Michelle Young, pregnant mom, murdered Part 18

[raisincharlie]

Hi, Citygirl. I don't know that I have much inside info I cannot share. Maybe a little, but nothing significant.

As some posters have been so kind to point out, I have told about everything I know. I have shared the mysterious bloody little footprints, the killer's bloody shower, the neglected bloody socks, the ignored bloody linen, the constipated dog, the forgotten tooth.

I freely admit that in most cases I merely followed up on what JTF had revealed before. I'm not trying to be the hero here.

What else is there? What would you have if JTF and I hadn't shared? And not even a thank you from most posters.

--Jake

Please explain how you feel what you claim is of any significance or how it is even helpful. Mysterious bloody little footprints which you saw and photographed - how do they compare to what LE saw upon entering that scene ? I doubt there is much comparison truthfully.

The neglected bloody socks - you don't know how they came to be bloody but yet you think they have some significance. You don't know what forensic investigative techniques were applied but yet you assumne the socks were overlooked.

The ignored bloody sheets - you never mentioned seeing a bed spread. Did you consider that the bed may still have been made when the killer entered the house ? Did you consider LE collected that bed spread and didn't need the sheets as they would reveal no trace evidence having been under the spread but they would indeed be bloody?

Did you ever consider that the tooth may well have been lodged in the drywall and vibrated out when the sheetrock above was cut out ? Have you recalled how many people posted under your nic various stories which contradict each other ? Then we have the document being a print out about a purse for Michelle for her anniversary - oops the aniversary was the month before she was murdered - must have been a Christmas present instead. Sorry the dog was constipated, hadn't heard that one but I suppose that is why he did not respond to an intruder in the house.

So what do we have after what you and JTF have voiced your observations - nothing more than what we had without your observations to be truthful. RPD has provided significantly more factual and useful information as noted in the blog.

 

[jilly]

JTF swore to it - payback. You haven't forgot about those tirades have you ?

Thanks RC. I guess that was one part that I didn't absorb!:crazy:

 

[jilly]

This is much too serious for "payback". I'm much more peeved than the family is.

--Jake

So they're still peeved - just not as much as you.

 

[jilly]

jilly

Dr Greene performed the autopsy on Saturday am. Dr Clark signed the final report that was written by Dr Greene.

Thanks Barney. What do you think about this?

 

[scandi]

Don't know why LE took the wall. But surely a tooth sticking in the wall would have been noticed.

--Jake

Different wall Jake than she is talking about. Where they cut the 4' x 4' section of wall out plus the small piece off to the left and down lower like you told us, that was on the outside wall that the headboard of the bed was up against.

Then there is a wall about 5 or so feet away from the bed to the left, {going towards the front of the house} and in that wall are his and her walk in closets. That is where you said the tooth landed, inbetween the carpet and the wall next to the closet.

I almost feel like I have walked into that room! LOL Scandi

 

[jilly]

Please explain how you feel what you claim is of any significance or how it is even helpful. Mysterious bloody little footprints which you saw and photographed - how do they compare to what LE saw upon entering that scene ? I doubt there is much comparison truthfully.

The neglected bloody socks - you don't know how they came to be bloody but yet you think they have some significance. You don't know what forensic investigative techniques were applied but yet you assumne the socks were overlooked.

The ignored bloody sheets - you never mentioned seeing a bed spread. Did you consider that the bed may still have been made when the killer entered the house ? Did you consider LE collected that bed spread and didn't need the sheets as they would reveal no trace evidence having been under the spread but they would indeed be bloody?

Did you ever consider that the tooth may well have been lodged in the drywall and vibrated out when the sheetrock above was cut out ? Have you recalled how many people posted under your nic various stories which contradict each other ? Then we have the document being a print out about a purse for Michelle for her anniversary - oops the aniversary was the month before she was murdered - must have been a Christmas present instead. :laugh: Sorry the dog was constipated, handn't heard that one but I suppose that is why he did not respond to an intruder in the house.

So what do we have after what you and JTF have voiced your observations - nothing more than what we had without your observations to be truthful. RPD has provided significantly more factual and useful information as noted in the blog.

Good post RC!

 

[scandi]

Anybody figure out yet why this "oh, by the way" revelation at this time by AL? Is it possible there is some sexual-related evidence LE wants to make public? But why? How could this help to catch the killer?

Maybe someone on good terms with AL could write her and ask.

--Jake

Hmmmm, OK, you asked for it! It is quite coincidental that twice it ends up that what you have posted on forums prompts a published article by AL. The first time you told us you were composing a letter to her boss, I beleive, which was after the autopsy photos were viewed by RPD.

I won't mention this time, as you know everything you wrote about since May 1st here, and the culminating point you wanted to make wasn't the little stuff like keeping evidence from LE or something derogatory about Jason that Meredith knows and doesn't want to give to LE. It was about the sexual exam Michelle wasn't given That's what you were leading up to.

