Michelle Young, pregnant mom, murdered Part 18

[scandi]

Thanks Barney as that makes it much more clear. I see I misspelled Dr Greene's name before. :slap:

Also, I agree about Jake not posting anything like names on a public board - thanks for pointing that out, but was hoping he could convey his thoughts to Scout by PM. Scandi

 

[scandi]

You're welcome Scout. There are several posters here I would trust implicitly {sp}, and think you are a good choice!

 

[jake]

Accusing an innocent person of murder on a public board would cause you trouble. I understand your reluctance Jake.

Thanks, Barney. You forgot to add....unless it's Jason. Yeah, innocent.

--Jake

 

[jilly]

Is the morgue where Michelle was taken in Chappel Hill? I have read this Dr Groene performs 250 autopsies a year and his chosen field is ME frorensic pathology. He is a regular doctor who is just not yet board certified.

What does that really matter. I think part of being board certified would involve overseeng procedures, taking responsibility for work done, decisions made and teaching. Does any of that really play into doing a great job in performing the autopsy itself?

To the Defense attorney, it sure is imo because it's not just this particular oversight we're talking about. This autopsy, as opposed to the one done on Kathleen Peterson lacks detail. jmo

 

[Scout]

More questions for you, Jake:

Was the master bedroom the only place that you observed carpet (or other permanent fixtures) removed from the house?

Regarding the bluish/greenish substance, did you see it only in spots where blood was obvious, or were there places where you noticed this substance but there were no visible bloodstains?

Did you see any disturbed areas in the house that you attributed to the killer's activities rather than to the investigative process? If so, why?

 

[strach304]

To the Defense attorney, it sure is imo because it's not just this particular oversight we're talking about. This autopsy, as opposed to the one done on Kathleen Peterson lacks detail. jmo

Absolutely. I've been following Hawthorne's posts on ctv about this as she has said all along she hoped there was another. If she can get an expert friend to look it over and detail as much as she did about what was missing think about the defense's experts and what they'll do with this. Lets not think Jason for a minute and assume that someone is eventually charged. They don't need motive legally but won't the jury want some kind of evidence if this is a random person of rape or robbery for instance.

We did question this way back when Hawthorne brought it up but hoped there was something else. Same with the alcohol test being the only one listed. I know toxicology tests take much longer for the results but again we figured they'd be in a final report of some kind.

As to Jason being the one charged if so for those who followed the Laci Peterson case, remember how Geragos handled every single prosecution witness? Even the accuracy of mitochondrial dna. We're at the point in this case where everyone involved with any evidence collecting, processing, etc. is being called to the carpet in the wake of what happened with the Durham prosecutor. Obviously that matters too or everyone wouldn't keep bringing it up as a reason for proceeding so carefuly in this case.

 

[jake]

More questions for you, Jake:

Was the master bedroom the only place that you observed carpet (or other permanent fixtures) removed from the house?

Regarding the bluish/greenish substance, did you see it only in spots where blood was obvious, or were there places where you noticed this substance but there were no visible bloodstains?

Did you see any disturbed areas in the house that you attributed to the killer's activities rather than to the investigative process? If so, why?

Yes, Scout, that was the only place.

Can't even guess. I didn't look that closely. I've heard the name of that stuff, but can't remember it. It was not luminol, for that must be seen under a special light in darkness.

No, I reckon not. LE could answer that, but I saw it only after many people had investigated the house. I can't know what the killer did and what LE did.

--Jake

 

[scandi]

Excellent posts Girls, That is why I thought they would be extra carefull in processing everything to do with this case, from the crime scene all the way down to keeping it close to the vest. Everything done by the book and not rushed for time.

I have often thought there should be a new autopsy on Michelle, but then I think Barney said even a nurse could examine and detail wounds on a report, so maybe it is fine. But I would love to hear Dr Werner Spitz on the subject!

Scandi

 

[strach304]

It's so disheartening after following this case from the beginning and being sure that LE would get whooever is responsible. I have seen incompetency in LE on many other cases where those crimes are not solved. I don't mean unsolved crimes mean incompetency either. There have been several that come to mind also where LE weren't up to par that the perp was caught by pure luck or however you want to put it but not to their credit.

I'm not ready to give up all hope but I certainly have valid reasons to worry. Jason is still very suspect to me until I see real evidence of someone else's involvement which I have not seen so far but that doesn't mean LE hasn't.

 

[jilly]

As to Jason being the one charged if so for those who followed the Laci Peterson case, remember how Geragos handled every single prosecution witness? Even the accuracy of mitochondrial dna. We're at the point in this case where everyone involved with any evidence collecting, processing, etc. is being called to the carpet in the wake of what happened with the Durham prosecutor. Obviously that matters too or everyone wouldn't keep bringing it up as a reason for proceeding so carefuly in this case.

