State vs Jason Young 2-17-2012

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Can someone explain why Becky Holt doesn't say to this witness: please summarize your findings in regard to the shoe impressions taken from 5108 Birchleaf? And THEN dissect the details as necessary? Goodness, the jury has got to be bored out of their gourds... This seems ridiculous.
 
Didn't something like that happen in the Scott Peterson trial? Wasn't the foreman dismissed halfway through deliberations and the red headed alternate added? Maybe the rules are different in different states?

Yes, it happened in Peterson and it could happen in NC. I just linked the statute upthread.
 
The toe is not a big deal in my opinion. He played basketball when not planning and killing people. (Of course, maybe even as she was unable to lay a hand on her attacker, maybe Michelle managed one good foot stomp that caught this toe.)

The photo from the link GrammyJean provided, pic #4, is certainly of interest. Even four days later, the side of Young's foot appears irritated. I wonder what could've caused that? http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/image_gallery/9726547/

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/image_gallery/9726547/
 
I don't know, but I can see the first question a juror asks is 'how do we even know that CY had medicine in her system'? And what's the answer to that?

:dunno: How's that?
 
I'm only addressing this section, curiosity only. If you were out of town on business, and your pregnant wife was found dead in the home, brutally murdered, would you never help the police by answering simple questions as to 'was it normal practice for your wife to be sure to lock all the doors at night?' 'Was it normal practice for your wife to perhaps take the trash outside after dark?" "Is there anything here in your home that you see out of place/missing?"

Let me first say, I've never been in this situation so I'm not completely sure what I would do. I believe that once I learned that I was a primary target of the investigation, I would lawyer up. I would hope there would be some way to help the investigation, with lawyer present that would prevent me from incriminating myself. But I honestly have no idea what the attorney's advise would be here. All I have to go by is what my LE family have told me in the past about not talking.


Since you were hours away, and you knew you were innocent, would you not want to help find out who the heck beat your wife's face/head to a pulp? Like wouldn't you say 'you know, there are some trailers behind our house, and I've always been a bit concerned about that.' Or perhaps, 'you know, I was outside mowing the lawn Thursday afternoon, and I saw some 'unknown' scummy looking characters walking/driving through our neighborhood.....'

Probably - but see above. It's hard to know what would go through my mind. My wife and unborn child were just murdered, my daughter was present. Cops think I did it.


What I'm trying to ask is, wouldn't you help at all in attempting to figure out WTF killed your wife??? I just don't get that? I've followed crime my entire life, even told hubby, 'ask for a lawyer', but if I knew I wasn't guilty, and somebody brutally murdered my husband, in our home, while I was out, I'd be banging on everybody's house up and down our road to see what my neighbors saw while I was gone. Much like the broken into cars.

I would have a strong desire to help investigators, but it would be very careless to do so.

Sorry, I don't know how to BOLD things to stick my comments in the proper place. :( I haven't seen anywhere that JLY was a *primary suspect* less than 24 hours after the murder. He was just like Meredith, who did give a statement to the police. He was someone close to the victim, someone who had to be interviewed and state his whereabouts the previous night. It was testifed to that EVERYONE connected to Michelle had to be talked to. And everyone else was. Even after he retained a lawyer, he never assisted in the investigation *with a lawyer present*. I don't know about you, but I'd be beating down their door for information. Or having my attorney call and find out about progress in the case for me. JLY NEVER did any of those things. He gave the impression he had no interest what so ever in discovering who murdered his wife. If he was so confident in his innocence, he would have said 'Funk, I wasn't even in town.' IMO

I found it telling that when Shelly Schaad testifed, her husband, a very close friend of JLY, upon FIRST hearing of Michelle's murder, blurted out 'god, I hope jason didn't do it.' In any other situation that would be considered an 'excited utterance'.
 
Can someone explain why Becky Holt doesn't say to this witness: please summarize your findings in regard to the shoe impressions taken from 5108 Birchleaf? And THEN dissect the details as necessary? Goodness, the jury has got to be bored out of their gourds... This seems ridiculous.

LOL that would help. I'm dozing off at my desk. I guess it's necessary to go through the tedious evidence in any trial.

