State vs Jason Lynn Young 2-28-12

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
And now she just said that their salaries were quite good. I just feel like she says one thing and then later changes her story, it seems subtle but I it bugs me. To me that is not being truthful. IMHO

I caught that too. Just imagine how the jury sees it? Sitting right there!

I was a little late this a.m., court already in session. I'm struck by the different attitude of the witness from yesterday. I'm sure the jury can see that as well.

JMHO
fran
 
Pointless?? Jurors are probably thinking that mommy painted a fairy tale story yesterday about her impish son.......

Yesterday PY talked about what JY was like when he was growing up, and when he met Michelle, etc. Things she directly witnessed.

Today Howard Cummings is asking her about affairs that JY had, financial issues, and DV...all things that have to do with his adult life that PY would not directly have witnessed or even know anything about.

We then found out that PY did not know about the affairs until the trials.
 
This woman is making stuff up....or, doing a lot of "assuming"....

Oh good! The washstand!
 
I agree. I think everyone was relieved that Mrs. Cooper wasn't cross examined in that trial.

Don't you remember that HC had kittens and said nasty things to Mrs. Cooper when she brought in the ducks. He was very unprofessional that day. I still chuckle over that. :floorlaugh:
 
Michelle said that he could have??? WOW!! So he had to get permission to have something.....
 
Yesterday PY talked about what JY was like when he was growing up, and when he met Michelle, etc. Things she directly witnessed.

Today Howard Cummings is asking her about affairs that he had, financial issues, and DV...all things that have to do with his adult life that PY would not directly have witnessed or even know anything about.

We then found out that PY did not know about the affairs until this trial.

She must've known about the affairs from the previous trial?:waitasec:
 
I'm starting to feel for her. She obviously loves her son and is wanting to protect him (i.e. not tell the entire truth at all times). Not saying it's right at all, and I'm hopeful 1). I would NEVER be in such a situation; and 2) If I was, I would be able to act honorably. But it's hard I'm sure. I know HC is needing to rein in some of the stuff, but he just needs to end soon before the jurors start feeling like I am (and this is a complete change of opinion for me).
 
I'm starting to feel for her. She obviously loves her son and is wanting to protect him (i.e. not tell the entire truth at all times). Not saying it's right at all, and I'm hopeful 1). I would NEVER be in such a situation; and 2) If I was, I would be able to act honorably. But it's hard I'm sure. I know HC is needing to rein in some of the stuff, but he just needs to end soon before the jurors start feeling like I am (and this is a complete change of opinion for me).

Well, that is probably what the defense is hoping. There is a fine line before the jury changes its feelings, especially on mothers. MOO
 
I'm starting to feel for her. She obviously loves her son and is wanting to protect him (i.e. not tell the entire truth at all times). Not saying it's right at all, and I'm hopeful 1). I would NEVER be in such a situation; and 2) If I was, I would be able to act honorably. But it's hard I'm sure. I know HC is needing to rein in some of the stuff, but he just needs to end soon before the jurors start feeling like I am (and this is a complete change of opinion for me).

I agree.
 
HC is clearly showing that she didn't really know Michelle and Jason's marriage all that well and that Jason portrayed it as a good marriage (most romantic weekend ever!) when it really wasn't. He's also showing her memory is good when it benefits her son, but not so good when the true answer might help the prosecution. Can't wait to hear more....

Is the longest, most pointless cross-exam in history? I cannot imagine what the jurors are thinking at this point.
 
Well at least it's not like listening to paint dry, or whispering, or ummm ummm. LOL. A lot of people here thought it was ridiculous/disingenuous for PY to go on and on yesterday with her happy little family stuff. Sooo if this is a mock jury I don't necessarily think this is a bad idea/cross for the PT. Esp. if JY doesn't take the stand again. It certainly puts all his character flaws in the forefront of their minds near the end of the trial. Unless of course it backfires. I'm 50/50 on this one.
 
Did anyone else see that video from the courtroom just now of JY with PY?
 
The prosecution has 1 shot to get it right - give it your all. If she's a liar, let HC show it. If she loses her temper or gets frazzled, all the better...

And I think that's fine to point out in a very respectful manner. I would not do it like HC is doing it. I think he's being rude. Families of both sides should be treated with something akin to kid gloves. I'm not saying you can't impeach her, but do it respectfully.
 
It's a strategy to remind the jury about all of JY's lies, behaviors, hidden agendas, as well as bring out the inconsistencies in testimony. He can get this info in and do the reminding through JY's mother, who painted a specific picture of her little imp yesterday.

Also, PY lied on the stand. I caught at least half a dozen lies, but I was only listening a little bit yesterday and earlier today. The state would be remiss if they did not impeach testimony that is in direct conflict with the truth. Yes she's his mother, but she is also complicit in some of his deeds and certainly in several things after the murder.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
130
Guests online
3,394
Total visitors
3,524

Forum statistics

Threads
604,293
Messages
18,170,432
Members
232,328
Latest member
NH_Gal
Back
Top