I totally agree with your entire post Strach. I have been very patient this past 6 mos relying on all this i dotting & t crossing but now I'm starting to wonder. So what else is going on besides:

The AR lacking detail; failure to conduct a rape kit, 3rd yr intern performing autopsy, No report from Pathologist.;

The CSIs - leaving a tooth/piece of tooth at the crime scene after 13 days of so-called "fine tooth-combing".

The defense is going to make mincemeat out of this. They're going to chip at it in cross just like any good attorney. Yes I remember Geragos dong this and I'll never forget "WELL, MR FUNG!!" under Barry Scheck.

I also have a few concerns about LE but I'm going to keep these to myself until I have more info. I think they've reached a road block. I'm also thinking jy made a deliberate attempt to commit the perfect crime by googling with a libary card, booking a hotel without surveillance, keeping his cell phone off. Then he lawyers up immediately.

I agree with Scandi about Cassidy and the 911 tape but you can bet your bottom dollar that the Defense will fight like hell to keep that out for being too prejudicial.

 

[scandi]

I totally agree with your entire post Strach. I have been very patient this past 6 mos relying on all this i dotting & t crossing but now I'm starting to wonder. So what else is going on besides:

The AR lacking detail; failure to conduct a rape kit, 3rd yr intern performing autopsy, No report from Pathologist.;

The CSIs - leaving a tooth/piece of tooth at the crime scene after 13 days of so-called "fine tooth-combing".

The defense is going to make mincemeat out of this. They're going to chip at it in cross just like any good attorney. Yes I remember Geragos dong this and I'll never forget "WELL, MR FUNG!!" under Barry Scheck.

I also have a few concerns about LE but I'm going to keep these to myself until I have more info. I think they've reached a road block. I'm also thinking jy made a deliberate attempt to commit the perfect crime by googling with a libary card, booking a hotel without surveillance, keeping his cell phone off. Then he lawyers up immediately.

I agree with Scandi about Cassidy and the 911 tape but you can bet your bottom dollar that the Defense will fight like hell to keep that out for being too prejudicial.

Hey Jilly! ;} I think your reasoning on how to commit the perfect crime in this case is excellent. The no surveillance and phone off could work either way though, as it doesn't prove where he was all the time. Do you have a theory on what was done with the accoutrements to the crime, and I still wonder about where the bloody sheet and socks are now.

See ya later alligater! Scandi[/olor]

 

[spring]

Hey Jilly! ;} I think your reasoning on how to commit the perfect crime in this case is excellent. The no surveillance and phone off could work either way though, as it doesn't prove where he was all the time. Do you have a theory on what was done with the accoutrements to the crime, and I still wonder about where the bloody sheet and socks are now.

See ya later alligater! Scandi[/olor]

that is the true needle in a haystack. there are so many lakes and bodies of water that JY is all too familiar with, but i really think that any trash bin along his however many mile route that he took back to his hotel and to his mother's would have sufficed. i don't really know how as an investigator you would begin to look for those items.

 

[Stoli]

that is the true needle in a haystack. there are so many lakes and bodies of water that JY is all too familiar with, but i really think that any trash bin along his however many mile route that he took back to his hotel and to his mother's would have sufficed. i don't really know how as an investigator you would begin to look for those items.

I think the garbage dump is the place to get rid of evidence if you never want it found. If Nov 3rd was a garbage day, a bag filled with evidence could have been dumped and it will never, ever be found.

 

[Barney Fife]

that is the true needle in a haystack. there are so many lakes and bodies of water that JY is all too familiar with, but i really think that any trash bin along his however many mile route that he took back to his hotel and to his mother's would have sufficed. i don't really know how as an investigator you would begin to look for those items.

Hey Spring !

I agree . The weapon, shoes and clothing were probably placed in a garbage bag from his kitchen drawer and dropped in one of the many cans or dumpsters along the 175 mile route back to Hillsville......long gone.

 

[jilly]

Hey Jilly! ;} I think your reasoning on how to commit the perfect crime in this case is excellent. The no surveillance and phone off could work either way though, as it doesn't prove where he was all the time. Do you have a theory on what was done with the accoutrements to the crime, and I still wonder about where the bloody sheet and socks are now.

See ya later alligater! Scandi[/olor]

Yes the phone & surveillance could work either way but this is going to be a CE case. LE needs something that the jury can get their teeth into and we haven't seen or heard anything yet. I really tried to be optimistic but now we have this other stuff coming out and I can see it's made it easier for the Defense to chip away at reasonable doubt. I really hoped (like you) that LE ".... would be extra carefull in processing everything to do with this case, from the crime scene all the way down to keeping it close to the vest."

What we've read recently doesn't add up to dotting the I's & T's does it?

I have no idea about the accroutrements. Think we might just have to wait for some hiker or fisherman to come across them one day.

