State vs Jason Lynn Young 2-16-2012

[Just the Fax]

Did they say how many adult shoe prints were found? I've seen the carpet shot JTF posted; wondering how many were on pillows.

He said some were overlapping and could not tell which was which.

I'll find the number and repost...I do know there were more hush puppy vs Franklin
=======================================================

One pillow were the Franklins, HP & child's sock

PE papers - child's sock, HP shoes

bed spread - HP shoes.

Carpet - HP, Franklins, child's sock

 

[the couger]

They discovered two different shoe prints on a pillow. One was from a size 10 Franklin shoe; the other a size 12 Hush Puppies brand "orbital" model shoe (which wasn't identified until 2008). Records show that the Young's purchased a pair of Orbital Hush Puppies In July 2005. They were a size 12. In addition, a podiatrist testified that the sores on Jason's feet (photoed 5 days after the murder) were consistent with blisters that come from wearing shoes that are too small.

Paige, did the podiatrist that you state "testified', offered any testimony as to the bruise on his toe. I sure don't remember a podiatrist testifying in this trial or the last.

 

[fifteen89]

Ok, question. I thought the hairs found in Michelle's hand and under her body were her hairs. Am I right? If yes, why, when Judge Alex says the Prosecution will have a tough time explaining those hairs because they don't match Jason.....why didn't Vinnie or Beth Karas correct him????

 

[Talina]

Ok, question. I thought the hairs found in Michelle's hand and under her body were her hairs. Am I right? If yes, why, when Judge Alex says the Prosecution will have a tough time explaining those hairs because they don't match Jason.....why didn't Vinnie or Beth Karas correct him????

IMO, InSessions and HLN has been way off on getting up to speed and keeping up with testimony and evidence in this trial. I know Beth is there now and has been for a few days but she wasn't the entire time.

I've seen them quote and comment on a lot of incorrect things based on the actual testimony.

Up until yesterday, they were saying the hair in her hand and underneath her was unknown after DNA testing. Then last night it was finally said that it tested to be hers. Now today they seem to have forgotten that again.

That channel is really frustrating lately. IMO

 

[Madeleine74]

Those size 10 Franklins don't mean JY wasn't there.

I believe there is enough evidence to show JY was there during the murder.

What isn't known and may never be known is if he was the only one there during the murder, or at all that night after the murder.

In 5.5 years no one has ever come forth, no one has ever snitched to a friend, absolutely no info about what (and possibly who) created those 2nd shoe prints.

 

[Madeleine74]

TV Talking heads do not know the details of this case very well, if at all. You cannot take their comments as anything but fluff. They get things wrong all the time. If you watch them and get your info that way, you will be getting incorrect case info.

 

[fifteen89]

It's fascinating to hear someone who can with certainty say what the jury must do and what they will and will not ignore. I take it midway through the prosecution's case last trial you knew it would be a mistrial?

I've never met anyone - judge, lawyer, jury consultant, or even individual member of a jury, who knows with certainty what each juror will conclude, particularly before all the evidence is in.

Our firm used to pay money for a consultant to sit in the courtroom and read the jury each day. Actually watching them. And even with that we were never certain what they thought.

To me, some humility of one's own predictive powers is in order when it comes to the idea of knowing what twelve individuals, especially ones you don't know, will or won't think weeks from now.

eace::clap:

 

[gritguy]

Those size 10 Franklins don't mean JY wasn't there.

I believe there is enough evidence to show JY was there during the murder.

What isn't known and may never be known is if he was the only one there during the murder, or at all that night after the murder.

In 5.5 years no one has ever come forth, no one has ever snitched to a friend, absolutely no info about what (and possibly who) created those 2nd shoe prints.

If he had a pair of those Franklins too then I still go with it was just him, switching shoes for some reason. Hard to imagine he would meet up with another person to kill his wife. He's big enough to do it himself, and it really complicates his future as it would not be a secret to him that he could keep.

 

[Talina]

Actually, Michelle has spoken. Michelle's therapist said she told her there was no physical violence in the marriage. The jury can not disregard the words from the victim.

An incident five years previously when Young was drunk will be ignored by the jury after they hear from Josh Dalton that there were no visible injuries.

JMO

I need to go back and re-listen to that testimony. I don't recall her saying Michelle said there was no physical violence.

I recall her being asked if Michelle said there was physical violence and the answer was no. To me, that is not the same as if Michelle had actually said there was none.

It doesn't sound to me like it was discussed one way or the other. Michelle didn't mention physical violence and the psychologist didn't ask.

I may have heard it incorrectly.

 

[Madeleine74]

If he had a pair of those Franklins too then I still go with it was just him, switching shoes for some reason. Hard to imagine he would meet up with another person to kill his wife. He's big enough to do it himself, and it really complicates his future as it would not be a secret to him that he could keep.

I agree I think it was all done by him.

I'm just curious if he purchased those size 10 shoes as part of his advance planning. Because it doesn't make sense he would have purchased those shoes to actually wear himself.

He wasn't expecting a bloody crime scene like what he created. So at 3am I don't see him calling up some buddy to come over and help him out. Yet those size 10 shoe prints are there at the crime scene. They got there somehow.

 

[gritguy]

TV Talking heads do not know the details of this case very well, if at all. You cannot take their comments as anything but fluff. They get things wrong all the time. If you watch them and get your info that way, you will be getting incorrect case info.

Probably the show would be better and more accurate, and it would have more informed pro and con theories, if it just showed a rolling image of these threads (absent tangents of course :blushing. Or they could have one talking head repeating post pro G verdict and another repeating those pro NG.

