Verdict Watch

[cody100]

He had as much as 90 min in that house. Could have been less though. How long does it take to bludgeon someone 30+ times? 5 min? Less? Say, 15 min to wash himself, 10 min to change clothes afterwards, 5 min to walk around in another pair of shoes. That's 35 min. Even if he was there for only 1 hr that's another 25 min to attend to C.Y., clean her feet, drug her, put her back to bed. Possible? Certainly so.

Actually I meant when did MF clean CY? I agree completely he had time to do that and clean her up.

 

[Just the Fax]

JTF, under that scenario, when would MF have cleaned up CY? When she got there?

They floated she had a gap in her time-line after 2:30AM.

 

[bobloblaw]

Sorry, folks, I'm not crying a river over this. Unlike most of the contributors to this forum, I tend to believe in innocent until proven guilty. I am disheartened by the volume of posters who were convinced of guilt before the first voir dire. However...

While you commiserate and ponder how this could have happened, take a moment and listen to the closing arguments of the defense, particular the recitation of mileage and fuel purchases. As you listen, remember that the State has the burden of proving its assertions and allegations, and cannot conveniently "explain away" things with no proof.

I don't remember the specifics, but I was paying attention when defense counsel related stipulated mileages and evidence of fuel purchases. Discounting an alleged purchase in King, NC, where the cursing customer was a little taller than a 5' 0" clerk and the identification was based on showing a single photograph rather than an array, the Explorer got 19.55 MPG from Hugo to the fillup somewhere in western VA. The next fillup was in Burlington, where the average was 19.5 or so. That seems to hold up pretty well.

Now, about the alleged King NC purchase...

Using the ~19.5 mpg number, had Jason driven to the Hampton Inn, returned to his home to commit murder, and then driven back to the motel, he would have run out of fuel 18 miles from the King station. Oh, go ahead and say he could have stopped and purchased fuel, but if he did, why in the world did he stop in King, but more importantly, where was any evidence introduced to show this additional purchase.

Further, using the stipulated mileage figures and the stipulated gasoline price of $2.16, had Jason made the surreptitious purchase at King, he would have had to maintain 38 mpg to the next fuel stop. Oh, go ahead and say he could have stopped anywhere, but remember, it the burden of the state to PROVE that he purchased just enough additional fuel to make the mileage figures work. And why oh why, if he was the cursing customer, did he only pump $15 from a $20 bill and then stop yet again for some small purchase to make that consistent 19.5 mpg work out.

My fellow sleuths, whatever else was presented regarding with whom he slept, whether he engaged in childish behavior, swallowed wedding rings, cheated and wrote long emails, you prove to me that the fuel mileage argument is NOT reasonable doubt.

Sure, the red rocks and hush puppies and mangled cameras and clean babies and hush puppy footprints are very interesting, but get me beyond the mileage argument laid out at closing without resorting to "he could have." Anybody could have done anything. That's no way to incarcerate a man for life.

Flame away.

Great post. Its hard to get by his alibi. I have reasonable doubt.

 

[cody100]

Great post. Its hard to get by his alibi. I have reasonable doubt.

I thought when I heard the closing, that this might be enough reasonable doubt. I personally think he is guilty, but there is no proof he bought additional gas. That seemed to catch at least one juror's attention when it was being presented.

 

[Prancy]

They floated she had a gap in her time-line after 2:30AM.

I wonder if any on the jury wondered about that and the report from the Post Office worker who saw a woman with bushy hair coming from scene the next morning. Did they give the testimony from postal employee and news carrier any weight?

Also, why do you think the jury asked for the 911 transcript? What in that transcript would help convict JY?

 

[gracielee]

Something to think about if you are ever foreman of a jury:

Going through every piece of evidence, every witness, every circumstance carefully before taking an anonymous straw vote is a good idea. That way each piece of evidence can be discussed before anyone even has to write a vote on a little slip of paper. Certainly no one ends up on the spot and having to "hold fast or save face" this way.

Each witness can be evaluated based upon jurors feelings about their credibility and accuracy (not necessarily the same thing.) Each piece of evidence can be evaluated and discussed for suggesting guilt, suggesting innocence, or neither. Relative importance of evidence can be discussed as it is right there in front of you. Maybe, in looking slowly through the evidence, someone will see something (like those trash bags on the counter by the open cupboard) that no one else noticed. I think it's much harder to do what I suggest when the evidence can't be taken into the jury room. What a crappy law!

I always wonder at these long trials that come back with a verdict really fast, or even "hang fast" like this one. I wonder what procedure they used to go through things, or if they just opened with a show of hands vote and went on to debate from there.

