SBI probe into possible juror misconduct

[nursebeeme]

peeps, we are NOT sleuthing JR.. thanks

 

[knicksgal1]

Why would an alleged friend of the hairdresser who is supposedly on the jury be a supporter of Jason if she voted guilty? I don't get that. Am I missing something?

It is my opinion that there is no hairdresser and no contact with a juror based on reading some additional information in a cached version of wral facebook yesterday. Google was helpful.

 

[~n/t~]

It is my opinion that there is no hairdresser and no contact with a juror based on reading
Some additional information in a cached version of weal facebook yesterday. Googl was helpful.

Are you saying this is a hoax?

 

[knicksgal1]

Are you saying this is a hoax?

It is my opinion that it is a hoax. I will be very upset if I am wrong.

 

[Wolfpack]

Are you saying this is a hoax?

That's exactly what quite a few people believe. Many people post things on the internet without regard for truthfulness, or the consequences. I have no idea if this poster was making things up, or if she truly believed her hairdresser was telling the truth (and the hairdresser was making things up), or if the hairdresser thought she was being honest, but SHE was lied to. There are many people down the line, and this is the PERFECT example of why hearsay is such a problem as evidence.

Hopefully it won't take long for the SBI to get to the bottom of this.

 

[gritguy]

Floating Goth Facebook posters give jY and supporters hope!

 

[Talina]

Curious what the locals there with knowledge of how SBI works on this sort of investigation, how long should we expect them to come to a conclusion? Is this something that will get priority or just get to it when they can sort of thing?

 

[fran]

Please!

No quotes and that INCLUDES photos and snap-shots, without a link. All posts without a link where it's required, will be removed.

Let's not start calling the jurors names. That's not a proper way to treat this group of 12 jurors who sacrificed their valuable time to serve their civic duty.

As of this moment, everything is speculation. Who knows if these allegations are true. But the SBI will find out, you can be assured of that.

Until it's proven otherwise, these are ALLEGATIONS.

Jason Young is a convicted murderer and isn't going anywhere in the near future, except behind bars.

fran

 

[Mama-cita]

It is my opinion that it is a hoax. I will be very upset if I am wrong.

I agree knicksgal. I strongly believe it is a hoax. Unfortunately people are emboldened by the "anonymity" of the internet, even if they use their real name. People can make whatever claims they want to and they are not subject to scrutiny. Unfortunately as well, there are many unstable people
Out there who are dying to feel important. <modsnip>

 

[Madeleine74]

(some) People are idiots. And idiots have computers and Internet access and Facebook accounts. The SBI still has to investigate it even though it might be some drooling idiot just gossiping. They'll figure it out. If it's someone who wants attention, they'll get it. If some juror broke the rules they'll get a judicial smack down.

 

[gracielee]

(some) People are idiots. And idiots have computers and Internet access and Facebook accounts. The SBI still has to investigate it even though it might be some drooling idiot just gossiping. They'll figure it out. If it's someone who wants attention, they'll get it. If some juror broke the rules they'll get a judicial smack down.

All anyone has to do to understand that is read on those golo boards a bit. If that's all one read during trials, people would think raleigh was filled with raving lunatics. Like Maddie said, if it's not gossip, it will be discovered. And if it is gossip, hopefully those involved will be dealt with severely. I know this is their facebook page, but I have a facebook account and steer clear of the comments on WRAL stories because I've found the same to be true of those posters.

 

[kljohnson0458]

Mornin' sweetpea.

Hey there. Thanks for the heads up last night. I came over to find out what I missed yesterday.

 

[borndem]

Maybe nothing at all happened like what is being alleged by the person who posted on facebook.

Maybe nothing at all intimidated the jurors (as has been suggested) and the process with all its integrity shines brightly down upon this verdict.

I certain did not at all get the impression that the 3 jurors that spoke out yesterday were intimidated. I felt they were humbled by the process they had just participated in and took it very seriously.

At this point, I am giving all of the jurors the benefit of the doubt and will not participate in any speculation regarding misconduct by any of them. I think, without hesitation, they have earned that consideration by what they have done for the past 4+ weeks for this trial. Further, I think at this point, not one of them has done a thing to deserve anyone questioning their integrity as it pertains to their behavior or intentions on this jury.

IMO

Bravo! Talina!

These jurors knew what they were "in for" well before they were sworn as the official jury of 16. They knew it would take -- what were they told? -- 4--6 weeks, IIRC. They knew the restrictions, knew that this trial would be a hardship on himself/herself and the families, co-workers, possibly neighbors, social friends, church friends, etc., etc. This was not going to be a walk in the park or to be looked at as entertainment or mere adventure.

I have read comments from trial attorneys -- both sides -- who say they find that juries get very possessive and proud of what they do. The jurors are the only ones besides the trial principals who see and hear it all, and they know that no one from the outside knows more than they do(these comments are a general discussion about jurors -- not specific to this case, be assured).

