State vs. Jason Lynn Young 2-20-2012

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Geez, this went downhill.
it is now clear as mud where that pullover was.

The jury was left to believe he could have been wearing the pullover at MF's
 
Is it the defense theory that certain clothes were never found because he was wearing them when he returned from Brevard and they were never requested? That would certainly explain why police don't have them.
 
There's pictures of him arriving on the scene. There's statements from his mom too about his clothes, etc.

So glad JY testified already.

Hope he tries his bs again.

Don't think he's gonna have a second chance to fool a jury. This da has his number!

JMHO
fran
 
So much of this evidence wasn't included in the last trial ... this is starting to look like a very tight case.

I agree. I'm trying not to make up my mind until the defense has had their say, but the evidence is making that increasingly difficult.
 
Wasn't it a huge oversight not to have him turn over his clothes and SHOES that he was wearing when he returned to Raleigh?
 
Is it the defense theory that certain clothes were never found because he was wearing them when he returned from Brevard and they were never requested? That would certainly explain why police don't have them.

So where are they now? They searched for them at different places.
 
So where are they now? They searched for them at different places.

They searched for them in 2008, the murder was more than a year earlier ... anything could have happened to them.
 
does anyone know about how much longer this trial should last?
 
Common sense would tell me that he did not have on the same clothes when he arrived in Raleigh that he had on the night before at the HI that is seen on the video there as well as at the CB.

He'd been to a business meeting that morning at a hospital, drove from there (per his own testimony) to another hopeful meeting at a different hospital, then drove from there to his mothers house. I would expect that he had on his business clothes at that point, not the clothes he'd had on 24 hrs earlier.

To suggest that LE does not have those clothes seen in the video because he was wearing them, and not his business meeting clothes, defies logic. But if he did, then where are his clothes he wore to the business meetings? Were those part of the clothing items seized from the confiscated vehicle and luggage? He couldn't have been wearing both sets of clothes. One or the other and then what he didn't have on was in the luggage. Or should have been.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out there is missing clothing. All you have to do is follow the pieces of the puzzle through deductive reasoning.

IMO
 
Speaking of fans...

:::crickets:::

I'm not exactly a fan of JY (and admittedly haven't been able to watch much today) but unless they've introduced some new evidence to prove that he left the hotel, I still think they will end up with a hung jury at best, or outright acquittal.

Still don't buy the gas station testimony and that is the only thing that would have proved that he left his hotel - unless they've introduced something else today. Also the orbital hush puppy shoe ID is fairly weak - I couldn't convict someone based on that. (JMO, obviously)

For me it's not about whether or not he did this (my opinion is that I have no idea what the heck happened that night) but whether or not they can prove that he left the hotel grounds that night.
 
Common sense would tell me that he did not have on the same clothes when he arrived in Raleigh that he had on the night before at the HI that is seen on the video there as well as at the CB.

He'd been to a business meeting that morning at a hospital, drove from there (per his own testimony) to another hopeful meeting at a different hospital, then drove from there to his mothers house. I would expect that he had on his business clothes at that point, not the clothes he'd had on 24 hrs earlier.

To suggest that LE does not have those clothes seen in the video because he was wearing them, and not his business meeting clothes, defies logic. But if he did, then where are his clothes he wore to the business meetings? Were those part of the clothing items seized from the confiscated vehicle and luggage?

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out there is missing clothing. All you have to do is follow the pieces of the puzzle through deductive reasoning.

IMO

Good questions. Do we know what clothes were taken? I know I change out of my business attire before driving home for a long trip. But if his dress slacks and shoes weren't in his suitcase, then that raises exactly the point you are making.
 
Yep, things plunged downhill late this afternoon. What a huge mistake not to request those clothes. Klink seized that opening.
 
I'm not exactly a fan of JY (and admittedly haven't been able to watch much today) but unless they've introduced some new evidence to prove that he left the hotel, I still think they will end up with a hung jury at best, or outright acquittal.

Still don't buy the gas station testimony and that is the only thing that would have proved that he left his hotel - unless they've introduced something else today. Also the orbital hush puppy shoe ID is fairly weak - I couldn't convict someone based on that. (JMO, obviously)

For me it's not about whether or not he did this (my opinion is that I have no idea what the heck happened that night) but whether or not they can prove that he left the hotel grounds that night.

I think that testimony today further discredited the gas station attendant so there's still a big problem with gas and mileage.
 
I think that testimony today further discredited the gas station attendant so there's still a big problem with gas and mileage.

How so? I missed anything regarding the gas station attendant today.
 
Is it the defense theory that certain clothes were never found because he was wearing them when he returned from Brevard and they were never requested? That would certainly explain why police don't have them.

He was wearing a shirt and tie and had his suit jacket over his shoulder.
Mama then put the cream sweater on him in the car (recovered later)

LF and MF saw him when he came in, so he can't claim he was wearing the dark pullover.
 
They searched for them in 2008, the murder was more than a year earlier ... anything could have happened to them.

As posted above my previous post, the testimony shows that he wasn't wearing that particular shirt, so again, where could it be?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
97
Guests online
2,166
Total visitors
2,263

Forum statistics

Threads
599,730
Messages
18,098,771
Members
230,917
Latest member
CP95
Back
Top