Guilty of first degree murder/verdict watch #2

[CBTampa]

He had five years to come up with the shirt, shoes & jeans he was last seen wearing. Perhaps, had he at the very least, listened to what the officers had to say that first night, and assisted in the investigation to the point of doing a walk through in his own residence, with his attorney present, to look for missing or moved items........

and yet, he did nothing.

 

[MyBelle]

He had five years to come up with the shirt, shoes & jeans he was last seen wearing. Perhaps, had he at the very least, listened to what the officers had to say that first night, and assisted in the investigation to the point of doing a walk through in his own residence, with his attorney present, to look for missing or moved items........

He wasn't required to prove anything and his silence could not be used against him. Perhaps after scouring the IP and phone records of all jurors--and prosecuting any juror misconduct-- future jurors will follow judge's instructions.

JMO

 

[JoeFromLB]

I'm not aware of any appellate court "second guessing" the deliberations of a jury, as to matters of fact.

If they misapplied the law, well, then that would be grounds to argue for another trial.

 

[Madeleine74]

JY attempted to pass off a look alike pullover on a picture taken at his daughter's 3rd bday party as if it were the one seen on video on 11/2/06. But... no cigar. <pun intended>

 

[BrownRice]

If not for JY, Michelle and Ryan would still be alive, even if there were many people in the room with JY, it is still murder because of JY.

I think that is a comment EVERYBODY can agree on.

 

[gritguy]

Just a reminder - JY is still in jail where he belongs.

 

[gracielee]

Just a reminder - JY is still in jail where he belongs.

Actually, it's even better then that! He's in Central Prison. With Brad Cooper. And hopefully Raven will be joining them shortly. :fence:

 

[MyBelle]

I'm not aware of any appellate court "second guessing" the deliberations of a jury, as to matters of fact.

If they misapplied the law, well, then that would be grounds to argue for another trial.

I'm pretty sure this investigation into juror misconduct is still under Judge Stephens, not the appellate court.

JMO

 

[nursebeeme]

I'm pretty sure this investigation into juror misconduct is still under Judge Stephens, not the appellate court.

JMO

we have a thread to discuss the SBI investigation into unsubstantiated facebook posts.

SBI probe into possible juror misconduct - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

 

[jrb0124]

We'll have to agree to disagree. A jury is not supposed to "surmise" anything. To conclude that he had help because it is the only way to explain the "clean" child is quite a leap. Who was this helper? Why aren't the police seeking this helper?

I think the defense will gain a new trial out of it.

JMO

If each of the 12 jurors can state:

"After deliberating in accordance to the jury instructions, I am convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that MY was murdered, and that JY was at the crime scene when MY was murdered"

...according to the jury instructions, they are directed to find JY Guilty.

Any beliefs or guesses about what happened before during or after that are (according to the jury instructions) irrelevent.

A juror may elect to speak out about why they believe JY was at the crime scene when MY was murdered. You may or may not agree with their logic or rationale for being convinced beyond a reasonable doubt - but that decision is their's alone to make.

Yes, its possible that the jurors may disagree amongst themselves on things like: who cleaned up CY, who left the size 10 prints, who interceded with the camera at the hotel, did JY really smoke a cigar...but as long as they all agree that "beyond a reasonable doubt MY was murdered, and JY was at the crime scene when MY was murdered" - they are directed to vote G. They are not obligated to walk that conclusion backwards through any legal test of logic - nor is their individual decision making process to arrive at that conclusion (short of tampering) subject to appeal.

 

[borndem]

:clap:

There is a section of town in Memphis called Cooper-Young district, I think there will be a section of the prison also titled like this.

:what:
:silly:

 

[Bottle Cap]

The use of the word surmise in a sentence that also contains probably (twice) and possibly, is actually bang-on word usage - extra points for vocabulary.

I'd say that's an intelligent juror. : )

 

[MyBelle]

The way the appeal process works is that a panel of 3 judges will review the complaint and consider the legal errors suggested. IF 2 of those judges concur that legal error contributed to the adverse verdict, they can direct remedy. One form of this is granting a new trial. To be honest though, I highly doubt this will happen.

