State vs. Jason Lynn Young 2-23-2012

[borndem]

BAM. May was supposed to be the deal, but he blew it.

If at once you don't succeed, try try again with a fer-shure plan this time. And so far, it's working.

Oh, I want the pure pleasure of seeing the WCSO
surround him, after the verdict is read,
cuff him,
take him outta there,
have a change of orange & whites waiting for him, and
cart him off to
Central Prison
do a body & cavity search,
and then lock his sorry azz in a cell
For the rest of his life

 

[Boodles]

It was quick but I sure thought I heard the judge allude to the DT questioning of MF on cross had somehow opened the door to this testimony.

IMO

There must be some significant reason this is being allowed; perhaps that's it.

 

[otto]

I think, for once, he should try the truth. If I were a juror, and the defendant said "I didn't respond to the lawsuit, because I knew it would damage my chances at the criminal trial, and I was advised as such by my attorneys," then I would believe him, and respect that. Spewing other lies doesn't help him.

Custody is complicated and emotional ... I would think that everyone understands that decisions are not simple and that they are never based on one factor.

 

[gracielee]

I haven't seen the JLY *smirk* today.....

 

[Tipstaff]

Gritguy - my take on all this is what you referenced yesterday - that JY would not go for a custody hearing for CY or pursue a claim because he did not want to undergo a deposition in any of the actions.

Is the purpose of this (supposedly) to show this but to also get it in front of the jury?

 

[nursebeeme]

SLAYER STATUTE!

This is how JY got that "Slayer" title, btw.

It was through the default of this legal action and the judgement entered by the court.

Cannot recover any life insurance proceeds.

Is liable for damages/claims.

Paragraph 6 of civil complaint: says "JY brutally murdered MY at their residence." That is in the civil complaint.

will the jury now get a copy of this to read?

 

[Whimsigal]

Has she been doing that little smile thing after everything she says all her life?

Funny you should ask because, she always was a little quirky in school. I thought she had some form of tourettes because she used to blink a lot. I don't remember her smiling this way but it could just be a nervous tic.

 

[fran]

IMHO, I think they're showing WHAT was in the filing documents, "that he murdered Michelle Young," is going towards his failure to not answer this complaint.

IMHO, if you were accused for killing someone and you didn't do it, would you let something like this go to court unanswered!?

Sorry, no innocent person would stand for this type of judgment to stand in court and on file.

Just my opinion, of course,
fran

 

[cityslick]

There must be some significant reason this is being allowed; perhaps that's it.

DT said they questioned MF on the custody suit, but not on the civil suit. Judge just he was allowing it because he thought it was relevant.

 

[Madeleine74]

DT opened the door to this.

Hmmmm...

 

[cityslick]

IMHO, I think they're showing WHAT was in the filing documents, "that he murdered Michelle Young," is going towards his failure to not answer this complaint.

IMHO, if you were accused for killing someone and you didn't do it, would you let something like this go to court unanswered!?

Sorry, no innocent person would stand for this type of judgment to stand in court and on file.

Just my opinion, of course,
fran

They can't consider that as part of the special instruction though, if I understood it correctly.

 

[Tipstaff]

This testimony scares me and I do believe the DT will make a motion for a mistrial.

 

[Cammy]

They can't consider that as part of the special instruction though, if I understood it correctly.

That is correct, but it sure doesn't go in Jason's favor.

 

[johnfear]

So, off the cuff, isn't it weird that he just baled on the idea altogether? Sorta dampens the motive they've presented.

 

[gritguy]

Here's an example. Federal rules of evidence have an exception to hearsay for former criminal convictions on point, but only if by trial or guilty plea and not by criminal equal of no answer. There is no exception for a civil judgment. NC DOES NOT even have the exception that the federal rules do for criminal convictions. Which makes this very interesting to me which rule they are getting this in under. Here's the federal exception (none in NC):

(22) Judgment of a Previous Conviction. Evidence of a final judgment of conviction if:

(A) the judgment was entered after a trial or guilty plea, but not a nolo contendere plea;

(B) the conviction was for a crime punishable by death or by imprisonment for more than a year;

(C) the evidence is admitted to prove any fact essential to the judgment; and

(D) when offered by the prosecutor in a criminal case for a purpose other than impeachment, the judgment was against the defendant.

The pendency of an appeal may be shown but does not affect admissibility.

 

[the couger]

The prosecution may indeed prove that Pat Young could have paid to fight for custody, or even that Jason willingly gave up custody ... does that prove murder?

MOO, Mama may have decided, instead of selling family property, it would NOT be fair to her other children. Therefore told Jason, you are innocent, go to court and prove you did not have anything to do with your wifes murder. If found guility or go to jail when arrested, you will lose custody of CY. When you are arrested, found NG then I will give you the money to get your daughter back. She was basically thinking about the future and not time of today. This is something many people can not do. Many can only think in the moment...In other words, why spend the money to fight something today that may very well be taken away from you in the very near future. I agree with this thinkiing.
IMO... When and if he is found NG, he can then fight to have all the legal custody, voided.. All MOO

 

[otto]

It seems like Jason had a right to remain silent, but when he did that there were consequences ... and now that is being used against him again. He remained silent, a judgement was made against him, now that judgement, even though it wasn't based on fault, is being used to kind of preclude the criminal process and label him as already guilty?

I'm not making sense, but this doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Cammy]

This testimony scares me and I do believe the DT will make a motion for a mistrial.

Maybe more of an appellate issue later on, should there be a conviction?

I see the day care center testimony and the gas station attendant testimony as appellate issues also.......

Many convictions have been overturned because of faulty eye witness testimony.

I am confident the defense will rebound.....but, still this looks bad the way it is coming in.

imo

 

[Mama-cita]

DT opened the door to this.

Hmmmm...

Not watching so forgive the ignorance. Which of the defense's actions led to opening the door for this? Did they say?

 

[Turnadot]

It doesn't prove he committed murder, but it does point towards him being a liar. You add in he denied having anything to do with his wife's murder, well, you get the point.

JMHO
fran

Yes, but my fear is that juries no longer care that a defendant is a pathological liar. Don't get me wrong, I think the State has enough to convict, but I'm not confident that hammering on the fact he's a liar is going to help.