 

[Just the Fax]

If he had a pair of those Franklins too then I still go with it was just him, switching shoes for some reason. Hard to imagine he would meet up with another person to kill his wife. He's big enough to do it himself, and it really complicates his future as it would not be a secret to him that he could keep.

Complicated, isn't it?

I have a hard time believing jay would own a pair of Dollar General, Franklin shoes, especially size 10. I also don't believe he had them there to cover this murder. If so, why have his size 12 on first to leave his calling card?

 

[Cammy]

Paige, did the podiatrist that you state "testified', offered any testimony as to the bruise on his toe. I sure don't remember a podiatrist testifying in this trial or the last.

No podiatrist testified in the last trial, Coug.

But, they may bring in one this time.

Jason's blisters could be from the new shoes he bought for Michelle's funeral.

 

[rockin10]

With regard to the two sets of shoe prints, I think it was either one of two things.
1. He planned on using two sets of prints on purpose to throw off investigators OR

2. He planned on wearing the size 10 Franklins, when he thought it was going to be just a strangulation. When the murder didn't go as planned and there is blood all over the master bedroom and he now has bloody footprints, he needs to change into some shoes that he could leave in, and he either decides at that point to stage extra prints or he already has on the new shoes and while dealing with CY and he accidentally makes some additional prints and then adds a few more to make it look like there were a couple of people there.............

I think that he did ALOT of planning, and I think the size 10s were from the original plan, the other shoes were not, they became part of plan B. I think that is why he has bruising on his feet/toes, I think he was committing a very violent and physical attack in those shoes and it left a mark.

 

[Madeleine74]

Complicated, isn't it?

I have a hard time believing jay would own a pair of Dollar General, Franklin shoes, especially size 10. I also don't believe he had them there to cover this murder. If so, why have his size 12 on first to leave his calling card?

My only explanation for that (having on the size 12 HP) is that he did not expect any blood (or much blood) in committing this murder and when his strangulation didn't work and he switched to beating, he wasn't thinking about his shoes at that point.

But then why did he have those size 10 franklins? And if he didn't have them before, where did he get them? And if it was someone else who entered the crime scene, who and why and what did they do (besides walking around to make bloody shoe prints?).

ETA: Does anyone in his family wear a size 10 men's shoe? Could he have purchased those shoes for someone in his family, intending to take them up to Brevard or something and he grabbed them to use when the crime scene got bloody? This presumes, of course, there is no Dollar General in the Brevard vicinity that would have carried shoes... (just thinking out loud here)

 

[Talina]

If he had a pair of those Franklins too then I still go with it was just him, switching shoes for some reason. Hard to imagine he would meet up with another person to kill his wife. He's big enough to do it himself, and it really complicates his future as it would not be a secret to him that he could keep.

Unless their (Franklin brand) sizing is slightly off, I don't see how anyone can put a pair of shoes on that is 2 sizes smaller than their normal size. I know I wouldn't even be able to get a shoe on like that if it were 2 sizes smaller than my normal size. (for me one size difference would be hard to do, can't imagine 2 sizes)

I've thought about perhaps their sizing is off a bit as some brands can be from time to time but then I remember the size was determined by print measurements used by LE so that idea gets tossed out the window.

For me, the size 12 shoe print in a shoe that he is known to have had likely puts him there. I'm not sure what to think yet about the size 10 shoe print. For me, it doesn't eliminate him at all. It just makes me wonder if someone else was there or if he was clever enough to get the print there himself by other means. (I'm not sure I'd give him that much credit just yet)

 

[Just the Fax]

Jason's blisters could be from the new shoes he bought for Michelle's funeral.

:floorlaugh:

No "new shoes" bought for Michelle's funeral.
He already had his dress shoes with him from his meetings.

 

[gritguy]

Complicated, isn't it?

I have a hard time believing jay would own a pair of Dollar General, Franklin shoes, especially size 10. I also don't believe he had them there to cover this murder. If so, why have his size 12 on first to leave his calling card?

Very good point.

Ok - so you go buy the unanticipated size 10 franklins planning to wear those while on the scene to throw off LE. you do but you end up with blood all over them which you didn't plan, so you change into your exit clothing, and having more work to do leave size 12 prints that you didn't plan to leave. that may not be wholly consistent with the scene though.

 

[Paige SC]

Paige, did the podiatrist that you state "testified', offered any testimony as to the bruise on his toe. I sure don't remember a podiatrist testifying in this trial or the last.

"On August 5, 2008 a board certified podiatrist reviewed photographs of Jason Young's feet from the Non Testimonial Identification Order. He stated that blister like irritations were consistent with someone who may have been wearing shoes too small for their feet".

It's 3/4th's the way down. LOTS of good juicy tidbits if you have 30 minutes to read through.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...4En7gz&sig=AHIEtbSv5FHAxrkR4AxaHkb1MtyEnPJnDQ

PS, not sure if this was testimony on the stand or pretrial discovery, but one was consulted. If they didn't do it last time they should do it this time around, especially since they took the time to consult with one who gave them an answer consistent with what they think happened. Why wouldn't they use that information?

 

[Just the Fax]

My only explanation for that (having on the size 12 HP) is that he did not expect any blood (or much blood) in committing this murder and when his strangulation didn't work and he switched to beating, he wasn't thinking about his shoes at that point.

But then why did he have those size 10 franklins? And if he didn't have them before, where did he get them? And if it was someone else who entered the crime scene, who and why and what did they do (besides walking around to make bloody shoe prints?).

That is the mystery.
Not only size, but brand. Jay wore Adidas, Nike and Reebok. I doubt seriously he ever stepped foot in a Dollar General dime store.