State vs. Jason Lynn Young 2-22-2012

[gritguy]

I wonder if the biggest 'gotcha moment' will be details of that wreck he described in early June 2006. If it existed at all, I bet we hear about the real circumstances and the extent of the man's injury. I doubt we will hear he suffered a 'knock-out blow'.
Could be interesting......

On the way to winston-salem the other day there were many wrecks. one was very bad. i easily could have imagined myself comforting the victim, and there was an actual wreck, if i wanted to impress with the story. i won't believe a word he says - due to his documented habit of lying about everything - it would have to be shown by credible 1st responders that he was on the scene.

Or perhaps, much like Batman, he slipped away into the night as authorities pulled up.

I concede there can be times when JY says something that agrees with the truth, but those are only the results of chance and probabilities, and not any motive on his part to be factual with anyone.

 

[Madeleine74]

IS gets case facts wrong. You cannot listen to the talking heads. They are worse than local media in terms of correctness. That way lies frustration.

 

[gracielee]

Oh Geesh! Really? I'm watching IS and Mike Brooks and CP are discussing the case, and MB just said (paraphrasing), " well, he put that fleece sweater on when he went back outside..." Point being, he was referring to the sweater from the bday party picture.... He thinks it's the same sweater. He either isn't paying attention, and didn't catch on, or the pros isn't making this very clear. I really hope it's the former. CP gets the facts wrong a lot, but MB is usually pretty sharp.....

Really? I've found Mike Brooks to be just the opposite most of the time. JMO I've heard him misstate evidence, in fact he was the one, earlier on, who kept saying 'michelle had unidentified hair in her hand'.

 

[fran]

It's been so long, I did follow this case, little Samantha Runnion, at the time. IIRC, his prior trial involved two little girls, approx 5 or 6 yrs. old???? And although they both testifed as to what Sam's killer did to them, the jury found them to be not-believable. And so he was acquitted of the crimes against them. I want to say, the day the killer got Samantha, he was actually out looking for one of those little girls. They lived near, or in the same complex as, Samantha. He was unable to find the child, but did come upon Samantha and her little play-mate, and grabbed Sam. I heard that early on in the case, whether that was ever clarified, I'm unsure. I also want to say that was how he, the killer, was identified so quickly. The other child gave a description of him, Sam's play-mate, and the mother of one of his previous victims saw the drawing and identified him as the guy who had been acquitted of molesting her child. I could be all wrong here, as it's been so many years now and I follow a lot of these cases. :waitasec:

No, you're right in everything you said about the other case.

Having said that, I also attended the day they had the pros and def closing statements. The pros goes through each phase, if you will, of what they were pointing out during the case. The closing is to explain where each item discussed, fits into the puzzle that points to the def being the culprit who committed the crime.

I have no doubt, this pros team is going to explain everything to the jury, in a neat little timeline, if you will. There won't be any doubt as to the motive for their madness in presenting their case in point.

I really believe the pros has proved their case. But I don't think they're done yet!

We'll see.

JMHO,
of course!
fran

 

[Boodles]

OMG, these talking heads on TruTV are talking about what a "credible, good witness" JY was. It's hard to believe seasoned legal professionals could be so credulous. I thought they would have good BS detectors by now. That said, I'm sure some of them know that they can get booked on a show for being reliably pro-defense, pro-prosecution, or what have you.

I KNOW! I feel like I am hallucinating! "He's very believable." Really? His testimony (at least the direct part where he, on purpose, stuttered and repeated at the beginning of every response) was so obviously rehearsed. How difficult it must be to rehearse stuttering responses when you don't really speak that way!

He sounded like porky pig all through direct. Then on cross, where he is not reciting canned/rehearsed responses, he STOPS stuttering! What up with that?

Mike Brooks talks out of both sides of his mouth, and I discount everything he says. That Sunny woman is pro-defense and not balanced. But I like Vinnie

 

[fran]

On the way to winston-salem the other day there were many wrecks. one was very bad. i easily could have imagined myself comforting the victim, and there was an actual wreck, if i wanted to impress with the story. i won't believe a word he says - due to his documented habit of lying about everything - it would have to be shown by credible 1st responders that he was on the scene.

Or perhaps, much like Batman, he slipped away into the night as authorities pulled up.