So do I because I don't believe it will get that far. Judge Stephens still has the case and decisions are at his discretion.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

we have a thread to discuss the SBI investigation into unsubstantiated facebook posts.

SBI probe into possible juror misconduct - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

sorry, I meant to type "case" rather than investigation.

 

[Velouria]

Just a reminder - JY is still in jail where he belongs.

And very unlikely to go anywhere else! :jail:

 

[OneLove]

He wasn't required to prove anything and his silence could not be used against him. Perhaps after scouring the IP and phone records of all jurors--and prosecuting any juror misconduct-- future jurors will follow judge's instructions.

JMO

Yes, but coming up with the "missing" clothing would practically have guaranteed him an acquittal. And what innocent person would not have done that?

As I see it, blaming the jurors, who did their duty, is a continuation of the enabling behaviors that made JY a murdering narcissist in the first place.

I agree with you about prosecuting juror misconduct, if it did indeed happen. But we haven't seen any good evidence of that yet and I hate to see the expense of yet another trial foisted upon the people of that state. It is bad enough that the people of NC have to support JY for life. And another trial will still lead to a guilty verdict.

 

[OneLove]

We'll have to agree to disagree. A jury is not supposed to "surmise" anything. To conclude that he had help because it is the only way to explain the "clean" child is quite a leap. Who was this helper? Why aren't the police seeking this helper?

I think the defense will gain a new trial out of it.

JMO

Whether he had help or not, he did the deed. This argument reminds me of my former fourth graders who, when having to serve a consequence for their misconduct, would argue they shouldn't have to because someone ELSE did the same thing and didn't get caught.

If he had a helper, maybe he will roll on them; maybe not. His prob entirely.

 

[borndem]

Originally Posted by calamityjane831
I need a new trial to follow. Any suggestions?

Junkie! (Typed with love and understanding.)

Is Raven Abaroa ever going to go to trial? That's one I am going grey waiting for.

Hi, CalamityJ and Brit -
I would recommend the Jason (ack!) Williford 1st Degree Murder - Death Penalty attached, trial, scheduled to start (jury selection, that is) on April 9th. It occurred right here in Raleigh, NC (what is in the water?).

Here are a couple of links to get you started.


Taft dies from wounds suffered during attack:
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/7191395/

Suspect in Taft investigation arrested:
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/7434511/

Either of these articles will get you to an entire archive of the news on the case from beginning to present.

I anticipate a lot of WSers will be joining in this case.... We have a couple of weeks or so to "come down" from this one, and then we can settle-in to this one. Somewhere along the line, Abaroa should follow but I don't know when. Then there's Grant Hayes, and I don't know "what all."

 

[janesdean]

His lawyers chose a strategy that put the burden of proof totally on the prosecution. They didn't anticipate that the jury would "surmise" on their own. I think he'll get a new trial and a different strategy will be used.

JMO

bbm
The burden of proof IS on the prosecution, and if he does get a new
trial (highly unlikely) the outcome will be the same. Evidence proves Jason Young murdered his wife, that won't change.

 

[janesdean]

The biggest problem I've had with this case is that the prosecutor encouraged the jury to leap to conclusions without basis in evidence and the Judge seemed to be deluded into thinking a few instructions would rectify any bias. The jurors comments about using his silence as a presumption of guilt or surmising someone else was present along with Jason are but two examples. That area of the country has a terrible reputation for prosecutor/LE misconduct. It seems to be an accepted part of their culture.
I'm betting there will be a new motion for a re-trial shortly.
JMO

bbm
The prosecuter may have left a lot of things "hanging" in the first trial, but certainly did not in the second, this jury had the evidence spelled out for them. The evidence that was devastating to JY was that his "murder" clothes disappeared and Gracie Bailey id'd him, along with the tampering of the cameras JY was toast, it was inevitable.
The defense has no grounds for any motions requesting a new trial, Judge Stephens conducted his court in such a way that was ensured.