Michelle Young ~ Pregnant Mother NC Part 3

[raisincharlie]

I don't know what you mean when you say that if it happened before May 20, it would be suspicious. I think that if it happened after they signed for the house it's suspicious. First, it makes it seem that Jason was not happy about the purchase of the house but more importantly, most mortgages have an insurance clause such that the death of one spouse results in the pay out of the mortgage. Michelle was an astute accountant and, having been married to one of those at one time, I know that they tend to include that clause in their house mortgage plan.

To me the house issue could go either way - accident before - didn't want to spend the money, seems they also have other real estate as well. Or it could be just as you say, pay out for the house. This theory would be plausible if the accident occurred in either 2005 or 2006, so possible.

To catch you up, a poster claiming to be in the know, with respect to the couple, at CTV is saying the accident was in May 2006. First it was definitely May 6th but later changed to maybe the 29th so...this poster also says that about 2 weeks after the wreck was when it was discovered the baby had stop developing and a medical abortion was performed and Michelle immediately got pregnant afterwards. FWIW.

 

[SewingDeb]

I don't know what you mean when you say that if it happened before May 20, it would be suspicious. I think that if it happened after they signed for the house it's suspicious. First, it makes it seem that Jason was not happy about the purchase of the house but more importantly, most mortgages have an insurance clause such that the death of one spouse results in the pay out of the mortgage. Michelle was an astute accountant and, having been married to one of those at one time, I know that they tend to include that clause in their house mortgage plan.

Just what I was thinking. If one died, the other would have the house with no mortgage payments.

 

[raisincharlie]

Charlie,

"Promiscuous" is one of my favorite songs. I always have to sing along when I hear it on the radio. Thanks for posting the link to Nelly Furtado's music.

I had not heard "Say It Right" until now. Very nice.

I like Promiscuous as well but Say it Right just blows me away...glad you enjoyed it !

 

[strach304]

Wasn't the house bought in May of 2005? Maybe that's where the confusion comes in with the date of the accident? From what I remember it was first reported by the media as happening this past spring and then that one poster on ctv said 2005. We know CC has given incorrect info over there before.

 

[raisincharlie]

Wasn't the house bought in May of 2005? Maybe that's where the confusion comes in with the date of the accident? From what I remember it was first reported by the media as happening this past spring and then that one poster on ctv said 2005. We know CC has given incorrect info over there before.

Correct - the house was bought in 2005, well lets say the deed was filed May 20, 2005.

The article posted by Otto a few posts back says the accident was in May of 2005 as well. It is getting confusing but I suspect that might be the aim. JMO.

 

[otto]

To me the house issue could go either way - accident before - didn't want to spend the money, seems they also have other real estate as well. Or it could be just as you say, pay out for the house. This theory would be plausible if the accident occurred in either 2005 or 2006, so possible.

To catch you up, a poster claiming to be in the know, with respect to the couple, at CTV is saying the accident was in May 2006. First it was definitely May 6th but later changed to maybe the 29th so...this poster also says that about 2 weeks after the wreck was when it was discovered the baby had stop developing and a medical abortion was performed and Michelle immediately got pregnant afterwards. FWIW.

The poster in the know is full of it if they say it happened in 2006.

Let's suppose that Michelle was 4 months pregnant at the end of May 2006. After the accident, she saw a doctor and it was determined that the baby stopped growing. This doesn't happen in a week, this usually can take up to month 7, but let's assume this was determined in a few weeks. We're now into June and most likely towards the end of June at least. After a miscarriage or therapeutic abortion, it takes about 6 months for a woman to conceive (recovery from the trauma). Even omitting this, let's assume that Michelle became pregnant immediately after the therapeutic abortion so we're now in August and Michelle gets pregnant. Between August, September (1), October (2), half November (2.5) ... Michelle could only have been 2.5 to 3 months pregnant and that's not giving any time to recover from a therapeutic abortion. She was 4 months pregnant when she died so it is impossible that she was in the accident in May 2006.

 

[otto]

To me the house issue could go either way - accident before - didn't want to spend the money, seems they also have other real estate as well. Or it could be just as you say, pay out for the house. This theory would be plausible if the accident occurred in either 2005 or 2006, so possible.

To catch you up, a poster claiming to be in the know, with respect to the couple, at CTV is saying the accident was in May 2006. First it was definitely May 6th but later changed to maybe the 29th so...this poster also says that about 2 weeks after the wreck was when it was discovered the baby had stop developing and a medical abortion was performed and Michelle immediately got pregnant afterwards. FWIW.

Just for the record, after a therapeutic abortion, a woman bleeds profusely for about 7 - 10 days and is highly advised not to have sexual activity for at least a couple of months to avoid the possibility of aggravating any lesions that may have resulted from the procedure. There is no way that Michelle was pregnant again in June, given the May 29 date of the accident, or July, given the precautions surrounding a therapeutic abortion. Then we need another month for her period to regulate and another month to get pregnant. Whoever is telling you Michelle was pregnant within a month of losing a baby is either male or really dumb about pregnancy.