And jurors are very guarded about this "thing" that they collectively possess. And they bond with each other in many cases, and again, are proud and private about what they know and do. For this reason, I think, especially with this jury so far along in the process, that none of them would do anything to take this "thing" away from them, or do anything to look ignorant, irresponsible, or nonchalant about their duty.

In short, I think it is at best someone who is not related to this case at all trying to look like a bigshot, or at worst, someone from the outside who is trying to sabotage the good job that this jury performed. I, too, call BS. JMO.

 

[Luna24]

The 9/3, 10/2, 11/1, 12/0 all happened on MONDAY. Are we to believe a juror texted during Monday's deliberations, to their HAIRDRESSER to give them a status update? That's preposterous. Also people are saying "ooh the Facebook posts got the numbers right" (which actually they didn't but anyway) but there are only 6 possible ways the vote can go with 12 people. You take out 12/0(0/12)(since they hadn't decided yet) and you have only 5 ways. Not a huge coincidence IMO

I was about to post the same thing mama-cita - thanks for saving me some typing.

 

[Luna24]

That's exactly what quite a few people believe. Many people post things on the internet without regard for truthfulness, or the consequences. I have no idea if this poster was making things up, or if she truly believed her hairdresser was telling the truth (and the hairdresser was making things up), or if the hairdresser thought she was being honest, but SHE was lied to. There are many people down the line, and this is the PERFECT example of why hearsay is such a problem as evidence.

Hopefully it won't take long for the SBI to get to the bottom of this.

I agree WP...and I am one of those people that thinks it's a hoax...it could be someone who wanted to seem important to their friends that they were "in the know" especially the way her FB page read and she comments on several trials/local news happenings. It could also be someone that knows JY - his sister and several friends posted things that were untrue after the crime...

in this day of social media, people think they are "anonymous" but I'm thinking it should be somewhat easy for the investigators to prove this true or false. While they're doing so, I'll take what Judge Stephens said in his letters because he said it's not unusual and he doesn't think it's anything but he is right to have it investigated..

JMHO...

 

[AlwaysShocked]

"in this day of social media, people think they are "anonymous" but I'm thinking it should be somewhat easy for the investigators to prove this true or false"

Hard to believe that anyone who has watched a murder trial within the past 5 years or so could continue to think they are "anonymous" when using any kind of an electronic device or posting on the internet.

Even the programs that redirect an IPS address show up at the very least as an IPS redirection program having been used. So theoretically, one could use such a program but investigators can tell that this type of a program has been used.

Hoax IMO

 

[Luna24]

"in this day of social media, people think they are "anonymous" but I'm thinking it should be somewhat easy for the investigators to prove this true or false"

Hard to believe that anyone who has watched a murder trial within the past 5 years or so could continue to think they are "anonymous" when using any kind of an electronic device or posting on the internet.

Even the programs that redirect an IPS address show up at the very least as an IPS redirection program having been used. So theoretically, one could use such a program but investigators can tell that this type of a program has been used.

Hoax IMO

BBM

I know what you mean AS but people can be very naive especially if they were never into message boards, etc for years before facebook became popular...hoping this is proven out either way very soon. I can't imagine it feels good for the jurors if they didn't do anything wrong to have someone looking at them suspiciously because of some false claims if that's what happened.

 

[MyBelle]

"in this day of social media, people think they are "anonymous" but I'm thinking it should be somewhat easy for the investigators to prove this true or false"

Hard to believe that anyone who has watched a murder trial within the past 5 years or so could continue to think they are "anonymous" when using any kind of an electronic device or posting on the internet.

Even the programs that redirect an IPS address show up at the very least as an IPS redirection program having been used. So theoretically, one could use such a program but investigators can tell that this type of a program has been used.

Hoax IMO

I think it is more likely the person(s) responsible held the false assumption that such postings would not "hurt" anything because deliberations were started. The Judge made it clear from the very beginning such conduct would not be tolerated. Mistrial is a given at this point.

JMO

 

[Madeleine74]

The FB poster claimed some portion of the jury was deadlocked. According to the jury they were never deadlocked, one person who was NG on Fri quickly went from NG to undecided then G, and it sounded like the process flowed until all 12 came to G.

Considering most of these voting changes happened over the course of about 5 to 6 hrs on Monday, up until about 3:30pm, that narrows the time fame for a juror's phone to be checked to breaks and lunch, assuming the info that no juror had their cell phone out & on during deliberations is accurate.

Sounded like the jury was working, not stuck and not deadlocked. Of course the FB person could have interpreted that info as "ng" and "deadlocked."

Stay tuned...

 

[SteelerGirl43]

Well, someone on this very forum claimed to know one of the alternates... They never claimed the person gave out any information, but how do we know.... I say it needs to be investigated....

I'm pretty sure if one of you or one of ur loved ones was on trial or had been on trial you would be all upset & want it investigated...