Will he get bail?

[Anderson]

I have not been biased toward the treatment of "these people" as I have not treated them at all. I am friends with one of "these people" and that person has been shown nothing but my compassion and respect in regards to this situation. I have never once suggested that her friends are lying, only that her friends can only relay what was told to them and that even in the custody hearing, none of them had witnessed what was told to them with their very own eyes.

Oh okay, I stand corrected about your intentions. (BTW, for the record, Krista and HP did witness things first hand.)

As for posting about a specific person in this situation, I posted it in a forum labeled "theories" which are definitively based on speculation and have no basis in fact. .

Okay, that is your view. Theories are usually based on something more significant in my experience.

NC's friends are not on trial nor is another person charged with the murder of NC. There is no other party in which to show bias. I don't owe it to this board or NC's friends to determine his absolute guilt in the absence of solid evidence.

Nobody expects you to determine his 'absolute guilt' or innocence on this board.

 

[jmflu]

I've come to the conclusion that some do not follow the trail of evidence where it leads, therefore they stand solidly on the defense. Only when the official person gives the word, i.e. "He's guilty" do they then accept it. Others take off on the trail and follow every lead and as they get closer and closer to one destination it leads them to believe strongly that it has led them there for a reason. No one will pull the plug on him until it's official, but until then these two camps will never agree because one camp stands and watches, waiting for the decision to be told to them, while the other wants to determine the answer to the puzzle themselves.

 

[Anderson]

I've come to the conclusion that some do not follow the trail of evidence where it leads, therefore they stand solidly on the defense. Only when the official person gives the word, i.e. "He's guilty" do they then accept it. Others take off on the trail and follow every lead and as they get closer and closer to one destination it leads them to believe strongly that it has led them there for a reason. No one will pull the plug on him until it's official, but until then these two camps will never agree because one camp stands and watches, waiting for the decision to be told to them, while the other wants to determine the answer to the puzzle themselves.

Great point!

 

[RaleighNC]

Oh - there's plenty of evidence - it's just circumstantial.

Brad admits to cleaning - something very much out of the ordinary
Brad doesn't go out looking for her when she's late even though he's set to play tennis at 9:30. Since they've not been getting along, I think he would have been in the car trying to find her (annoyed that she changed his plans).
Brad does not give her the $300. They argue about it Fri. afternoon, and yet he doesn't stop to get money, he doesn't give it to her at the party, or "the next morning". The argument just didn't go away - esp since Nancy needed the money to get some clothes for the girls. Brad testified that Friday was her "payday".
Brad's doing laundry and other things and he doesn't see her leave and what he said she was wearing does not match how she was found.
Brad no longer will speak to law enforcement.
Brad lawyered up with a firm for a CRIMINAL DEFENSE very early after her disappearance. I still believe the old saying that truth is the best defense and he didn't need a lawyer (if he were innocent).
2 or 3 days prior to NC's death - the garage was a disaster. The day of, one could pull a car in there.
Brad's car's trunk was meticulously cleaned and he didn't clean the interior???
Brad explained cleaning the trunk due to gas spillage, yet there was no detectable odor.

there's more, there's lots more - much of it given by Brad himself.

As I have said on more than one occasion - this is NOT even close enough for a conviction. And I could not convict based on this.

However, one can intelligently surmise that the DA has more EVIDENCE than what he has against Jason Young, and I consider that pretty substantial. One can also surmise that the Grand Jury felt that enough evidence existed.

So - couple all the above with statistics on homicides being committed by spouses and the folks that are in the "I think BC is guilty" camp don't look quite like the crazy lynch mob that you portray. I don't want revenge, just justice. And I believe that a guilty verdict will be justice in this case.

Statistics on women killed - for some reason I can't copy / paste - but women are 9 times as likely to be killed by a someone they know vs a stranger and other relevant tidbits.

http://www.ncadv.org/files/WhenMenMurderWomen2004_.pdf

 

[jumpstreet]

...one camp stands and watches, waiting for the decision to be told to them, while the other wants to determine the answer to the puzzle themselves.

Jmflu... seems to me the two 'camps' you describe aren't mutually exclusive.