 

[strach304]

Otto, was it the 5th. or 29th because that's 3 weeks diffrence there?

Hope everyone had a great holiday

 

[raisincharlie]

Just for the record, after a therapeutic abortion, a woman bleeds profusely for about 7 - 10 days and is highly advised not to have sexual activity for at least a couple of months to avoid the possibility of aggravating any lesions that may have resulted from the procedure. There is no way that Michelle was pregnant again in June, given the May 29 date of the accident, or July, given the precautions surrounding a therapeutic abortion. Then we need another month for her period to regulate and another month to get pregnant. Whoever is telling you Michelle was pregnant within a month of losing a baby is either male or really dumb about pregnancy.

Well, I wasn't going to go there. Like you I have seen various reports from different sources that say the wreck was in May 2005. I certainly didn't think it would be possible but I am male...

 

[otto]

Otto, was it the 5th. or 29th because that's 3 weeks diffrence there?

Hope everyone had a great holiday

The first reported date, confirmed in a newspaper article, was May 29, 2005. I linked it a few posts back ...maybe the observer.

 

[otto]

Well, I wasn't going to go there. Like you I have seen various reports from different sources that say the wreck was in May 2005. I certainly didn't think it would be possible but I am male...

It is highly unlikely, in my humble opinion, that Michelle had a miscarriage/therapeutic abortion after May 29, 2006 and was four months pregnant in mid-November, not even a cheerleader.

 

[otto]

What a hoot: "Lawyers are known as a lot of things. Unfortunately, 'human' is rarely one of them. " That's bold to put on a business website.

Whose lawyer is this again? Or which lawyer is it? http://www.tharringtonsmith.com/attorneys.php

 

[PolkSaladAnnie]

Whoever is telling you Michelle was pregnant within a month of losing a baby is either male or really dumb about pregnancy.

Hey otto. Now you made me laugh,again lol, at the above! Dear oh dear - Isn't your comparison a bit of a dichotomy? Lol, j/k ...tongue in cheek. OR the story teller is forging a tale he/she wishes an audience to presume or lodge in their mind?

 

[PolkSaladAnnie]

What a hoot: "Lawyers are known as a lot of things. Unfortunately, 'human' is rarely one of them. " That's bold to put on a business website.

Whose lawyer is this again? Or which lawyer is it? http://www.tharringtonsmith.com/attorneys.php

Otto, I heard it's Richard Smith, not Wade, his son. Perhaps there's another Smith at this firm? Going on cases that I've noticed in random searching - their success rate does not scream a 'win' every time. But then, maybe the reporter only zoomed in on a few cases that Smith and Wesson, I mean Smiths & Wade & co lost

 

[PolkSaladAnnie]

So 'we' are returning baby gifts but yet we have not talked or called LE about the murder of 'our' precious Michelle and baby boy. 'We' can't find time to tell LE all 'we' know that may help find Michelle's murderer. :loser:

JTF better quit while they're behind!

JMHO
fran

:clap: :clap: :clap:

Well said, fran!

 

[PolkSaladAnnie]

This argument that they are trying to correct mistruths and the media frenzy garbage simply does not fly with me as there are too many inconsistencies within their own posts. i also have to wonder if they are so worried about the press trying to get information from them, why the heck are they on a public use forum spilling their story. Sorry if this sounds harsh, but I do not know of any reason why my opinion, or anyone's opinion for that matter, should be of such great concern to this person especially when they claim such overwhelming grief at this time. Seems their energy would be much better spent on direct family members rather than on a message board. Maybe I'm just a hard a.. but that's how I see it.

100% behind this thinking, charlie, as I have been from the get-go. To me, it is anonymous posting on not just A message board, but across a few web-threads and it's always about Jason and how his alibi is 100% sound. There's NO attempt to swallow one or two ideas. Everything is justified and Jason is the All-American Hero of grande proportions. Not. No-one is!

The more I read such determined, passionate anonymous justificaiton for Jason to "whomseoever" may read and absorb the REAL STORY tell me there is more desperation out there than serious dedication to an extremely sombre setting out in Brevard.

Sure, it's not uncommon to read posts/viewpoints in various forums from a 'member of the family' and while in lurk-mode, I've seen a fair share here at W/S. Like most W/S-ers, my heart goes out to them and it's a brave thing to go out there and communicate blindly with a global audience.

Outside of Scott Peterson's case which spiralled into heated debates, bannings and some utterly crass remarks - only once has poster-interation (in my experience & lurking, that is) come across with an 'atmosphere' - and that was RileysFamily (or similar). Of course these events destroy a family, heavens above - who could POSSIBLE be so cold so as not to care? And, as most of us have equally experienced during these crimes, some members of immediate family simply cannot bear to acknowledge or accept a person in their own gene-pool is capable of such heinous acts of cold-blooded murder.