 

[raisincharlie]

Yes the phone & surveillance could work either way but this is going to be a CE case. LE needs something that the jury can get their teeth into and we haven't seen or heard anything yet. I really tried to be optimistic but now we have this other stuff coming out and I can see it's made it easier for the Defense to chip away at reasonable doubt. I really hoped (like you) that LE ".... would be extra carefull in processing everything to do with this case, from the crime scene all the way down to keeping it close to the vest."

What we've read recently doesn't add up to dotting the I's & T's does it?

I have no idea about the accroutrements. Think we might just have to wait for some hiker or fisherman to come across them one day.

Wow Jilly !

Do you really think the entire case hinges on what the ME did or did not do ? Do you not think that Michelle's clothes will add some independent significance to this? What if the ME had indeed done a rape kit and it was negative - does it change the truth ?

I know what you are saying but, I'm not ready to think this case has been denied because of this - it is for one thing, correctable. second - the tooth - you know as well as I do that the source of that has been identified by now. If it turns out to be Michelle's - hmmm it really isn't evidence is it ?

I'm willing to continue thinking there is more to this case than what we know. Call me an optimist but the reality is there is more evidence than we know about. How strong how weak we don't know. Yes a defense lawyer is going to try to make everything look bad - does it change the truth ? I wouldn't be surprised to see the DA call some people that aren't thinking they will be called - there is lots of explaining to do on both sides I think.

 

[scandi]

That is interesting Charlie, and from what I have just read over at CTV on the Phil Spector thread, it could be our case could even get more interesting!

I only have just read the jist of this, but in Ca they have a rule of reciprocal evidence. After the forensic team and crime scene investigators take down the tape on a crime scene, the defense does have the opportunity to go through it. If they find anything they are bound to share it or notify the prosecution they have located something which might be evidenciary.

I don't know what the laws are in NC, but if what has been thrown out to us is true, and at the same time as when the tooth was found by the family {say within a couple of days or till the cleaning crew came in}, if something else was taken from the scene and withheld for months, and finally turned over to the defense attny, couldn't that also be a problem at trial?

In the Spector trial the judge spoke of 'moved evidence' which caused a mini trial within the big trial, and the judge listed many violations against the defense.

I would think a family member witholding evidence from LE for a period of time could be just as serious as the fact that LE asked for certain evidence to be collected and the ME failed to do so. Hmmmmmmmmm LOL

 

[strach304]

One of the major differences in this case to compare to the Peterson conviction is Scott's big mouth and actions after the fact. I said some time ago the smartest thing Jason could do if guilty is keep his mouth shut and he has. Scott was told to do the same thing.

With stuff like this hanging out there and the possibility of more the DA would be smart not to take it to trial yet without overwhelming evidence that is sure to get a conviction. I'm counting on what they do have and not on what they don't.

 

[raisincharlie]

That is interesting Charlie, and from what I have just read over at CTV on the Phil Spector thread, it could be our case could even get more interesting!

I only have just read the jist of this, but in Ca they have a rule of reciprocal evidence. After the forensic team and crime scene investigators take down the tape on a crime scene, the defense does have the opportunity to go through it. If they find anything they are bound to share it or notify the prosecution they have located something which might be evidenciary.

I don't know what the laws are in NC, but if what has been thrown out to us is true, and at the same time as when the tooth was found by the family {say within a couple of days or till the cleaning crew came in}, if something else was taken from the scene and withheld for months, and finally turned over to the defense attny, couldn't that also be a problem at trial?

In the Spector trial the judge spoke of 'moved evidence' which caused a mini trial within the big trial, and the judge listed many violations against the defense.

I would think a family member witholding evidence from LE for a period of time could be just as serious as the fact that LE asked for certain evidence to be collected and the ME failed to do so. Hmmmmmmmmm LOL

Scandi,

You have touched on one of the reasons why I believe this case is moving slowly. NC does not have the requirement for reciprical discovery except for alibi witnesses. Otherwise, the state is indeed open to being blind sided as the state must turn over eveything once a suspect is arrested.

Think about that one !

As to with holding evidence - well I suspect if that were true, someone would be screaming from the mountains by now if it were indeed exculpatory...don't you ?

 

[strach304]

Scandi, I think the whole point in this particular issue where a family member may have found something as Jake said they didn't know it was important or thought it wasn't because LE did not collect it. Therefore, LE is imcompetent so what else did they miss? Strange to me how six months later they realize it is important. Can't be the package of condoms because they were listed in a warrant so we know LE took those. That ties in with no SA test done being made into a major issue, Now what if those prints are what's not id'd? Major boo boo even if it is just the store clerks.

It isn't that what was found or discovered yielded anything of evidentiary value it's that it wasn't collected in the first place by LE. They really aren't in a position to say or do anything to whoever found whatever as long as that person is saying they had no idea it was important but LE should've known, right?