State vs Jason Lynn Young 2-9-12

[Cammy]

Well at the least I could prove I am a moon

Let me know when you are coming to a place near Jersey.

:floorlaugh:

 

[rockin10]

I am curious as to what everyone thought of Gracie, no one is saying much.

Thoughts?, good?, bad?, indifferent?

I think she was better than I was expecting. While clearly she has some memory issues and makes her less credible, I thought she did a much better job this time around. imo

 

[Cammy]

Cammy, I don't see what difference that would make in Jason leaving early or late on Thursday. As far as I remember from the first trial Jason did not know about MY's father when he left Thursday night. Also we heard today MY's father had left a message on MY's machine on Friday morning.

Sounds like Jason didn't have much of a plan, to me.
If he was thinking about killing Michelle before he left, he might have stayed and had dinner with her and Shelly to make it look good.
He might have also printed the directions to his meeting sooner, than just a few minutes before he left.
He might have been all packed and ready to go.
He might have filled up some gas cans before he left, he had just used the lawnmower.
He might have not had an affair with MM, or talked to her a million times in the days leading up to the murder.
He might have chosen a night when CY was not there.

JMO

 

[octobermoon]

I am curious as to what everyone thought of Gracie, no one is saying much.

Thoughts?, good?, bad?, indifferent?

She has a good heart. I believe she saw JY. Her memories are jumbled together. So no harm= no foul. She was truthful, but.... JMO IMO MOO
Up on the fence still :fence:

I am waiting for more.

 

[otto]

I doubt it too, the step stool in her bathroom had blood that had pooled in the bottom of it. No way she walked on that carpet to the bathroom, her feet had to have been dripping with blood, for all that blood to be on bathroom wall, floor and step stool. In the photo, the prints at bathroom doorway look like Jason carried her that far, and then set her down in the doorway.

Who do you think left small bloody footprints on the carpet between the bedroom and the bathroom?

 

[otto]

Because???

There have been times our power was out, or the heat didn't work, when I've slept in whatever I had that was *warm*. Her friend just testified that she kept her coat on the whole time she was there that evening. If Michelle had been in bed with her coat on would you think she was going out?

The exercise machine was turned out, there was a partially empty water bottle next to it, Michelle was wearing a zip-up hoodie. What evidence is that that she was asleep in bed?

 

[otto]

Never heard an attorney say don't talk to anyone, not your mom, friends, in laws, not even the tree. What I HAVE heard is don't talk to anyone w/o an attorney present. Jason milked that lie for over five years, why ? Because that's what kept everyone at bay, and him still looking semi-innocent and he would have plenty of time to get a story together over time. Pretty smart, actually. That way as the five years went by, he was privy to whatever was in the search warrants they released, and whatever else came to light, and he could match up excuse after excuse to the evidence. And when the trial finally started not one witness could testify to what he had told them, and his story would be told by him for the first time ever, in whatever way he felt like telling it. WOW, if I didn't think he was such a , I could almost call him intelligent. But alas, NO WAY, he's a in the worst way

Every single thing he said to anyone under any circumstance is being used against him. He was in a receiving line at a funeral and he probably said a lot of different things to a number of people when they consoled him (if he had robotically repeated the same thing, that would be used against him). To one woman, he said "[my daughter] is a real trooper". That was used against him in court today. He made the right decision in remaining silent.

 

[otto]

bcbm
Totally agree, no footprints in the hallway carpet, she was carried and not by a random killer, by her father.

Why do you think the officer testified that there were footprints in the hallway? Was he completely mistaken?

 

[octobermoon]

I always thought the better argument for the timeline would have been to skip the trying to cram the drive in and establishing the alibi and try him for conspiracy. It would be a much easier sell.

I don't know who it was. It could have been any of the people we might see on the witness stand (but probably isn't) but who keeps that a secret? I can see having a friend who would help you hide a body. I can't see having a friend who would do what was done to her. I can't see hiring someone who would do that. Not even a ne'er do well.

