Trial Delayed until at least January

[borndem]

Coincidences don't imply cause. Jason's wife was murdered while he was on a business trip. Investigators have failed, thus far, to demonstrate how he could have committed the murder.

Who else was staying at the hotel that night ... were there any wedding parties or other partiers that could have been fooling around with cameras? We can't know that, but maybe the coincidence was that there was a party and the cameras were moved or unplugged.

What we know is that police focused exclusively on Jason from the moment they discovered the body. Jason knew this, his family and friends knew this and Jason's lawyer advised him to avoid the police. It was good advice. Police set about trying to prove that Jason could have committed the murder. Thus far, they have failed.

bbm

IDK, Otto. Seems to me, when the LEO's looked at the scene --saw the savagery on her once-pretty & smiling face, her head, her teeth on the floor, saw what was later counted as 29--30 wounds, blood everywhere, saw things around the house that should have been picked up as loot (including her purse on the kitchen floor which would have been easier to pick up than to step over while on the way out), saw that there was no forced entry -- with a pregnant woman alone with a 2-year old with her husband out of town overnight with the back door unlocked, saw a dog going crazy, saw a little girl who was unharmed after they totally and savagely beat her obviously pregnant mother and left the child unharmed, saw an opportunity to steal her car (keys possibly in her purse), saw tools in the garage, the only thing that looked like a possible burglary was the jewelry box -- could this have been a staged scene?? Experience, experience says Yes. Rule out the husband first. He who wouldn't even help them look for missing items at least to make it look like a robbery (in his favor, this). The entries and exits on his hotel room door -- or lack thereof. And all the rest... And they never could quite rule him out .....

 

[MyBelle]

There aren't any other known viable suspects. Investigators had tunnel vision in this case, which is a shame. What we are left with is that the husband is the most likely suspect, but there isn't enough evidence to demonstrate that he committed the murder. Some murders happen simply because one person is really angry at the other. Regarding the fact that his wife was pregnant, he may have perceived that as a reason to murder her - that she was trapping him with a big family and too much responsibility. I think it's quite common for men to be apprehensive about a pregnancy.

Jason was a really lousy husband, a chauvinist, ill-tempered, dishonest and manipulative with a sense of humor that usually involved humiliating others. With a character like that and a murdered wife, one does have to wonder. There's no way that I would rule him out ... ever. Still, I don't see enough evidence to conclusively demonstrate that he is guilty.

The tunnel vision has resulted in an unsolved crime. There is a way to rule him out and that is with the security video that never made its way into the courtroom--or the hands of the defense. That bothers me far more than his bad character.

Jason Young may have been a lousy husband in your opinion but his wife
had not made any move to divorce him and she willingly became pregnant with his child three times. There was much testimony about the value they both placed on their family life together. Michelle's choices are not for any of us to judge and I think it unfair to try. She and their son are victims as is Jason, if he's innocent of the murder.

I do have to disagree with you in your contention that the husband in this case was the most likely suspect. If he had been in town, I would agree with you. But, he was out of town and could prove it. Others also knew he was out of town and he was not the last person to see his wife alive. Many viable suspects from which to choose.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

Come on Belle, you know Jay told us he left the hotel at midnight.
Where is the evidence he returned?

1- door keycard?
2- Video?

Nope

hotel premises include the parking area. Jason never said he left the premises and the prosecution failed to prove it.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

I'd say there was evidence of planning when he decided to stay at a Hamton Inn half way to his business meeting rather than one right in the area.Also showed planning when he would not use his key card to get back in the room. Also showed planning when he printed off papers about he Coach purse and then "forgot" to take them off the printer. Also showed planning when he called Meridith to go to the house. Also showed planning when he got rid of the shirt that he was wearing when he left the hotel at midnight.

So, propping open a hotel door to avoid the hassle of a key card is your idea of evidence of planning of murder? There are far more compelling details that a planned murderer would have anticipated, such as working video cameras on exit doors and the possibility a rock left to prop a door would be noticed and removed by staffers, that he would be recognized by convenience store clerks and customers. All of it beyond Jason Young's control yet none of it was available to help persuade the majority of a jury. Amazing.

No evidence was presented that he left the hotel premises and no evidence he got rid of anything at all. Just videos inside the hotel and Gracie's confused memory and bloggers who have invented their own evidence.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

Belle, no offense, but if you were the jury forewoman, I think you would be impeached.

I work in a maximum security prison and it is the defense that usually boots me from the jury pool.

