Michelle Young, pregnant mom, murdered Part 15.

[Taximom]

Scandi, the latest theory I see coming down the pike because imo that's what's beeen hinted at for a few days now is Michelle's father. Based simply on suspicion that's what Michelle was seeing a therapist for. It started here imo by one poster recently banned, trails back to JTF's statement about the answer being in NY. Michelle was said to have been in NY in July, a rift with her father and similar indications also from Meredith on her MySpace page. As of today I saw someone post another little hint about someone who didn't want MY and JY to be married who was not at the wedding. We know it's been stated her father wasn't. All imo. so be ready.

This case just keeps reminding me of all the gobbledy-gook in the Laci Peterson case. It's amazing.

 

[strach304]

This case just keeps reminding me of all the gobbledy-gook in the Laci Peterson case. It's amazing.

You are so right about that. The same kind of stuff caused anyone who knew Laci to stop reading the boards and commenting too.

 

[Barney Fife]

Scandi, the latest theory I see coming down the pike because imo that's what's beeen hinted at for a few days now is Michelle's father. Based simply on suspicion that's what Michelle was seeing a therapist for. It started here imo by one poster recently banned, trails back to JTF's statement about the answer being in NY. Michelle was said to have been in NY in July, a rift with her father and similar indications also from Meredith on her MySpace page. As of today I saw someone post another little hint about someone who didn't want MY and JY to be married who was not at the wedding. We know it's been stated her father wasn't. All imo. so be ready.

ETA: Also the sex therapist questions that about Michelle presented here and the past questions about her being possibly sexually abused as a child by said banned poster. Hi'ya BF. Any news on those fingerprints?

My contact says that the reason MY and her father have been somewhat 'estranged' was due to his 2nd wife. Apparently, she did not like the Fisher girls and wanted her husband to have little contact. Her nic was "Step Monster".

MY was NOT abused in any way by her Father.

 

[Utopia]

Scandi,

Okay, I just spent WAY too much time combing through posts on the date of the car accident. There was absolutely lots of confusion about 2005 vs. 2006, but in my opinion there is far too many posts that start with "according to another board" or "an insider said". Several of the media links are no longer working so the only media links I could find were the Amanda Lamb report on November 15th stating May 29th, 2005 for the accident - with no mention of a pregnancy at the time, and reference to a Greta show on November 16th that claimed she was pregnant at the time of the accident. The rest as far as I can tell have come from "insider" information. Personally, I'm not convinced either way. The media does make mistakes and I don't trust insider information. I think its really important that posters be clear about where information is coming from and try to provide links when possible.

I still think 2005 makes a lot more sense at least for the pregnancy, and if its true that she was pregnant at the time of the accident then it also makes sense that the accident was then as well.

JMO:twocents:

Yea Utopia, I thought there was something a bit off about that. They just posted that Amanda Lamb made an error in her article, so it was in May of 2006.

A poster has just posted there they found trace amounts of blook in JY's car on the floor mats, door and steering wheel I believe. Amazing we have never heard this before, and I don't know if this poster is an insider - AE. Top part of page 6 on today's daily forum.

It would make one wonder why they didn't arrest him, but maybe the tests were inconclusive for some reason, or they still needed to have something else. Don't you think that would put him at the scene. In many Forensic Files cases on TV they have evidence you would think would nail the guy, but need a string of telling evicence to make it a dead set case the prosecution can win.

LOLOLOL I feel like a little narc, running back and forth with info! Oh, well!

 

[jilly]

Well, if their relationship was somewhat extranged then Michelle & her father must have come together somehow because it was the father who arranged for them to get the '04 explorer wasn't it?

I would guess her father is taking this murder very hard.

 

[Utopia]

What if the insider who "corrected" the accident date from 2005 to 2006 had a motive to do so, i.e. to separate pregnancy and car accident by a year. I could be way off, just asking. Of course, this is not how the inference was taken, we all assumed that if accident occurred in 2006, then so did 2nd pregnancy. I think from what info we have that she was pregnant at time of accident and it was likely the reason she lost the baby, even if there is no way to prove it - but I also think its more likely that it happened in 2005 not 2006 - but its all speculation, I think I'll await the facts.

If anyone finds any other media links to the dates of the car accident, pregnancy or "therapeutic abortion" (she carefully puts in quotes), it would be great if they could be linked again.

Thanks, Utopia

ETA: I don't suppose the original accident report is accessible somehow?

Scandi,

Okay, I just spent WAY too much time combing through posts on the date of the car accident. There was absolutely lots of confusion about 2005 vs. 2006, but in my opinion there is far too many posts that start with "according to another board" or "an insider said". Several of the media links are no longer working so the only media links I could find were the Amanda Lamb report on November 15th stating May 29th, 2005 for the accident - with no mention of a pregnancy at the time, and reference to a Greta show on November 16th that claimed she was pregnant at the time of the accident. The rest as far as I can tell have come from "insider" information. Personally, I'm not convinced either way. The media does make mistakes and I don't trust insider information. I think its really important that posters be clear about where information is coming from and try to provide links when possible.

I still think 2005 makes a lot more sense at least for the pregnancy, and if its true that she was pregnant at the time of the accident then it also makes sense that the accident was then as well.

JMO:twocents:

 

[Barney Fife]

Well, if their relationship was somewhat estranged then Michelle & her father must have come together somehow because it was the father who arranged for them to get the '04 explorer wasn't it?

I would guess her father is taking this murder very hard.

Estranged was the wrong word. The Step Mother was the problem.

 

[5bigfish5]

My contact says that the reason MY and her father have been somewhat 'estranged' was due to his 2nd wife. Apparently, she did not like the Fisher girls and wanted her husband to have little contact. Her nic was "Step Monster".

MY was NOT abused in any way by her Father.

Thanks Barney,

I suspected it was "much ado about nothing".

5bigfish5

 

[jilly]

Estranged was the wrong word. The Step Mother was the problem.

Thanks Barney. Do you know if they've scaled back the investigation on this case at all?

 

[strach304]

My contact says that the reason MY and her father have been somewhat 'estranged' was due to his 2nd wife. Apparently, she did not like the Fisher girls and wanted her husband to have little contact. Her nic was "Step Monster".

MY was NOT abused in any way by her Father.

Thanks, didn't think so and it was made clear by several people who posted early on that they had reconciled, etc. Being that he lives far away from NC. also gives me reason to believe he may not have been able to attend that ceremony for other reasons imo. Also puts him very far away from the crime scene but facts haven't stopped certain speculation so far. :doh:

 

[raisincharlie]

What if the insider who "corrected" the accident date from 2005 to 2006 had a motive to do so, i.e. to separate pregnancy and car accident by a year. I could be way off, just asking. Of course, this is not how the inference was taken, we all assumed that if accident occurred in 2006, then so did 2nd pregnancy. I think from what info we have that she was pregnant at time of accident and it was likely the reason she lost the baby, even if there is no way to prove it - but I also think its more likely that it happened in 2005 not 2006 - but its all speculation, I think I'll await the facts.

If anyone finds any other media links to the dates of the car accident, pregnancy or "therapeutic abortion" (she carefully puts in quotes), it would be great if they could be linked again.

Thanks, Utopia

ETA: I don't suppose the original accident report is accessible somehow?

Utopia,

Hope your studies are going well ! The above is interesting about the poster having a reason to change the year for this accident. As I recall this same poster was very adament that the car accident had absolutely nothing to do with the loss of the baby. I find that hard to believe given all the other claims made along with it. There seems to be a contradiction there if one thinks about it. They want you to believe the accident happened without consequence. I suppose it is possible but then again, the list of coincidences in this case is becoming longer and longer. I will go back and look through the links as I do not believe Amanda Lamb was the only one to report 2005 as the year, keep in mind that this poster has also been very accusatory of Ms. Lamb as well - second agenda.


Scandi,

No I was not thinking of a paper suit. Firm believer here in KISS. I was thinking along the lines of the basics such as gloves and a mask. The reference to a single hair found on Michelle's hand as referenced in the AR made me think about this. Just my way of thinking, if the murderer's head was exposed, there may been more hair. Michelle fought back if the scratches on her neck were made by her - hair pulling would be automatic in my way of thinking.

 

[raisincharlie]

Utopia,

Having checked the property tax statements from Wake County note that the taxes paid:

Mitsuibishi - 1/24/06
Explorer - 9/15/06

This indicates the Mitsuibishi was still registered as of January 2006, the Explorer was recently paid in 2006 as well - this tends to indicate that the accident did indeed occur in May of 2006 and the Explorer was purchased in 2006.

That should refine the issue. The accident most likely occurred in May (29th) 2006.

 

[Utopia]

Thanks RC, you are a fine detective! Okay, I'll accept that the accident was most likely May 06. I did find transcripts from a Nancy Grace show and a Jan 22nd 07 Greta show that seem to be referring to the accident as happening in 2006 as well.

Was the Explorer purchased before or after May 06? If before, and the accident occurred in May 06, then it wasn't purchased specifically to replace the Mitsuibishi. Sorry this might be a stupid question given the info you provided re taxes but I'm assuming the tax statement dates have nothing to do with purchase dates. I suppose its possible that even if the accident occurred in 2005, they could have kept the Mitsuibishi in spite of the water damage.

Sorry, don't mean to flog a dead horse, I'll just accept for now that the accident was probably in 2006.

ETA: Studies would be going much better if I could get some self discipline and stay off this board! Hubby coming for a visit in less than two weeks and I have much to accomplish before then.

Utopia,

Having checked the property tax statements from Wake County note that the taxes paid:

Mitsuibishi - 1/24/06
Explorer - 9/15/06

This indicates the Mitsuibishi was still registered as of January 2006, the Explorer was recently paid in 2006 as well - this tends to indicate that the accident did indeed occur in May of 2006 and the Explorer was purchased in 2006.

That should refine the issue. The accident most likely occurred in May (29th) 2006.

 

[raisincharlie]

Thanks RC, you are a fine detective! Okay, I'll accept that the accident was most likely May 06. I did find transcripts from a Nancy Grace show and a Jan 22nd 07 Greta show that seem to be referring to the accident as happening in 2006 as well.

Was the Explorer purchased before or after May 06? If before, and the accident occurred in May 06, then it wasn't purchased specifically to replace the Mitsuibishi. Sorry this might be a stupid question given the info you provided re taxes but I'm assuming the tax statement dates have nothing to do with purchase dates. I suppose its possible that even if the accident occurred in 2005, they could have kept the Mitsuibishi in spite of the water damage.

Sorry, don't mean to flog a dead horse, I'll just accept for now that the accident was probably in 2006.

ETA: Studies would be going much better if I could get some self discipline and stay off this board! Hubby coming for a visit in less than two weeks and I have much to accomplish before then.

No the tax dates would have nothing to do with purchase dates. As to the Mitsuibishi - motors and water don't mix well, very costly to replace but I suspct there was more than just water damage. From this I cannot positively state the Mitsuibishi was done in May and the Explorer was the replacement but logic would seem to dictate it as the case.

 

[Niner]

okay... trying to catch up here... I have 'skipped' threads 8 thru 13... Hopefully I won't miss much, eh??!! LOL!

I do have a question though!!

Charlie - you said: One thing is for certain, the dog bit story in lin with everything else and claiming HY "knows" whose footprint was found...

Footprint??? I guess that must have been mentioned in the threads I missed - can you elaborate on 'where' this footprint was found?? TIA!

and from April 15th - Charlie:
GO Ferrari!!! - YEA!! Go Kimi AND Ferrari!!

And I noticed on the part #14 - that someone mentioned that an arrest will be made by March 31st?? okay... 5 days away!!

Thanks for your answers in advance! Trying really hard to catch up here! :slap:

 

[raisincharlie]

okay... trying to catch up here... I have 'skipped' threads 8 thru 13... Hopefully I won't miss much, eh??!! LOL!

I do have a question though!!

Charlie - you said: One thing is for certain, the dog bit story in lin with everything else and claiming HY "knows" whose footprint was found...

Footprint??? I guess that must have been mentioned in the threads I missed - can you elaborate on 'where' this footprint was found?? TIA!

and from April 15th - Charlie:
GO Ferrari!!! - YEA!! Go Kimi AND Ferrari!!

And I noticed on the part #14 - that someone mentioned that an arrest will be made by March 31st?? okay... 5 days away!!

Thanks for your answers in advance! Trying really hard to catch up here! :slap:

Niner,

I'm afraid you have picked up on a series of what can only be termed rumor at this point. A supposed "insider" claims there was a bloody foot print that did not belong to JY or Cassidy somewhere in the crime scene. This has no official status, strictly rumor. Another "insider" claimed there were dog bite victims in the ER the night of the murder and that yes there was a foot print and that yes JY knew who it belonged to. Again, this is all rumor and at this point there is no way to tell what is true. Best advice - wait for news reports as I believe certain people are "jerking" chains.

Ferrari Fan aye ?

Check this out - new shell commercial - using the old flat 312 B changing into the F248 I believe. Also in the Totally off Topic Thread part 1 - if you want some free Ferrari collectable stickers check out post 721.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0jrPrjW3Oc

As to Kimi - not totally sold on him but sold on Ferrari - tough act to follow Schumacher but Kimi has one win in hand - should be an interesting season. Yes - GO Ferrari !!!

 

[less0305]

No the tax dates would have nothing to do with purchase dates. As to the Mitsuibishi - motors and water don't mix well, very costly to replace but I suspct there was more than just water damage. From this I cannot positively state the Mitsuibishi was done in May and the Explorer was the replacement but logic would seem to dictate it as the case.

True, I bought my car in January of 06 and my taxes came due in April of 06.

 

[FactsareFacts]

I hope this is not off topic but I just wanted to say that I love the way this board is run. I have spent several days reading at CTV and there are some really great posters over there but; there are too many petty, argumentative, rude posters. If those posts were removed the MY board would be cut in half over there. It makes me appreciate this place so much even though I don't post alot, I never have to wade thru pages of BS.

I know some of you post over there and I tip my hat to you for your patience. There are a couple posters over there who would not last a day here from what I see. It looks like one of them got the boot today over there though.

So thank you fellow posters and also the moderators here for making this an adult place to discuss this tradgedy respectfully. :clap:

 

[caffeinatd]

True, I bought my car in January of 06 and my taxes came due in April of 06.

Auto taxes are generally billed within 3 months of licensing/renewing tags in that county. So, if they bought the car in June, taxes would be billed in Sept. I think you have a few months to pay them without penalty.
I wonder if Jason went to NY with Michelle, and drove the explorder back. Seems like about the right time, and then Michelle and Cassidy would have driven back on their own. JMOO

"Approximately three months after registration takes place, a tax bill will be issued by the Wake County Revenue Department for each vehicle registered. Motor vehicle bills are due on the first day of the fourth month following registration and become delinquent on the first day of the fifth month following registration. Past due accounts are assessed an interest charge of 5% the first month and 3/4 of 1% each month thereafter. Any bill not paid in full by the eight month following registration will result in the enforcement of a "block" to the registration. If this occurs, the NCDMV will not issue a renewal card for the vehicle or allow registration without evidence of payment." from the Wake county tax website
http://www.wakegov.com/tax/vehicles/default.htm

 

[raisincharlie]

Thanks for the information Caffinated - the timing does seem to line up in a manner to conclude the Explorer was indeed a replacement and your explanation of how it may have been picked up makes great sense as well.