State vs Jason Lynn Young 2-15-2012

[foltster]

There is a BIG difference in protecting your rights with silence and hanging up on police officers before you know how your wife was killed and giving zero information about your whereabouts and zero worry about your child IMO.

Protecting your rights and doing NOTHING to help find the killer are opposite ends of the spectrum IMO.

Unfortunately the law and constitution do not agree with your opinion...

 

[Cammy]

Side note - I was in the courtroom for a little while yesterday. Was interesting.

Would love to hear anything you saw !

 

[otto]

But otto, If the print does have the splatter around it... but the print has no blood on the actual print then it would coincide with the murder. If not it is not certain when the print was put on the wall... it may have been when moving in or moving furniture at some point.
Isn't there also the possibility that his dna was on the wall previously and he did have gloves on when the print was made?

If they could prove the print/blood spatter/dna all happened at the same time it would be JY 'hooped' IMO. But they can't... so we are left to speculate.

Suppose that Jason put his print on the moulding while he was setting up the bed at the time they moved in. Suppose that someone else murdered Michelle while wearing gloves, he or she put his or her hand on the moulding, the spatter goes in areas around the gloved hand and, at the end, Jason's DNA is in the void left behind.

Every other piece of evidence or missing evidence has been explained with the argument that the murderer must have been wearing gloves. Okay, let's go with that for a minute. All of a sudden, we need the murderer to not be wearing gloves in order to match this evidence to Jason. It seems like we have Jason putting on and taking off gloves through the hour that he could have been at the house to explain whatever evidence the prosecution would have us believe. Let's go with the totality ... gloves, no gloves, or a silly murderer that only removes gloves while touching the moulding?

 

[MyBelle]

There is a BIG difference in protecting your rights with silence and hanging up on police officers before you know how your wife was killed and giving zero information about your whereabouts and zero worry about your child IMO.

Protecting your rights and doing NOTHING to help find the killer are opposite ends of the spectrum IMO.

Young knew his wife was dead before the police officer phoned him.

Young did have the right to invoke silence and he did so. You may not agree with this Constitutional right but the jury will have no choice in the matter.

JMO

 

[Cammy]

Another Michelle on the stand, works for the crime lab, and dna expert.

 

[dgfred]

Obviously, her supposed friendship with MY was just superficial. I wonder if she would be so amused were it MY on trial for killing JY.

I don't find her attitude to the present situation anything, other than disturbing.

JMHO
fran

I don't find her attitude necessary or productive in any way... for her or the defense.

 

[octobermoon]

Side note - I was in the courtroom for a little while yesterday. Was interesting.

Oh, please tell us your thoughts when you get the time. TIA

 

[dgfred]

Young knew his wife was dead before the police officer phoned him.

Young did have the right to invoke silence and he did so. You may not agree with this Constitutional right but the jury will have no choice in the matter.

JMO

Whatever... my agreement with the Constitutional right has nothing to do with it.

'The rights of mankind'... now that's another story about what would have been the CORRECT and PROPER things to do if you had nothing to do with her murder. The jury can also decide ON THEIR OWN what they think was correct and proper... they do not to explain why they think that way.

 

[nursebeeme]

Onto the jewelrty box, partial dna.

You need 16 genetic lowside alleles_____to make a match
Freeman found only 2 on the box.

that is cause the part the perp was touching is missing (re: the drawers):twocents:

 

[otto]

Wow, I just saw her as pleased as punch to be in the "spotlight" so she could complain about how badly she had been treated by the media, LE, FBI and the internet people. I saw not one ounce of sadness over MY's murder. Very weird to me. If I have time I'll try to watch again tonight.

I don't think she was ever Michelle's friend. People may have thought that she was a friend to Michelle, but I don't believe that she ever was a friend ... she started an affair with Jason - friends don't to that.

 

[MyBelle]

But otto, If the print does have the splatter around it... but the print has no blood on the actual print then it would coincide with the murder. If not it is not certain when the print was put on the wall... it may have been when moving in or moving furniture at some point.
Isn't there also the possibility that his dna was on the wall previously and he did have gloves on when the print was made?

If they could prove the print/blood spatter/dna all happened at the same time it would be JY 'hooped' IMO. But they can't... so we are left to speculate.

blood spatter analysis is no longer allowed in NC due to the corruption of the lab staff doing past blood spatter analysis in other cases, including this one.

JMO

 

[dgfred]

Unfortunately the law and constitution do not agree with your opinion...

Once again, the jurors can decide on their own whether something constitutes signs of guilt or not. They do not have to say why they feel that way or what exactly they based their decision on.

 

[Talina]

Young knew his wife was dead before the police officer phoned him.

Young did have the right to invoke silence and he did so. You may not agree with this Constitutional right but the jury will have no choice in the matter.

JMO

Isn't the jury instructed to not hold against the defendant their decision to not take the stand in their own trial?

I don't think I've ever seen instructions given to a jury telling them that a defendant's behavior during the investigation, whether that be hiring a lawyer, refusing to speak to LE, refusing to offer up anything to the investigation before a NTO is issued, etc. etc. can't (not can - typo in first post) be used against him/her in their deliberations.

Certainly, that is a person's right to do what JY did, but I do not believe the jury will be instructed that they can not consider this in their deliberations. IIRC, they will be told they are not to hold it against him if he decides to not take the stand, nothing else. They will certainly be able to use whatever evidence and testimony against or for him, some of that being his lack of assistance and cooperation in the investigation. Whether or not the jury chooses to weight that against him or not will just be part of their deliberations.

IMO

 

[gritguy]

I don't agree with you. The jury adopts the presumption of innocence. The majority of the last jury could not find Jason Young guilty so they did agree with the defense. The decision to retry was made solely by the prosecution. If I was a taxpayer, I'd be outraged at the waste of resources.

JMO

That's wrong.

The prosecution asks for a conviction. The defense asks for an acquittal. A hung jury occurs when the jury does not agree with either party. Neither the prosecution nor the defense wanted that result, and neither would have seen that as the jury "agreeing" with them but rather the hung jury being better than a result against them.

So the jury did not agree with either party. Individuals in within the jury varied of course.

 

[Madeleine74]

CY's DNA was found on the medicine dropper in her bedroom and on the water spiggot outside the home.

 

[dgfred]

blood spatter analysis is no longer allowed in NC due to the corruption of the lab staff doing past blood spatter analysis in other cases, including this one.

JMO

My point was that if anybody could figure out when the print was made that would help the prosecution case... since it is not possible... it doesn't help.

 

[MyBelle]

Whatever... my agreement with the Constitutional right has nothing to do with it.

'The rights of mankind'... now that's another story about what would have been the CORRECT and PROPER things to do if you had nothing to do with her murder. The jury can also decide ON THEIR OWN what they think was correct and proper... they do not to explain why they think that way.

Not true. The jury is given instructions and they are required to abide by those instructions.

There are no "rights to mankind" in our constitution. Jason invoked his constitutional right to silence. I respect his decision and so must the jury.

JMO

 

[Cammy]

that is cause the part the perp was touching is missing (re: the drawers):twocents:

Right!!

If the drawers are not there, naturally they can't be tested, but this is more of a generalization finding of the jewelry box and what they found as markers.

 

[Madeleine74]

Confirmed:

Hair in MY hand matched MY.
Hair under MY was MY's

 

[octobermoon]

I don't think she was ever Michelle's friend. People may have thought that she was a friend to Michelle, but I don't believe that she ever was a friend ... she started an affair with Jason - friends don't to that.

I understand what you are saying. My granny would have called her "a real piece of work"