This is the first case I've followed that I think the defendant is innocent. In fact, it would have never made it beyond the prelim hearing if it had happened here.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

bbm

IDK, Otto. Seems to me, when the LEO's looked at the scene --saw the savagery on her once-pretty & smiling face, her head, her teeth on the floor, saw what was later counted as 29--30 wounds, blood everywhere, saw things around the house that should have been picked up as loot (including her purse on the kitchen floor which would have been easier to pick up than to step over while on the way out), saw that there was no forced entry -- with a pregnant woman alone with a 2-year old with her husband out of town overnight with the back door unlocked, saw a dog going crazy, saw a little girl who was unharmed after they totally and savagely beat her obviously pregnant mother and left the child unharmed, saw an opportunity to steal her car (keys possibly in her purse), saw tools in the garage, the only thing that looked like a possible burglary was the jewelry box -- could this have been a staged scene?? Experience, experience says Yes. Rule out the husband first. He who wouldn't even help them look for missing items at least to make it look like a robbery (in his favor, this). The entries and exits on his hotel room door -- or lack thereof. And all the rest... And they never could quite rule him out .....

I was surprised that LE said they wanted him to come to the house to look around. It was a sealed crime scene and his presence in it would compromise it. It's stunning to me that LE thought determining what stuff was missing was a priority over solving the horrific murder of a young mother.

JMO

 

[otto]

Tunnel vision?
Are you serious otto?
Did you see the 2007 SW's questioning MF's involvement?
The investigation lasted 3 years. No stone left unturned.
Everything lead straight to JLY.

I thought you followed this case early on?

I'm stunned that investigators ever suspected the victim's sister. That was a huge waste of time and resources.

 

[Cheyenne130]

I work in a maximum security prison and it is the defense that usually boots me from the jury pool.

This is the first case I've followed that I think the defendant is innocent. In fact, it would have never made it beyond the prelim hearing if it had happened here.

JMO

Is it your desire that a murderer go free because there is not an eyewitness or video of him commiting the actual crime? I'm also curious; in the prison where you work, how many of the inmates claim that they are innocent?

In order to believe he is innocent you have to ignore leaving the papers for the purse on top of the printer when he took the directions with him. You have to ignore the camera tampering and door propping (and he actually admitted that he propped the door). You have to ignore the print in blood at the crime scene in a shoe in his size known to be owned by him. You have to ignore a vehicle described as one being driven by him in front of his house parked oddly in the early, early morning hours. You have to ignore the same description given for the vehicle at the gas station that had an irate customer who was in such a hurry he didn't pump the full $20 and didn't come back into the store for his change. There's more but this should REALLY be enough. IMO

 

[borndem]

I was surprised that LE said they wanted him to come to the house to look around. It was a sealed crime scene and his presence in it would compromise it. It's stunning to me that LE thought determining what stuff was missing was a priority over solving the horrific murder of a young mother.

JMO

Having a survivor of a murder/probable burglary look over the premises while accompanied by his lawyer and the LEO's is SOP in these cases. JY lived in the premises -- how could he compromise it in the presence of his lawyer and LEO's. JY was the only adult witness who would know how the house looked when he left -- what is missing? Did he or she have valuables (jewelry, rifles, shotguns, PCs, video games, cameras, a nice leather coat, silver, cash, credit cards, stereo equipment, cell phones, etc., etc.) that are missing? Who else would know? Put those little blue booties on everybody's feet -- no one touch anything -- and the scene would not be compromised at all (where does that come from?).

OT, Belle -- I find it very interesting that you work in a max security prison. I am so totally unfamiliar with how things are in such a place -- are they really as tuff and as "scary" (in my imagination at least) as I have heard? Women's prison or men's prison? Is it tense all the time? Is the food awful? Please excuse these childish questions, but I am obviously ignorant of that segment of life as we know it. If you would say -- a big TIA.

 

[gracielee]

He told us Michelle sent the 15 month old shoes to charity

I bet it was the homeless person who got those hushpuppies! Came back for the rest of the outfit. After all, don't most vagrant home invader/killers wear hush puppies? :fence: :waitasec: :great:

 

[gracielee]

Is it your desire that a murderer go free because there is not an eyewitness or video of him commiting the actual crime? I'm also curious; in the prison where you work, how many of the inmates claim that they are innocent?

In order to believe he is innocent you have to ignore leaving the papers for the purse on top of the printer when he took the directions with him. You have to ignore the camera tampering and door propping (and he actually admitted that he propped the door). You have to ignore the print in blood at the crime scene in a shoe in his size known to be owned by him. You have to ignore a vehicle described as one being driven by him in front of his house parked oddly in the early, early morning hours. You have to ignore the same description given for the vehicle at the gas station that had an irate customer who was in such a hurry he didn't pump the full $20 and didn't come back into the store for his change. There's more but this should REALLY be enough. IMO

Reminds me of the judges instructions to 'use your common sense' when deliberating. Obviously 4 of the jurors did just that. It would help to know what the sticking point was and which jurors. Their education and background.

