State vs. Jason Lynn Young 2-24-2012

[cityslick]

I wonder what happens if the DT calls CY? How the PT would handle that on cross?

Note: I would hope this would not happen, because I'm not sure what benefit there is to gain from her testimony.

 

[MyBelle]

Exactly. I have a hard time imagining that any points she may win for the defense will outweigh the huge potential danger she puts her client in by getting on the stand. Because ultimately, it's HIS privilege to waive, and he's still her client in a sense.

I don't see any danger whatsoever. I still think she can handle any questions just fine.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

She can also testify as to the cost of a protracted custody battle, give an opinion as to whether custody is all wrapped up and final after agreeing to the initial proposed interim agreement, whether she advised Jason that he would be subjected to interrogations related to the criminal investigation, whether questions asked during the custody deposition could be provided by investigators ... she can clarify whether it was in Jason's best interests to settle custody and revisit the situation once the criminal investigation was complete or fight it out to the bitter end in the middle of the criminal investigation. I don't think she can give an opinion about Jason's guilt in the criminal investigation as she was not retained in that capacity.

I totally agree with your take on it.

 

[Wolfpack]

Huh? There was no separation agreement. She is a family law attorney who represented Jason on the child custody matter. She wasn't Jason's criminal attorney nor was she Pat Young's attorney afaik.

JMO

You stated settlement agreement. I mis-typed and put separation agreement. I'm not suggesting she was Pat Young's attorney, but if she prepared a document that Pat Young saw at any point, in relation to custody, then Pat Young can testify about it. And if Alice Stubbs was doing her job as the family law attorney, then she knows a great deal of information about the criminal case.

I don't think she can give an opinion about Jason's guilt in the criminal investigation as she was not retained in that capacity.

No, but once she waives privilege, she can be asked about EVERY conversation she and JY ever had. Every conversation she had regarding his case. She can be asked about every piece of evidence she ever viewed, and any and all notes that she took on the custody case. She knows a great deal about this case, I wager just as much as JY's defense attorneys, and she will have to lay all of that in front of the jury if asked about it. Just because she didn't represent him in the criminal matter does not mean she cannot be cross examined about ALL of her knowledge.

And if the Cooper case tells you anything, Alice Stubbs knows the details of the criminal case, even when she's "just" the family law attorney.

 

[otto]

Well, not what I understood at all. Not sure why you are speculating?
You may recall Collins dropping his name in the first trial.
Deaver was never involved in any blood spatter analysis in this case.

According to links provided upthread, Deaver was involved in blood analysis in this case:

"prosecutors will have to figure out what to do about Deaver's bloodstain pattern analysis in the 2006 death of Michelle Young, a pregnant woman whose husband, Jason Young"

http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/02/21/1003842/doubt-spatters-old-cases.html#storylink=cpy

Do you have a link stating the opposite?

 

[Talina]

Huh? There was no separation agreement. She is a family law attorney who represented Jason on the child custody matter. She wasn't Jason's criminal attorney nor was she Pat Young's attorney afaik.

JMO

She wasn't his criminal defense attorney but I believe she is law partners with the attorney that was his first defense attorney. IIRC

Remember the Fisher's attorney stated on the stand today that his correspondence to her was addressed to Mr. Smith ( a partner in her firm) that was his defense attorney at that time.

Calling her to the stand would be disastrous as far as opening up a can of worms regarding his attorney/client privilege with his defense attorney.

IMO

 

[MyBelle]

I wonder what happens if the DT calls CY? How the PT would handle that on cross?

Note: I would hope this would not happen, because I'm not sure what benefit there is to gain from her testimony.

I think CY's therapist is a more likely witness. LE seized some type of report and I think it could be very enlightening to the jury.

JMO

 

[cityslick]

She wasn't his criminal defense attorney but I believe she is law partners with the attorney that was his first defense attorney. IIRC

Remember the Fisher's attorney stated on the stand today that his correspondence to her was addressed to Mr. Smith ( a partner in her firm) that was his defense attorney at that time.

Calling her to the stand would be disastrous as far as opening up a can of worms regarding his attorney/client privilege with his defense attorney.

IMO

I agree, I think the risk far outweighs any benefit she would provide.

 

[Talina]

I agree, I think the risk far outweighs any benefit she would provide.

I think you'd see Judge Stephens asking JY over and over and over...then over again does he realize what he is waiving by allowing this attorney to be called to the stand.

IMO

 

[twirlygurl]

I missed the Day Care Teacher's testimony. Anyone have a link?

 

[MyBelle]

She wasn't his criminal defense attorney but I believe she is law partners with the attorney that was his first defense attorney. IIRC

Remember the Fisher's attorney stated on the stand today that his correspondence to her was addressed to Mr. Smith ( a partner in her firm) that was his defense attorney at that time.

Calling her to the stand would be disastrous as far as opening up a can of worms regarding his attorney/client privilege with his defense attorney.

IMO

I think Jason's attorneys know best about what is best for Jason and will proceed accordingly. A letter addressed to Mr. Smith could have certainly been forwarded to his partner, Ms. Stubbs.

I do hope she testifies.

JMO

 

[otto]

I missed the Day Care Teacher's testimony. Anyone have a link?

Beginning of Day 11

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/asset_gallery/10754465/

 

[Bottle Cap]

I think she could have her days confused. Do you really believe she invited this witness over that night for pizza and to watch a movie with her and CY, the same night she had invited SS to come over and watch Grey's Anatomy? I don't think so. MOO
BBL

If you'd watched a little more of the babysitter's testimony, you would have heard her discuss this at some length with BH. She was invited over that night to watch Cinderella with MY and CY. She was unaware that SS was invited over later to watch a different show, but did know there was to be pizza.

