State vs Jason Lynn Young 6-22-11

[NCEast]

I followed the BC trial closely and was in the courtroom when that verdict was read. I was surprised by that verdict, even though I felt he was guilty. I have not followed this trial nearly as closely, but it seems to me much more likely for a NG verdict in this trial than in the BC trial.

Maybe I missed it, but what is the jury makeup on this one by sex/race?

I was honestly thinking the Cooper jury was going to come back with a not guilty verdict....and that this jury would have no problems coming back with a resounding guilty. However, after spending the past few weeks watching most of this trial, I'm not so sure of the guilty any more.
I think the jury is primarily white with 2 AA if I am remembering correctly. Can't recall the male/female ratio. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[otto]

Mr. Collins is having a hard problem with the silence issue - he knows the jury is not going to like this issue.

Jason himself contradicted your claim on the silence issue by simply taking the stand.

The prosecution emphasized that Jason's refusal to discuss the case (followed his lawyer's advice) implied he was guilty. They don't want the jury to be told that he had the right to remain silent even pre-arrest.

 

[gracielee]

The difference is JS has been fair and impartial throughout this case. Most people respect his decisions.

I beg to differ. IMO, Judge Stephens rulings have been as pro prosecution as the other. I think in most trials, it's the nature of the beast because the defense is trying everything they can think of to get their client off. What rulings has JS ruled against the pros?

Another thing that has troubled me is that it appeared the circle of friends was mostly Jason's circle. He himself stated on the stand that 'Michelle didn't feel a part of the other 'girls', which was why on the week-end before her murder, she wanted to ride to the wedding with him as opposed to the other females. Regardless if that was the exact testimony, the impression I got was that the circle of friends revolved around Jason more so than Michelle. Just the opposite of the cooper trial.

 

[Boodles]

I followed the BC trial closely and was in the courtroom when that verdict was read. I was surprised by that verdict, even though I felt he was guilty. I have not followed this trial nearly as closely, but it seems to me much more likely for a NG verdict in this trial than in the BC trial.

Maybe I missed it, but what is the jury makeup on this one by sex/race?

That's interesting, because I feel the opposite. I was surprised by the Cooper verdict, although I believed he was guilty. But with this case, I don't have any doubts. What I do have is utter disbelief that a man could be so - I can't think of the word - cruel and callous - to premeditate this murder and execute it in this manner. Don't misunderstand, I have no doubt he did this. I just can't conceive of planning something like this to the degree that he did and being so brutal. Usually there is extreme anger, a "heat of the moment" element to such brutal murders. It's just a horrendous situation.

 

[cody100]

I believe JS will give limited instructions on how to consider JY's refusal to talk to LE. Anything further on his silence will not be given since there is no law to substantiate that statement.

 

[Boodles]

Another thing that has troubled me is that it appeared the circle of friends was mostly Jason's circle. He himself stated on the stand that 'Michelle didn't feel a part of the other 'girls', which was why on the week-end before her murder, she wanted to ride to the wedding with him as opposed to the other females. Regardless if that was the exact testimony, the impression I got was that the circle of friends revolved around Jason more so than Michelle. Just the opposite of the cooper trial.

Perhaps they were mostly his pals because whenever she brought a friend into the scene, Jason hit on her.

 

[cody100]

I beg to differ. IMO, Judge Stephens rulings have been as pro prosecution as the other. I think in most trials, it's the nature of the beast because the defense is trying everything they can think of to get their client off. What rulings has JS ruled against the pros?

Another thing that has troubled me is that it appeared the circle of friends was mostly Jason's circle. He himself stated on the stand that 'Michelle didn't feel a part of the other 'girls', which was why on the week-end before her murder, she wanted to ride to the wedding with him as opposed to the other females. Regardless if that was the exact testimony, the impression I got was that the circle of friends revolved around Jason more so than Michelle. Just the opposite of the cooper trial.

I said JS has been FAIR AND IMPARTIAL throughout this trial. I do not understand your disagreement with me. Do you think he was PARTIAL to the prosecution? What does the circle of friends have to do with JS? Did I miss something?

 

[gracielee]

That's interesting, because I feel the opposite. I was surprised by the Cooper verdict, although I believed he was guilty. But with this case, I don't have any doubts. What I do have is utter disbelief that a man could be so - I can't think of the word - cruel and callous - to premeditate this murder and execute it in this manner. Don't misunderstand, I have no doubt he did this. I just can't conceive of planning something like this to the degree that he did and being so brutal. Usually there is extreme anger, a "heat of the moment" element to such brutal murders. It's just a horrendous situation.

Keep in mind the murder of Laci Peterson, and the cool, calculated planning of Scott, as he's making his cement anchors after having purchased the 'secret boat'. < shakes head > It boggles ones mind though, the callousness of these type crimes. And the mothers of these sons. Jackie Peterson, Coopers mother, and Pat Young. I recall watching a trial years ago. IIRC, the mother of the son/killer, was some sort of LE herself. And she deduced it was her son that committed the crime, encouraged him to confess, and then pled for his life after he was convicted. Totally opposite of what these enabler-mothers do. MOO as to how I *see* all this.

 

[Madeleine74]

JLY wasn't expecting to have to beat MY 30+ times. He expected one hit to knock her out and then thought he'd be able to strangle her to death, no big mess.

He seemed to have no 2nd thoughts, no hesitation, no nerves about it. He decided he was "done," and he became judge/jury/executioner.

 

[borndem]

The difference is JS has been fair and impartial throughout this case. Most people respect his decisions.

