't prove that Josh Young did it, but it would definately have made their case stronger if they had used Gouker's own testmony to show he was lying that he killed Trey all by himself or even killed him.

 

[aa9511]

LOL! They so dropped the ball this evening, huh? They must be bound pretty tightly with NG's contract, maybe a 'no cutting into her program unless it involves her' clause.

Actually didn't NG drop Josh Young case a while ago? Cause I would tune in to see and all she was talking about was the kidnapped girl...for the entire show...not one mention of the Josh Young trial....guess she didn't agree that HLN should be airing it?

 

[Cappuccino]

I don't mean to be the Monday-morning quarterback...but oh well here goes...the prosecution could have done a much better job of their questioning with Gouker on the stand. When they and the defense finished I was like, what?? That's it??? I mean, they had spent the ENTIRE time in the case up to that point talking about Gouker. And both sides still talked about him quite a bit after his testi-phony.

Prosecution should have pushed him more to give the details of the murder. They just let him get away with basically not saying much about the actual murder or how he did it, even though he had already "confessed" to it! I can imagine Juan doing it...can u imagine how many details Juan would have asked him? I mean, the murder was everything obviously. If he says he can't "remember," they should have just kept asking him details, his response to every one would have either been "I can't remember," or he would have give contradictory answers to show he was lying. A lot of "I can't remember" would also mean he's lying.

It wouldn't prove that Josh Young did it, but it would definately have made their case stronger if they had used Gouker's own testmony to show he was lying that he killed Trey all by himself or even killed him.

I have to agree with you here, that was such a major weakness in the prosecution's case that they didn't seem to know how to break Gouker's confession. Its not, I suppose, a task that comes naturally to a prosecutor - its more in their nature to sell the idea that all confessions are true, because of course most confessions are evidence for the prosecution.

It would have been a good idea if they'd hired an experienced defense attorney to advise them on how to go about that task. Undermining a confession in the eyes of a jury is really more a defense lawyer's job.

 

[aa9511]

I have to agree with you here, that was such a major weakness in the prosecution's case that they didn't seem to know how to break Gouker's confession. Its not, I suppose, a task that comes naturally to a prosecutor - its more in their nature to sell the idea that all confessions are true, because of course most confessions are evidence for the prosecution.

It would have been a good idea if they'd hired an experienced defense attorney to advise them on how to go about that task. Undermining a confession in the eyes of a jury is really more a defense lawyer's job.

OMG Cappuccino good point! I never thought about it like that, in terms of their actual training, experience, etc.. I remember during Jodi Arias trial, everyone (talking head's) were saying oh, Juan won't be able to question her correctly, prosecutor's don't have experience questioning the suspect...well he did a MASTERFUL job. I see now how if Jodi Arias had been in any other court in America, she probably would have gotten 2nd degree, manslaughter, or maybe they just might have even believed self-defense! He did such a good job. If he hadn't jumped all over the place and asked her DETAILED questions about everything, jury would have never caught her bluff.

They never asked him things like, step-by=step, tell me what you did after the cookout. Oh, okay Trey was with you on the couch...where was Amanda? What exactly did you say to get him to go to the ditch? Why couldn't you just smoke at home? How exactly, in detail step-by-step, did you kill him? What did you use to kill him? What did you tell Trey about why you took "the weapon" with you to the ditch? Etc, etc, etc....there were sooooooo many questions. They couldn't ask Josh Young, he didn't testify, but they could've asked Gouker, who was supposedly there and would know how everythng went down. So frustrating....

 

[aa9511]

Cappucino, I was just thinking after I wrote that, that maybe the prosection purposefully didn't want to "break" his confession, like you said, because they don't wanna risk him getting out of jail somehow. Like people are saying he's gonna say now that his confession was false and wants to go to trial now. Maybe he could show the judge his testimony from this trial to show he was lying. But I dunno, 'cause in that case he would WANT to say contradictory things to muddy the waters.

I'm so confused on all of this...I don't really blame the jury. But I guess if the purpose is to get the to the truth, then the prosecution had an obligation to ask him some detailed questions and call out his lies.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Cappucino, I was just thinking after I wrote that, that maybe the prosection purposefully didn't want to "break" his confession, like you said, because they don't wanna risk him getting out of jail somehow. Like people are saying he's gonna say now that his confession was false and wants to go to trial now. Maybe he could show the judge his testimony from this trial to show he was lying. But I dunno, 'cause in that case he would WANT to say contradictory things to muddy the waters.

I'm so confused on all of this...I don't really blame the jury. But I guess if the purpose is to get the to the truth, then the prosecution had an obligation to ask him some detailed questions and call out his lies.

The DA was willing to accept a plea from Gouker because they knew they did not have the evidence to prove he murdered Trey.

They firmly believed both of them conspired with each other but thought JY was the actual murderer of Trey and that is why they even refused to accept a Alford plea from him. Sometimes even if they win or lose ........they have to do the right thing.

She did try to pin him down on the details. He had only a blank look and was totally evasive saying he couldn't remember one detail about the actual murder ...not even the time......... even though he had given LE exact timelines on when certain things happened prior to the murder that night. He conveniently had the Jodi Arias fog roll in. That way she couldn't catch him in lies that did not match up with the timeline or the forensic evidence. He is a seasoned felon who was as slippery as an eel. It worked and ..........his guilty son got off.

IMO

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Defendants' Incentives for Accepting Plea Bargains

Keeping others out of the case. Some defendants plead guilty to take the blame (sometimes called the "rap") for someone else.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/plea-bargains-defendants-incentives-29732.html

 

[CUCKOOHEAD]

IMO another murderer walks off scott free. I wonder if JG will pick up the pace on his appeals.

At his age I don't see Josh Young changing his spots. I hope we won't hear about another awful crime with his name attached to it. If I were those foster parents I would sleep with my bedroom door locked at night and a loaded shotgun within reach.

I can't believe how callous that jury was to eat pizza before freeing JY. If they had found him guilty then I could understand that they may have wanted to put off having to send him to prison but if they had found him NG then set him free asap and eat your pizza afterwards.

What are the chances you will get away with murder in the USA? I'd say since I started watching trails live 50% are found not guilty. Casey Anthony, Levi Chavez and now Josh Young.

Just don't leave any DNA to tie you to the crime. Heck this trial has proven you don't even have to keep your big mouth shut so feel free to blab to whoever you want.

 

[MissJ]

I don't have any idea who did what but I do not believe JG was in any way innocent of any involvement. Plus he is not the kind of man who would fall on the sword for anyone if he was totally innocent. I know the area where this all happened and its JMO the jury didn't believe some of the witnesses. Many juries in KY like to convict if they have a shred of evidence. JMO

 

[aa9511]

The DA was willing to accept a plea from Gouker because they knew they did not have the evidence to prove he murdered Trey.

They firmly believed both of them conspired with each other but thought JY was the actual murderer of Trey and that is why they even refused to accept a Alford plea from him. Sometimes even if they win or lose ........they have to do the right thing.

She did try to pin him down on the details. He had only a blank look and was totally evasive saying he couldn't remember one detail about the actual murder ...not even the time......... even though he had given LE exact timelines on when certain things happened prior to the murder that night. He conveniently had the Jodi Arias fog roll in. That way she couldn't catch him in lies that did not match up with the timeline or the forensic evidence. He is a seasoned felon who was as slippery as an eel. It worked and ..........his guilty son got off.

IMO

Hi OceanBlue! I can't wait until we hear from some jurors...if they ever talk, that is.

She did try to pin him on some details, yes, but then when he was evasive, she went to reading his previous confession back to him....his own words...and he could just say "yeah, yeah, I said that." I don't know what the point of that was. I mean, he had already said it. She didn't really, IMO, press him on a lot of the holes in his story.

I don't know even know if that would have made a difference, though. Basically the jury just did not believe anyone, IMO.

 

[aa9511]

One more thing...I realize a lot of you have moved on, but I am still thinking about this case!...well one more thing is that why didn't LE ask Gouker what he was wearing DURING the cookout, and ask others like Amanda, Cassie, John, Amanda's brother, to confirm it. Even if it was a month after the murder, they might have remembered what he was wearing. That way they could see if he was wearing the 34 red jersey the entire night, or if he changed. I don't see Gouker as the kind of guy who would change just 'cause his clothes smelled like BBQ.

 

[cubbeegirl]

I dont know who did what in this case, but
I can say that I personally had a hard time
Finding most of the witnesses credible except
For the detectives , ME and Treys father.
That includes Amanda.
This case was Deliverance come to life IMO
I am curious to find out if the jury just felt
That they could not convict due to lack
Of evidence ?

 

[Sydni]

just a quick observation here. I just watched on HLN a couple of minutes ago ... the verdict and when they all stood up, the defense attorneys kinda looked a little shell shocked to me .. almost like they were not pleased with getting this guy off. Especially the two on the left of JY. The anorexic short-blonde hair attorney on the right of the screen seemed a bit more "accepting" of the verdict.

IDK .. I am really, really, really disappointed in our justice system these days. There have been so many "wrong" verdicts in my opinion, especially in these high profile cases. It seems to me that the system is set up to protect the "criminal" (of course it has to be), but the way the laws are written it almost does NOT allow for jurors to use their common sense. I understand "reasonable doubt" and that whole concept, but I do NOT understand when jurors do NOT use common sense (ie. the Caylee Anthony "murder"). The jurors wanted a video to show how little Caylee died even though it was obvious that she died and was disposed of by her mother. I just don't get it sometimes.

Sorry Mods ... I got a little off topic. But I am just so frustrated by the "jury system" is working and the way the laws are written. :banghead:

MOO

 

[annmarie62]

...looks like I'm in the minority here, but I believe JY is innocent (has, in fact, never had a real chance in life once Gouker took him from his foster parents) and I believe he deserves a chance to have a real life. Only time will tell what he does with this life, but Jesus knows I am praying for and have hope in my heart for this boy. He has been through hell. Enough already.

 

[cubbeegirl]

Annmarie , I joined in late to the party , but from what I had seen
Of the trial and researched online I am inclined to agree with you,
But then again I am just not sure what happened, i dont
Think I could have voted for guilty if I were on that jury.
One big reason being I simply did not find any of their witnesses
Credible. And I will go one further and say that I think the
Mother knows more than she is saying and she is still scared
To death of Gauker and his cohorts. I sure would be !

 

[Hopeful One]

After Dark (I know, I know) covering this now. They have home video of JG and and JY when he was little. JG is holding JY, leans over to "grandma" (I think) and tells JY to "pop her in the mouth.

Juror on also. He's remaining anonymous. He and some jurors think JY "may have been aware of the situation" and brought into it unknowingly. A scenario they considered was Trey was sneaking out with JY and JG used that opportunity to kill Trey. He believes JG killed Trey.

Juror says the moment on the stand where JG says he was "covered in Trey" the night of the murder was like JG was reliving that moment. He believed it.