 

[otto]

bbm

IDK, Otto. Seems to me, when the LEO's looked at the scene --saw the savagery on her once-pretty & smiling face, her head, her teeth on the floor, saw what was later counted as 29--30 wounds, blood everywhere, saw things around the house that should have been picked up as loot (including her purse on the kitchen floor which would have been easier to pick up than to step over while on the way out), saw that there was no forced entry -- with a pregnant woman alone with a 2-year old with her husband out of town overnight with the back door unlocked, saw a dog going crazy, saw a little girl who was unharmed after they totally and savagely beat her obviously pregnant mother and left the child unharmed, saw an opportunity to steal her car (keys possibly in her purse), saw tools in the garage, the only thing that looked like a possible burglary was the jewelry box -- could this have been a staged scene?? Experience, experience says Yes. Rule out the husband first. He who wouldn't even help them look for missing items at least to make it look like a robbery (in his favor, this). The entries and exits on his hotel room door -- or lack thereof. And all the rest... And they never could quite rule him out .....

It's almost common sense that the husband did it, but the evidence doesn't seem to be there. There has to be a missing piece of the puzzle. Police explored the possibility of an accomplice, but there's simply no evidence that someone assisted.

 

[otto]

The tunnel vision has resulted in an unsolved crime. There is a way to rule him out and that is with the security video that never made its way into the courtroom--or the hands of the defense. That bothers me far more than his bad character.

Jason Young may have been a lousy husband in your opinion but his wife
had not made any move to divorce him and she willingly became pregnant with his child three times. There was much testimony about the value they both placed on their family life together. Michelle's choices are not for any of us to judge and I think it unfair to try. She and their son are victims as is Jason, if he's innocent of the murder.

I do have to disagree with you in your contention that the husband in this case was the most likely suspect. If he had been in town, I would agree with you. But, he was out of town and could prove it. Others also knew he was out of town and he was not the last person to see his wife alive. Many viable suspects from which to choose.

JMO

Perhaps, if the police had taken a different tone with Jason from the start, things would have been different. Instead, they seemed to approach him and his family as suspects from the beginning.

He couldn't be ruled out simply because he refused to talk with investigators. That was a direct result of warnings from friends and family that he was considered to be a suspect from the beginning even though he was out of town at the time of the murder.

 

[otto]

I was surprised that LE said they wanted him to come to the house to look around. It was a sealed crime scene and his presence in it would compromise it. It's stunning to me that LE thought determining what stuff was missing was a priority over solving the horrific murder of a young mother.

JMO

It's possible that they simply wanted to observe him in the crime scene ... perhaps to see if he was glancing around to see if he'd made any mistakes.

 

[otto]

Just the fax is the name. Please don't insult me by calling me Kim Young -just the facts:crazy:

She said "light" could have been white. It is for me, not you?

I'll try to phrase it differently when I'm discussing only known facts.

It was light colored. That could be white, cold gray, warm gray ... could be many colors. What is always true is that it was a light colored vehicle. What may be true; whether it could have been white, seems more like wrapping the facts around the crime than the other way around. That is, it seems like tunnel vision.

 

[otto]

Is it your desire that a murderer go free because there is not an eyewitness or video of him commiting the actual crime?

<snipped for simplifying the response>

There would be some difference between a video of him re-entering the hotel at some point between 11 PM - 7 AM and a video of the actual crime. I think the question is more about the former and how he could have entered the locked side door after the rock had been removed. How did he get to the point of being able to turn or unplug the camera without first walking in the front door?

 

[otto]

Yes, I believe the camera is a red herring and will be again at the next trial. The testimony that I heard was about a rock being removed prior to 5:00 a.m. I think you are confusing it with the camera and there was testimony that the camera did not contain Young's prints.

JMO

But ... wasn't he seen leaving the hotel side door at midnight with his gloves? If it was him and he had gloves, there wouldn't be prints ... so the absence of prints on the camera doesn't lead me to believe that the camera is a red herring. The more interesting question, for me, is how he got into the hotel given that the side door was locked? He should have been seen on the hallway camera that recorded him at midnight if the same camera was tampered with. How did he get to the camera without being seen?

Was the door locked and rock removed at 5 AM?
At what time was that door unlocked?

 

[otto]

Is the story that he slipped in through the front door when the desk clerk was away, he went down the other hallway, that particular hallway camera was broken and didn't record his return, in the stairwell he tipped the camera?

I came across this image from a while ago. I looks like there are two cameras at each end of the building: one in the hallway, one in the stairwell. Were all the cameras working that night?

 

[otto]

This is a very old file, built on computers long gone. It's my opinion how Jason would have entered the home if he did it ... in through the garage door (the overhead door may have been stuck in a partially open position, up the back stairs, into the bonus room (over the garage), through the office, across hall and into the master bedroom ... silent, stealthy.

 

[otto]

Belle, no offense, but if you were the jury forewoman, I think you would be impeached.

Jury members, let alone forepersons, are never selected from forums.

That's a fact.