My opinion is that 99.9% of us (involuntarily or otherwise) are in the 'standing and watching' bucket. After all, unless you're out there gumshoeing it, or working in the courthouse, you're left to 'stand/sit' around, waiting for the next bit of news to post on WRAL, WTVD, or wherever. Sure, some have made field trips including recon missions to the courthouse the 'residence', Harris-Teeter, LifeTime Fitness, etc, but I think very few (none?) of us are in a position to generate any actual new significant information relevant to this case. [ Therefore, by necessity, everyone here is primarily just passive yet interested (to different degrees) observers ]

However, I also think that 99.9% of us wouldn't mind determining (or at least knowing) the answer to the puzzle.

Bottom line, in my opinion, most everyone here falls into both the camps you describe: at once standing (probably sitting actually), watching, waiting, and wanting to determine/know the truth.

Still more in this case that we don't know... than what we do. Far more...

 

[ncsu95]

My take on ncsu's question is: (just out of curiosity) historically, how often has this particular DA been correct in his assessment that 'enough evidence' has been gathered.

That seems a reasonable question to be curious about...

If the DA is conservative in moving to trial, and has a strong conviction rate, that's one thing. If he's conservative in moving to trial, but yet still ends up with a very low conviction rate anyway, that's another. How does Wake County's percentage conviction rate compare against other county's. It seems a reasonable question to be curious about (to me).

Well stated....this is basically what I was asking.

 

[ncsu95]

My emotions are not heightened and my hope that all people are given the presumption of innocense until proven guilty by a jury of his/her peers, in a court of law hardly makes my position strongly slanted towards BC. I have never once said that BC did not do it. I have always maintained that he could have, I just have not seen anything to date that has convinced me beyond a reasonable doubt. Bias towards one party over the other? What other party are you referring to?

I feel the exact same way...but we seem to be labeled as friends of Brad or Brad supporters. As I've said before, if he did this, I hope he rots in jail for a very long time. I am definitely not a BC supporter. I think he is a mainly because I have zero tolerance for people that cheat on their spouses.

 

[ncsu95]

rwesafe, I think that everyone would agree that Brad has a right to a trial, and that he will not be given a 'guilty verdict' until a jury has made that decision. In a preliminary way, a grand jury has done that job, although we certainly do not know the details. This certainly does indicate that the case is moving in a certain direction and that would suggest that BC may be guilty. We are following the case on this board, so when we speculate about the possibility that he is guilty, this is in response to developments in the case.

The other party would be NC's friends and supporters. Whether you notice this or not, you have been very biased in your treatment of these people. I think that is partly what SG is pointing to in her post. And you have done this all along, at times hinting that a specific person from this camp may be more deeply involved in the crime. That was certainly unjustified speculation on your part. I would hope that your wish to cause no harm would also be extended here.

I personally think that it is unfair to continually suggest that NC's friends are lying, particularly since it has absolutely no effect on the outcome of the case at this point. They have been true friends to NC in my opinion.

JMHO

Some of this is unfair. Is it not reasonable to discuss alternate theories on a message board even if they have no basis in merit? I recall that MH has been discussed as potentially being involved and his integrity questioned on this site as well.

 

[jmflu]

Some of this is unfair. Is it not reasonable to discuss alternate theories on a message board even if they have no basis in merit? I recall that MH has been discussed as potentially being involved and his integrity questioned on this site as well.

That is because we were following the fact that MH was taken in and questioned and the police seemed to think he was involved.

None of her friends have been suspect!

 

[ncsu95]

I've come to the conclusion that some do not follow the trail of evidence where it leads, therefore they stand solidly on the defense. Only when the official person gives the word, i.e. "He's guilty" do they then accept it. Others take off on the trail and follow every lead and as they get closer and closer to one destination it leads them to believe strongly that it has led them there for a reason. No one will pull the plug on him until it's official, but until then these two camps will never agree because one camp stands and watches, waiting for the decision to be told to them, while the other wants to determine the answer to the puzzle themselves.

And a large group of people speculate about what every little thing means and are able to assign it to mean that a person must be guilty, even if it is really insignificant. I'm certainly not waiting for a decision to be told to me. I don't need to hear jurors saying he is guilty before I believe he is guilty. I just need to see real evidence that would allow me to logically conclude he has to be guilty. As I've said before, I believe Jason Young is guilty...and he hasn't even been arrested.