Journalism is your forte. Using your skills as a journalism expert, is it possible your plan is to cajole the press into making LE look far less than perfect.

Now from what we have seen in the last two days, they need to change the way they do things so this will never happen again. I am thankful this has been brought out in the open now so it can be remedied. But I do think you owe us the respect of acknowledging your plan to us after you have really used us as a sounding board to set the stage.

I will agree with you that the Raleigh newspapers and media do not even come close to what Mr William Brand wrtes everyday in the Oakland
tribune. LOL Now that is the stuff that keeps the reader glued to the page. You probably should have mailed Amanda the article you thought she should write about this new development. BTW, I thought she did a great job on the previous articles about the autopsy photos and then the followup blurb about forum world!

Nothing personal Jake. Scandi

PS: Sorry for O/T - For posteritys sake, here is the article of all time IMHO by William Brand about the discovery of Laci Peterson's body weeks before she washed ashore:

http://www.scottisinnocent.com/Media/articles/secret.htm

 

[Samiya]

Scout, a reporter is trained to put his most important news in the lead, the first paragraph of his story. AL did not do this. Why not? Because she is protecting a source? Because she has even more information she is going to break later?

--Jake

Amanda,

When you break more about this SNAFU ask Sam Pennica WHY a CCBI Agent who had no idea about Michelle's case was sent to be present at the autopsy. The agent wasn't even briefed in regard to what evidence was requested in that document so that he/she could make certain that the stated evidence WAS collected by Clark.

Sami

 

[Samiya]

Barney......

So John Butts is lying?

Sami

 

[raisincharlie]

Barney......

So John Butts is lying?

Sami

Sami,

Have you read this article ? http://www.newsobserver.com/141/story/571083.html

"But pathologist Thomas B. Clark III, who conducted the autopsy, did not perform the sexual assault test, said Dr. John D. Butts, the state's chief medical examiner.

Butts said he did not know why Clark decided not to conduct the test, but that Clark did look for bruising, tears or other signs of a rape and found no injuries. "An examination was made and no evidence of a sexual assault was found," he said.


This one indicates that Clark himself did the autopsy. I wonder if anyone in the ME's office really knows ? As to the agent sent over - he/she was probably passed out, as would I have been. What is more distrubing is the last two paragraphs - apparently Butts feels that it is the ME's job to determine what is appropriate - not LE.

 

[jake]

jilly

Dr Greene performed the autopsy on Saturday am. Dr Clark signed the final report that was written by Dr Greene.

snipped from WRAL++++++++++++

It's unclear why the evidence was not collected and Chapel Hill's chief medical examiner, Dr. John Butts, doesn't know, because he said he has not had a chance to talk to pathologist Dr. Thomas Clark, who performed the autopsy, about that piece of evidence.

++++++++++++++++++++++

Do we believe Amanda or Barney? I reckon we'll know eventually. Not really important, I reckon.

--Jake

 

[Scout]

snipped from WRAL++++++++++++

It's unclear why the evidence was not collected and Chapel Hill's chief medical examiner, Dr. John Butts, doesn't know, because he said he has not had a chance to talk to pathologist Dr. Thomas Clark, who performed the autopsy, about that piece of evidence.

++++++++++++++++++++++

Do we believe Amanda or Barney? I reckon we'll know eventually. Not really important, I reckon.

--Jake

The article was written by Sarah Ovaska, Jake.

 

[Barney Fife]

snipped from WRAL++++++++++++

It's unclear why the evidence was not collected and Chapel Hill's chief medical examiner, Dr. John Butts, doesn't know, because he said he has not had a chance to talk to pathologist Dr. Thomas Clark, who performed the autopsy, about that piece of evidence.

++++++++++++++++++++++

Do we believe Amanda or Barney? I reckon we'll know eventually. Not really important, I reckon.

--Jake

Do we believe the N&O or Barney ? It is important, so why not get the facts straight ? Dr Clark was not present in the autopsy suite that Saturday. As a Senior Pathologist, he reviewed and approved Dr Greene's report. I reckon you need to send one of your poison pen campaigns to the N&O now. Maybe you can get Sarah Ovaska fired for sloppy reporting ?

 

[jake]

The article was written by Sarah Ovaska, Jake.

snipped+++++++++++++++

It's unclear why the evidence was not collected and Chapel Hill's chief medical examiner, Dr. John Butts, doesn't know, because he said he has not had a chance to talk to pathologist Dr. Thomas Clark, who performed the autopsy, about that piece of evidence.

"I wasn't there," he said. "If a decision was made not to collect that kit, I don't know why that decision was made."

Butts did say, however, that requests on the pathology sheet often change once a body is ready for autopsy. But those requests aren't always documented on the sheet and that the sheet isn't always used during the autopsy.

