Jason Young to get new trial #3

[Grammy Jean]

I'm not saying it proves his guilt.

I think I'm agreeing with you in that math and science don't lie. So both sides need to make a convincing presentation about the gas mileage and how it supports their case -- I can't see a scenario where it could support both.

I did hear the explanation of gas mileage in the first trial, but for some reason it was left out in the second trial. So that makes me wonder if some additional information was discovered between the first and second trial.

What I'm saying is that hard evidence and numbers about gas mileage - and what's possible and what's not - would be enough to convince me, whichever side it definitively supports or definitively refutes. KWIM?

Very good point that I did not think about before. Why was that gas mileage not use by the DT in trial 2? There has to be a reason.

 

[sunshine05]

Three weeks late? After he spent his anniversary with his girlfriend? He cared enough to research it? I wish I could remember what he said on the envelope. Too lazy to look it up. I don't buy it.

You are changing the subject now --- claiming he was a poor husband for looking for a gift three weeks late. JY was doing this to please MF and LF because he knew they were disappointed that he didn't but her something special for their anniversary.

Did you know that he made her a hand-made anniversary card with Starbuck's gift cards because he knew how much she loved Starbuck's? That wasn't good enough for the mother and the sister. He only searched for a 3rd anniversary gift because they were on his case about it.

I am not excusing the affair but he did get her a gift even w/o the purse and then he researched the purses because of all the family pressure (totally intrusive into their marriage, IMO).

 

[oenophile]

My mind just i a flashback to the Jodi Arias case. Would'nt it be possible JY had gas in a gas can and later got rid of the gas can.

Most things are possible, but this is one of those examples where someone takes incredibly improbable scenarios that aren't supported by evidence in order to do an end-run-around actual evidence.

Isn't it possible that MY had a boyfriend on the side that no one knew about? Of course there is zero evidence to support this, and there should be evidence if she did, but that is an example of an incredibly improbable scenario that would solve the "it must have been rage" conclusion.

 

[oenophile]

Very good point that I did not think about before. Why was that gas mileage not use by the DT in trial 2? There has to be a reason.

I'm curious about that as well.

 

[citygirl]

Ok but why steal valuable property (and commit a brutal murder in the process) if you can't pawn the items or turn them into cash? That's why it doesn't make sense, and that's why the failure to recover any of the items or even receive any leads points more towards a staged crime scene, a staged robbery and a killer with a different motive.

Operative words: it doesn't make sense.

 

[oenophile]

Sorry, IMO, with all due respect weak argument. The killer gave them away? After all that work? I'm beginning to see the light.

I'm not trying to make a convincing argument. I'm saying that there are lots and lots of possible reasons.

 

[sunshine05]

Very good point that I did not think about before. Why was that gas mileage not use by the DT in trial 2? There has to be a reason.

Time. They had more to go through with all of the civil case stuff. They only have so much time and have to prioritize. The numbers haven't changed. The gas mileage is still consistent with his trip, does not work for the State's theory.

 

[minor4th]

Where I differ with you is that I do not believe anything points to a staged crime scene unless you first assume it is staged.



I don't know why you would steal valuable property without pawning it (didn't someone earlier in this thread say that no real valuable property was missing so it couldn't have been a robbery?). But there could be a completely valid reason which is more valid than a staged scene.

Well, you know it's my opinion at the moment that there was no robbery. But we're just tossing around ideas, and what I see is what looks like a staged robbery. Do we know what was contained in the two drawers?

Michelle's ring was also stolen - it's worth something. But I don't see a robber killing her just to get that ring if they can't pawn it or sell it. That's part of why it looks staged to me. Especially in light of Jason's history with wedding rings and the significance he apparently attached to them.

 

[minor4th]

My mind just i a flashback to the Jodi Arias case. Would'nt it be possible JY had gas in a gas can and later got rid of the gas can.

LOL. Sure it's POSSIBLE, but ...

 

[citygirl]

Being separated from your father and then discovering the possibility that he was unjustly brought to trial for the murder of your mother can be extremely traumatic in later years. I have no doubt that she is being well cared for now. However, there are long term ramifications of the murder trials. Not to mention that she is not developing a relationship with her father, which can also be harmful to her upbringing and later life.

Even more traumatic would be that her father was JUSTLY charged. No easy life for CY. Why did Daddy elect to give her up? MY's family was looking for visitation rights. And he said, you can have her! He gave her up!

 

[minor4th]

Time. They had more to go through with all of the civil case stuff. They only have so much time and have to prioritize. The numbers haven't changed. The gas mileage is still consistent with his trip, does not work for the State's theory.

I really wouldn't be so sure of that. It was the most persuasive part of Jason's defense and could exonerate him. I can't imagine why his defense would not present that information if it remained exactly the same as the first trial.

His criminal defense attorneys would not have been the ones working on the civil suit. And in fact, it seems no one was really paying it any time or attention. Jason defaulted and did not present a case. His family law attorneys negotiated the custody matter - bit his criminal attorneys would remain focused on his criminal trial.

 

[Grammy Jean]

LOL. Sure it's POSSIBLE, but ...