Honestly, if you take everything that has been made public so far and present just that to a jury, there is absolutely no way that jury could find BC guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. If they did, I would lose faith in our justice system. Obviously there is a bunch of evidence we don't know about...and when that is made public during the trial, I will make up my own mind about his guilt or innocence.

 

[ncsu95]

That is because we were following the fact that MH was taken in and questioned and the police seemed to think he was involved.

None of her friends have been suspect!

So that makes it alright to basically accuse him here on this site? Obviously nothing has come of it, so I doubt that had any real reason to question him on it. I don't care anything about MH, and I think it is okay to speculate about his involvement...but I think it is also okay to have other theories as well, even if they include people that obviously aren't responsible.


And besides...the speculation was not without some merit...it dealt with the text message that NC allegedly received that night...so it dealt with motive. How was that unwarranted? And for the record, I'm 100% sure that JA had absolutely no involvement in the death of NC.

 

[Anderson]

That is because we were following the fact that MH was taken in and questioned and the police seemed to think he was involved.

None of her friends have been suspect!

Funny, I was just about to post exactly the same response! We took note of MH on the board because he was questioned by investigators. At one point, they seemed to believe that MH may have made the phone call that was presumably made by NC. Perhaps FBI specialists came up with an alternate theory. We don't know what happened yet.

As JMFLU notes, NC's friends have never been under investigation as far as we know. I have only seen website posters speculate that one or more of her friends may have been involved. I have never understood why anyone would think that, except to divert attention away from the person who clearly was under investigation.

JMHO

 

[ncsu95]

Funny, I was just about to post exactly the same response! We took note of MH on the board because he was questioned by investigators. At one point, they seemed to believe that MH may have made the phone call that was presumably made by NC. Perhaps FBI specialists came up with an alternate theory. We don't know what happened yet.

As JMFLU notes, NC's friends have never been under investigation as far as we know. I have only seen website posters speculate that one or more of her friends may have been involved. I have never understood why anyone would think that, except to divert attention away from the person who clearly was under investigation.

JMHO

Because it is a message board forum in a thread titled "theories". I didn't agree with the theory, but I didn't think there was anything wrong with discussing it as a theory. It didn't divert attention away except for the people reading the thread. But that's what message board forums are about.

 

[jmflu]

Because it is a message board forum in a thread titled "theories". I didn't agree with the theory, but I didn't think there was anything wrong with discussing it as a theory. It didn't divert attention away except for the people reading the thread. But that's what message board forums are about.

What I don't get though, is why you seem to think that it is harmless and what a message board is all about to discuss NC's friends having played a role, but to discuss MH is accusing him??

 

[Anderson]

Because it is a message board forum in a thread titled "theories". I didn't agree with the theory, but I didn't think there was anything wrong with discussing it as a theory. It didn't divert attention away except for the people reading the thread. But that's what message board forums are about.

We simply have different understandings of what makes a good or plausible theory. I would suggest that a theory should emerge from a set of observations. This is inductive logic. I am sure that investigators would take this sort of approach.

You would accept that pure speculation can also be used in theories. And, this is one definition. This is deductive logic. This is based on assumptions, rather than evidence or observations. That is why we are talking past each other. I do accept that you have a different view of what is acceptable.

 

[per_curiam]

Hyperbole? Word salad. Things are getting repetitious. Let in some fresh air.

Good grief, Charlie Brown. I'm ready for the trial.

 

[ncsu95]

What I don't get though, is why you seem to think that it is harmless and what a message board is all about to discuss NC's friends having played a role, but to discuss MH is accusing him??

I don't. I think it was okay to discuss both.

 

[ncsu95]

We simply have different understandings of what makes a good or plausible theory. I would suggest that a theory should emerge from a set of observations. This is inductive logic. I am sure that investigators would take this sort of approach.

You would accept that pure speculation can also be used in theories. And, this is one definition. This is deductive logic. This is based on assumptions, rather than evidence or observations. That is why we are talking past each other. I do accept that you have a different view of what is acceptable.

I didn't say it was a good theory. I thought it was a ridiculous theory. But I thought it was okay for him to raise it.

 

[jmflu]

Not to beat a dead horse, but this sentence "So that makes it alright to basically accuse him here on this site?" did not sound like you were alright with it.

 

[ncsu95]

ther_beatingA_Dead

:truce: