Michelle Young, pregnant mom, murdered Part 17

[Scout]

I've been having some thoughts about the legal ramifications of arresting someone as a material witness. I've got a link and short summary from Wikipedia....probably just enough information to confuse me and others.

Maybe someone on the board with a legal background will tell us how this applies to this case---or not, if you think I am just trying to get free legal advice. But this might be of interest to everyone shortly.

I'm guessing that anyone--such as Jason--who is a suspect would not be a material witness. He would be testifying against himself.

I'm guessing that Jason's lawyer could not be a material witness.

I'm guessing that anyone else who is suspected of having pertinent information might be subject to arrest....Jason's family, Michelle's family, my family, your family, etc.

I have no idea why LE would use this arrest power rather than a subpoena.

--Jake

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_witness

A material witness is a person with information alleged to be material concerning a criminal proceeding. The authority to detain material witnesses dates to the First Judiciary Act of 1789, but the Bail Reform Act of 1984 most recently amended the text of the statute, and it is now codified at Section 3144 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

[citation needed] The most recent version allows material witnesses to be held to ensure the giving of their testimony in criminal proceedings or to a grand jury. Since September 11, 2001, the U.S. has used the material witness statute to detain suspects without charge for indefinite periods of time, often under the rubric of securing grand-jury testimony. This use of the statute is controversial and is currently under judicial review.

Is paranoia a new thing for you or something you've dealt with for a long time?

 

[jake]

Is paranoia a new thing for you or something you've dealt with for a long time?

Legal background I said, Scout. Not psychological. Wait your turn.

--Jake

 

[Scout]

Legal background I said, Scout. Not psychological. Wait your turn.

--Jake

C'mon, Jake. I've said plenty of times that I have no background in psychology. I'm just an average Jane who recognizes paranoia when she sees it. Maybe it's a "takes one to know one" type thing?

 

[athy]

I've been having some thoughts about the legal ramifications of arresting someone as a material witness. I've got a link and short summary from Wikipedia....probably just enough information to confuse me and others.

Maybe someone on the board with a legal background will tell us how this applies to this case---or not, if you think I am just trying to get free legal advice. But this might be of interest to everyone shortly.

I'm guessing that anyone--such as Jason--who is a suspect would not be a material witness. He would be testifying against himself.

I'm guessing that Jason's lawyer could not be a material witness.

I'm guessing that anyone else who is suspected of having pertinent information might be subject to arrest....Jason's family, Michelle's family, my family, your family, etc.

I have no idea why LE would use this arrest power rather than a subpoena.

--Jake

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_witness

A material witness is a person with information alleged to be material concerning a criminal proceeding. The authority to detain material witnesses dates to the First Judiciary Act of 1789, but the Bail Reform Act of 1984 most recently amended the text of the statute, and it is now codified at Section 3144 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

[citation needed] The most recent version allows material witnesses to be held to ensure the giving of their testimony in criminal proceedings or to a grand jury. Since September 11, 2001, the U.S. has used the material witness statute to detain suspects without charge for indefinite periods of time, often under the rubric of securing grand-jury testimony. This use of the statute is controversial and is currently under judicial review.

if i'm not mistaken jake, they would/could arrest someone that is a material witness to a crime but doesn't want to testify at court. doing this would assure the person would be available to be put on the stand.

 

[Stoli]

JAKE: Who is the material witness in this case? I'm just curious.

 

[jake]

JAKE: Who is the material witness in this case? I'm just curious.

Don't really know if anyone is. I reckon I don't know enough to be a witness, but possibly someone in Jason's family might be.

--Jake

 

[athy]

Don't really know if anyone is. I reckon I don't know enough to be a witness, but possibly someone in Jason's family might be.

--Jake

haven't heard there was a material witness. you're the one that brought it up and i was just answering your question as to why they would arrest one.

 

[jake]

if i'm not mistaken jake, they would/could arrest someone that is a material witness to a crime but doesn't want to testify at court. doing this would assure the person would be available to be put on the stand.

Okay, that's what I think. It won't be I, then, because I don't know enough.

I've got a feeling something is about to break in this case. Just a feeling. I believe the Raleigh N&O is publishing a six-month recap of the case soon. May 3 is the six-month mark.

 

[athy]

Okay, that's what I think. It won't be I, then, because I don't know enough.

I've got a feeling something is about to break in this case. Just a feeling. I believe the Raleigh N&O is publishing a six-month recap of the case soon. May 3 is the six-month mark.

it would be good for them to finally find the person that did this, no matter who it turns out to be and i do hope its soon. for everyone's sake.

 

[jake]

haven't heard there was a material witness. you're the one that brought it up and i was just answering your question as to why they would arrest one.

Thank you. I don't even know who LE would consider a material witness.

--Jake

 

[jake]

it would be good for them to finally find the person that did this, no matter who it turns out to be and i do hope its soon. for everyone's sake.

Maybe you'll get your wish in the next day or so. Like you, I'm hoping.

--Jake

 

[athy]

Thank you. I don't even know who LE would consider a material witness.

--Jake

not all trials have a material witness. so its probably irrelevant in this case.

the only way i could see one possible would be if the person who did it confessed to another person or if another person helped the murderer get rid of evidence. perhaps then, not sure. that could be considered conspiracy i guess not necessarily material witness in the case of helping them get rid of evidence.

 

[citygirl]

Okay, that's what I think. It won't be I, then, because I don't know enough.

I've got a feeling something is about to break in this case. Just a feeling. I believe the Raleigh N&O is publishing a six-month recap of the case soon. May 3 is the six-month mark.

Hi Jake,

When you say something is about to break, do you mean a story or 6 month recap ? That would hardly be intuitive. Or do you mean something more ? Has the husband's or lawyer's PI come up with some breaking news ? Just curious, as the LE and DA don't seem to give a whit about giving the general public anything. Surely you agree ? Not a crumb of news for us to nibble on.

 

[Scout]

Okay, that's what I think. It won't be I, then, because I don't know enough.

I've got a feeling something is about to break in this case. Just a feeling. I believe the Raleigh N&O is publishing a six-month recap of the case soon. May 3 is the six-month mark.

You don't know enough? Who quantifies enough, Jake?
I would think if you know anything at all, you could be a material witness. I'm just guessing though that you're concerned about Mrs. Young and, perhaps, Mr. McIntyre, Heather and her husband.

 

[athy]

it would seem to me if anyone was a material witness it could be the therapist because of the notes she's turned over to the LE perhaps from Michelle's session(s)

 

[strach304]

Ok, Jake you know something. Spit it out!

You just pulled the material witness thing out of thin air first of all, then said someone in Jason's family maybe.

First thing that came to my mind was his mother with the info about the time arranged for him to visit Brevard. Last minute or whatever it turns out to be. I have several thoughts on the who and what since there are several possibilities. Then you brought up N&O and them doing a story so you obviously know something. I can't see anyone in his family voluntarily testifying about anything that would be incriminating to him but if it applied to someone else LE wouldn't need to arrest them would they?

 

[Scout]

A personal question for Jake:

Do you ever call your son-in-law by the moniker, "meathead"?

 

[raisincharlie]

RC, please forgive me for taking the focus off of Jake for a moment , but I hadn't read this article. I don't know what object they found, but do you really think that Jason would leave the murder weapon behind? I think that he probably cleaned it and took it with him or put it back in its place in the home. What do you think?

Nanandjim,

This warrant was returned today. According to Sheriff Harrison, they do not believe it had anything to do with Michelle's murder. This mallet was found on the edge of the lawn by a neighbor.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1373778/

Additional article - 12 inch metal mallet with black handle found in a location to where it could have fallen off of a passing truck:

http://www.newsobserver.com/141/story/569673.html

 

[scandi]

Interesting topic Jake!

Would you interpret 'material' as meaning 'having relevance' to a crime. Would there be any qualification on that witness. For instance; he saw something relevant to the crime, overheard two people talking about what happened, was told something about how the crime was committed or a confession, like something simply overcame him and he can not even remember doing it?

I would also wonder if there would have to be some reason the person might take the 5th, and if they are held until it is possible for them to give their testimony, then they will have to respond and can not escape testifying.

if they were family, a lover who was involved with this person at the time of the murder {the affair had not been broken off formally yet}, someone who was approached to assist after the crime, someone whose personal life might be jeopardized or financially dimmed by the association with a possible murderer; these could all be people who would then feel admitting something under oath that might be detrimental to their lives. It could also mean that these people would never want to say anything that could be used against this person, as they do not want to see him incarcerated for the rest of his life or be put to death, or that they might leave the area before served with a subpoena and then would be untouchable.

I really thought in America anyone could take the 5th at any time.


Scandi

 

[Kadie]

Nanandjim,

This warrant was returned today. According to Sheriff Harrison, they do not believe it had anything to do with Michelle's murder. This mallet was found on the edge of the lawn by a neighbor.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1373778/

Thanks for the update, RC!