State vs. Jason Lynn Young 02-29-12

[fifteen89]

Yup! IMHO, he did have on gloves. As he lived in the house and this was HIS bedroom, the fact his prints are in that room, mean absolutely, well,.............he was in that room while he lived in that home.

and.......................

that's about it!
JMHO
fran

Yeppers. Using where you live as the scene of the crime can sure muddy things up.

 

[fran]

So, someone put their fingerprint on a portion where JY had previously touched.

and..........????????????

the point is?????????????????????

nothing,
JMHO
fran

 

[fromageball]

IMO I think that mamma knows a whole lot more than she is telling.

If JY did this, I'm sure mamma knows but she will take it to her grave.

 

[Turnadot]

Well now, this print/blood spatter testimony has perked me right up.

 

[Cammy]

Now, we go to the Hampton Inn camera print.

This could be BIG !

Yep, excluded the print on the camera as to being Jason Young's!!

Now, the print on the pipe.

The hand gripped the pipe, all the way around.

He excluded the print of Jason Young !!

 

[Boodles]

The prosecution/LE really should have compared all LE/investigator people's fingerprints.

 

[fran]

This is the second time I've heard him say, 'photo-shop.'

Just that word, to me IF I were a juror, would loose my interest in anything he's saying.

JMHO'
of course!
fran

 

[Tipstaff]

People in the house could include builders movers, friends, family, plumber, electrician, cleaning lady, baby sitter, baby sitter's boyfriend, carpet cleaner, butcher, baker and Indian Chief.

 

[Stella5]

Honestly as many times as they had people in & out of the house, there is going to be unidentifiable prints all over that house. Unless you can tell me there are unidentified prints on Michelle's body or the murder weapon, which conveniently was never found... then I don't care how many unidentifiable prints are all over the place. Unless of course there is unidentifiable prints, in the victims blood clearly left where they should be... on exit doors, etc... Whoever did this planned not to leave any identifiers behind.

 

[octobermoon]

IMO JMO MOO

:truce:

:deadhorse:

:whiteflag:


This means nothing. IMO
We know all of this from the PT CIC.
Defense did a good job on cross with those witnesses,
why are we going over this again.

:banghead:

 

[fifteen89]

If this is in fact the DT's last witness, he's an interesting choice. I don't expect the jurors are looking at this from the meta-information standpoint that many WS posters are. But to put up a lot of scientific mumblety-mumble after the fairly damning testimony about JLY's personality over the last two days is, from where I sit and IMO, maybe a tell.

I'd say it's a pretty BIG tell.

 

[Wolfpack]

People in the house could include builders movers, friends, family, plumber, electrician, cleaning lady, baby sitter, baby sitter's boyfriend, carpet cleaner, butcher, baker and Indian Chief.

I Was following you up until you got to Indian Chief. That one threw me!

 

[waltzingmatilda]

I wasn't able to watch today. Did the Defense rest? Can someone give me a quick synopsis? Pretty please....

thanks,

wm

 

[tarheellvr]

IMO I think that mamma knows a whole lot more than she is telling.

I TOTALLY agree......thanks for posting your thoughts! I, and some others here, have said all along Mrs Young should be charged with AATF. :banghead:

 

[fran]

He also keeps saying 'think.' I 'think.'

That means he doesn't know.

At least to me.
JMHO
fran

 

[dmaxphil]

This is the second time I've heard him say, 'photo-shop.'

Just that word, to me IF I were a juror, would loose my interest in anything he's saying.

JMHO'
of course!
fran

He mentioned earlier that he adjusted contrast in PS.

 

[iucpa]

Just happened to check out tweets related to trial and people are completely discounting this evidence. I see this as the most direct and relevant evidence that's been presented in the entire trial. Forensics are EVERYTHING - can't be faked, can't be lied about, aren't circumstantial.

This is very significant testimony IMO.

 

[Turnadot]

So, someone put their fingerprint on a portion where JY had previously touched.

and..........????????????

the point is?????????????????????

nothing,
JMHO
fran

That's Jason's print was there before the crime, since there's an overlap, is where they are going with this, IMO.

 

[Madeleine74]

I know this fingerprint/blood order on wall wasn't impeached during trial #1 and is new to this trial. I guess the defense sees that as a big item they needed to address or try to address.

It was a piece of evidence I found compelling when watching Saack's closing arguments and I sure remembered it. I'm not hearing this expert say definitive, I'm hearing "could be."

 

[fran]

I wasn't able to watch today. Did the Defense rest? Can someone give me a quick synopsis? Pretty please....

thanks,

wm

Nope! This is the final witness, I think! for the defense.

fran