Yes, cody, and it's clear that the principals in this case certainly do! Respect with a dash of awe, seems to me. You don't wanna pizz this guy off, 'cause you will lose -- and should lose. This guy is TALL, and yes, Mad74, easy on the eyes. :blushing::bateyes:

 

[otto]

Keep in mind the murder of Laci Peterson, and the cool, calculated planning of Scott, as he's making his cement anchors after having purchased the 'secret boat'. < shakes head > It boggles ones mind though, the callousness of these type crimes. And the mothers of these sons. Jackie Peterson, Coopers mother, and Pat Young. I recall watching a trial years ago. IIRC, the mother of the son/killer, was some sort of LE herself. And she deduced it was her son that committed the crime, encouraged him to confess, and then pled for his life after he was convicted. Totally opposite of what these enabler-mothers do. MOO as to how I *see* all this.

I'm of the opinion that it's difficult, if not impossible, for a parent to be responsible for their adult children's decisions, and disagree that most parents of murderers are enablers. I agree that most parents have difficulty believing that a child of theirs could commit murder and that they probably struggle with accepting a guilty verdict for the remainder of their lives, but I don't think parents of murderers have any responsibility for the actions of an adult child. I find it interesting that he mothers, specifically, are viewed as the problem.

 

[cody100]

I think that JY was more outgoing as was a victim in another trial. So, it doesn't surprise me that more of their friends are his friends. I suspect also MY was not feeling well and not happy in this marriage so perhaps she was truly depressed (as MF indicated). It is so sad in any case that she was more comfortable going to the wedding with him and not the other gals.

 

[gracielee]

I said JS has been FAIR AND IMPARTIAL throughout this trial. I do not understand your disagreement with me. Do you think he was PARTIAL to the prosecution? What does the circle of friends have to do with JS? Did I miss something?

I don't know how to copy what you are replying to, but my original remark was that I didn't think Judge Stevens was any different than Gessner in his rulings. The only difference was *style*, personality, etc. The majority of JS's rulings favored the pros. because of the way the law is written.

A lot of people on WS's appeared to *dislike* nancy cooper as a person IMO. Much was written about her personality. If anything, IMO, NC was far more restricted if you will, BC attempted to control her more than JY was able to control Michelle, IMO. I simply don't see all that much difference between the cases per se. And I find it far more questionable the lack of DNA and blood evidence in the Young crime scene, far more brutal and messy, than the cooper one. Just a lot of similarities in the crimes, motive, means and opportunity, yet far less squabbling about the young case here on WS's. MOO I don't think this case has any more compelling evidence, IMO, than the cooper case had. MOO MOO MOO

 

[otto]

I think that JY was more outgoing as was a victim in another trial. So, it doesn't surprise me that more of their friends are his friends. I suspect also MY was not feeling well and not happy in this marriage so perhaps she was truly depressed (as MF indicated). It is so sad in any case that she was more comfortable going to the wedding with him and not the other gals.

Maybe she viewed attending a wedding as something that couples did together.

 

[cody100]

I don't know how to copy what you are replying to, but my original remark was that I didn't think Judge Stevens was any different than Gessner in his rulings. The only difference was *style*, personality, etc. The majority of JS's rulings favored the pros. because of the way the law is written.

A lot of people on WS's appeared to *dislike* nancy cooper as a person IMO. Much was written about her personality. If anything, IMO, NC was far more restricted if you will, BC attempted to control her more than JY was able to control Michelle, IMO. I simply don't see all that much difference between the cases per se. And I find it far more questionable the lack of DNA and blood evidence in the Young crime scene, far more brutal and messy, than the cooper one. Just a lot of similarities in the crimes, motive, means and opportunity, yet far less squabbling about the young case here on WS's. MOO I don't think this case has any more compelling evidence, IMO, than the cooper case had. MOO MOO MOO

I understand what you are saying now. It is my understanding that we should not discuss the BC case here. I will say that I do not agree with you on your opinion of JG and let's leave it there.

 

[gracielee]

I'm of the opinion that it's difficult, if not impossible, for a parent to be responsible for their adult children's decisions, and disagree that most parents of murderers are enablers. I agree that most parents have difficulty believing that a child of theirs could commit murder and that they probably struggle with accepting a guilty verdict for the remainder of their lives, but I don't think parents of murderers have any responsibility for the actions of an adult child. I find it interesting that he mothers, specifically, are viewed as the problem.

A friend of mine, from another country, were having a discussion about this just last week. She is having *problems* with her husband, and described his relationship with his mother, much like that of certain of these men we've discussed. We were marveling on the fact that often times mothers & sons have an almost unhealthy bond in some cases. 'Son can do no wrong'. I'm certainly not saying that is always the case, but in some of these recent cases we've seen, it has been the case IMO. Shades of Jackie Peterson and Linda Young.

 

[cody100]

Maybe she viewed attending a wedding as something that couples did together.

That is very possible, Otto. It sounds like they smoothed it out though.

 

[Landonsmom02]

Thanks eveyone for the updates. I haven't read all the posts yet but what a LIAR!!!!! Ugh......I hope BH gives it to him. ( If she already hasn't, I'm still reading on page 12)

 

[Dkny]

i am so disappointed in BH's cross. She had the opportunity of a lifetime to broil him. He did show his cocky little man side as well as shirking responsibility JMO. BH is not doing closing is she ?

 

[otto]

That is very possible, Otto. It sounds like they smoothed it out though.

I think we sometimes overthink things. Jason and Michelle were a married couple with a child, and I think that if we want Jason to be the responsible, stable adult, then we would want him to attend a wedding or funeral or any other important event as a family. The idea of splitting into sorority and fraternity groups to attend a wedding well after finishing college seems juvenile to me.