"The fact that someone checked something doesn't mean that request was conveyed to us," he said.

• Reporter: Amanda Lamb
• Photographer: Chad Flowers
• Web Editor: Kelly Gardner

Copyright 2007 by WRAL.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

+++++++++++++++++

--Jake

 

[jake]

Do we believe the N&O or Barney ? It is important, so why not get the facts straight ? Dr Clark was not present in the autopsy suite that Saturday. As a Senior Pathologist, he reviewed and approved Dr Greene's report. I reckon you need to send one of your poison pen campaigns to the N&O now. Maybe you can get Sarah Ovaska fired for sloppy reporting ?

Who's Sarah Ovaska? Has she also betrayed a confidential source to you? If so, she should be fired. Let me find my poison pen.

--Jake

 

[Barney Fife]

Sami,

Have you read this article ? http://www.newsobserver.com/141/story/571083.html

"But pathologist Thomas B. Clark III, who conducted the autopsy, did not perform the sexual assault test, said Dr. John D. Butts, the state's chief medical examiner.

Butts said he did not know why Clark decided not to conduct the test, but that Clark did look for bruising, tears or other signs of a rape and found no injuries. "An examination was made and no evidence of a sexual assault was found," he said.


This one indicates that Clark himself did the autopsy. I wonder if anyone in the ME's office really knows ? As to the agent sent over - he/she was probably passed out, as would I have been. What is more distrubing is the last two paragraphs - apparently Butts feels that it is the ME's job to determine what is appropriate - not LE.

RC

Either the N&O or Dr Butts and the whole NCME office has been smoking something. According to the official report , Dr Greene, Bill Holloman(photographer) and Kevin Gerity (facility manager) where present during the actual autopsy. I am sure Dr Clark consulted with Greene to compile the report, as he was the one who signed and released it. In fact, I met him in The NCME office and i had assumed he performed the autopsy as well.

 

[Scout]

snipped+++++++++++++++

It's unclear why the evidence was not collected and Chapel Hill's chief medical examiner, Dr. John Butts, doesn't know, because he said he has not had a chance to talk to pathologist Dr. Thomas Clark, who performed the autopsy, about that piece of evidence.

"I wasn't there," he said. "If a decision was made not to collect that kit, I don't know why that decision was made."

Butts did say, however, that requests on the pathology sheet often change once a body is ready for autopsy. But those requests aren't always documented on the sheet and that the sheet isn't always used during the autopsy.

"The fact that someone checked something doesn't mean that request was conveyed to us," he said.

• Reporter: Amanda Lamb
• Photographer: Chad Flowers
• Web Editor: Kelly Gardner

Copyright 2007 by WRAL.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

+++++++++++++++++

--Jake

Sorry, Jake. I was reading the more recent N&O article:

http://www.newsobserver.com/102/story/571083.html

 

[raisincharlie]

RC

Either the N&O or Dr Butts and the whole NCME office has been smoking something. According to the official report , Dr Greene, Bill Holloman(photographer) and Kevin Gerity (facility manager) where present during the actual autopsy. I am sure Dr Clark consulted with Greene to compile the report, as he was the one who signed and released it. In fact, I met him in The NCME office and i had assumed he performed the autopsy as well. WRAL removed the autopsy report link from their web page ?

Thanks Barney

Seems the whole thing is a mess right now, Butts seems to be running for cover but is only making it worse by not providing consistent statements. Confusing but in the end, other than bits of egg falling from faces of the ME, the significance may not be as severe as it appears right now. I must say however I am very disturbed by his stance that the ME decides what is appropriate for testing - this sounds like a territorial issue. LE's needs should never be overlooked - especially in a murder case IMO.

 

[jake]

snipped from N&O++++++++

Sarah Ovaska, Staff Writer
RALEIGH - A thorough examination to look for evidence of a sexual assault or encounter was not performed on Michelle Young, a November murder victim from southern Wake County whose killing has gone unsolved for six months.

Crime scene investigators with Wake's City-County Bureau of Identification requested that a pathologist use a sexual assault kit when they brought Young's body to the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner in Chapel Hill, said CCBI's director Sam Pennica on Friday. CCBI is responsible for collecting evidence at Wake County crime scenes.
But pathologist Thomas B. Clark III, who conducted the autopsy, did not perform the sexual assault test, said Dr. John D. Butts, the state's chief medical examiner. Butts said he did not know why Clark decided not to conduct the test, but that Clark did look for bruising, tears or other signs of a rape and found no injuries.

+++++++++++++++++++++++

Never mind, Barney. Now I see who Ms. ovaska is.

--Jake

 

[raisincharlie]

Thanks RC. I guess that was one part that I didn't absorb!:crazy:

Jilly,

Sorry I can't give you a link to those posts at CTV - they have disappeared - surprise:crazy: