State vs. Jason Lynn Young 02-29-12

[Wolfpack]

I don't recall anybody discussing this yesterday during PY's testimony.....The fact she said JY had 2 wedding bands (a dress one and a regular one). I've heard of women (wealthy, rich women with huge diamonds) doing that, but not men. And JY was a white collar worker, so it's not like he had to worry about doing construction work and damaging the ring. I thought that was a bit odd.

I don't think it's all that uncommon here. Most of the men in my circle (not wealthy) have two bands. My husband is the only one in our group that doesn't, and he's asked me for a dressier band. Usually a tungsten carbide or similar choice for daily wear, and a 14k or platinum for dress wear. Certainly not everyone, but it doesn't stick out as an oddity either.

 

[Bottle Cap]

Thanks for clarifying that this was an accident. We just do not know whether she was wearing a seatbelt or not. Don't think they can prove that either way. MOO

It can't be proven, but there IS someone who knows whether this was an accident or otherwise. That he's on trial for the murder of his wife and baby speaks volumes, unless you believe in coincidence.

I do not, and will happily state that I 100% believe he engineered the crash.

 

[nursebeeme]

Mister nurse has four wedding bands:



1) the clauddagh (that he just HAD to have)
2) the first one I got him (currently in the mud in Bosnia: he lost it there during deployment)
3) the one to replace the Bosnia one
4) another dressier one

 

[Talina]

I'd be very surprised if the jury spends any amount of time at all discussing the car accident. It's one of those things that could make you go "hmmm" and start an interesting discussion (as evidenced in the discussion that has taken place on this board) but as far as does it provide a crucial piece of the puzzle in the murder case against JY? I don't think so.

IMO

 

[Talina]

Interesting comments about the multiple wedding bands.

I've never known any man to have more than one wedding band. (by that I mean one at at time). I've known men to have had to replace a band for a variety of reasons but never owning more than one at a time.

 

[fredwomble]

Re the accident and the trooper's testimony. I absolutely believe he testified what he believed to be factual, and by all appearances, looked to be just that - an accident. No reason for him in that moment to suspect anything, nor anyone else to suspect anything either. No reason for the prosecution to call him in my opinion, they weren't going to change his accident report -- and again, to be clear, there would have been no reason for him to record it any other way than he did.

That doesn't mean Jason didn't manipulate (to quote Brian Ambrose) the situation to influence the accident report. I.e., if he was the only one who spoke to the trooper or he and Michelle together agreed to state she was wearing her seat belt and she later told a coworker/Shelly Schaad a different story, that's what is telling to me. That is not a burden that the trooper bears -- he reported on the facts as he knew them right then.

Edit to add: I also agree with the statements that this will likely have minimal if any impact on the jury. It does to me, but I've been very familiar with this case, and who Jason Young is, since 2006.

 

[CeeKer]

Trial's on.

 

[CeeKer]

They're playing the video they couldn't get to work yesterday.

 

[jrb0124]

DT is showing the videos of the door mechanics, then we are moving on to the next witness.

 

[BrownRice]

Riveting video

 

[jrb0124]

Okay, so this video shows that the door would close and the latch would not catch at times even though it sounded like it did.

 

[jrb0124]

Spivey called, lets see if they talk about the FH

 

[CeeKer]

Maybe I haven't had enough coffee or I was up too late reading the thread but he was on the inside of the room? Why wouldn't he do it from the outside?

 

[gritguy]

Ok, so if you barely let a door close, it sometimes might not latch. Got it.

That doesn't any in way change that it makes no sense to testify, as JY did, that he purposefully left his keycard in his room. In fact, the PI testified earlier he DID take his keycard, in case the door locked, like anyone else would.

Interesting now, since the DT is calling Det. Spivey. It appears they will go after eyewitness testimony to cars seen that morning, and that should be the crux of the DT presentation from what I've heard coming

 

[luckyme]

Spivey called, lets see if they talk about the FH

AND!!! a big fat objection!!! LOL :seeya:

 

[cody100]

I think this is a little housekeeping chore to clear up Ms. Hemsley's testimony. She said it was on another street.

 

[gritguy]

Maybe I haven't had enough coffee or I was up too late reading the thread but he was on the inside of the room? Why wouldn't he do it from the outside?

IMO, too easy to get locked out and you'd have to use the keycard to get back in and that would look quite bad. Plus, since the failure to latch was when the door was allowed to lightly self close after only a few inches of movement by its self closure, it probably would latch all the time if you closed the door from the outside by pulling the latch like people do. Like a screen door. If you hold a screen door, that otherwise normally closes, open an inch or two, you probably will get to fail to latch sometimes.

 

[jrb0124]

Yesterday FH testified to all of these things:

1-around 6:15 she saw a car facing out parked at the bottom of the Young driveway
2-the house was where MY lived
3-the house was on Enchanted Oaks
4-the house was not on Birchleaf
5-Spivey took her to the house where she had seen the car

Not all 5 can be accurate, so DT will try and get Spivey to support their assertion that FH was accurate with 1,2 & 5.

 

[jrb0124]

HC objecting to Spivey answering several questions about where FH said she saw the car - overruled on each one.

 

[CeeKer]

Yeah I don't think this had any value. Sometimes in hotels the airflow in the hall and/or the pitch of the door would make the results different. I did like his tie though.