Jason Young to get new trial #4

[SteelerGirl43]

I would have to look it up, just like you.
Still looking, but the purchase in KIng, NC would have netted him 6.94 gallons.

Its an 8 with a 22.5 gal gas tank..

 

[JusticeFever]

OK, I thought you were saying he could not get 45 miles out of $15...
(not read about a weeks worth of posts, just scanning and usually reading last 2 or 3 I see.)
Could he have gotten gas in that half hour or so he was "lost"?
I get it that there are no records, does not mean he could not have stopped though, yeah?
I know LE was supposed to have canvased all the stations from home to Timbuktu, but as is said often here, LE can be incompetent at times

Jason didn't get lost until he was very close to his meeting, he missed a turnoff in Clintwood. The very same thing LE also did while following the route.

And, I don't know if Jason had a 6 or 8 cylinder, but, maybe someone else does!

 

[JusticeFever]

Its an 8 with a 22.5 gal gas tank..

Thanks SG!! Sooooooooo, where did he stop next?
I doubt there will ever be an answer.

But, think about his plan some more! He was going to kill his wife, waits until last minute to print directions
because he doesn't even know where he is going, although he knows he will be in the mountains, but doesn't think to get a gas can, because it would be legit, in this instance, instead runs out of gas, and then throws a fit in King, in front of Gracie and another customer, and , and, and doesn't know whether the cameras are on or not and his little tantrum has been recorded.

Is there any wonder why I or anyone else question the bogus stop in King, NC?
Because it never happened...!!!!!!!

.imo

 

[citygirl]

Jason didn't get lost until he was very close to his meeting, he missed a turnoff in Clintwood. The very same thing LE did while following his route.

And, I don't know if Jason had a 6 or 8 cylinder, but, maybe someone else does!

He missed his turnoff in Clinton? That's what he said under oath?

 

[JusticeFever]

So.... Doesn't mean anyone has mocked her..... I don't believe her.... Now point out one post where I have made fun of her... Thanks

No one has made fun of GB, but you know who has been made fun of, a lot?
Cindy Beaver, a busybody who inserted herself in the case for her 15 minutes of fame. :innocent:

 

[SteelerGirl43]

No one has made fun of GB, but you know who has been made fun of, a lot?
Cindy Beaver, a busybody who inserted herself in the case for her 15 minutes of fame. :innocent:

So true.. I believe her but not Gracie .. Not saying she right out lied but she had the help of the state to make up her mind.. IMO

 

[SStarr33]

OK, I thought you were saying he could not get 45 miles out of $15...
(not read about a weeks worth of posts, just scanning and usually reading last 2 or 3 I see.)
Could he have gotten gas in that half hour or so he was "lost"?
I get it that there are no records, does not mean he could not have stopped though, yeah?
I know LE was supposed to have canvased all the stations from home to Timbuktu, but as is said often here, LE can be incompetent at times

Yes, of course he could have stopped somewhere else.

But that has to be proved by the State. :banghead:

I'm sure if one of your loved ones was falsely accused, you would let this kind of stuff slide, right?

 

[SStarr33]

If you want to see people being made fun of, go back and read the old threads on this case.

It was like the Wild Wild West here at WS back then.

 

[Glenn101]

BBM

To me the biggest piece of evidence that puts him at the crime scene is that HP print. What random killer would wear the exact shoe siz in the exac shoe size as the accused? MY's body was moved. Blood splatter evidence proves that during the beating the door to JY closet was closed. After the crime, someone(who I believe to be JY) moved her body to get in his closet. Now, here is the part that makes his story unbelieveable. On the stand he states that MY gave those HP shoes away to goodwill sometime. Then he lawyer, in the closing stated the killer took the shoes from his closet. Well which is it? How do you not know if those shoes are in your closet? heck I know what shoes are in my husband's closet as does he. Plus, on the CB video it looks like he is wearing those HP shoes as it also does in the HI CCTV. I find it hard to believe that those shoes were given away after only a year. Plus, the addidas shoes he bought at the same time where found in his belongings. And, why did he need to go buy new shoes days after the murder? Some can say because LE had his stuff but did he drive back to Raleigh barefoot? I see no point in buying new shoes when he had perfectly good shoes. He needed new shoes for the NTO? The clothes he was wearing on 11-2-06 have never been found? It's funny that things that would prove his innocense can't be found.

There are several problems with the hushpuppy shoe evidence. (1) Was the print found definitely established as being a size 12? One poster has already said that the size of the HP print was not precisely determined. (2) HP shoes were not a rare breed of shoes. No one has established any evidence that HP shoes were a rarity.

As to exactly what happened to those shoes, i.e. was Jason's explanation plausible? He thought that Michelle had donated them to charity. I don't think that the defense attorney stated for a fact that the killer was the one that took the shoes from Jason's closet. It was just one of the possibilities. Wasn't there DNA from an unidentified source found on a shoeshine box in Jason Young;s closet???

as to your assertion that nothing was out of order in Michelle's closet, I remember reading that the defense introduced pictures at one of the trials showing evidence that things in Michelle's closet had been moved around, persons and reasons unknown.

As to why Jason bought a new pair of shoes before returning to Raleigh, I haven't a clue. It hardly because he needed a pair or be barefoot. I doubt very much that he went to his meeting in Clintwood barefooted, or wearing a pair of Addidas sneakers.

If you were not looking for a pair of HP's, would you honestly be able to identify the brand of slip on shoes Jason was wearing from the videos, etc?

The investigation was very sloppy. The contents of Jason's suitcase was not inventoried when his SUV was impounded. How long after that was it that the investigators went looking for the shoes and shirt? Wasn't it three years or so later?

I do not want to sound offensive or anything like that, but this is not very strong evidence. Jason is not required to prove his innocence. It is the burden of the prosecution to prove his guilt. You are reversing the burden by requiring Jason to prove his innocence.

And lastly, can you point us to some type of evidence that will show how Jason was able to drive all of those miles on the known quantities of gasoline he purchases? Even if you include the alleged gallons he was supposed to have purchased in King, he could not have made it to Duffield.

The gas mileage is the stumbling block that anyone who wishes to show that Jason was likely to have committed that crime. There just is not any evidence to back up any conjecture.

Thanks,
Glenn

Edited to add: I found a news link to the testimony of the SBI footwear expert. She testified that the shoe print could have been a hushpuppy size 12, lending a bit more ambiguity to the shoe print evidence.
http://centralnc.twcnews.com/conten...otwear-testifies-in-jason-young-murder-trial/

 

[JusticeFever]

To be fair, most of those who question what she said don't appear to be doing so simply because they don't want to believe her. My impression is that they are looking at factors surrounding her testimony and questioning whether or not what she has said is accurate.

Even though I am not one of the "pro JY" people, I also find it tough to accept her testimony. For me, it's the fact that she admits to having significant memory issues yet her memory of what happened seemed to improve as time went on. That, combined with the apparent fact that her description of the person started out being off by quite of bit yet gradually progressed to being a close description of JY, makes me wonder how much help she had remembering things.

I have no issues with her on a personal level. I'm sure she is a sweet person who truly wants to help. But, to me at least, there is reason to question what she has said.

Thanks, I think that explains it very well. I know, for me, it sure would be easier to believe Gracie, if there was just one thing to back her up. But, there isn't. I have posted lists of just one thing I would need....but she changed her story and she changed the description of Jason over the course of the years. I just can not find her credible.

I honestly do not know what the state was thinking by trying to get this person's account of Jason admitted as key eye witness evidence.
Didn't they know there would be other transactions happening at the same time, didn't they know
that the witness in the store would never be found, b/c he more than likely doesn't exist.
And, if you think he does, explain this!

This just reminded me, but, do you know, that LE put up surveillance video in the store in the days that followed to
try and find the witness?
But, they never even bothered to show the tapes to Gracie???

all jmo

 

[Boodles]

There are several problems with the hushpuppy shoe evidence. (1) Was the print found definitely established as being a size 12? One poster has already said that the size of the HP print was not precisely determined. (2) HP shoes were not a rare breed of shoes. No one has established any evidence that HP shoes were a rarity.

As to exactly what happened to those shoes, i.e. was Jason's explanation plausible? He thought that Michelle had donated them to charity. I don't think that the defense attorney stated for a fact that the killer was the one that took the shoes from Jason's closet. It was just one of the possibilities. Wasn't there DNA from an unidentified source found on a shoeshine box in Jason Young;s closet???

as to your assertion that nothing was out of order in Michelle's closet, I remember reading that the defense introduced pictures at one of the trials showing evidence that things in Michelle's closet had been moved around, persons and reasons unknown.

As to why Jason bought a new pair of shoes before returning to Raleigh, I haven't a clue. It hardly because he needed a pair or be barefoot. I doubt very much that he went to his meeting in Clintwood barefooted, or wearing a pair of Addidas sneakers.

If you were not looking for a pair of HP's, would you honestly be able to identify the brand of slip on shoes Jason was wearing from the videos, etc?

The investigation was very sloppy. The contents of Jason's suitcase was not inventoried when his SUV was impounded. How long after that was it that the investigators went looking for the shoes and shirt? Wasn't it three years or so later?

I do not want to sound offensive or anything like that, but this is not very strong evidence. Jason is not required to prove his innocence. It is the burden of the prosecution to prove his guilt. You are reversing the burden by requiring Jason to prove his innocence.

And lastly, can you point us to some type of evidence that will show how Jason was able to drive all of those miles on the known quantities of gasoline he purchases? Even if you include the alleged gallons he was supposed to have purchased in King, he could not have made it to Duffield.

The gas mileage is the stumbling block that anyone who wishes to show that Jason was likely to have committed that crime. There just is not any evidence to back up any conjecture.

Thanks,
Glenn

Edited to add: I found a news link to the testimony of the SBI footwear expert. She testified that the shoe print could have been a hushpuppy size 12, lending a bit more ambiguity to the shoe print evidence.
http://centralnc.twcnews.com/conten...otwear-testifies-in-jason-young-murder-trial/

Glenn, have you watched either of the trials? Also, are you familiar with the concept of circumstantial evidence? If so, do you accept that it is valid evidence or do you feel that it is, by definition, insufficient?

I'm not being snarky, just curious since I have read your posts and these questions came to mind.

 

[JusticeFever]

There are several problems with the hushpuppy shoe evidence. (1) Was the print found definitely established as being a size 12? One poster has already said that the size of the HP print was not precisely determined. (2) HP shoes were not a rare breed of shoes. No one has established any evidence that HP shoes were a rarity.

As to exactly what happened to those shoes, i.e. was Jason's explanation plausible? He thought that Michelle had donated them to charity. I don't think that the defense attorney stated for a fact that the killer was the one that took the shoes from Jason's closet. It was just one of the possibilities. Wasn't there DNA from an unidentified source found on a shoeshine box in Jason Young;s closet???

as to your assertion that nothing was out of order in Michelle's closet, I remember reading that the defense introduced pictures at one of the trials showing evidence that things in Michelle's closet had been moved around, persons and reasons unknown.

As to why Jason bought a new pair of shoes before returning to Raleigh, I haven't a clue. It hardly because he needed a pair or be barefoot. I doubt very much that he went to his meeting in Clintwood barefooted, or wearing a pair of Addidas sneakers.

If you were not looking for a pair of HP's, would you honestly be able to identify the brand of slip on shoes Jason was wearing from the videos, etc?

The investigation was very sloppy. The contents of Jason's suitcase was not inventoried when his SUV was impounded. How long after that was it that the investigators went looking for the shoes and shirt? Wasn't it three years or so later?

I do not want to sound offensive or anything like that, but this is not very strong evidence. Jason is not required to prove his innocence. It is the burden of the prosecution to prove his guilt. You are reversing the burden by requiring Jason to prove his innocence.

And lastly, can you point us to some type of evidence that will show how Jason was able to drive all of those miles on the known quantities of gasoline he purchases? Even if you include the alleged gallons he was supposed to have purchased in King, he could not have made it to Duffield.

The gas mileage is the stumbling block that anyone who wishes to show that Jason was likely to have committed that crime. There just is not any evidence to back up any conjecture.

Thanks,
Glenn

Edited to add: I found a news link to the testimony of the SBI footwear expert. She testified that the shoe print could have been a hushpuppy size 12, lending a bit more ambiguity to the shoe print evidence.
http://centralnc.twcnews.com/conten...otwear-testifies-in-jason-young-murder-trial/

Hi Glenn and :cheers:
Welcome to the Board, there is a lot in your post to be discussed, good to see you are able to be so objective~~

 

[Glenn101]

Glenn, have you watched either of the trials? Also, are you familiar with the concept of circumstantial evidence? If so, do you accept that it is valid evidence or do you feel that it is, by definition, insufficient?

I'm not being snarky, just curious since I have read your posts and these questions came to mind.

I have not watched either of the trials. I have read quite a bit on many of the forums about the trials and the evidence that was presented.

I am aware of the concept of circumstantial evidence. When someone points out what he or she feels is a strong bit of circumstantial evidence, I go back and do a bit of research on that aspect of the trial. I am really big on evidence.

The shoe evidence is circumstantial. And it most plausibly points to two people being involved in that murder.

The unknown DNA found on the shoeshine kit in Jason's closet is another bit of circumstantial evidence that points away from Jason. As is the unknown DNA from the cigarette butts.

The gas receipts are circumstantial evidence that points away from Jason being in Raleigh that night. That is the biggest hurdle that anyone needs to overcome to have me lean towards a guilty verdict. Up to this point, no one has presented any evidence to overcome that bit of circumstantial evidence. And it is not like the investigators did not try.

At this point, as I have stated, I do not know. I have not seen any evidence, circumstantial or direct, that would provide a tipping point for me.

Thanks,
Glenn

 

[JusticeFever]

I have not watched either of the trials. I have read quite a bit on many of the forums about the trials and the evidence that was presented.

I am aware of the concept of circumstantial evidence. When someone points out what he or she feels is a strong bit of circumstantial evidence, I go back and do a bit of research on that aspect of the trial. I am really big on evidence.

The shoe evidence is circumstantial. And it most plausibly points to two people being involved in that murder.

The unknown DNA found on the shoeshine kit in Jason's closet is another bit of circumstantial evidence that points away from Jason. As is the unknown DNA from the cigarette butts.

The gas receipts are circumstantial evidence that points away from Jason being in Raleigh that night. That is the biggest hurdle that anyone needs to overcome to have me lean towards a guilty verdict. Up to this point, no one has presented any evidence to overcome that bit of circumstantial evidence. And it is not like the investigators did not try.

At this point, as I have stated, I do not know. I have not seen any evidence, circumstantial or direct, that would provide a tipping point for me.

Thanks,
Glenn

Whew, glad you didn't run off, lol.. and I see you do understand the concept of c/e very well.
Not that cases can't be won on just c/e because they have, even this one. But, for me, it
just lacks that one thing that says :::gotcha:::

 

[JusticeFever]

I am just wondering why the person who was with Gracie in the store, didn't come forward on their own?
They had to see the news, or a newspaper, or something online.....but, to this day, almost 8 years later, no one has.
The same can be said for the people in the car in the driveway at the Young home that CB saw. They never came forward either. If they were someone local, who were just using the driveway to turn around in, wouldn't they have also came forward and said so?
The only reason they wouldn't is if they had something to hide.
Coincidence that at 5:27 am in King, NC and at 5:30 am in Raleigh, NC.. things happened almost simultaneously?

 

[sunshine05]

I am just wondering why the person who was with Gracie in the store, didn't come forward on their own?
They had to see the news, or a newspaper, or something online.....but, to this day, almost 8 years later, no one has.
The same can be said for the people in the car in the driveway at the Young home that CB saw. They never came forward either. If they were someone local, who were just using the driveway to turn around in, wouldn't they have also came forward and said so?
The only reason they wouldn't is if they had something to hide.
Coincidence that at 5:27 am in King, NC and at 5:30 am in Raleigh, NC.. things happened almost simultaneously?

The thing that gets me is that 3 independent people reported seeing a light SUV in the driveway from 3-7AM. Tiller initially said between 4-5 but it somehow changed to 3-4 to conveniently fit the State's timeline. Anyhow, say 3 -7. This means the SUV sightings were corroborated. No one can corroborate Gracie's statements, not a camera or another person.

The evidence of the SUV sightings are stronger than Gracie's statements and they point away from JY.

 

[SStarr33]

The thing that gets me is that 3 independent people reported seeing a light SUV in the driveway from 3-7AM. Tiller initially said between 4-5 but it somehow changed to 3-4 to conveniently fit the State's timeline. Anyhow, say 3 -7. This means the SUV sightings were corroborated. No one can corroborate Gracie's statements, not a camera or another person.

The evidence of the SUV sightings are stronger than Gracie's statements and they point away from JY.

Sunshine, do you have a link to Tiller's original 4-5 am statement? I know I read it somewhere, but now I can't remember where.

 

[Grammy Jean]

The thing that gets me is that 3 independent people reported seeing a light SUV in the driveway from 3-7AM. Tiller initially said between 4-5 but it somehow changed to 3-4 to conveniently fit the State's timeline. Anyhow, say 3 -7. This means the SUV sightings were corroborated. No one can corroborate Gracie's statements, not a camera or another person.

The evidence of the SUV sightings are stronger than Gracie's statements and they point away from JY.

So as you stated Tiller was called by the DT and when cross examined said closer to 3-4. Ms. Helmsley was a sweet, witty older lady who said definitely she was not on Birchleaf. So if we are going to fault Gracie and her poor memory we should also admit Helmsley was confused. So that leaves only CB making the claim and I at least think it is reasonable that she could have been mistaken about the day. So IMO Gracie and Cindy cancel each other out.

 

[sunshine05]

Sunshine, do you have a link to Tiller's original 4-5 am statement? I know I read it somewhere, but now I can't remember where.

It was in one of the search warrants.

 

[sunshine05]

So as you stated Tiller was called by the DT and when cross examined said closer to 3-4. Ms. Helmsley was a sweet, witty older lady who said definitely she was not on Birchleaf. So if we are going to fault Gracie and her poor memory we should also admit Helmsley was confused. So that leaves only CB making the claim and I at least think it is reasonable that she could have been mistaken about the day. So IMO Gracie and Cindy cancel each other out.

No, I disagree that we exclude her based on her testimony because her early memory at the time of the crime was that the SUV was at that house. She took Spivey to that house. It was all in the notes.

Whether Tiller saw it at 3 or 4 doesn't matter much except that if at 4 it definitely excludes JY's vehicle due to the tight timeline. We still have 3 witnesses who told police just days after the murder that they saw the SUV. CB saw two people inside it. Much more convincing than unverified Gracie.