No timestamp this time, you're on yer own!

 

[MyBelle]

You stated settlement agreement. I mis-typed and put separation agreement. I'm not suggesting she was Pat Young's attorney, but if she prepared a document that Pat Young saw at any point, in relation to custody, then Pat Young can testify about it. And if Alice Stubbs was doing her job as the family law attorney, then she knows a great deal of information about the criminal case.



No, but once she waives privilege, she can be asked about EVERY conversation she and JY ever had. Every conversation she had regarding his case. She can be asked about every piece of evidence she ever viewed, and any and all notes that she took on the custody case. She knows a great deal about this case, I wager just as much as JY's defense attorneys, and she will have to lay all of that in front of the jury if asked about it. Just because she didn't represent him in the criminal matter does not mean she cannot be cross examined about ALL of her knowledge.

And if the Cooper case tells you anything, Alice Stubbs knows the details of the criminal case, even when she's "just" the family law attorney.

From what I've seen so far, the only details Stubbs knows is that Jason was told to remain silent and he did so. At the time of the child custody lawsuit, there was no criminal case against Jason Young.

I look forward to her testimony.

JMO

 

[Wolfpack]

From what I've seen so far, the only details Stubbs knows is that Jason was told to remain silent and he did so. At the time of the child custody lawsuit, there was no criminal case against Jason Young.

I look forward to her testimony.

JMO

I do as well. I hope very much that I am proven wrong. Just remember, at the time of the BC custody lawsuit, there was no criminal case against him either.

 

[Talina]

I think Jason's attorneys know best about what is best for Jason and will proceed accordingly. A letter addressed to Mr. Smith could have certainly been forwarded to his partner, Ms. Stubbs.

I do hope she testifies.

JMO

On that bolded part, we definitely agree. It is precisely because I believe they know what is in JY's best interest that they will not let any past or present attorney's (family law or otherwise) that represent(s) JY come anywhere near that witness stand.

IMO

 

[AlwaysShocked]

Re: Child's DNA on medicine dropper not meaning she was given medication that night - I agree, it doesn't.

Re: Unknown fingerprint on medicine bottle cap and/or upside down cup that comes on top of medicine bottle - I am unsure of upon which of these the unknown print was found. In either case, my question would be, where was the medication obtained? When was it obtained? How full was the bottle of medication? If obtained from a pharmacy shelf, it could have been from another customer or pharmacy worker handling the bottle. If obtained by JY as a sample, could have come from a person who works in the factory where produced or from a person who unpacks samples for salesmen.

So, to me, an unknown fingerprint on a medicine bottle means nothing. BUT the fact that this particular medication was found in the child's room points in the direction that CY was being given this medication at some point by someone. Could Daddy have given it to her? Of course he could have. And he knew one of the main side effects of this medication is "drowziness".

I surely hope the Prosecutors are prepared to deal with the "paradoxical hyperactivity" listed as a side effect and used by the Defense during Trial #1. A paradoxical side effect is unexpected and is not "usual". It is unusual. But if it happens often enough (and I don't know the percentage) during clinical trials of the drug, it must be listed. A PDR gives information about the number of subjects in the initial clinical trials and the number who experienced a listed side effect. It is not hard to find this informationl. But by and large, the side effect to be expected from this medication in the vast majority of administrations is drowziness, NOT hyperactivity.

Unknown fingerprint(s) on computer print out papers. These were print outs that were sitting in the print out tray of the printer, located in the office. I think it was the print outs of the purse information that he "wanted the sister to come and retrieve." NUMEROUS phone calls, including calling his mother to request that SHE call Meredith about picking up these printouts? Yeah, right.

To my knowledge, unknown fingerprints were NOT found on the papers found in the Master Bedroom along with Michelle's body. Explanation? In pre-planning this murder, Jason obtained computer paper in advance from some other place - perhaps at his work, then placed this paper into the home printer to be used on that particular evening.

Likely LE did not test it, but I wonder if any unknown prints appeared on any of the unused paper sitting in the printer? That would be interesting to know.

IMO This trial has gone much like the Scott Peterson trial. It is based on circumstantial evidence - as are many murder trials - and it will be up to the jury to make a decision on that evidence.

Way, way too many coincidences for me. There is no getting around it, the sleazeball JY was smart. He watched a lot of crime shows and he had a lot of luck. But I think he did it. And yes, he had 4 million motives.

 

[MyBelle]

If you'd watched a little more of the babysitter's testimony, you would have heard her discuss this at some length with BH. She was invited over that night to watch Cinderella with MY and CY. She was unaware that SS was invited over later to watch a different show, but did know there was to be pizza.

No timestamp this time, you're on yer own!

BBM. Very interesting, thanks for sharing.

I don't believe SS was invited over later, I believe SS stated she and Michelle made plans earlier that day.

MY already had plans with her friend and after CY spending all day at daycare, why would MY want her daycare provider to spend more time at their home? To me, that makes no sense at all.

It is interesting that the daycare worker knew Jason was going to be out of town. I wonder if she was ever on the suspect list.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

On that bolded part, we definitely agree. It is precisely because I believe they know what is in JY's best interest that they will not let any past or present attorney's (family law or otherwise) that represent(s) JY come anywhere near that witness stand.

IMO

I don't share your opinion that Jason's own attorney is in any way a threat to him because I don't believe Jason confessed his guilt of murder to her and that is the only thing that would cause him harm with this jury.


JMO

 

[Cammy]

If anyone here has a 2 year old, maybe show the child the image of the figure holding the chair and ask the child to describe what they see.

I need to see that doll demo again, was CY holding one doll and the chair in one hand, and in the other hand the Mommy doll?

Would she even be able to hold a doll and a chair in the same little hand?

I have to go look at that again.