Even if this remains hung, he will be convicted upon retrial. At this point it is just tax money going up in flames if it becomes a do-over, but that's the system we have and I think it's the best we can do.

I recall a couple trials where the foreperson, after a hung jury, said 'some juror/s simply refused to deliberate'. They came to their opinion and refused to discuss it anymore. Cases like that, it doesn't pay to drag it out. MOO

 

[lib's mom]

The defense suggested MF cleaned CY.....does it not make sense JLY did that????
I can't believe they did not address that.
So many missed opportunities to win this case.

Next time, I would go in and concede in the opening there is possible evidence of more than 1 in the house during the murder. Kill the unknown DNA, cig butts and size 10 shoes right off the bat.

Just jumping off your post JTF,

I think you're absolutely right about conceding someone else was in that house. Some people here brushed aside the post office lady's testimony (Mrs. Beaver, I think was her name); I found her extremely believable. Add her testimony to the NY Times delivery lady and mix in the written testimony submitted and stipulated to by both sides (I'm guessing she also saw something that morning) and I fully believe that house was lit up that morning at 5:30 a.m. and there were other people there. And no, the N and O delivery man did *not* make those other three testimonys go away for me.

I still think JLY is involved, but I'm wondering if maybe someone on that jury didn't also wonder about THREE other people who saw a lit up house/two people there that morning and didn't feel it was adequately addressed by the prosecution.

 

[Wyn]

The rain ...falls upon the just and the unjust alike; a thing which would not happen if I were superintending the rain's affairs. No, I would rain softly and sweetly on the just, but if I caught a sample of the unjust outdoors I would drown him.
- Mark Twain

 

[Madeleine74]

Ominous thunder happening now...

 

[Wyn]

Ominous thunder happening now...

It's very appropriate isn't it?

 

[cody100]

Yes, these have been some good thunderstorms. Needed the rain.

 

[Madeleine74]

Why would the foreman say they "had a little more work to do?"

If they are 6 and 6 that says, to me, they have a lot more work to do...if they are going to try and get to a verdict.

 

[otto]

I thought when I heard the closing, that this might be enough reasonable doubt. I personally think he is guilty, but there is no proof he bought additional gas. That seemed to catch at least one juror's attention when it was being presented.

One, or perhaps six. The gas mileage, Jason testifying, the prosecution giving up because they didn't want him to lie on the stand ... many reasons to have doubts.

 

[gracielee]

Ominous thunder happening now...

Long, rolling thunder and very dark skies out here in Northwestern Johnston Co.

 

[Wyn]

That's just not a fair statement. These jurors have a much greater responsibility than us anonymous internet posters. Just because they haven't come to the same conclusion as you (and me too...I believe he is guilty) doesn't mean they aren't bright. It means they aren't willing to send someone to jail for the rest of their life with the obvious holes in this case. As much as I wanted this to be, it is absolutely not a slam dunk case. But I applaud these jurors for doing their job, regardless of the end result.

My opinion remains that they've not done their best. Maybe if two or three thought he was innocent, but not half the jury.

 

[otto]

My opinion remains that they've not done their best. Maybe if two or three thought he was innocent, but not half the jury.

If they continue to try to do their best, they may end up with 2 or 3 that think he is guilty.

 

[ncsu95]

Totally agree, if this is the best Wake Co. has to offer, CW better be out scouring law schools for new graduates. Those with some balls. Boz Z, at that other trial, was criticized by some. That's what is needed IMO. Namby-pamby is right, Maddie. :banghead:

I think Boz has tremendous potential. I criticized him heavily for some of the tactics he used and the way he talked down to defense witnesses. Also the way he lied/manipulated the judge and the lies he told in closing arguments. But out of all of the prosecutors in both trials, he has the potential to be the best.

 

[Wyn]

If they continue to try to do their best, they may end up with 2 or 3 that think he is guilty.

I guess they think he's just the unluckiest guy around with all those "coincidences". Poor *advertiser censored*. :innocent:

 

[Melanie]

Just curious what you all think...

The jury is made of of 7 men and 5 women.

Any guess on the gender makeup of the not guilty group of 6? :crazy:

tip-toeing in to merely specultate. Maybe 6 men who really don't like their wives? Again...just my :twocents:

MOO

Mel

 

[NCB]

How badly does BC wish he went second right about now?

I wonder, with the repeated concerns about the media, if the flack over the BC verdict/trial publicity has had an effect on any of these jurors. I noted they asked about security/media again on the day of closings--when people were standing in the back and against the wall to hear arguments.
It may not have had any effect on their deliberations, but it certainly impacted how JS paced this trial. MOO