Yeah yeah I must admit pretty weak. It just brought Jodi Arias to mind

 

[citygirl]

I thought the prosecution team in the first trial was much more respectable than the second trial. Cummings has a way of bullying defense witnesses that literally makes me sick to my stomach. The prosecutor in the first trial did his job but did not cross the line when it comes to questioning witnesses. Cummings did the same thing in the Cooper trial. I find it very offensive and unethical.

The first trial was a hung jury? I can understand why you preferred the prosecutors in that trial. Have you had occasion to watch the prosecutors in the Oscar Pistorius trial? Not like our system. Pitbulls, the lot. They pull no punches. Cummings looks like a beagle in comparison.

 

[citygirl]

You commented - it cuts both ways --- not a fact that his car was not there. I was pointing out that is WAS a fact that his car was not there at a time where if someone was casing the house, his car could not have been there.

Who said anything about someone casing the house? Really lost. Sorry.

 

[sunshine05]

My mind just i a flashback to the Jodi Arias case. Would'nt it be possible JY had gas in a gas can and later got rid of the gas can.

No, because the gas receipts match up perfectly with his trip mileage and do not work at all for the State's theory --- the round trip back to Raleigh. I can't see any way he could have calculated things "just so" with the use of a gas can. I believe he would have needed several gas cans. Then what happens to Gracie's claim that he was there because he's running out of gas at 5:30AM. It simply does not work. Period.

 

[citygirl]

You are changing the subject now --- claiming he was a poor husband for looking for a gift three weeks late. JY was doing this to please MF and LF because he knew they were disappointed that he didn't but her something special for their anniversary.

Did you know that he made her a hand-made anniversary card with Starbuck's gift cards because he knew how much she loved Starbuck's? That wasn't good enough for the mother and the sister. He only searched for a 3rd anniversary gift because they were on his case about it.

I am not excusing the affair but he did get her a gift even w/o the purse and then he researched the purses because of all the family pressure (totally intrusive into their marriage, IMO).

And you know this how? Who gave you that information? Also not convinced that you aren't excusing his affair. Seems to me that you are. I have no problem with that. Just own it.

 

[sunshine05]

Who said anything about someone casing the house? Really lost. Sorry.

cg - please go back and read post #87.

 

[Grammy Jean]

No, because the gas receipts match up perfectly with his trip mileage and do not work at all for the State's theory --- the round trip back to Raleigh. I can't see any way he could have calculated things "just so" with the use of a gas can. I believe he would have needed several gas cans. Then what happens to Gracie's claim that he was there because he's running out of gas at 5:30AM. It simply does not work. Period.

I have admitted this gas can idea was a weak suggestion by me. But I still can not in any way understand why the DT did not use this gas presentation in trial 2. I can not go along with your idea that they did not have time. I think there has to be something more

 

[minor4th]

Being separated from your father and then discovering the possibility that he was unjustly brought to trial for the murder of your mother can be extremely traumatic in later years. I have no doubt that she is being well cared for now. However, there are long term ramifications of the murder trials. Not to mention that she is not developing a relationship with her father, which can also be harmful to her upbringing and later life.

When it comes to children, however, especially children in their tender years - the court considers only the best interest of the child. That includes the child's stability, the child's safety, the caregivers' ability and willingness to allow the child to maintain relationships with other family members/extended family - especially when a parent is deceased.

And there's a weighing of the potential harm and the gravity of that harm.

Jason Young has been indicted for first degree murder of Cassidy's mother. In addition he was actively alienating Cassidy from any of her mothers side of the family.

Although Jason Young is innocent under the law until proven guilty, the family court is not so interested in whether the State can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Jason murdered CY's mother. They consider whether there's enough evidence to justify restricting JY's access to Cassidy, and the family court is going to err on the side of caution to protect the child.

Not developing a closer relationship with her father is an acceptable outcome for the child when weighed against the possibility of her being physically harmed or killed by her father.

If Jason Young were given primary custody, and he didn't allow MY's family to maintain a relationship with her - then there's much more turmoil if he's convicted, and CY is either placed in foster care or moved to relatives who have become strangers. Worse, if Jason is a murderer and suffers from certain personality disorders, Cassidy's life could be at risk if Jason decides to end it with murder/suicide, rather than face life in prison and give up his daughter to his accusers.

See Joshua Powell case for example

http://deseretnews.com/article/7053...-family-Susan-Powells-sister-says.html?pg=all

 

[sunshine05]

I really wouldn't be so sure of that. It was the most persuasive part of Jason's defense and could exonerate him. I can't imagine why his defense would not present that information if it remained exactly the same as the first trial.

His criminal defense attorneys would not have been the ones working on the civil suit. And in fact, it seems no one was really paying it any time or attention. Jason defaulted and did not present a case. His family law attorneys negotiated the custody matter - bit his criminal attorneys would remain focused on his criminal trial.

Correction: The Defense did cover this at trial 2 as well. It's a little bit different in that he covers the entire timeline with phone calls and everything.
Begin @ 44:40
http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/video/10800874/