I'm back, and aiming to be on my best behavior.
I felt such relief last Monday afternoon. Finally, a jury reached the only unanimous verdict 12 people would ever find in this case. Like many in the Triangle region and even beyond, I've followed this case since day 1. Last year's mistrial was shocking, especially that 8 people would have voted not guilty. Those who feel so strongly about this case must never forget it took 4 people to hang that jury, and you can imagine it was a hard thing to not waiver in their conviction. They will never receive the public commendation, but we are grateful.
As to some post-verdict reaction. Judge Stephens' comments in denying the motion to set aside were concise and so very powerful. He crystallized it so well in noting that none of Jason and Michelle Young would've been surprised if law enforcement found Jason had beaten her badly but not killed her. Why then indeed, was it a surprise that his violence in fact killed Michelle? I doubt Jason has ever felt a shred of remorse for what he did. He is a sociopath, and Judge Stephens hinted at this as well. I found it interesting as well that in sentencing him, he did not say "Mr. Young, please stand up..." It was just, "Jason Young,..." I.e., I will not dignify you with the title of "Mr. Young".
Finally, I rewatched the defense closing arguments last week. In hindsight it is very easy to assess but I would argue that if you knew nothing about this case and only watched the defense's closing, you would vote guilty. As strong as Klinkosum and Collins were as a team, in the end they had an unwinnable case because their client was so clearly guilty. When I heard them both argue that the killer spent time with Cassidy and cleaned her up, and both argue that Jason Young's shoe may have been present, I put myself in a juror's position. The defendant's client tells you the killer stayed with Cassidy for some time. They tried to sell the idea that Jason would not have had time to commit the crime and get back to Virginia. That was just a bad tactical decision. I don't even listen to the timeline argument relative to the idea that the defendant's own attorney has the killer tending to a 2-year-old child. A random killer might not have hurt her, but no sensible argument can be made that a random killer would clean the child and care for her in any way unless he knew and cared for that child. They admit his shoe may have left the print. As a juror, I would have seen Young's prior testimony that the shoes had been donated to Goodwill.
Now as for the misconduct probe, I hope some of you saw the facebook page of the woman in the Burlington area who started all this. It was down fast last week after the news came out. This woman is obviously a kook. Her entire facebook wall was about criminal cases that involved the Triad. Jason's Cracker Barrel stop and references to driving through Burlington were fairly frequent in the trial. I have zero doubt whatsoever that any juror was talking with a darn hairdresser. And similarly that any juror would be running their mouth at a bar to some stranger. It'd be quite easy for someone to make up lies like that though. A real headscratcher to see people cling to the lamest of possible technicalities, that are transparently false. Laughably false if this weren't a serious matter. I hope the SBI will charge someone following the investigation. Someone should be made an example.
In the end, thank goodness that justice was served. Jason Young, convicted and locked away forever.
