Jason Young to get new trial #4

[citygirl]

It wasn't just about "dressing down" for the NTO. He needed a pair of shoes to wear! Would you not buy a new pair of shoes if you had no access to any of your things? There is nothing odd about that.

He had a pair of shoes. They were dress shoes.

 

[citygirl]

I found another image of CY's bathroom from a different angle so thought I would share it here. The door was definitely closed when some of them were made due to the location of them. Also, there are no prints exiting that bathroom that I can see. They all go inward.

Chilling. You can see where she might have laid on her back and made bloody swipes with her feet. Disgusting. Poor child. Just awful.

 

[sunshine05]

Cracker Barrel

 

[sunshine05]

He had a pair of shoes. They were dress shoes.

Exactly. That's why he bought a new pair.

 

[sunshine05]

Footprints on pillow -

 

[citygirl]

Exactly. That's why he bought a new pair.

Help me out here. Were his dress shoes not comfortable? His wife had just been murdered and he was focusing on what shoes to wear to the NTO? I'm having a hard time getting my head around this.

 

[TorisMom003]

If the dress shoes were acceptable for him to wear during his drive to the hotel the night of his wife's murder, then surely they were acceptable enough for him to wear them to the NTO. And why wear the dress shoes to the hotel when his meeting was not until the next morning? Why not wear comfortable shoes that are not dressy and put the dressy shoes in his suitcase?

 

[SStarr33]

Help me out here. Were his dress shoes not comfortable? His wife had just been murdered and he was focusing on what shoes to wear to the NTO? I'm having a hard time getting my head around this.

I cannot imagine wearing the same shoes for more than two days in a row--I don't care what happened. And if I only have dress shoes and I am wearing comfy clothes, I am going to buy a new pair, or I am going to have someone run out and get me a pair . Seems completely normal to me.

 

[SStarr33]

If the dress shoes were acceptable for him to wear during his drive to the hotel the night of his wife's murder, then surely they were acceptable enough for him to wear them to the NTO. And why wear the dress shoes to the hotel when his meeting was not until the next morning? Why not wear comfortable shoes that are not dressy and put the dressy shoes in his suitcase?

Um, they confiscated some of his shoes.

 

[sunshine05]

Help me out here. Were his dress shoes not comfortable? His wife had just been murdered and he was focusing on what shoes to wear to the NTO? I'm having a hard time getting my head around this.

What difference does it make? Are you trying to suggest that the shoes he had were the murder shoes? Remember that there was no blood in his vehicle or at the HI. Clearly they were NOT at the crime scene.

 

[Madeleine74]

Allegedly the shoes he had on at the Cracker Barrel were determined to be similar to the Orbital HP sole shoes that left the prints in MY's blood in her BR. If I recall correctly, a guy from the HP shoe company testified, in addition to the shoe specialist from the SBI. There was also someone else consulted with (from the FBI) though I don't remember if they testified or not.

The implication though was, to the extent shoes can be visually ID'd based on whatever quality photo/video was available from the Cracker Barrel, it appeared that JY was wearing those HP shoes. However, this is not a definitive level of ID in and of itself. By itself it's not proof and additional corroborating evidence is necessary. The fact that JY did own these very shoes is one factor. JY claimed his wife must have given away the shoes to Goodwill, but that doesn't make sense. Why would MY determine the wearability of JY's shoes or not? He would determine that. I found it interesting that one of his defense attorneys claimed (during closing) that JY's shoes were still in his closet and the killer must have walked around in them. The other defense attorney claimed in his closing that JY's wife had donated those shoes to Goodwill. The orbital sole shoes in a size 12 are rare enough (even with related styles that also use that sole) that a jury would have to wonder about the likelihood a random killer just happened to have a pair of the exact same size and sole type shoes and that person just happened to murder MY.