I guess for the sake of the neutrality, what else could it have been?

It wasn't a rape. It was a half-*advertiser censored* robbery at best. Could it have been a robbery interrupted by the kid? If you remove the husband killing her from the picture and look at it, it doesn't make sense. If you put him back in the picture, it doesn't really make sense.

I can't picture a random intruder (s) grabbing a lamp from the hall table and beating her to death with it.

But, the lack of direct contact evidence is baffling. I mean, there had to have been blood somewhere.

Would he be dumb enough to clean up in his yard (ie. the running spicket) and not leave a speck anywhere else? But risk being seen?

BBM I think he did. Mr. G. was there and never alerted the neighborhood. It was dark, the dog was trained to his commands. CY was tucked in with only PJ's and cleaned up. Mr. G wimpered when Meredith arrived. His daughter asleep or hiding, pretending ( ) in the bed. Running the water on the lawn even in Nov. this year wouldn't be suspect. (it has been a dry winter) It all points to JY so far, but I am willing to keep an open mind.

Just don't pee on my leg........ *or sit on my couch nekkid :what:

Occam's razor

when you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better

 

[otto]

I am curious as to what everyone thought of Gracie, no one is saying much.

Thoughts?, good?, bad?, indifferent?

I think that she wanted to please the prosecution and tell them what they wanted to hear. As a result, her testimony changed and morphed until it better reflected the prosecution's theory. I don't think the jury can take her seriously because of her memory problems. This happened 6 years ago and she claimed that since 2006 she has had many problems and memory issues. We also know that she has a brain injury but said she doesn't - still, she receives social assistance for a brain injury. Does she not know that she has a brain injury or was she not being truthful ... who knows.

 

[octobermoon]

I think that she wanted to please the prosecution and tell them what they wanted to hear. As a result, her testimony changed and morphed until it better reflected the prosecution's theory. I don't think the jury can take her seriously because of her memory problems. This happened 6 years ago and she claimed that since 2006 she has had many problems and memory issues. We also know that she has a brain injury but said she doesn't - still, she receives social assistance for a brain injury. Does she not know that she has a brain injury or was she not being truthful ... who knows.

I agree with you.

I still like her.

 

[Just the Fax]

I think that she wanted to please the prosecution and tell them what they wanted to hear. As a result, her testimony changed and morphed until it better reflected the prosecution's theory. I don't think the jury can take her seriously because of her memory problems. This happened 6 years ago and she claimed that since 2006 she has had many problems and memory issues. We also know that she has a brain injury but said she doesn't - still, she receives social assistance for a brain injury. Does she not know that she has a brain injury or was she not being truthful ... who knows.

Please the prosecution?
Sounded like she just told the truth....yep, both the good and bad.

I don't think there is any doubt she saw Jason Young and his white SUV at 5:27AM on 11-3-06

 

[Elisaa444]

Because???

There have been times our power was out, or the heat didn't work, when I've slept in whatever I had that was *warm*. Her friend just testified that she kept her coat on the whole time she was there that evening. If Michelle had been in bed with her coat on would you think she was going out?

Me too. I've fallen asleep in my hoodie many times just watching tv in bed. I've also slept in a hoodie, jogging pants, thick socks and even my Ugg boots when I visited my mom in Raleigh and I was used to living in Fl ...I was freezing. Just bc one is wearing a hoodie certainly doesn't mean they wouldnt be sleeping.


* moo moo moo moo *

 

[Cammy]

I think that she wanted to please the prosecution and tell them what they wanted to hear. As a result, her testimony changed and morphed until it better reflected the prosecution's theory. I don't think the jury can take her seriously because of her memory problems. This happened 6 years ago and she claimed that since 2006 she has had many problems and memory issues. We also know that she has a brain injury but said she doesn't - still, she receives social assistance for a brain injury. Does she not know that she has a brain injury or was she not being truthful ... who knows.