The FIRST big red flag to me - is when a claimed close friend/family member immediately jumps on LE and media. These folk descended across the 'Net instantly and vociferously in acute defense of Jason. There seemed little or no real sorrow over Michelle and her unborn baby. It comes across to me as a matter of "Michelle and Baby were murdered: It couldn't have been Jason because he's this, that and the next thing; the media frenzy (that's a joke) and LE are distorting the truth because they need an arrest."

Let's NOT forget that this clan's initial posts contained a bitter swipe at the Sheriff claiming they needed support for the (then) up-coming elections. And now, the subliminal messages are turning me further and further away. Now I see them in as a poor a light as I see the image of the real murderer.

JMO.

 

[PolkSaladAnnie]

Omg Charlie, am I losing my touch? :crazy: I found Just the Facts to be very genuine.
Ocean

Hi again Ocean. Lol .... 'losing your touch', ?? Doubt it. I've been reading your posts for ages - even way back, when your forum siggy still read something along the lines of "No matter what - I am still the orginal OceanBlueEyes"... Well, that's for sure!

In all your writings over the years, much of which has educated me, I believe your skills (imo) in prizing apart specifics and bringing in a good, rational debate remain fair. In Jason's case, perhaps I've witnessed a slight change; maybe it was your instant and unquestioning support via 'the facts from an insider'? Lol, I almost wanted to ask if you knew Jason, and/or his family lol! , j/k.

You've never bashed opponents of your views - which, of course, remain your absolute and respected right to share ... indeed you may be 100% correct in your determining.

However, these posters commenced with 'political gain for elections' & 'Michelle may have been having an affair' i.e. knocking the victim (HER problems, background,honesty, integrity, family) all the while putting Jason on a pedestal. Everyone else is wrong: but not JY.

Facts remain sketchy. We know JY's gone over the hills and far away; a.k.a. vanished; he's said little or nothing; no public grief or community outreach; no concern for (and seemingly abandoned) Michelle's family with his dau; he certainly didn't even demonstrate complete family-grief at the funeral. ONLY HE was earlier issued a court notice to submit evidence. He instantly lawyered up with high profile criminal defense atties. Fine if one of the above happened. But ALL of these things have happened.

EVERY time jtf etc read from the going-for-guilty posts, they jump in with total redemption for their 'man' - rebuking anyone who refuses to swallow their anonymous facts. (Everything is 'impossible - he wouldn't have - this is why he did that bla bla bla.)

The subliminal messages speak loud and clear, imo. The more they post in defense, the more I challenge their 'facts'. Overkill. And they're very, very worried, MOO.

With others, I have faith in this Sheriff. If his work proves it wasn't Jason, then hey, I go by that. I feell he is scrupulously dedicating his time and attention to all aspects of this crime.

For me: ... statistics, motive, opportunity, financial security, his very new job, as-released official crime/media details, (possibly sex) the 911 tape, their history, the sparkling personality MY appeared to be, his pre/during/post-crime actions and time-line tell me a whole lotta something else. And jtf helps me stick to my guns, heh...

OK - reeling back with a sock in my mouth, lol

PSA...

 

[otto]

Otto, I heard it's Richard Smith, not Wade, his son. Perhaps there's another Smith at this firm? Going on cases that I've noticed in random searching - their success rate does not scream a 'win' every time. But then, maybe the reporter only zoomed in on a few cases that Smith and Wesson, I mean Smiths & Wade & co lost

I see Roger and Wade. You probably meant Roger. There's no other Smith, just Uncle Wade, Roger Sr and Roger Jr.

I guess I should read about Roger Jr to see what his weaknesses are, although Wade is probably a better victim. So, Roger Sr is defending Jason Young. Soooooo, the son appears to be an English major that decided wood working was a good career, then all of a sudden won a law award and started working in his dad's law firm. Okay. Wade is probably the brains behind both Rogers.

Since they appear to be more shrewd than intelligent, their best advice for their client is indeed to remain silent, as there is absolutely no other suspect anywhere in the picture. As for sending a clerk or office assistant into the net to see what's up and ensure that everyone sees their story, that wouldn't surprise me. Lawyers have been known to use propaganda when beneficial to the cause. ... Beware of persons posing as realtors without business cards.

 

[otto]

OK - reeling back with a sock in my mouth, lol

PSA...

Pretty funny ... you

 

[PolkSaladAnnie]

Pretty funny ... you

...

Well I'm not good at taking on 'the big guns' heh heh, but I do enjoy this forum immensely.

Otto, some of us seem to be gathering thoughts that the Jason-clan may be protesting just that little bit too much that everything JY said, does, did, doing etc, is 100% justified. What d'you really think?

BTW: I had friends at a BBQ last night, 2 from USA and the gals got together and discussed this case. Gee, they were adamant and actually said" It's husbands that do this and are the only ones ever to have real motive. It's called trying to get out the cheap and nasty way but they always get caught."

(One woman is from East Coast - theeee most hysterical, warm, in-your-face character I've ever met. Loud, logical and lovely, in MOST opinions. She 'pretended' to call him acting as though she was Nancy Grace, Lord, mimic artist extraordinaire)

Anyway, back to the Q above...

PSA