Keep in mind at the time his vehicle was seized by LE the night of MY's murder and taken to be processed at the CCBI, investigators knew nothing about what evidence did or did not exist in the way of video/photos at either Cracker Barrel or the HI hotel. They would have had no idea at that time that he even owned HP shoes nor were the footprints ID'd at that time. They would not have known about what clothes he wore at restaurant, the changed clothes he wore around midnight or any of that. All of those areas of info would come later, but on Nov 2nd, 3rd timeframe they would have none of that info.

One last point, not about the shoes, but about the patio door.

It was locked when MF and investigators first got there. That's in testimony. One of the LE guys unlocked the back patio door and there's been confusion about doors being left unlocked. That one was never left unlocked until LE did so during their walkthrough.

 

[SStarr33]

Allegedly the shoes he had on at the Cracker Barrel were determined to be similar to the Orbital HP sole shoes that left the prints in MY's blood in her BR. If I recall correctly, a guy from the HP shoe company testified, in addition to the shoe specialist from the SBI. There was also someone else consulted with (from the FBI) though I don't remember if they testified or not.

The implication though was, to the extent shoes can be visually ID'd based on whatever quality photo/video was available from the Cracker Barrel, it appeared that JY was wearing those HP shoes. However, this is not a definitive level of ID in and of itself. By itself it's not proof and additional corroborating evidence is necessary. The fact that JY did own these very shoes is one factor. JY claimed his wife must have given away the shoes to Goodwill, but that doesn't make sense. Why would MY determine the wearability of JY's shoes or not? He would determine that. I found it interesting that one of his defense attorneys claimed (during closing) that JY's shoes were still in his closet and the killer must have walked around in them. The other defense attorney claimed in his closing that JY's wife had donated those shoes to Goodwill. The orbital sole shoes in a size 12 are rare enough (even with related styles that also use that sole) that a jury would have to wonder about the likelihood a random killer just happened to have a pair of the exact same size and sole type shoes and that person just happened to murder MY.

Keep in mind at the time his vehicle was seized by LE the night of MY's murder and taken to be processed at the CCBI, investigators knew nothing about what evidence did or did not exist in the way of video/photos at either Cracker Barrel or the HI hotel. They would have had no idea at that time that he even owned HP shoes nor were the footprints ID'd at that time. They would not have known about what clothes he wore at restaurant, the changed clothes he wore around midnight or any of that. All of those areas of info would come later, but on Nov 2nd, 3rd timeframe they would have none of that info.

One last point, not about the shoes, but about the patio door.

It was locked when MF and investigators first got there. That's in testimony. One of the LE guys unlocked the back patio door and there's been confusion about doors being left unlocked. That one was never left unlocked until LE did so during their walkthrough.

Link please about the door being locked. Here is where Agent Galloway says the door was unlocked and the gate was open:

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/video/10723727/

 

[Madeleine74]

Go listen to the testimony of the first office on the scene. He testified he checked all the doors and windows and everything he checked (including the back patio door) was locked. That does not include the broken garage door. I'm only commenting on the back patio door. Agent Galloway was not the first, second, third, or even fourth person on the scene at Birchleaf Drive. Gotta go with the first one who was there.

Link: http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/video/10703577/

 

[SStarr33]

Go listen to the testimony of the first office on the scene. He testified he checked all the doors and windows and everything he checked (including the back patio door) was locked. That does not include the broken garage door. I'm only commenting on the back patio door. Agent Galloway was not the first, second, third, or even fourth person on the scene at Birchleaf Drive. Gotta go with the first one who was there.

Per Salem's post above, please provide a link.

TIA.

 

[sunshine05]

Allegedly the shoes he had on at the Cracker Barrel were determined to be similar to the Orbital HP sole shoes that left the prints in MY's blood in her BR. If I recall correctly, a guy from the HP shoe company testified, in addition to the shoe specialist from the SBI. There was also someone else consulted with (from the FBI) though I don't remember if they testified or not.

The implication though was, to the extent shoes can be visually ID'd based on whatever quality photo/video was available from the Cracker Barrel, it appeared that JY was wearing those HP shoes. However, this is not a definitive level of ID in and of itself. By itself it's not proof and additional corroborating evidence is necessary. The fact that JY did own these very shoes is one factor. JY claimed his wife must have given away the shoes to Goodwill, but that doesn't make sense. Why would MY determine the wearability of JY's shoes or not? He would determine that. I found it interesting that one of his defense attorneys claimed (during closing) that JY's shoes were still in his closet and the killer must have walked around in them. The other defense attorney claimed in his closing that JY's wife had donated those shoes to Goodwill. The orbital sole shoes in a size 12 are rare enough (even with related styles that also use that sole) that a jury would have to wonder about the likelihood a random killer just happened to have a pair of the exact same size and sole type shoes and that person just happened to murder MY.

Keep in mind at the time his vehicle was seized by LE the night of MY's murder and taken to be processed at the CCBI, investigators knew nothing about what evidence did or did not exist in the way of video/photos at either Cracker Barrel or the HI hotel. They would have had no idea at that time that he even owned HP shoes nor were the footprints ID'd at that time. They would not have known about what clothes he wore at restaurant, the changed clothes he wore around midnight or any of that. All of those areas of info would come later, but on Nov 2nd, 3rd timeframe they would have none of that info.

One last point, not about the shoes, but about the patio door.

It was locked when MF and investigators first got there. That's in testimony. One of the LE guys unlocked the back patio door and there's been confusion about doors being left unlocked. That one was never left unlocked until LE did so during their walkthrough.

According to JY's testimony, he only knew that he was no longer wearing those shoes because they weren't comfortable. He was only guessing that MY may have donated them to charity but he couldn't be sure. I see nothing wrong with speculation that someone could have planted one of the shoe prints at the scene. There was something odd going on with shoes because even MY's closet had a bunch of opened shoe boxes on the floor.

Also, the one shoe print on the pillow case (Franklin?) looks fairly light. The other one appeared to have been saturated on blood before it was imprinted. We really don't know but I don't think it's far fetched to consider that it could have been a staged print. I still and will always believe that the prints in CY's bathroom were staged.

Thank you for the information about the patio door. Galloway's testimony always gave me the impression that he was the first to try that door.

 

[TorisMom003]

Wake County patrol Deputy Scott Earp was the first LE on scene. Earp testified that the patio door would not open from the outside. The knob would turn in his hand, however the door itself would not open. He felt the patio door was locked by the dead bolt.

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/video/9707479/

 

[Nymeria]

I cannot imagine wearing the same shoes for more than two days in a row--I don't care what happened. And if I only have dress shoes and I am wearing comfy clothes, I am going to buy a new pair, or I am going to have someone run out and get me a pair . Seems completely normal to me.

What??
Am I reading this wrong?
You can not wear the same shoes 2 days in a row?
I think I am tired and not grasping your post :facepalm:

PS- Unless you are in fact Imelda Marcos :giggle:

 

[TorisMom003]

According to Crime Scene Investigator Michael Galloway's testimony there was "small bloody footwear impressions" on the carpet at the top of the stairs leading to the hall (CY's) bathroom. There was also "bloody footwear impressions" in the hall (CY's) bathroom. He also said that on the wall in that bathroom "there appear to be bloody footwear impressions".

Since he called the bloody footprints in the bathroom, that was clearly made by CY, "bloody footwear impressions" then one can conclude that the "small bloody footwear impressions" in the hall leading to that bathroom also came from CY. Also in the video it appears that those hall bloody footprints appear to be the same size as the ones in that bathroom. Then it appears that CY was not carried into that bathroom but walked in there on her own.

This part of his testimony can be heard beginning around 38:47 in the following video.

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/video/10723727/

MOO

 

[Glenn101]

I am new to this forum, although not entirely new to the case. I approach everything with a presumption of innocence just as I would if I were a juror. I actually have only come close to being a juror once,so I really do not know the view from the inside.
With any trial, I am looking for evidence, whether it be direct or circumstantial, in order to come to a conclusion of guilt or innocence. In this case, I probably do not have enough facts to make a really informed choice.

For instance, the gas mileage receipts paint a picture that is pretty consistent. But I do not have enough information on the Ford Explorer to get much further.
For a Ford SUV with a V8 engine, 19.5 MPG is a stretch, but still within the realms of possibility. However, with a 4.0 liter V6, 19.5 MPG is doable.

I did a bit of math myself, adding the miles from Hillsville back to Raleigh, to King NC, back to Hillsville, to Clintwood, and the Duffield. A total of around 550 miles. If JY had filled up in Hillsville before allegedly heading back to Raleigh, then picked up 6.94 gallons of gas in King, then added a little over nineteen gallons in Duffield, that would require that his vehicle average 20.7 or more MPG. For a 4.0 V6 engine, this is a bit of a stretch, but not out of the realm of possibility.

If Jason would have had to have filled up in Hillsville or not too far out on his alleged return trip, or the apparent gas mileage would have really been out of whack.

That being said, it is the prosecutions job to provide evidence that Jason did fill up in Hillsville or between Hillsville and Raleigh. Thus far, they have not done so. To me, that is a fatal flaw in their theory, although the last jury did not seem to be bothered by that too much.

I have the same problem with shoes. The prosecution has no evidence that Jason ever purchased a pair of size ten Franklin shoes. I have a problem with the theory that he wore them to throw investigators off track. I have a size 11 foot and can squeeze my feet into a size ten. I have a handicapped son who does have size ten foot and I tried to put on his shoes by mistake a couple of weeks ago. I never made it. I just cannot imagine getting into a shoe two sizes too small.

Any supposed plans, etc. having to do with those unidentified shoes on Jason's part is just conjecture unsupported by any evidence. I am big on evidence and not much for conjecture.

I don't put too much stock in Jason's other girl friends as a motive for wanting to get rid of Michelle. There are a lot of people in adulterous relationships that do not commit murder. And there are some that do. But Jason seemed to have a "good thing" going, i.e. he was having his cake and eating it too. A wife with a good income and a couple on the side. Not a very nice guy in that respect. But, to me, not enough for a murder motive. In fact, maybe just the opposite. This is a toss-up to me. My opinion could change with evidence that Michelle had found out and was maybe priming for a divorce.

I am wondering why Michelle was still fully dressed in the middle of the night. I have not seen that aspect explained anywhere yet. It may have been covered in other threads. Is this something that was normal for her, wearing her regular clothes to bed? If she like most women that I know, she would change into her night clothes before going to bed, and maybe even lounge around in them while watching TV or working with her laptop just before retiring.
If she were in the more normal habit of donning bed clothes, such as pajamas or a nightgown, that to me, would indicate an earlier time for the murder to have occurred rather then some time around three or three thirty A.M.

A thought on Cassidy's "excited utterance" about "mommy being spanked for biting". I am wondering just what a surprised intruder would have done if being bitten by a person he/she was trying to subdue???

I am also a bit confused by the supposed attempted strangulation marks. The killer supposedly was trying to strangle Michelle but became enraged when she fought back and beat her too death with a blunt object that has not been found. Where did the intruder get the object? Did he/she bring it in or pickit up out of the room? Was there anything found to be missing from the room or from JY;s SUV that could have been used? Was it close enough at hand to just switch suddenly from strangulation to bludgeoning? Or did someone else hand it to the would be strangler, or did someone else than the would be strangler wield that blunt object?

These are thoughts and questions that have occurred to me over time.

Glenn (I use the handle Glenn101 because I am just basic.)

 

[Nymeria]

:welcome: Glenn!