DNA testimony is almost always boring and looong.

zzzzzzzzz
 
please take legal questions to the legal thread where you can ask a verified lawyer. thank you.
 
Gritguy is an attorney, I'm certain he knows the law and statutes.
 
Thanks but I'll continue to hold my opinion.

Nobody can guarantee what this Judge will do but he's already displayed an intolerance for juror misconduct to the point he said he was considering contempt charges. If he suspects juror misconduct in the deliberations phase, absolutely he'll replace a juror rather than declare a mistrial and start over entirely. Of that, I have no doubt.

JMO

Please. Stop.

Alternates are dismissed prior to deliberations. If there is misconduct in deliberations - there would be a mistrial.

Besides having confirmed that your statements about the way the law works are inaccurate (per verified legal expert), this would make NO SENSE and leave the judicial process open for so much corruption - if the Judge would determine he didn't like the way things were going in the deliberations - he'd toss the "offending" jurors and toss in some alternates! Holy moly - talk about problems!
 
This is very tedious evidence. Wish they had it up on a screen for everyone to see at once.
 
I don't know, but I can see the first question a juror asks is 'how do we even know that CY had medicine in her system'? And what's the answer to that?

CY's DNA was found on that dropper that was laying on the shelf near the Tylenol Adult Strength liquid. That dropper had been in CY's mouth. Inside the dropper Tylenol Adult Strength Rapid Blast (red liquid) was found. It was dripping onto the shelf as well, in 2 spots.

A jury can infer that with CY's DNA on the dropper end (the part that goes into someone's mouth) combined with the substance ID'd inside the dropper as the Tylenol Adult Strength medicine, that the dropper with the Tylenol was given to CY.
 
Just hurts my heart to think of a little girl walking through...:(
 
This is very tedious evidence. Wish they had it up on a screen for everyone to see at once.

It is tedious ... and if any of the jurors are skeptics, at least one of them is wondering why the prints are only being connected with shoes not in evidence. At least one of them probably throws everyday type shoes in the trash before the year is over and would not have shoes with good clear sole prints 1.5 years after they were purchased ... so the prosecution alleging that 1.5 year old shoes add clear prints matching shoes that Jason no longer owned would put some of the jurors to sleep.
 
The judge seems to also be wondering where all this shoe business is going ... speculating on the reason for the sidebar.
 
The illustrations being shown to the jury are not scaled 1:1, but have been scaled - no accurate scale provided - for "illustrative" purposes. Seems to me that true scale, or specified accurate scaled value, would provide more accurate information.
 
I agree. Why would he buy a franklin in his size? If he wanted to throw off police? He purposely bought them smaller so it looked like someone else. I think the partial hushpuppie sole was a mistake! moo

That's exactly what my husband said last night, after our shoe test. He said 'of course he'd buy a smaller shoe, and *of course* he wouldn't buy a size 11, too close to his normal size.' "If it was me, I'd buy a size 10, to be sure no one would *think* it was me, having too close a normal size shoe would leave doubts' IHO.
 
Deck ... footwear impressions on stain ... similarity to Franklin shoe suspected, so she photographed, labeled and collected impressions. She concluded that the deck prints were from a different shoe: Marks and Spencer 3 shoe, doesn't know if it's an athletic shoe. That evidence was collected November 2007 ... year after the murder. She also was at the house to measure the floor tiles in the bathroom to give scale to the bloody footpints.
 
CY's DNA was found on that dropper that was laying on the shelf near the Tylenol Adult Strength liquid. That dropper had been in CY's mouth. Inside the dropper Tylenol Adult Strength Rapid Blast (red liquid) was found. It was dripping onto the shelf as well, in 2 spots.

A jury can infer that with CY's DNA on the dropper end (the part that goes into someone's mouth) combined with the substance ID'd inside the dropper as the Tylenol Adult Strength medicine, that the dropper with the Tylenol was given to CY.

Quick question about the contents of the dropper. Wasn't it testifed to that there was a mixture of meds in that dropper?? I *thought* early on it was stated that the dropper contained the Adult Strength Tylenol & mixed with that other codine type med JLY had samples of???
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
149
Guests online
1,737
Total visitors
1,886

Forum statistics

Threads
602,024
Messages
18,133,392
Members
231,208
Latest member
disturbedprincess6
Back
Top