I concede there can be times when JY says something that agrees with the truth, but those are only the results of chance and probabilities, and not any motive on his part to be factual with anyone.

or, on the other hand, you can compare his emotional state at the time he discussed comforting this alleged accident victim, against when he described seeing photos of his murdered wife's body.

NO emotion! None! Zero! Like he was talking about taking a walk in the park.

That in itself says a LOT to me.

He didn't care about MY and his words are, just empty. Meaningless when he said he 'loved his wife.'

JMHO
fran

 

[Lori59]

OMG, these talking heads on TruTV are talking about what a "credible, good witness" JY was. It's hard to believe seasoned legal professionals could be so credulous. I thought they would have good BS detectors by now. That said, I'm sure some of them know that they can get booked on a show for being reliably pro-defense, pro-prosecution, or what have you.

Credible being used in the same sentence with JY is laughable to me. Although I consider myself to have a good "read" on people...this morning I couldn't even continue to listen to his voice and turned down the volume. Even then, just watching his non verbal behavior, it is so contrived, staged, unauthentic and exaggerated.

 

[Just the Fax]

Very surprised Spivey did not point out what he was carrying, in addition to the paper and water bottle?

 

[pjcitizen]

Very surprised Spivey did not point out what he was carrying, in addition to the paper and water bottle?

That's what I thought he was getting at when discussing the video. What was he getting at by pointing out the item JLY walked up to the counter with? I have no clue.

 

[Madeleine74]

Spivey cannot tell what JY is carrying on top of that newspaper. He's not going to speculate; he didn't in the first trial and he's not doing it here either. The detail is not clear enough.

 

[Just the Fax]

IS gets case facts wrong. You cannot listen to the talking heads. They are worse than local media in terms of correctness. That way lies frustration.

I never realized it was that bad until I heard them speak of "facts" in this case.
Everyone, except that blonde attending court is clueless.
I will be very skeptical from now on when I hear these talking heads in the future.

 

[Tipstaff]

Holy Mother of God it is simple why he didn't fight custody.

He wanted his daughter. He had the money. He DID NOT want to testify.

Whether guilty or innocent it is blindingly obvious his motivation. The money issue was another lie. His honest statement would have been, "I did not want to break my silence." But JY rarely does honest.

I needed that smack on the side of my head and after BC you'd think I would have gotten it! :what:

 

[gracielee]

Spivey cannot tell what JY is carrying on top of that newspaper. He's not going to speculate; he didn't in the first trial and he's doing it here either. The detail is not clear enough.

I'm surprised they didn't get the FBI to attempt to *clear* that image more. Or perhaps they did and it still wasn't legible.

 

[Just the Fax]

Spivey cannot tell what JY is carrying on top of that newspaper. He's not going to speculate; he didn't in the first trial and he's doing it here either. The detail is not clear enough.

He did indeed last trial...he speculated he had a pamplet in his hand
(before he knew it was USA Today)

He could show the picture, point out the item and let them draw their own conclusion....for me, a glove

 

[Boodles]

Very surprised Spivey did not point out what he was carrying, in addition to the paper and water bottle?

Maybe HC forgot to ask him.





Sorry. I know this isn't funny.

 

[Lori59]

Liars always go into great detail about the smallest thing, go on and on, how it was, what they were thinking, even recalling boyscout information......like how he says he closed the door just shown on In Session. Just sayin. He may not have talked to investigators but is an open book as far as personality traits. LIAR.

 

[pjcitizen]

I'm surprised they didn't get the FBI to attempt to *clear* that image more. Or perhaps they did and it still wasn't legible.

Was hoping this was the case. There's always the hope of new evidence not presented in the first trial.

 

[luckyme]

I really hope the smoking gun is coming because otherwise, it takes one juror!!!:innocent:

 

[Grammy Jean]

That's what I thought he was getting at when discussing the video. What was he getting at by pointing out the item JLY walked up to the counter with? I have no clue.

What I thought he was indicating was looking at JY prior to going up to the counter and then seconds later going away from the counter he was inferring the exact same things were in JY's hands both times. To me that meant JY lied and did not get a USA Today at that counter. That is what I took from it.

 

[Madeleine74]

Very true about the excruciating details used by liars.

Someone who remembers little things down to the butt lint level 5 yrs after a seemingly innocuous hotel visit but doesn't remember the major stuff is not credible.