:goodpost:

I can't believe the Pros would use her unless they really really really really needed her.
( which is exactly what they told her after they drove hours to interview her)

To put her through such rough testimony, knowing she was not going to hold up, almost makes me angry at them.

The poor woman did not even realize she said the customer who was the witness left at 5:26 BEFORE Jason even came in.

 

[fromageball]

Does she not know that she has a brain injury or was she not being truthful ... who knows.

I think she testified that her mother said that at age 22 she would have the mind of a 2 year old. I realize that she is older now, but if that really is the case she may not have completely understood what she was doing - or understood the depth of what she was doing as a witness in a murder case.

I could be way off base, but if I'm not then it seems like it is sort of unethical for the prosecutors to use her this way. I didn't see her testimony in the first trial but watched it this time and felt bad that the prosecutors were putting her through this. Technically she is an adult, but if she has the mind of a small child...small children don't testify in court for a reason.

Or is that just the job of the jury to sort out how much weight they will give the testimony?

In the end a man's life is on the line and her testimony is a key part of what the prosecution is using to try to put him away for life.

 

[Cammy]

I agree with you.

I still like her.

I like her too.

Just think of all the pressure she must have felt about testifying at a murder trial...

I hope she is chilling out tonite, knowing this is all behind her now, unless
there is a 3rd trial.

Kidding.

:innocent:

 

[Cammy]

I think she testified that her mother said that at age 22 she would have the mind of a 2 year old. I realize that she is older now, but if that really is the case she may not have completely understood what she was doing - or understood the depth of what she was doing as a witness in a murder case.

I could be way off base, but if I'm not then it seems like it is sort of unethical for the prosecutors to use her this way. I didn't see her testimony in the first trial but watched it this time and felt bad that the prosecutors were putting her through this. Technically she is an adult, but if she has the mind of a small child...small children don't testify in court for a reason.

Or is that just the job of the jury to sort out how much weight they will give the testimony?

In the end a man's life is on the line and her testimony is a key part of what the prosecution is using to try to put him away for life.

Wow, we just posted almost the same thing at almost the same time.!
:rocker:Fromageball

I could not agree more, the stress she had to be under knowing she had to testify at a televised murder trial, wow.

 

[Elisaa444]

I have always felt this is a revealing piece of CE for me. Supposedly he really wanted to get this business deal. He had off all day Thursday. So, he cut the lawn but he could easily have left in the afternoon and driven to a hotel right near where the meeting was in Clintwood. Of course than he really couldn't go back to Raleigh in time to kill his wife. That to me also shows premeditation.

That is what I have yet to understand ....has it been said anywhere why exactly he didn't stay at a hotel near Clintwood where his important meeting was being held? When I go on business trips I stay as close as I can to the meeting facility because ...well...for me it makes sense and less stress for me. Of course, I more than know not everyone does as I do. It's not logical to me ...at least not yet. (probably won't ever be)





*moo moo moo moo moo*

 

[fromageball]

Wow, we just posted almost the same thing at almost the same time.!
:rocker:Fromageball

I could not agree more, the stress she had to be under knowing she had to testify at a televised murder trial, wow.

ahaha...I know, I didn't even want to post mine because it makes me feel so bad to talk about her, but none of this is her fault. So yeah, great minds, etc.

I wonder how Judge Stephens felt after he learned about this...didn't they have a separate hearing after he found out? and then decided that defense could question her about it?

 

[octobermoon]

I like her too.

Just think of all the pressure she must have felt about testifying at a murder trial...

I hope she is chilling out tonite, knowing this is all behind her now, unless
there is a 3rd trial.

Kidding.

:innocent:

The pros was foolish to put her through cross. IMO JMO MOO

She is a lovely lady with a good heart. She didn't do anything wrong.

I still believe her.


(we need donuts in the morn. I got hot choc. and mini marshes. common peeps chip in or else ;P )